Report: Red Sox Won't Give Josh Beckett More Than 4 Years
by Ben Buchanan on Mar 27, 2010 11:30 PM EDT
Email
PrintAccording to Gordon Edes, the Red Sox have set the limit at 4 years in Josh Beckett's extension negotiations.
The Red Sox have always been reluctant to sign aging players to lengthy deals, but after John Lackey received a 5-year contract, it's surprising to see them put such a limit on Beckett. One has to imagine the Sox have specific medical issues with Josh Beckett that make him less appealing than Lackey.
Beckett and the team have been talking about an extension over the course of the offseason, as Beckett is in the last year of his contract. It had seemed like the two sides were getting closer over March, but if the Sox are not willing to go to 5 years, one has to wonder if Beckett would really sign for only 4, especially given the Red Sox' willingness to give the older and recently injured Lackey 5 years.
Given the inclusion of injury protection in John Lackey's contract, it's possible the Red Sox could ask the same of Beckett if a deal were to go beyond 4 years.
48 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I’ll wait to see what plays out. Gordon Edes has been wrong on more than one occasion.
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
by Lloyd Christmas on Mar 27, 2010 11:56 PM EDT reply actions
+2
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Mar 28, 2010 10:14 AM EDT up reply actions
Edes has been way off recently. Used to be very good.
Plus, there could be all kinds of exceptions to this. Nor do I think this is anything new.
I still think its 90% he signs an extension. Negotiations were reportedly going well before – what is this, breaking news? Are we supposed to believe they didn’t discuss the length of contract until now? B.S.
Bullpen Banter
www.bullpenbanter.com
twitter: @alskor
It's possible they just got him to take new medical examinations.
Remember, they changed the Bay offer well into the negotiating process.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Mar 28, 2010 1:39 AM EDT up reply actions
Its possible.
But they did give him a full medical when he reported to camp, and they test pretty much everything then – shoulder strength, etc… to get baselines. I think it was mentioned here awhile back, but they even go so far as to test bat speed for hitters. Seems pretty doubtful (especially with the excellent spring he’s had and the decision to pitch him opening day and going again before the #5 starter) that much has changed.
I seriously doubt its a new medical reason. Most likely its either something theyve already been concerned about long term or just a management of resources issue (don’t want that many pitchers that long term that age). I really doubt either is news to Beckett or his agent, just to Gordon Edes… and I seriously doubt either stands in the way of a new deal, as much as its a negotiation point.
Bullpen Banter
www.bullpenbanter.com
twitter: @alskor
Another Thing to Consider
Think about it: there’s no information about any other contract details, etc. This could very well be 4 years max without anything to cover injury-related issues.
If both sides can agree on injury-related contract terms, then expect to go 5 years. As Ben mentions, why would they only offer Beckett 4 years when Theo & Co. just gave Lackey 5 years w/injury protection clauses?
Dumber things have happened in regards to the front office, but they would have to be dumber than bricks if they let Beckett just slip away.
Bottom line: all pitchers as of late have been susceptible to injury; it’s hard to find a workhorse nowadays.
How about zero years?
Can we go zero years? Or trade him tomorrow?
Building Fenway from the ground up - Virtual Fenway
Sure.
That will allow us to see Josh Beckett: NY Yankee come in and dominate us as we cruise to 2nd and 3rd place finishes the next few years. If that’s the sort of thing you like.
Hell, we can always replace him with Felix, Verlander, Josh Johnson – On no wait, there’s absolutely no front line starting pitching available forever.
Bullpen Banter
www.bullpenbanter.com
twitter: @alskor
Don't bother, alskor
Sean hates Beckett.
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Mar 28, 2010 10:15 AM EDT up reply actions
If only the Red Sox
were allowed to have a farm system like the other 29 clubs. Whatever will we do without Beckett being constantly injured?
Building Fenway from the ground up - Virtual Fenway
Ignorance.
Are you really insulting the production of the Redsox farm system? I don’t need to list Papelbon, Youkilis, Pedroia, Bucholz, etc… to prove that statement false.
Or are you simply pretending our farm system has an ace waiting in the wings? Because that is false too.
Beckett’s health has not even been a concern that much over the past two years. Honestly, there are medically far worse of teams that the Redsox and our rotation.
"Hating the New York Yankees is as American as apple pie, unwed mothers and cheating on your income tax." -- Mike Royko
by sox-inda-south on Mar 28, 2010 3:35 PM EDT up reply actions
I would rather the Red Sox
hold a contest to pick a random fan to pitch than see Josh Beckett out there. I’m happy seeing what our farm system can do if the alternative is throwing $80m at meathead.
alskor seemingly stating that we are DOOMED unless we resign our fragile, overrated pseudo-ace is illogical to me.
Building Fenway from the ground up - Virtual Fenway
Sean, you're not really rational when it comes to Beckett
It’s one thing to say you think Beckett is a risk at 4+ years because of injury. It’s quite another to say you’d rather “hold a contest to pick a random fan to pitch” instead of Beckett or to promote someone from the minors. Beckett is one of the better pitchers in the AL. No one the Sox have in the minors is likely to be better in the short-run (I won’t even mention the fans).
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Mar 28, 2010 4:32 PM EDT up reply actions
I can throw about 35 mph, with a wicked screw ball
and a 15 mph change
The Red Sox offense isn't an issue,- until its an issue.
No, I'm not
that’s because I hate him, and hate is rarely rational. The thought of having him around for another 4 years is an unpleasant thought, especially when we have Lackey already.
Building Fenway from the ground up - Virtual Fenway
Frankly, I'd rather have 14 twinkies and a rootbeer over 5 years
…than Lackey.
I need Beckett on this team to buffer the Lackey.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
I have a five-tool player in my pants.
ACTUALLY, advanced metrics show that that wasn't "premature".
Our farm system isn't ready to produce a top-flight ace by next year though.
Our choices in Pawtucket are Tazawa, Bowden and Adam Mills. You may not like Beckett but I’d bet he has better numbers over the next 4-5 years than that group. I may not like giving any pitcher over 30 5 years, not Lackey, not Beckett, but our farm isn’t ready to develop that kind of talent until guys like Younginer or Mendez come up (I like Kelly, and he’s very talented, but most have him pegged as a very good #2, not an ace)
Then again, you hate Beckett, so this probably doesn’t matter much to you.
DFA Beckett
by South Coast Ghost on Mar 28, 2010 11:31 PM EDT up reply actions
that is true but is it necessary?
When Lackey and Lester are already on the staff. Right now there are essentially three aces, and we could maybe scrape by with two. Don’t get me wrong, I love Beckett personally, and I would hate to see him go, but it’s not like if he leaves we suddenly have a bad pitching staff- the organization would survive and could do quite well, even if it was a couple years until the next ace came up. Right now I wouldn’t call any of them a top-flight ace quite anyways (which i consider Lincecum, Halladay… not sure if anyone else, but i may be too picky about the designation), so I’m not sure if that is completely necessary- though a very good pitcher would be nice. Still might be plenty advantageous to let Tazawa, Bowden, eventually Doubront, Kelly, Mendez, Youninger get some time (since we’re talking over a 5 year period)
Not sure I really have a point there, other than, while a top pitcher is a huge asset for the rotation, it’s not like the roster is dead without one (like KC without Greinke).
As far as Kelly’s projection, sure no one knows, the people that say solid #2 are probably trying to not overhype him so they don’t look foolish and the people that say #1 are probably being overly optimistic. We’ll have a better (though still unclear idea) after next year.
Oh, no, we wouldn't be screwed if Beckett left
I totally agree with that. I was merely arguing that for the next few years I, in my personal opinion, didn’t think our farm system could reproduce the value that Beckett will give to our rotation. Sure, in three/four years Younginer or Mendez or Manny Rivera or Britton could flourish into an ace (or even Kelly and prove prospect evaluators wrong), and in the mean time you could sign Brandon Webb to a 3 year deal or someone else in the short term. There are always options available to us, including resigning Beckett.
DFA Beckett
by South Coast Ghost on Mar 29, 2010 1:47 AM EDT up reply actions
Constantly injured?
What are you smoking?
In his four years in Boston he’s pitched over 200 innings 3 times and 174.1 the other year!
Bullpen Banter
www.bullpenbanter.com
twitter: @alskor
I think they'll be smart about this
The fact that he’s the opening day starter, not Lester, shows me that they really are trying hard to re-sign him- not just trying to appear like they are. I wouldn’t be surprised if They offered 4 guaranteed years with a vesting option for the 5th (which stops automatically stops vesting if he misses significant injury time). Other than that, they could probably afford something similar to the Halladay contract with all the money coming off the books (maybe slightly less), though I’m not sure if Beckett deserves that.
I think you hit the nail on the head.
They’re using the Halladay deal as a model.
Bullpen Banter
www.bullpenbanter.com
twitter: @alskor
he deserves nothing close to what Halladay got.
he is beyond frustrating year after year.
The Red Sox offense isn't an issue,- until its an issue.
Seriously
Halladay is a consistent ace. Beckett can barely make 200 innings and is dramatically worse. Any comparison is ludicrous.
Building Fenway from the ground up - Virtual Fenway
I'd rather you not agree with me or if you do-please do so in silent.
The Red Sox offense isn't an issue,- until its an issue.
by gizmosandy on Mar 28, 2010 4:37 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
Halladay & Beckett
FIP the last 3 years
Halladay: 3.06, 3.03, 3.55
Beckett: 3.63, 3.24, 3.08
Halladay is surely a better pitcher, but not that much better
That's what she said.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
I have a five-tool player in my pants.
ACTUALLY, advanced metrics show that that wasn't "premature".
Have I mentioned lately how much I hate the Lackey signing?
Oh, I have? Nevermind then.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
I have a five-tool player in my pants.
ACTUALLY, advanced metrics show that that wasn't "premature".
Ditto, +100, (insert infinity symbol), On Da Hop, etc....
But its done so we’ll make do.
"Hating the New York Yankees is as American as apple pie, unwed mothers and cheating on your income tax." -- Mike Royko
by sox-inda-south on Mar 28, 2010 3:37 PM EDT up reply actions
This year plus 4 years = 5 years.
Could that be what they’re talking about in concluding a contract extension now? That way, this year plus the 4 years = approximately Lackey’s deal.
Good point
We don’t have to pay him an extra $4-5 million this year, but doing so might help us negotiate down to 4 years added on.
LACKEY/Beckett
Now the Lackey deal really makes sense;Beckett will go someplace else-probably Yankees,the same way that Bay went-New York.The Red Sox are 110% business,and as long as they fill the park and dangle playoffs to the fans;it’s all gravy for the owners;ricardo bird
Sounds a bit cynical
We are talking about a group that just added about $40 million in payroll and has brought 2 WS to town…
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Mar 29, 2010 5:32 PM EDT up reply actions
I'd rather my team be all business than bleeding hearts.
The Red Sox offense isn't an issue,- until its an issue.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Over the Monster
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
