Sox Talk
Since I've been disconnected for a while, the Sox have been busy rearranging the 2010 team. They look like they've signed John Lackey and Mike Cameron, traded away Mike Lowell, and abandoned Jason Bay negotiations. First off, I love Mike Lowell, who has been nothing but professional and productive since we took on his contract as a concession in the Beckett deal. I was definitely one of the many in the Nation to join in the cheers "Resign Mike" after his 2007 World Series MVP award. But like all players, eventually they get old. After an injury plagued season, Theo and the front office think Lowell is on the ending stages of his career. The GM decided to trade Lowell for a young catching prospect, Max Ramirez. I'm not so sure this is a bad trade, but at first, it very much appears as such.
The Sox are eating Mike's entire contract. They view this as a sunk cost. Fine. The Sox need a backup in case Varitek can't make it through the season playing once a week. Fine. But this trade only makes sense if Epstien and crew have a master plan about what to do about the gap this creates at third (or if they move Youk back to his original spot across the diamond, we have a hole at first). Right now, the Sox don't have any infield prospect Major League ready. Since there is a fairly decent sized class of third base free agents available this off season, my guess is that Theo is waiting for a cheap bargain to pop up just before Spring Training. I'm fine with waiting to get a cheap, year long replacement for Lowell (or maybe even Nick Johnson, a power hitter, at first). But if the Sox are just waiting to get the scraps of some scrub corner infielder, why not just keep Lowell? This trade doesn't completely make sense because Lowell's contract is expiring, and for the exact same price, we could have signed this future corner infielder as a backup or as a platoon player. We will still have no backup at third. The only thing the Sox gain from the trade is a short term backup for the backup at catcher (backup´s backup). Ultimately, before passing any judgement, Sox Nation needs to wait to see the second half of this trade unfold, but right now, the Sox just look like they are needlessly dumping Lowell.
The Mike Cameron signing, on the other hand, is a great deal. It fills the Sox short term needs and enables long term needs in the outfield. The Sox's top prospects are all projected to be Major League ready by 2012, so the two year deal couldn't fit any better. This is perfect timing to move in the graduating Minor Leaguers when they are ready. Cameron also replaces the clubhouse persona lost with Lowell. As a bat, he is mediocre, but he fits the bill as a great defensive fielder. He will compete with Elsbury for webjems on a nightly basis, and since he'll be stationed at Fenway's short left field, I expect him to be even more of a star with diving spectaculars. I'm usually one to ignore defense in evaluating players (I place way more emphasis on offensive capabilities because I think they have greater effects on games), but some sabermetrics, statistics based, websites claim that Cameron's defensive abilities outweigh Bay's offensive abilities, aka, Cameron saves more runs than Bay creates. I'm excited to see another speedy outfielder to complement Elsbury.
Opposed to a great Mike Cameron signing, the John Lackey deal is another short sighted signing. John Lackey is a great pitcher who will definitely help the Sox win games this year, next year, and possibly in three years. But giving a 36 year old pitcher a five year deal is a mistake. It's wishful thinking to hope that Lackey will be pitching into his 40s. This guy has visited the DL and not pitched complete seasons the last two years. Usually Theo looks for these types of players, because he can sign them for a bargain. This time, it is not the case, and Epstein shelled out too many years to this guy. Terry Francona earlier offered these words of caution before signing Lackey. "To get that type of pitcher [Lackey], you're going to have to make quite a commitment. That's something that makes our organization a little bit uneasy. It doesn't mean a guy can't come in and help you win, but if there's an injury along the way, that can set your organization back quite a bit. So there's a lot to think about besides just the year 2010. You're possibly talking about 2015. That's a lot of years." The skipper clearly is extremely skeptical. Why should Theo take that gamble? The money saved on Lackey could have gone to signing great relievers (our bullpen's collapse when Masterson was dealt was the pivotal demise of the Sox last season) and with the proclaimed top priority of the Sox, signing Jason Bay, negotiations seem to have disolved. Basically, the Sox are giving up on Bay because he's asking for John Lackey type money and years. I understand the importance of a strong pitching staff, but I personally believe, over the course of five years, Bay will contribute to his future team more than Lackey will. In t-shirt sales alone, Bay could have made back that money; he was on his way to becoming a franchise player. Lackey won't have that same marketability. He won't have the same durability as the younger, healthy Bay. Lackey´s signing is a very short sighted decision and like Francona said, he could "set back your organization quite a bit."
The Sox are eating Mike's entire contract. They view this as a sunk cost. Fine. The Sox need a backup in case Varitek can't make it through the season playing once a week. Fine. But this trade only makes sense if Epstien and crew have a master plan about what to do about the gap this creates at third (or if they move Youk back to his original spot across the diamond, we have a hole at first). Right now, the Sox don't have any infield prospect Major League ready. Since there is a fairly decent sized class of third base free agents available this off season, my guess is that Theo is waiting for a cheap bargain to pop up just before Spring Training. I'm fine with waiting to get a cheap, year long replacement for Lowell (or maybe even Nick Johnson, a power hitter, at first). But if the Sox are just waiting to get the scraps of some scrub corner infielder, why not just keep Lowell? This trade doesn't completely make sense because Lowell's contract is expiring, and for the exact same price, we could have signed this future corner infielder as a backup or as a platoon player. We will still have no backup at third. The only thing the Sox gain from the trade is a short term backup for the backup at catcher (backup´s backup). Ultimately, before passing any judgement, Sox Nation needs to wait to see the second half of this trade unfold, but right now, the Sox just look like they are needlessly dumping Lowell.
The Mike Cameron signing, on the other hand, is a great deal. It fills the Sox short term needs and enables long term needs in the outfield. The Sox's top prospects are all projected to be Major League ready by 2012, so the two year deal couldn't fit any better. This is perfect timing to move in the graduating Minor Leaguers when they are ready. Cameron also replaces the clubhouse persona lost with Lowell. As a bat, he is mediocre, but he fits the bill as a great defensive fielder. He will compete with Elsbury for webjems on a nightly basis, and since he'll be stationed at Fenway's short left field, I expect him to be even more of a star with diving spectaculars. I'm usually one to ignore defense in evaluating players (I place way more emphasis on offensive capabilities because I think they have greater effects on games), but some sabermetrics, statistics based, websites claim that Cameron's defensive abilities outweigh Bay's offensive abilities, aka, Cameron saves more runs than Bay creates. I'm excited to see another speedy outfielder to complement Elsbury.
Opposed to a great Mike Cameron signing, the John Lackey deal is another short sighted signing. John Lackey is a great pitcher who will definitely help the Sox win games this year, next year, and possibly in three years. But giving a 36 year old pitcher a five year deal is a mistake. It's wishful thinking to hope that Lackey will be pitching into his 40s. This guy has visited the DL and not pitched complete seasons the last two years. Usually Theo looks for these types of players, because he can sign them for a bargain. This time, it is not the case, and Epstein shelled out too many years to this guy. Terry Francona earlier offered these words of caution before signing Lackey. "To get that type of pitcher [Lackey], you're going to have to make quite a commitment. That's something that makes our organization a little bit uneasy. It doesn't mean a guy can't come in and help you win, but if there's an injury along the way, that can set your organization back quite a bit. So there's a lot to think about besides just the year 2010. You're possibly talking about 2015. That's a lot of years." The skipper clearly is extremely skeptical. Why should Theo take that gamble? The money saved on Lackey could have gone to signing great relievers (our bullpen's collapse when Masterson was dealt was the pivotal demise of the Sox last season) and with the proclaimed top priority of the Sox, signing Jason Bay, negotiations seem to have disolved. Basically, the Sox are giving up on Bay because he's asking for John Lackey type money and years. I understand the importance of a strong pitching staff, but I personally believe, over the course of five years, Bay will contribute to his future team more than Lackey will. In t-shirt sales alone, Bay could have made back that money; he was on his way to becoming a franchise player. Lackey won't have that same marketability. He won't have the same durability as the younger, healthy Bay. Lackey´s signing is a very short sighted decision and like Francona said, he could "set back your organization quite a bit."
.
*** UPDATE***
Since I am one to admit my mistakes (and not try to cover them up by simply deleting and rewriting a post), it turns out that my information about Lackey was incorrect. He is not 36 years old, he is 31, a prime age for a pitcher. This completely changes my opinions about the Lackey signing. A rotation with Lester, Lackey, Beckett, Bucholtz, and Dice-K/Wakefield on paper is the most dominating rotation in baseball. And, if they resign Beckett next year, this rotation also has longevity, with young guns Lester and Bucholtz. Ignore my initial post regarding Lackey's age and the durability issues that accompany a veteran pitcher. Be glad, like I am, to find out that Lackey is young enough to potentially be very effective for years to come.
0 comments:
Post a Comment