sk7326

If you are selling, who cares if it is in the division or not. Saves some money - Kelly Johnson could easily be bought out.

Kelly Johnson coming back. Pure salary dump.

Good move - get Bogaerts back to SS, ride it out. Not sure who is coming back - not sure how much I care.

One theory that makes it all fit: Ownership gave Cherington a mandate to maximize the potential of the 2015 team, that the team was selling in 2014, but intend to contend next season. The two deals with Lester and Lackey have clear positive 2015 impact (especially if Craig's issues can be solved with an offseason of rest). The prospect inventory is still there to do a lot - they did not need to add more to that. I am not sure if that was the "right" course - but it makes sense in that context. In particular, if Lester is amenable to returning - this makes more sense than that. I don't like either trade - but if this is the endgame, it fits better.

Top 100 prospect in both BA and KLaw. He is struggling this year ... but as a 20 year old in AA. That is important to appreciate. Young for his level, stuff is raw but apparently very projectable. For a short reliever, this is pretty good.

Watching ESPN's roundup and Keith Law and Manny Acta talking about it. What has been interesting is that Boston's trades have been made specifically with improving the 2015 club in mind. They are clearly loading up for next season - and not worrying about the prospect inventory (which is considerable already). I am not sure I agree with the strategy but it makes sense, particularly if they do re-sign Lester (I put odds at less than 50-50, but not insane).

Can only evaluate the deal when it is made (what do you do with imperfect info and the evaluations at the time). Lowell was the price tag for a projected star (in addition to the prospects). There is no such star here. Not even a question mark with electric upside a la Carlos Martinez.

Mike Lowell was an anvil the Red Sox had to take on to land a 25 YEAR OLD FORMER WORLD SERIES MVP!!! Regardless of whether Beckett lived up to his promise, he was a premium asset in 2006. As a big market team, you use your ability to take a garbage contract (which Lowell was at the time), so you can get the premium asset. There is no premium asset here. Just a lot of hope.

Lackey was a #2 starter being paid in styrafoam packing peanuts next season. That was a large asset. The Sox traded their top 2 starters for no long term value. I don't think these are Cherington deals - a fantasy league would have protested this deal.

I suspect these aren't "Ben" trades.

Allen Craig, Joe Kelly

Joe Kelly and Allen Craig for Lackey

Also note the mechanism by which Cespedes goes free after 2015. His contract forbids the team from offering him salary arbitration - they essentially agree to cut him, thus no compensatory pick attachment. You have to think this was done with the intent of signing him longer but they did not buy a ton of control here.

In some ways he is a more attractive commodity - that extra year of control for peanuts.

It is the fascinating question - it has been good enough to pile up the runs so far. There was not a great impact bat left, so they went the other way.

The move also does block Betts - who picked up where he left off with his Pawtucket feats of strength. On the other hand, in Boston he'd be subjected to management who has been incredibly weak kneed about their internal prospect evaluations.

To be fair, they were already there - they and the Angels have been the 2 best teams in the AL most of the season, just crush it on the run differential. It's not like Detroit is getting 2012 Verlander performances this season. Hammel has been terrible for Oakland, so Beane I think was looking to upgrade opportunistically. They got Lester at what was (for them) a pretty small price - a low OBP outfielder who they were not going to resign after 2015. Not that they won't miss Cespedes, but for a rotation anchor rental, it was a pretty fair price.

Under the contract he signed, Sox are not allowed to offer him arbitration after the 2015 season. http://oakland.athletics.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20120213&content_id=26674580&vkey=news_oak&c_id=oak

Suffice to say, for the A's, this is a rental. At the same time, this is a tremendous deal for Oakland - improves their already terrific run prevention ... add a reasonable corner outfield bat who has played in big games (fwiw) and did not have to give up any young assets. If Lester comes back (or somebody similar in the offseason) this move looks better than it does right now. Getting 1 season of Cespedes for 2 months of Lester and Gomes is a solid return on some level, but considering what you'd have hoped for in dealing the top name on the market, it feels thin. Second of the Sox trades where it seems like they did not get 90 cents on the dollar.

I am not even thinking about the shiny baubles so much as the going rate for guys of Lester's ilk - in an industry drowning in cash ... in a market who gets a lot more bang for winning than others. A lot of teams are doing well, so the idea of replacing Lester easily (or Lackey for that manner - legit workhorses) is a bit of a dream. Especially with a lot of cheap controllable position help seemingly here or on the way, the money is there to allocate to the rotation. I do believe 30 year olds are risks on principle. But you have to evaluate individual investments, and Lester's durability changes the calculus significantly here. There was a solid industry comp to Lester to work with (Greinke) if they wanted it. But they've made their choice without an apparent plan B.

There is a huge winners curse to free agency - without a doubt. The best use of free agency is to fill a targeted need which you can't source internally - maybe a key bat, something like that. The Cuban signees had considerable risk (and Cespedes is a bit behind the other two although spectacular). Now that being said, starting pitching is one of the areas which is very hard to source if you don't already have it - so there is a market premium on good guys. The best use of money used to be for draft bonuses - but the league scuttled that. The latin FA pool is a source of efficiency but not the depth of the draft pool with a ton of performance variability. I think the worry that this franchise wants to go cheap is warranted - the owners have reps for begin fairly hawkish on the issue of compensating players - which does not fly when you charge the nation the prices or litter the broadcast with ads. Nobody is asking the Sox to spend stupidly - but the market has financial advantages, and the fans are asked more financially than any other set of fans. Those factors require that the team not run itself like the Pirates. Money has its perks - the ability to take on a Mike Lowell in a deal, the ability to resign homegrown guys and not have to make the sort of choices the Twins have to, and the ability to correct mistakes quickly.

He didn't cost an arm and a leg - and the durability and upside is there - if not the probability. For some contenders, they just need guys who can make a dozen reasonably competitive starts. It is interesting how the industry values innings - not necessarily stupendous quality, but the ability to deliver in bulk. (of course that is central as to why Lester is a good value in the market regardless of whether he replicates his 2014 form)

Not nearly that high. Basically when he said "let's move this to the offseason", Lester has committed to at least exploring the auction. Boston will have to put a competitive offer to get him. They might not have to offer the most, but it has to be close. There is very little evidence that they have been inclined to make that kind of offer. And frankly, I don't think has really been Cherington's call.

Oscar Tavares was one of the top 5 prospects in baseball with comps to Vladimir Guerrero. For 2 months of Jon Lester that is a pretty phenomenal return. I also am certain that was never offered because the Cards are not stupid.

Great buy low move for the Cubbies. Doubront for basically zippo ... his command sucks, he has #2 stuff but the command means he probably won't me more than what he was a year ago. That said, three years of control for a potential #3/#4 starter for a bag of donuts is a very good move. Cubs are loaded with farm bats - not so much with guys who can soak innings up.