Red Sox offer Beckett 4 years
by SoxDevil on Mar 30, 2010 12:25 PM EDT
in News
Email
PrintAccording to ESPN's Buster Olney, the Red Sox have offered starting pitcher Josh Beckett a 4-year deal worth roughly $16.5M annually. It's rumored the the total value of the deal will be worth between $65–70M. Beckett is in the last year of a 3-year, $30M deal.
Although Josh Beckett can no longer be considered the true Ace of the staff—that title belongs to Jon Lester—his peripherals suggest a consistency that belies his year-to-year ERA. 2009 saw Beckett post 20 Quality Starts with 199 Ks over 212.2 innings. Here are some numbers from at his past three seasons:
2007 – (200.2 IP) 8.70 K/9 1.79 BB/9 3.27 ERA 3.08 FIP 3.43 xFIP 6.5 WAR
2008 – (174.1 IP) 8.88 K/9 1.76 BB/9 4.03 ERA 3.24 FIP 3.24 xFIP 5.0 WAR
2009 – (212.1 IP) 8.43 K/9 2.42 BB/9 3.86 ERA 3.63 FIP 3.35 xFIP 5.3 WAR
As OverTheMonster member Drugs Delaney points out, only CC Sabathia, Roy Halladay, and Josh Beckett have been 5.0+ WAR pitchers in each of the last three seasons. It's virtually impossible to find that caliber of pitcher on the free market, and costs an organization's best prospects via a trade. This looks like a wise investment for the cash-rich Red Sox. (For more on the John Lackey vs. Josh Beckett debate, click here.)
110 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I'm curious as to how the discussion is going
Does Beckett want more money then that? More years? No trade clause?
It sounds like both sides are optimistic. I hope they get the deal done.
Being it's the first public offer...probably not
And worse – given it is a public offer, this could mean things are not going well.
Really want this dude locked up before Sunday if we can.
Nothing suspicious going on here...
Move along.
"You know you're having a bad day when the fifth inning rolls around and they drag the warning track." - Mike Flanagan, Baltimore Orioles pitcher, 1992.
I love Lester and all but..
I dunno if I’d call him the ace of the staff just yet. He was only arguably better than Beckett last year and he hasn’t proved he can repeat that just yet. Also he has to over come the slow starts he’s had the last 2 years, let alone win 20 games and carry Boston to a World Series. Do I think he has it in him, hell yeah, but he has to do it first.
Sodomize Intolerance
by sonicdeathmonkey on Mar 30, 2010 1:13 PM EDT reply actions
Also - Beckett still gets the ball from me in any game 7
Guy has been outstanding in the playoffs.
Lester hasn’t been bad really, but he’s not where Becks is yet either.
Dunno
The overall financial winds seem to be changing a bit….He would get paid a bit more than Lackey per year and would end up closing out his contract at the same time….
It wouldn't be more than Lackey
Lackey gets $16.5MM per year, and Becket is rumored to get roughly that. Also, if they don’t bump up his salary for 2010, Lackey’s deal looks better. I think he stays if we increase this years salary by about $4MM (up from $12MM) and give him $17-$18MM per year for 4 extra years. If we put that on the table, i be he’ll accept.
Funny
ESPN’s take on this is optimistic. I (like most others here) saw this offer and said “Oh no.”
Rock me, sexy Jesus...
by nuthinboutnuthin on Mar 30, 2010 1:46 PM EDT reply actions
I don't understand how signing Beckett to a 4 year deal for money in that range wounldn't excite any Red Sox fan.
Bullpen Banter
www.bullpenbanter.com
twitter: @alskor
+1
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Mar 30, 2010 3:45 PM EDT up reply actions
Well, if it were possible, yes...
I was saying that I didn’t think it would get done at 4 yrs. $ 16.5 AAV.
I’m also totally in favor of that three-team Jed Lowrie and Lars Anderson for Evan Longoria and Albert Pujols deal…
Rock me, sexy Jesus...
by nuthinboutnuthin on Mar 30, 2010 4:41 PM EDT up reply actions
Ok. That makes sense!
I honestly read your comment like five times and it didn’t make any sense to me. I wasn’t trying to be snarky at all. It didn’t sound like you were in the “beckett sucks” crowd, but I couldn’t see what you were getting at.
Bullpen Banter
www.bullpenbanter.com
twitter: @alskor
I don't think the '"beckett sucks" crowd' really qualifies
as a ‘crowd’.
‘More like a couple a guys hangin’ ‘round the corner by the shop, havin’ a smoke….
I totally could have been clearer
Rock me, sexy Jesus...
by nuthinboutnuthin on Mar 30, 2010 8:27 PM EDT up reply actions
Not less than 5
Lackey got 5 and Beckett is younger. Beckett will expect 5 too
5 years
Yes, Beckett will get 5 years, just like Lackey but for more money. Lackey agreed to a medical contingency and my bet is the Sox want Beckett to counter and they will offer a 5th year with contingencies.
What a wonderful thing to have not one, or two, but THREE top starters locked up for several years. Makes Dice-K look even better as a #4-5 and takes all pressure off young arms like Bucholz, Kelly, etc.
Let's say - for argument sake
That this deal is signed – or something like it for one more year with clauses
2011: figures in millions
Beckett – 16.5
Lackey – 15.95
Drew – 14
Youk – 12.25
Dice-K – 10.33
Cameron – 7.75
Lester – 5.75
Pedroia – 5.75
Scutaro – 5.5
Iglesias – 2.063
Wake – 1.5
Tazawa – 1.15
Beltre/Hall (Buyouts) – 1.5
TOTAL – 99.993 (Arbitration: Paps, Hermida (Arb 3), Okajima, Ramirez, Delcarmen, Bonser (Arb 2), Ellsbury (Arb 1))
That's a bit scary...
We’d need some very creative accounting to get back down to reasonable levels while filling out our holes.
I wonder if Paps is becoming an unaffordable luxury.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Mar 30, 2010 3:46 PM EDT up reply actions
Here are some rational to delusional things that could happen
1. Iglesias takes SS – we love his defense and learn to live with his hitting curve
2. Reddick takes 4th outfield role (or better yet, if he’s ready – slides into LF after Ellsbury is traded for another piece).
3. Bard takes closer and a cheap veteran closer type is brought in for insurance (Paps goes the way or a trade, perchance the same as Ellsbury).
4. V-Mart is signed to an extension
That would cover: C, 1B, 2B, SS, LF, CF, RF, SP, SP, SP, SP, SP, CL, RP, RP, RP, RP
Holes would be DH, 3B….one would be filled via the Paps/Ells trade…most likely 3B, the other via FA or Hermida?
Nothing looked too delusional
’Just need the youngsters to continue to progress and to find some buyers for Ells and Paps.
Scary?
Why? $100 mil. leaves plent of room for added salary. Papi may be back for less than the team option($12mil.), Papplebon is certainly not unaffordable for a contending, closer-needing team (luxury!!??). What is the tax threshold? $160 mil.?
Stop worrying about the Sox’ money more than they do.
OH GOD NO
please please please please please please please please no
Building Fenway from the ground up - Virtual Fenway
Out of curiosity, how did you feel about Beckett in 2007?
Hanley trade issues not withstanding.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Mar 30, 2010 3:41 PM EDT up reply actions
Someone I hated had a good year
I still didn’t like him, but even a blind squirrel finds a nut now and then.
Building Fenway from the ground up - Virtual Fenway
And, I should say
That I was thinking we wouldn’t have been down 3-1 or have been stuck with wifebeater if we had Hanley peppering the monster.
Building Fenway from the ground up - Virtual Fenway
Yeah, we would have missed the playoffs because we had no pitching
Also, another player you hate (MIke Lowell) was very good in 2007. It’s a pretty safe bet that the Sox don’t win in 2007 without Beckett and Lowell.
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Mar 30, 2010 3:44 PM EDT up reply actions
It's all speculation
I personally think the difference between Arroyo and Beckett is lesser than the difference between wifebeater and Lugo and $10-20m.
Building Fenway from the ground up - Virtual Fenway
That's a stretch
Arroyo is a marginal pitcher. Beckett is MUCH better.
Beckett was a 6.5 WAR player in 2007. Mike Lowell, the other player in the Beckett trade, was a 5.2 WAR. Lugo was worth 0.8 WAR. That’s 12.5 WAR for three players. In 2007, Hanley was a 5.7 WAR player. The Sox gained roughly 6 wins from the Beckett trade in 2007. Take 6 wins away from the team that year and they may miss the playoffs (depending on which opponent gained the wins).
Even though Arroyo was not involved in the Beckett trade, I’ll play along. Bronson was a 2.7 WAR pitcher in the NL in 2007. He’s a mid-4s FIP fly-ball pitcher. Maybe he brings 2 wins over replacement in the AL that year.
There’s no way you can argue that the Sox would have been as good in 2007 without Beckett and Lowell. Hanley and Arroyo are not an adequate replacement for them.
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Mar 30, 2010 4:06 PM EDT up reply actions
Not to mention: Who's on 3rd?
In that scenario, yes Arroyo replaces Beckett (SP) and Ramirez replaces Lugo (SS) – but who slides into 3B back then in place of Lowell, in this fantasy year that never existed (parallel universe?)?
However much Beckett's Salary + Lowell's Salary + Lugo's Salary - Hanley's Salary - Arroyo's Salary would buy.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Mar 30, 2010 4:14 PM EDT up reply actions
A younger Aramis Ramirez was available in 2006.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Mar 31, 2010 12:52 AM EDT up reply actions
so
would a h.r. + aroyo + aramis trio given us as much war as lowell + lugo + beckett?
Fangraphs totals say yes:
h.r.+aroyo+aramis = 5.7+2.7+5.1 = 13.5
lugo+becket+m.l. = 0.8+6.5+5.3 = 12.6
and the latter ended up costing us several million more $ as well, of course.
On the other hand, this is shifting the WAR off from SP and onto position players (specifically onto shortstop) …. hmm…. in theory win values are equivalent, but I’m not sure I’d be comfortable with that swap. Dominant pitching beats position players in the playoffs, usually. Tough call.
Well, if you look at the individual games Beckett pitched...
Only 1 of them was within even 6 runs, and that was 4-0.
And then if we look at the other games, we lost in extra innings, by 2 runs, and by 4 runs.
Probably would’ve won either way.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Mar 31, 2010 2:15 AM EDT up reply actions
We can't forget
That Lugo almost single-handedly cost us game 7. Everyone seems to forget his absolutely soul-crushing dropped fly ball right before the infamous Lofton stop sign. Section 32 looked like everyone got kicked in the nads immediately afterward.
Building Fenway from the ground up - Virtual Fenway
But, by that time the Sox already had Beckett and Lowell
Both were obtained in November 2005. It’s never smart to bank everything on a player who may or may not be available the following year (imagine if the Sox were waiting on Joe Mauer).
Also, Aramis re-signed with the Cubs in early November 2006 (Nov. 12th), less than two weeks after he filed for free agency. I don’t have the dates for 2006, but that may be within the window where the Cubs had exclusive rights.
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Mar 31, 2010 7:24 AM EDT up reply actions
No, Who's On First?
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".
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
No
It’s a what-if scenario from ‘06, where Arroyo was sent off after we got Beckett. Naturally, the assumption is that had we not acquired Josh, we would’ve kept Bronson.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Mar 31, 2010 1:57 PM EDT up reply actions
And so how does Willy Mo effect WAR?
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
I have a five-tool player in my pants.
ACTUALLY, advanced metrics show that that wasn't "premature".
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
There is no guarantee that we need Beckett with Lowell
If the Red Sox believed enough in Lowell to take him on as dead weight, they could’ve gotten him for nothing. And if they were smart, would’ve let him walk after ’07.
Building Fenway from the ground up - Virtual Fenway
They wouldn't have gotten Lowell. That was just a gift.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Mar 30, 2010 4:30 PM EDT up reply actions
The cheapest team in baseball
Wouldn’t give up a 31 year old who hit .236/.298/.360/.658?
Building Fenway from the ground up - Virtual Fenway
We never would have traded for him.
No one believed in him at that point.
Bullpen Banter
www.bullpenbanter.com
twitter: @alskor
So we spend
$10m on a plus-defender 3b coming off a horrendous season this year and nearly everyone celebrates, but the concept of trading for Mike Lowell after a bad year in 2005 was completely impossible for anyone on the planet to consider?
Building Fenway from the ground up - Virtual Fenway
Beltre had very specific injuries which clearly caused his issues
Lowell just looked like he was aging. Plus, defense has very quickly become much more highly valued than it was.
Blind squirrel?
Is Beckett not even a good pitcher?
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Mar 30, 2010 3:44 PM EDT up reply actions
Are you baiting Sean, USG?
You know he isn’t rational on this subject.
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Mar 30, 2010 3:45 PM EDT up reply actions
Not so much baiting.
I’m just curious as to how he feels. I can understand hating a deal, hating a contract, hating underachieving, etc.
But I don’t know if that’s how he feels, or if he just really thinks Beckett isn’t good.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Mar 30, 2010 3:47 PM EDT up reply actions
Beckett is good
he is not OMG 16M A YEAR good. 2007 was his great year, since then he’s been good. We already have one of those in Lackey.
Building Fenway from the ground up - Virtual Fenway
OK, fair enough.
I don’t quite agree, given how pitching contracts are trending upwards thanks to the Yankees’ deals to Sabathia and Burnett, but that’s an understandable position, at least.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Mar 30, 2010 3:50 PM EDT up reply actions
If he were 2007 regularly
or had any hope of ever 2007’ing again I’d be able to tolerate it. But this is another Lowell deal, paying for past performance argumentum ad ignorantiam.
It’s within the realm of reason that another human who can throw a ball will come around if we don’t re-sign Beckett. It isn’t the end of the world if we let him go to the Greater Fool.
Building Fenway from the ground up - Virtual Fenway
Beckett is still a 4-or-less ERA pitcher in the AL East in a hitter's park.
It’s not like this is a Sabathia-sized deal.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Mar 30, 2010 4:17 PM EDT up reply actions
Will he be in 2014?
We could easily have $40m for 2 4.75 ERA pitchers.
Building Fenway from the ground up - Virtual Fenway
PitchFX doesn't go back far enough for me to do much of an analysis on when similar pitchers lose velocity.
But I wouldn’t be too concerned about signing him through 33 or so.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Mar 30, 2010 4:21 PM EDT up reply actions
Well
Millwood is the top comp through 29 and hasn’t come close to 4.0 since he was 30. Jack McDowell had a series of 5.0s then was out of baseball at 33. Dennis Leonard was effectively out of baseball at 32. Jack Morris was good through 33. Brad Penny and Alex Fernandez blew up at 30. Hudson has alternated good and blowups. Hentgen blew up at 32. Freddy Garcia has been mediocre through 34.
The BR comps list does not give me much hope.
Building Fenway from the ground up - Virtual Fenway
What's the alternative?
As noted look at the deals of CC, Burnett and even Derek Lowe. Look at Barry Zito, Tim Hudson. There are a lot of expensive deals for pitchers out there, the terms for Becks are not out of line.
So in terms of OMG good, I would say that bar is now set at $18m +, $16m gets you just plain good to great pitchers.
I get the age concern, but really the list of 33+ yr old pitchers who are still elite is pretty slim. And that’s incredible hard to predict also.
The alternative
is not throwing $80m at an argument from ignorance. That is $80m we can throw at maximizing value, not just maximizing a tunnelvision view of what we require.
We can create pitchers, as we’ve shown multiple times recently. We apparently can’t create an SS or 3B. And so we buy… pitchers?
Building Fenway from the ground up - Virtual Fenway
Thats the best argument Ive heard you make about this.
but you have to be damn sure we can develop frontline pitching… because even the chances to spend big bucks to land frontline pitching in free agency are rare, never mind trade for one.
Bullpen Banter
www.bullpenbanter.com
twitter: @alskor
So $80m should be spent on SS and 3B prospects? Also consider what Curt Schilling received in '04
I get the farm system investment but the Sox are doing that just fine there with the payroll of the MLB roster as it is.
I have hard time thinking simply putting $10s of millions additionally into the system will mature more/better position prospects. Won’t hurt, but not a sure thing either.
I think you might be undervaluing the importance of proven starting pitching, especially playoff pitchers.
in ’04, the Sox gave $12m a year for a 37 year old pitcher – with his post season performance cited as a major factor.
Add 6 years on the clock and drop 7 years off the age and here was are with Beckett.
He’s not as established, and not as solid a pitcher, but he’s not too far off….I don’t think a $4m bump is that much in this sense.
Im assuming you didn't mean to respond to me since this strongly agrees with my position.
Bullpen Banter
www.bullpenbanter.com
twitter: @alskor
Beckett isn't a "proven" playoff pitcher
He’s crapped out in ‘08 and ’09. And before anyone jumps on me, I didn’t bring it up. He’s had just as many good as disastrous series.
I don’t think either myself or alskor is saying to put the money into the farm system. I was saying that chances are we can get a more-than-passable replacement out of our farm for pitcher rather than 3b or SS. Meanwhile, maybe for once in my lifetime we’d have an actual long-term solution at 3b.
$80m can go a long way, and I don’t like getting locked in to a player who has many negative factors when we already have so much money going to SP.
Building Fenway from the ground up - Virtual Fenway
Who's that solution?
Look at next year’s free agent crop. Crap except for Aramis and Beltre—33 and 32 respectively. Beltre will probably last at third, but the only way he’s on the market instead of with us for another option year is if he has another big offensive year, and you don’t like paying for past performance. No good options in ’12 either.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Mar 30, 2010 9:18 PM EDT up reply actions
Spending money to spend money isn't the solution
And again, argument from ignorance. Just because we don’t see anyone available doesn’t mean nobody will be available. Every trade deadline and offseason somebody unexpected arises, and rather than throwing money at a quasi-solution now that will bite us on the ass if comps are any indication, I’d like to be able to pounce on the surprise.
Building Fenway from the ground up - Virtual Fenway
Alright, let's stop that little argument from ignorance thing:
Aramis Ramirez – Already discussed
Pablo Sandoval – Really a first baseman, basically untouchable as he’s not even in arbitration.
Michael Young – Too old, also not able to toe the hot corner.
Martin Prado: Under team control, and not that great even if he weren’t.
David Wright – Franchiseish player with a questionable glove and signed to one of the richest teams in the game.
Scott Rolen – Too old to be the long-term solution you want.
Chone Figgins – Freshly signed and reasonable contract. The only way the Mariners move him is if he performs very badly. Would’ve been a nice signing this year, but oh well…
Ryan Zimmerman – Franchise player, untouchable for a few more seasons.
Adam Kennedy – Old, not very good.
Jorge Cantu – Not very good
Alex Rodriguez – Uh…yeah…
Evan Longoria – Not happening
Casey Blake – Too Old
Mark Teahen – Not very good
Pedro Feliz – Neither good, nor young
Chipper Jones – Old, not leaving the Braves
Mark Reynolds – Bad glove, under team control for 3 more years.
Andy LaRoche – No bat to date, under team control.
Kevin Kouzmanoff – No on-base abilities to speak of.
Jhonny Peralta – Had only one good year.
Emilio Bonifacio – I don’t think he even carries a bat to the plate.
Mark DeRosa – Too old
Brandon Inge – Can’t get on base.
Casey McGehee – No confidence in his ability to play 3rd
I’d say that satisfies enough burden of proof re: no good third baseman solutions being available. Let’s hope Yamaico Navarro develops well, eh?
Anyways, spending money on Beckett wouldn’t be spending money to spend money, it would be spending money to keep a sub-4 ERA pitcher in Boston. You talk about argument from ignorance and then say we shouldn’t sign Beckett because he’ll be a 4.75 ERA pitcher by the time he’s 33. You site Kevin Millwood because of the similarity scores, but those scores don’t tell you that Beckett is a 94 MPH fastball guy who was pretty good right up until his year 33 season anyways, andthen had a good year 34 season besides. Those numbers are only really good for matching up similar production, not how they go about it.
Obviously neither side has proven that Beckett will be good or bad at 33 because, quite frankly, neither side can. But that’s the case with all free agent signings, and I feel secure that Beckett will be at least a very good (sub-4) pitcher for the next 4 years. I don’t think we really have a suitable replacement for him until at least 2012, though, and while spending money to spend money isn’t the solution, holding money back hoping for some miracle to show up on the market instead of signing a 5 WAR pitcher is certainly not the solution either.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Mar 31, 2010 12:49 AM EDT up reply actions
I stick with the from ignorance approach
I think you’re greatly underselling the flexibility that Youkilis affords us. None of those names appear to be great solutions for us at the moment, however there’s also a pool of 1B or 1B/LF players who could easily take over for Youkilis and provide a substantial boost to our offensive production. I’m not saying this is what the Sox want to do by any means, but it is a possibility, whether it’s Adrian Gonzalez or Adam Dunn (splitting 1B/DH duties with Martinez?) or a lesser talent.
And the second part, once again, that’s how things appear at this moment. A year ago I never would’ve thought we’d have one of Cameron/Scutaro/Beltre, and here we have all three. Times and situations change.
9 of the 10 names on Beckett’s comps list completely crapped out in the time span we’re discussing, and none of them are from crazy-old time baseball either. He has already been fragile in his late 20s, and he has only been an elite talent for one season. He’s gone from horrendous to spectacular to above average to slightly greater above average.
So many of the arguments for resigning Beckett in these past 2 threads were “I don’t know how we’d replace him.” You can’t sign out of fear, especially when there are serious question marks about the target.
Building Fenway from the ground up - Virtual Fenway
Re:
9 of the 10 names on Beckett’s comps list completely crapped out in the time span we’re discussing, and none of them are from crazy-old time baseball either.
These comp lists are close to meaningless. Let’s look at Jon Lester. These are the most similar pitchers:
Mark Prior
Noah Lowry
Cole Hamels
Josh Johnson
Larry Jaster
Daisuke Matsuzaka
Jered Weaver
Joe Saunders
Monty Stratton
Roger Moret
This list is garbage. Incidentally, the most “similar” pitcher by age is Santo Alcala, who appears very dissimilar.
The reason why these comparisons are crap is because they factor in all kinds of useless stats like wins and losses. No FO would use these comparisons. They would be more inclined to look at similar style pitchers and players of a similar body-type, etc.
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Mar 31, 2010 11:25 AM EDT up reply actions
Really it's more of a hall-of-fame watch than anything else.
Player A produced as much as Player B had by this point, so if Player A just keeps on producing, he should go to the hall of fame!
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Mar 31, 2010 11:33 AM EDT up reply actions
So we're not going to bother with comparisons anymore at all?
terrible straw man, I expect more from you Ben.
Building Fenway from the ground up - Virtual Fenway
We can bother with comparisons.
Just not “similarity” ratings. Those are worthless. You want a comparison, look for a 29-year old groundball/strikeout power pitcher with some pre-draft shoulder concerns who relies on primarily fastballs and curveballs.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Mar 31, 2010 2:05 PM EDT up reply actions
I used through Age xx
Which is far more complimentary (and complementary, I guess) for Lester, and I feel more accurate for Beckett.
How many starting pitchers, power pitchers no less, can maintain their stuff through age 34 or 35? You have the Johnsons and Madduxes, but they’re generational talents.
I can’t be the only who thinking Beckett has never really been much of a pitcher, instead just trying to blow people away with the fb and mixing in the plus curve. So the players who tend to adapt and survive when their velocity starts to drop (which is a serious concern for someone with as many random injuries as Beckett has) don’t seem to be too similar to him.
Building Fenway from the ground up - Virtual Fenway
Re: Age
I looked at a few power pitchers: Curt Schilling, John Smoltz, Mike Mussina, Andy Pettitte, and Chris Carpenter were all effective into their mid-30s. Even Pedro (one of my all-time fave pitchers) was effective upt to 33-years old (his first year with the Mets)—and he was smaller and had many more injury issues than Beckett.
According to Fangraphs, Andy Pettitte didn’t start using a cutter until 2004. In 2002 and 2003 (the earliest years Fangraphs shows pitches thrown), Pettitte threw his FB more than Beckett does. Fangraphs has Beckett throwing a cutter 5% of the time last year. So, it appears Beckett is altering his approach.
The power pitchers that flamed out seem to have had a big drop in K/9 before they turned 30. Beckett’s K-rate is still very good (8.43 last year).
Look, I agree that there are always risks in signing pitchers in their 30s. But, it appears that there are no set patterns—and, more importantly, there are few options to replace Beckett in the near future. I’m not sure that any of the potential FA starters are better and some of the better ones carry more risk going forward than Beckett does.
The “most similar” comparisons are crap. As I said before, the FO will look at a variety of things: body type, medical history, and stats we are no privy to before making their decision. The Sox’ FO has a pretty good track record as talant evaluators. Hopefully, they’ll make the right decision.
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Mar 31, 2010 12:28 PM EDT up reply actions
I think Youkilis is done at 3rd base.
He gives us terrific defense at 1st, but in-between guys like Youkilis tend to lose that extra step they need around this age. If you want to use him for half a season or in an emergency, OK, but don’t go running him out there every day for a year. He’s just not going to be able to keep playing there much longer—which would break your “solution not stopgap” rule.
My argument for signing Beckett wouldn’t be “I don’t know how we would replace him” it’s "I know we will be replacing a #2 with a #5-type talent for at least the next few years, unless Kelly steps in and performs immediately in 2012.
If we can’t develop 3B prospects, though, why not just deal for one? Send Kelly out with some other talent for Pedro Alvarez, or even see if we can get the Jays to part with Brett Wallace (probably not, given the division).
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Mar 31, 2010 11:49 AM EDT up reply actions
But even if Youk is somewhat questionable at third
He’s locked down for us for at least a few years, and it gives us a chance to lock down a proper solution at 1B in the players I suggested.
My main argument against Beckett is that I hate him, but there are also serious reasons why we shouldn’t. We already have a clone of him who isn’t a douche for the next few years, and we create plenty of pitching prospects.
I’m totally open to a trade for a solution at 3b and ss, especially using our pitching surplus. With that I’ll agree completely. But with pitching often being the most varied position in terms of performance, why not go for stopgaps-and-depth there instead of every other position?
Building Fenway from the ground up - Virtual Fenway
What makes you say Beckett is a "douche"?
And how do you know Lackey isn’t a bigger douche? Beckett doesn’t embarrass teammates on the field. Nor does he whine as much as Lackey did in Anaheim.
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Mar 31, 2010 12:30 PM EDT up reply actions
Part of why I hate meathead
is his outrageous arrogance on his arrival in Boston before putting up a 5.01 ERA. He acted like he’s the best pitcher in the world, then did nothing at all to be passable while the 2006 Red Sox flamed out around him.
Building Fenway from the ground up - Virtual Fenway
OK, he had a rude awakening when he came to the AL
By all accounts Beckett is a model teammate.
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Mar 31, 2010 1:00 PM EDT up reply actions
Players who are arrogant
and whose arrogance lead directly to massive failure are dead to me. Same with Mr. Bundchen’s arrogance losing the super bowl for the Patriots single-handedly after the “I think we’ll score more than 17 points” boast.
Building Fenway from the ground up - Virtual Fenway
You really think Brady's arrogance was the cause of the superbowl failure?
And not the offensive line COMPLETELY VANISHING
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Mar 31, 2010 2:10 PM EDT up reply actions
What about the half dozen times
he launched the ball 15’ over Moss’ head when both were completely unmarked?
Building Fenway from the ground up - Virtual Fenway
I wonder if that could have anything to do
With having .3 seconds to throw the ball before Tuck was breathing down his neck.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Mar 31, 2010 2:32 PM EDT up reply actions
Seriously
there were a half dozen times when he was completely unmarked. Nobody was near him, and he just screwed the pooch. There were other times when he was getting pounded, but these were not those times.
Building Fenway from the ground up - Virtual Fenway
WHO ISN'T A DOUCHE????
Do you not remember the “the better team didn’t win” doucheologue?
If Beckett was a turd when he walked in, well that was then. In the meantime, he’s been a great teammate, by all accounts, and an effective pitcher. Never get a second chance to make a first impression with you, huh?
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".
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
Throw where?
This is not a deli counter; we have player A or player B. Teams can’t by $X worth of anything.
We have the money for both.
I cant imagine anyone actually believes they’d let a player like VMart walk b/c of money if they wanted to keep him. We’ve never operated that way.
Bullpen Banter
www.bullpenbanter.com
twitter: @alskor
If they let Victor go it's because they want to go a different way at C
whether it proves out his D is too subpar, or his bat wears down too much – they may want to look elsewhere.
Not really a lot of other options right now, and no real reason to think V-mart won’t have a solid season
What I really want to know is....
Who is “Drugs Delaney,” and how the heck do I get a nickname like THAT?? =D
Shhhhh....
He’s really Terry Francona
Rock me, sexy Jesus...
by nuthinboutnuthin on Mar 30, 2010 8:26 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah...and that's not green tea he drinks.
It’s mushroom tea.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
I have a five-tool player in my pants.
ACTUALLY, advanced metrics show that that wasn't "premature".
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
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
