sk7326

Pitcher wins means zero. He struggled a bit in August, 3 starts against Toronto and Texas particularly. He seemed possibly a little hurt towards the end as you noted. He's also 3 years younger than Jon Lester and as mechanically sound - so the idea of decline requires a bit more than 9 starts for evidence. The 30 inning drop from a year ago is indicators that he might not have been 100% coming in. Even so, he had numbers and win contributions right in line with his pretty amazing career. He's still in any best in the league conversation.

CC was excellent in 2012. It was a decline from 2009 since he provided 30 innings less of value, but yes the peripherals were excellent (FIP, K and BB percentages ... WHIP is silly to use in non-fantasy situations since it uses the wrong denominator). 2012 was a decline in that he was almost 2 wins worse than he was in 2011 and the innings pitched plummeted. He is still an innings horse, but not at the level he has been. But as I noted, getting him to a 2012 level (excellent peripherals, but not the guaranteed pitch to the 8th inning level of yore) will be plenty to go with Tanaka and Nova if they perform as anticipated. That is a rotation that can be a plus. Now, have the Yanks done enough to catch Boston and Tampa? Not to me. But the division is loaded.

Brentz was the easy call here just because he has options and other guys don't. Once again, spring training was not going to decide anything here. Heck, even last year with Bradley's amazing spring, he would not have made the club in April if Drew was not on the DL. Nice thing is that Brentz showed some indications that he can help the team if they need him.

Nats are a very strong bounceback candidate. Their lineup SUCKED inexplicably all season in a way that sure feels non-recurring. Getting a quality #2/#3 starter for basically free helps too. Braves still have better position players - although Jason Heyward staying healthy would be nice just so he can have a full season to flash his MVP-ness. Cardinals are the best team in the NL, and perhaps more. The strong lineup combined with a Tampa Bay-level bumper crop of pitching - they shut down a 15 game winner last season and their 7th inning reliever looks to have way way filthier stuff than the late season callup who started 2 World Series games for them - means an embarassment of riches. Pirates have a ton of prospect help coming too - especially if Jamison Taillon is ready for the show midseason. Dodgers are the best in the West - especially since Tim Lincecum is a #5 starter being paid like a #2. As far as the A's goes - Beane is the best GM in the game. He beat the market to OBP, and then when the price of OBP got too expensive, he beat the market to the evaluation of defense. Last year's division winners were 6th in OBP, the 2012 division winners were near the bottom. Beane saw the value in getting a near zero in OBP in Josh Reddick, and lean on his power and ability to field the hell out of his position to create value in that park. Had themselves an interesting offseason, adding Kazmir for a good price and getting Jim Johnson for a guy they gave up on. I like the Rangers more in the division - but the A's are gonna be right there. Detroit in a walk in the central, although Cleveland is going to remain pretty good - good young players, an elite manager and a pitching coach who seems to perhaps be a true team asset. As far as the East goes - last year I thought it was a 5 team race, and still do. Red Sox had the best combination of performance and injury luck and ta-da. But the Orioles got better - and they were a better team last season than the 2012 outfit without the phenomenal luck in close games. I liked the Johnson trade. He was going to be a big arbitration payment and Baltimore (correctly) decided their money was better spent on something other than a closer and so decided to save money there with a guy (Balfour) who is not going to be appreciably different. All four LCS participants last season had closers they discovered during the season - Tampa Bay picks through other team's trash for them - no point going to the mat for one. The Yankees got a little better, though their offseason would have made more sense if they actually kept the one superstar. Red Sox are gonna be good - although if you bet Sox v the Field, I'd take the field. Tampa objectively is the favorite in the division, but not by any real margin that matters. I like our chances this season as much as you can.

Lots of small sample size alerts at work here. First of all, the Red Sox did not jettison the best centerfielder in the AL without a fish in his name to bring in a reclamation project who has not been a replacement level player since 2010. I think the competition between Sizemore and Bradley is not nearly as close as it seems - not when the former cannot be counted on for 400 PAs. It would be a phenomenal story, but I think any Sizemore emergence is far more likely to impact LF than CF. Putting a guy with the knees of a 57 year old man in a very challenging CF is a recipe for disaster. Bradley can give the Red Sox near equivalent defense to Ellsbury, and that is still incredibly valuable. With Ellsbury and Victorino in CF and RF, the Red Sox were able to basically put potted plants out in LF and still be a good defensive outfield. You don't want to give that up without getting some serious pop in return - short of Sizemore being the MVP level guy he was eons ago, that tradeoff does not seem likely here. I think the org is going to have strong hands with Bradley here - have to count on your scouting and the development curve of a 23 year old who has delivered at every level of baseball he has been challenged at (aside from being overpromoted last season to the bigs).

Well, "show something" is an interesting criteria. If his amazing spring of 2013 was not proof of anything, then a slow spring in 2014 isn't either. If the Red Sox send Bradley down for a made-of-straw Grady Sizemore on the basis of a few dozen at-bats in March, they are stupider than we thought. Don't get caught with looking at the boxscores - spring stats mean zippo, unless there is some real underlying scouting flaws that go with it (a drop in bat speed, velo problems). Bradley is learning on the job - and if he defends at a high level, his track record is worth standing behind. I think there is zero chance Sizemore wins the CF job short of suddenly turning into the "best player in the AL" level he was in 2007.

Assuming 30 starts, you are talking about a guy who cannot get into the 7th inning in most of his outings. That sounds good in isolation, but that just murders your pitching staff over the long haul. The Red Sox bullpen was good this past season - but a lot of that had to do with their starters, including Dempster - preventing them from having to do excessively heavy lifting.

King Felix was one of the two best pitchers in the AL last season. Stop. CC IS declining, but a decline from "league's best" to "solid rotation guy" is not a big deal. Sabathia's 2012 is plenty achievable. The problem was that the Yankees' rotation depended on him being his 2009 form, which is too big a burden for him to carry. With Tanaka and a legitimately good Nova, that might be somewhat alleviated now. Obviously 200 IP with a 5 ERA is not good, and a rotation of those is a bad thing. But a 200 IP guy with a meh ERA is very very valuable over a 6 month haul - if nothing else to keep a pitching staff from being destroyed. DiceK in 2008 had a lovely ERA, but his sheer inability to pitch into games made his starts unnecessarily hard on the pitching staff.

CC's dropoff has been a major thorn for NYY since so much of their pitching relied on him being 2009 good. With Tanaka in the fold and Nova's peripherals starting to match his W/L numbers, the rotation has a much better chance to be competitive against restaurant quality opposition. But CC has to get back to being some form of an anchor there too. Nobody expects 2009 to come back, but at least getting back to 2012 Sabathia.

Mechanics have always been good from a low injury perspective - not a violent delivery. At some point you have to respect his ability to eat up innings and treat it as a trait. Yes, a long term deal you are probably paying for a #3/4 starter in Year 5. But the Red Sox can afford to do that, especially if years 1-3 are as fruitful as one expects.

FIP of 1.5 runs better for Lester. Santana hung up a 5.1 ERA in one of the best pitcher's parks in the bigs. Lester had some terrible homerun luck in 2012 and still cranked out nearly 30 innings more than Santana. ERA is a very small part of the story there. Lester had an off season. Santana was hide your eyes awful. Lester was still 4 fWINS better than Santana in 2012.

Santana has a very spotty case history and was probably the worst starter in baseball in 2012. He is having trouble finding a market at his price because he has been terrible in the very recent past. Lee is a good comparison although he got the best contract in his FA group. Garza's injury history brought down his numbers and RA Dickey also had a lot of flaws. The comps you bring up are interesting but all have their own quirks. You have to think in terms of today's baseball economy and all of Lester's virtues. His one flaw is that he is not Verlander-King Felix-Darvish, although he can get to that level from time to time. But the market is paying a lot of money for what Lester gives you - one of the most consistent records of quality in the league with almost none of the red flags that come with making future bets on starting pitchers.

AJ Burnett signed for $16 million - so let's stop laughing together. First of all, why does the salary matter - it's not going to affect anybody. It does not provide a dollar for dollar effect for the Red Sox - they might budget themselves based on the luxury tax - but it's all a matter of what they want to spend, and that has more to do with how many planes John Henry wants than anything. Second, you have to respect the goods - $17M a year is not a fair price for what Lester contributes to a high revenue club like Boston which can afford to pay a lot of money for WARs. A man can offer a discount - but he can't reasonably be expected to leave that much money on the table in such a seller's market. Lester's willingness to take a discount - or at least the announcement - is an olive branch that he wants to make a deal with Boston. It's not a pledge to work for peanuts because fans find it appealing - it is giving Boston a long reasonable crack at landing him. Boston should take advantage of the opportunity, offer him a deal which he can accept without feeling rightly insulted and get on with the title defense.

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.

True, although some of the drops, like the Cardinals was due to graduation. It is one thing to note with farm system rankings. Teams will dip as major leaguers get produced. Sox will drop off next year most likely as they will graduate at least 2 prospects.

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

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.

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

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.

Essentially zero ... the speed can help it, but station to station works too. Sox have put together outstanding run scoring outfits using both flavors. Just get on base and figure the rest out later. Also, the leadoff spot is a wee bit overrated - you only lead off once. But it does get more at bats over the season than other lineup spots, so having guys you want up the most does matter some.

Screw that - clogging the bases is just fine if he's clogging them up more than 35% of the time.

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.

Spring Training stats do not matter, full stop. All that matters is that the players stay healthy, and to see if any big changes have occured (velocity, bat speed and the like). Obviously these things sharpen up over the spring. The W/L do not matter at all, but how the players look do. Certainly Fred's notion on Spring Training records is silly. Hell, even the April and May games matter only to a point. Certainly a rotten start can kill you, but it's still about health and how you are playing ... and not to lose too much.

If Vasquez is the defender he has shown coming up, he can be a .240/.310/.390 sort of guy and be an average big league starter. You look at Vasquez' minor league career and he has always had some good contact rates - enough that he should be able to provide some empty average at worst. The Red Sox did a good job rescuing Salty who was adrift as a prospect and evolved into a legitimately above average starter. Lavarnway is a terrible receiver who also stopped being a good hitter. That means in the final analysis, he is not a real starter. Swihart is the best long term prospect, but Vasquez might still be a guy with a starter's ceiling. Having legitimate depth in the sport's most deserted position is kind of amazing.

His potential is exciting. Have to give him a run at SS. Even if he is blocked when it is time for him to come up, I could see him as our Ben Zobrist, a super mega-utility guy if he continues his developmental leaps.