The Jon Lester contract situation

[jacksonianmarch]

I wonder what is taking this issue so long to resolve. Then, my contrarian side came about and asked the question, maybe the sox don't want to re-sign Jon Lester? It sounds like a foolish proposition, but then I actually thought about it some more. What is the driving force for Lester to be re-signed now instead of allowing his contract to play out. Well, unequivocally, it is the fact that he was the balls in the playoffs in 2013. Well, strip away the tournament, and you have a guy who, even at a "discount" is expected to be paid for something that he isn't. Let's look at Jon Lester.

 

From 2008-2010, he was an unquestioned ace. 622IP with a WAR of 16.6. During that time, his average FB was a full mph higher than it is now.

 

From 2011-2013, he has been good, but not ace-like. 610IP 7.5WAR.

 

And now, we come to 2013, his so-called return to greatness year after his down 2012. Well, when you tear apart the numbers, the two seasons aren't that much different. Yes, his WAR was much higher in 2013, but it was still the second lowest of his career to 2012. Go based on his xFIP and you can see a player who was actually a little worse than 2012.

 

Strange indeed. Nobody is going to question the fact that Jon Lester is a front of the rotation starter, but IMO, he has been pitching like a #2 the past 3 seasons, when he was a #1 for the 3 before that. So fast forward to the contrarian argument. Lester just turned 30, meaning his first season of a new contract will be in his year 31 season. Everybody seems to use the Cliff Lee contract as a jumping point for Lester, and it has its valid points, but Lee turned 33 in the first yr of his 5 yr contract. Now, Lee had been more productive the three seasons prior to his contract yr compared to Lester has been his last 3, but consider that the cost of inflation. And if Lester gets placed under contract to a similar age, you are looking at a 7yr $175 mil deal. CC also inked a similar contract extension when he was close to opting out that would guarantee him $122 mil over 5 yrs before his age 32 season. So a market value Jon Lester deal is somewhere in the 6 yr $150 mil range. Let's say Lester wants to give the sox a discount.

 

Well, discounts usually are on AAV, not years. Let's say his discount is $20 mil. Would you sign Lester for 6 yrs and $130 mil? That is probably the question the sox are asking themselves right now. Is it worth it to commit to Jon Lester for years 31-36 at $22 mil a season, or have they already gotten his best years out of him and would they be better off getting a pick and bringing up a kid? It's an interesting dilemma, and one that makes me ever more curious the longer we go without Lester inking an extension

[jacksonianmarch]

And another thing. If the sox let him hit FA, he's gone. Part of a discount is a team assuming some risk while guaranteeing a player some security. One more season in, Lester will pull that offer. I guarantee it

[Palodios]

The Red Sox have not been in a rush with Lester. Most sources said that discussions would begin in Spring Training. It gives the team a chance to see what shape and health Lester is in after his 240 IP season. Ben prioritized the offseason on new acquisitions. Lester really wants to come back, and there are a good number of reasons that make him desirable to the Red Sox.

 

Playoff history, durability, consistency, numbers, relationship with Farrell and the rest of the pitching staff, team chemistry, the composure to play at Fenway. He's always the first one to report to Spring Training and wants to be in Boston. People were skeptical when reports came out that Lester wasn't involved in Beergate, but honestly if reports came out saying he wasn't part of Beergate -- even if they were lies-- it means that someone upstairs probably likes him.

 

The team just gained 13 million to Dempster, they're gaining 30ish million a year more on Peavy and Lackey next year. Homer Bailey is off the market, James Shields is 3 years older than Lester, and Masterson isn't in the same league.

 

Lester's contract extension is inevitable and it makes sense in every single possible way. It will happen.

[VA Sox Fan]

Way to over-analyze and dissect a non-issue. Are you bored?

[jacksonianmarch]

I am a little bored. Its always boring when baseball season isn't in play, especially after the SB. Regardless, I still wonder why this hasn't been done. Pal, you have a good point about waiting to see what shape he is in, but I am still surprised nothing has been done yet. He made those comments months ago. If the season starts and he isn't under contract, he's gone

[Bellhorn04]

The Red Sox have a history of announcing extensions after the season starts. It defers the increase for luxury tax purposes. See: Josh Beckett, Adrian Gonzalez.

[Palodios]

The Red Sox have a history of announcing extensions after the season starts. It defers the increase for luxury tax purposes. See: Josh Beckett, Adrian Gonzalez.

 

Weren't all of those deals leaked during the offseason? It seems that the two sides are still talking. The Levinson brothers aren't in camp to hang out.

 

I am a little bored. Its always boring when baseball season isn't in play, especially after the SB. Regardless, I still wonder why this hasn't been done. Pal, you have a good point about waiting to see what shape he is in, but I am still surprised nothing has been done yet. He made those comments months ago. If the season starts and he isn't under contract, he's gone

 

Who made what comments? Lester's reiterated the hometown discount comments only two weeks ago.

[seabeachfred]

Weren't all of those deals leaked during the offseason? It seems that the two sides are still talking. The Levinson brothers aren't in camp to hang out.

 

 

 

Who made what comments? Lester's reiterated the hometown discount comments only two weeks ago.

 

Well with Peavy and Lackey getting up in years, Buchholz and his health and Doubrant and his in and out performances, it would be foolhardy to let Lester walk when he is most likely the best and most dependable starting pitcher the Red Sox have. Notice most teams resign their solid pitchers; we can't be different especially when we aren't sure how the young prospects are going to turn out. Anthony Renaudo and Henry Owens I would put my money on and maybe Barnes as well, but that is not a certainty. What is a certainty in my opinion is that Alan Webster and Ruby Delarosa are what I said last year they were......a couple of over-hyped bums who most likely will never be able to cut it in the American League. Both got trashed in their pitching debuts the past few days and it is a continuance of what we saw in a small sample size of their shoddy work last year. Yes on Lester, and let's hope Clay and John and Felix make it big this season because we all know that you win with starting pitching. At least, that's my take on it.

[sk7326]

You don't want to give 5 year extensions for any 30 year old. However, that is going to the pay-to-play price with Lester, especially with free agency being the way it is (a lot of money chasing very few guys). Lester is a lot better than the best guys in this class for instance. He is what he is - an innings horse whose value is both in bulk as well as effectiveness. Yes, I am among those who cite his performance level more like a good #2 than one of the very very elite. But, the fact of the matter is that quality #2 starters, hell even quality #3 starters, who have no injury history and can crank out 200 IP seasons with such reliability, are VERY VERY rare in 2014 baseball. I think the question with Lester is not the length so much as the backside protection for Boston - will they demand some sort of options on years 5 and 6, and will Lester be comfortable offering them.

[Station 13]

The Red Sox are freed up a lot money with Peavy and Lackey contract ending, and the latter has a league minimum option. With only commitment to Buccholz, they can spend $20M+av to keep Lester. The key area is the number of years. If Lester seeks 6-7, he isn't returning.

[Dojji]

You don't want to give 5 year extensions for any 30 year old.

 

That's just a stupid overgeneralization. If you had a 30 year old Curt schilling or Randy Johnson, or Andy Pettitte, or Roger Clemens for that matter, you absolutely extend them 5 years. Jon Lester isn't quite in that group, but he's got a durability to match any of them, and that's the big thing when it comes to contracts.

 

If your guy has a long track record of durability and consistency, go for it. It might still blow up in your face, but the chance of success, and the upside in the case of success, is worth the possibility of catastrophic failure, which can occur at any point in a pitcher's career anyhow and doesn't magically increase just because a player hits an arbitrary age number

 

people pay too much attention to raw age in statistical analysis IMHO. It doesn't mean nothing, but if there's extenuating circumstances, then you need to stop behaving as if there aren't. Daniel nava is a classic example, no one wanted to give him any credit because he debuted in his late 20's, but he debuted in his late 20's because he started his path through the minors at age 23, not because he's a scrub like most late 20's debuts.

 

Similarly with Lester, you have a man who yes, is over 30, but also has never pitched less than 190 innings in a season, and the only time he ever missed significant time was with non-hodgkins lymphoma over 2006 and 2007. that's as safe a risk for a post-30 contract as you're going to find.

Edited March 5, 2014 by Dojji

[sk7326]

That's just a stupid overgeneralization. If you had a 30 year old Curt schilling or Randy Johnson, or Andy Pettitte, or Roger Clemens for that matter, you absolutely extend them 5 years. Jon Lester isn't quite in that group, but he's got a durability to match any of them, and that's the big thing when it comes to contracts.

 

If your guy has a long track record of durability and consistency, go for it. It might still blow up in your face, but the chance of success, and the upside in the case of success, is worth the possibility of catastrophic failure, which can occur at any point in a pitcher's career anyhow and doesn't magically increase just because a player hits an arbitrary age number

 

people pay too much attention to raw age in statistical analysis IMHO. It doesn't mean nothing, but if there's extenuating circumstances, then you need to stop behaving as if there aren't. Daniel nava is a classic example, no one wanted to give him any credit because he debuted in his late 20's, but he debuted in his late 20's because he started his path through the minors at age 23, not because he's a scrub like most late 20's debuts.

 

Similarly with Lester, you have a man who yes, is over 30, but also has never pitched less than 190 innings in a season, and the only time he ever missed significant time was with non-hodgkins lymphoma over 2006 and 2007. that's as safe a risk for a post-30 contract as you're going to find.

 

Someone didn't read the rest of my post ....

 

And even so, as an organization you'd rather give Lester a 3 year commitment (or less) - pitchers are just high risk categories. But if you are going to give 5-6 years, Lester is one of those guys for the reasons I noted and you repeated.

[Palodios]

If you give Lester a 3-4 year deal, i would be afraid of having the same exact problem we will have in 2015.... Except with a 34 year old pitcher instead of a 30 year old one.

Look at Sabathia-- his decline has started at 33-34. I would rather overpay for 31-35 than 34-37 in a few years.

[jacksonianmarch]

Lester said he'd give a discount to stay in Boston. Typically, a discount does not involve years, but AAV. So, if you get Lester at a discounted rate, you're still gonna have to give him the years. My guess is he'll sign for no less than five and as many as seven years

[sk7326]

If you give Lester a 3-4 year deal, i would be afraid of having the same exact problem we will have in 2015.... Except with a 34 year old pitcher instead of a 30 year old one.

Look at Sabathia-- his decline has started at 33-34. I would rather overpay for 31-35 than 34-37 in a few years.

 

With Lester, I'd go 5/110 with a 6th year team option and have no regrets.

[Dojji]

Lester said he'd give a discount to stay in Boston. Typically, a discount does not involve years, but AAV. So, if you get Lester at a discounted rate, you're still gonna have to give him the years. My guess is he'll sign for no less than five and as many as seven years

 

the question then being, does Jon Lester at age 36 have a fighting chance to be a productive upper middle of the rotation starter.

 

IMHO yes, I'd say that's a decent bet.

[redsoxrules]

With Lester, I'd go 5/110 with a 6th year team option and have no regrets.

 

If he's taking a home town discount, it won't cost that much to keep him.

[Station 13]

the question then being, does Jon Lester at age 36 have a fighting chance to be a productive upper middle of the rotation starter.

 

IMHO yes, I'd say that's a decent bet.

 

The poison of FA is teams will usually take a hit at the end of those deals. Lester is a work horse and a 5 year deal isn't that awful. He's still a #2 that gives them 200+ and doesn't have an injury history. Sign him to a 5 year if that what it takes to retain him.

[Bellhorn04]

If he's taking a home town discount, it won't cost that much to keep him.

 

It won't cost much less than that either.

[redsoxrules]

It won't cost much less than that either.

 

If he's truly taking a home town discount like Pedey, 15-17 MIL a year will get it done.

 

If not, he's not true to his words

[rjortiz]

Way to over-analyze and dissect a non-issue. Are you bored?

 

Isn't that the point of a message board?

[Bellhorn04]

If he's truly taking a home town discount like Pedey, 15-17 MIL a year will get it done.

 

If not, he's not true to his words

 

Disagree. Pedey's discount was unusual, and Lester shouldn't be expected to follow suit or risk being called a greedy putz.

 

If Lester has a big year and goes to free agency he should be able to command at least $150 million. So $100 or $110 million guaranteed is still a considerable discount, IMO anyway.

[sk7326]

Lester will look at Greinke as a comp, and I would too. I suspect the Red Sox do as well. $20-25M a year is not at all unreasonable for a guaranteed innings horse. I think the haggling is more about team options vs guaranteed years. If Boston could get Lester for 4/90 with 2 option years, that'd be about as team friendly as you're going to get. I can't imagine there is much disagreement on his dollar value so much as how much he will be guaranteed.

[sk7326]

If he's taking a home town discount, it won't cost that much to keep him.

 

$22M is a discount for what he'd be valued at.

[BornToRun]

I'm fine going into the 5/100 or 6/120 range for Lester. For a lot of reasons.

 

1. He's pretty much a lock to give you 30+ starts and 200+ innings every year.

 

2. In line with #1, he has no history of serious injury and he has very good mechanics so there isn't much to suggest that he's a major health risk going forward

 

3. Since he became a full time big leaguer in 2008, he's had one year where he failed to post an ERA in the 3's. And even in that off season (2012) his peripherals suggested he was the victim of some poor luck.

 

4. He's a lefty with a history of success at a park that isn't too friendly to lefties.

 

5. He's been nothing short of exceptional in postseason play.

 

6. 100/120 million might not seem like a discount but consider this:

 

Ricky Nolasco, the very definition of right handed mediocrity, just got close to 50 million dollars. How much would a guy with Lester's pedigree fetch on the open market?

 

Furthermore, with the way salaries are exploding in baseball, that 20 million AAV could very well look like a bargain in a few years.

 

Give Jonny his extension and move on with no regrets. This is a no-brainer to me.

[redsoxrules]

$22M is a discount for what he'd be valued at.

 

Justin Verlander and King Felix don't even make that.

And don't bring up Greinke, that was clear stupidity by the Dodgers.

I'll be shocked if it takes 20 MIL a year to keep him.

[Dojji]

Then you'll be shocked. Prices have gone up since Verlander and King Felix both gave their hometown teams significant discounts.

[redsoxrules]

Then you'll be shocked. Prices have gone up since Verlander and King Felix both gave their hometown teams significant discounts.

 

Exactly, discount. The way that Lester has been saying this for the past YEAR and has mentioned it numerous times I'm pretty sure he's willing to take a big cut. Maybe not as big as Pedey but less than 20

[Bellhorn04]

Justin Verlander and King Felix don't even make that.

 

Felix's extension was 7 years, $175 million = $25 million AAV

[sk7326]

Justin Verlander and King Felix don't even make that.

And don't bring up Greinke, that was clear stupidity by the Dodgers.

I'll be shocked if it takes 20 MIL a year to keep him.

 

Oh it was not stupid for Greinke (he's a really good pitcher). It was just the market he entered into. Lots of money chasing relatively few players. The draft picks are a far bigger deterrent than the salary.

 

Here is the thing - Lester might want to trade some salary because he is in a place where his family is happy. He owes the Red Sox nothing - it's business. But that has to come with some additional security - it's the tradeoff people make, perfect sense. Now Lester is a $25 million a year pitcher in the open market - quality #2, fringy #1, no injury history and a sure bet to spin 200 innings at a pretty good to really good level, and most of the teams are swimming in cash like Scrooge McDuck. He may not get it from all 30 teams, but he will fit many teams' budgets at that price.

 

He can offer a discount - but it has to be a discount from a fair open market price for him, not some sort of number dropped from the sky which seems emotionally satisfying but will not result in anything but some extra money to spend on Liverpool FC. $20M is a completely worthy number. Could he be had for less? If he feels good enough about his life, sure. But he certainly does not owe the Red Sox that, and asking for $20M is a considerable discount already.