I don't think it's obvious that the Sox will trade Buch, but it certainly creates some flexibility for them to do so. They could go with the awesome
strarting 5 of Lester, Beckett, Lackey, Dice-k, and Buch or trade Buch+ and get Wake and reclamation project to hold down the #5 starter spot until
Bowden/Tazawa/Kelley/etc is ready. (I'd hate to think Buch is going to be accompanied by Kelley or Westmoreland though). The move just gives them options
(although they might already have a plan worked out).
1 Point
Red Sox sign John Lackey, deal finalized
| Author | Comment | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
 JimRiceRocks |
#81 | |||
|
Veteran Member
Posts: 1215 12/14/09 4:40 PM Veteran Member |
"You can never have too much bitching" - left coast bosox fan
"No wonder a lot of opponent's announcers have bullpenis envy - left coast bosox fan |
|||
|
|
||||
|
Union4Sox |
#82 | |||
|
Veteran Member
Posts: 301 12/14/09 4:49 PM |
JimRiceRocks wrote:I can't see them re-signing Wake only to leave him out of the rotation. It certainly wouldn't make Wake happy and he wouldn't serve much of a purpose in the bullpen given his age and recent injuries ( I can't imagine how long it would take him to get loose in the pen). Dice-K is obviously staying around. And Buchholz is no longer suitable for the minor leagues. It is a disservice to him and makes no use of his inherent value to the Sox. It would make no sense for the Sox to keep him other than insurance against injury or the possible ineffectiveness of Dice K. Now, I'm a huge Clay fan. I've watched him play since he was drafted and I love his stuff. I think he is going to have a successful career. In a perfect world, I would love to see him pitch out of the number 5 spot. But he is too good to pitch out of the 5 spot. He gives much more value to the Sox in the form of a trade. Lets also remember that this was not a spontaneous decision. The Sox clearly have been following Lackey and I imagine a decision to acquire Lackey went hand in hand with a decision to trade Clay. For who? I don't know. But, I can't fathom him being on the roster next year, though it will be said to see him go. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
JimRiceRocks |
#83 | |||
|
Veteran Member
Posts: 1217 12/14/09 4:52 PM Veteran Member |
Union, don't forget that the Beckett extension is only rumor. Right now, he's only signed through the end of this year, so it may very make sense to
keep Buch around another year.
And I'm sure they'll find a way to rest people and get Wake some innings.
"You can never have too much bitching" - left coast bosox fan
"No wonder a lot of opponent's announcers have bullpenis envy - left coast bosox fan |
|||
|
|
||||
|
Union4Sox |
#84 | |||
|
Veteran Member
Posts: 302 12/14/09 5:12 PM |
JimRiceRocks wrote: No, no. I totally understand about Beckett. I just honestly think the Sox view Kelly as the heir apparent to Beckett. He won't be ready until 2012 in all likelihood, I understand. But, personally, I'm not entirely sure the Sox want to re-sign Beckett. I mean, after the Lackey signing, Beckett has to feel anxious being the second highest paid Texan on the team. Any extension will have to pay him more than Lackey, no agent will accept anything less. If Beckett doesn't get extended this off-season (which I see as a long shot), I see no way he returns to the Sox after testing the FA waters. So I understand the insurance Buchholz gives the Sox. But, the kid is too valuable to be throwing useless innings in AAA. And the Sox have a huge hole on offense that cannot be solved w/o letting go of Clay. Unless of course one is to assume that the Sox value Clay more than Kelly and I am 99% sure that isn't true. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
JimRiceRocks |
#85 | |||
|
Veteran Member
Posts: 1218 12/14/09 5:21 PM Veteran Member |
Don't get me wrong, I am not saying or advocating not trading him, just that I don't think it's obvious.
99% sure they value the unproven pitcher never having pitched in AA over Buch, eh? You may be right, maybe not.
"You can never have too much bitching" - left coast bosox fan
"No wonder a lot of opponent's announcers have bullpenis envy - left coast bosox fan |
|||
|
|
||||
|
ScottLevison |
#86 | |||
|
Veteran Member
Posts: 86 12/14/09 5:25 PM |
Sibby Sisti wrote:He doesn't have to face US anymore 
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
farmball |
#87 | |||
|
Rookie
Posts: 2 12/14/09 5:29 PM |
JimRiceRocks wrote: But if they don't extend him, then what is it that they see in Lackey that warrants him replacing Beckett? Beckett has been the face of the pitching staff for some time. Seems like it would just be easier to use the money that went to Lackey to replace Bay with Holliday rather than orchestrate a sea change that involves trading Beckett and Buchholz. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
rodstero4 |
#88 | |||
|
Veteran Member
Posts: 23 12/14/09 5:31 PM |
Union4Sox wrote: Let us not forget the lessons of 2006 with the awful Wily Mo Pena for Bronson Arroyo deal. I'm not at all comparing Arroyo to Buch, or for that matter Wily Mo Pena to whomever the sox would get in a trade for Buchholz. But the lesson, of course, is you can never have too much pitching. Someone will get hurt, someone will need rest, and there will be plenty of opportunities for Wakefield to pitch in 2009. I don't believe the Lackey signing necessarily precurses a trade of Buchholz. Besides, after Clay's awful 2008 campaign, I don't think it would be bad for him at all to pitch #5 in the rotation for a while. And again, you can't assume a healthy rotation all year. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
Nolson20 |
#89 | |||
|
Veteran Member
Posts: 386 12/14/09 5:43 PM |
farmball wrote: Lester is the face of this pitching staff now and for the foreseeable future. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
norsegodlars |
#90 | |||
|
Veteran Member
Posts: 167 12/14/09 5:45 PM |
jsinger121 wrote: Agreed. I got tired of the failed experiments of Smoltz and Penny. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
farmball |
#91 | |||
|
Rookie
Posts: 3 12/14/09 5:48 PM |
Nolson20 wrote:Agreed. Just trying to illustrate what Beckett has meant to the fanbase during his time here. And to let him go for another pitcher of essentially the same age and skill level (maybe less) seems unlikely. This isn't fantasy baseball. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
Nolson20 |
#92 | |||
|
Veteran Member
Posts: 387 12/14/09 5:50 PM |
farmball wrote: Maybe they think Lackey is less likely to break down over the course of the next five years. Or they want a rotation of Lackey, Beckett and Lester for the next 4-5 years. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
templeUsox |
#93 | |||
|
Posts: 15155 12/14/09 5:57 PM Veteran Member Podcast Panelist
|
I love Lackey as a pitcher. He's airs on the side of douchiness with his on-mound antics, and he sounds like something from another planet when he talks,
but he's a tremendous competitor. I remember we were facing him once, and Manny took a huge cut, basically swinging out of his shoes and missed. Manny then
turned with his face looking down to the ground and shouted some expletive in frustration that he missed the pitch. The next pitch Lackey plunked him. I love
it.
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
albertpujolsin2012 |
#94 | |||
|
Rookie
Posts: 52 12/14/09 6:02 PM |
Well, Lester is reasonably cost-controlled through 2013 and the budget and the financial flexibility is clearly there for Beckett-Lester-Lackey to be in the
top 3 in the rotation for as long as they want it. It will be interesting to see what Beckett wants for a contract because there was some form of premium, not
much of one, that was paid to Lackey. They still have a great amount of ability to still sign big free agents after this year if a trade for AGon does not
materialize, which I do not think Theo will do. He will still hold his pieces and go after the 1-2 year contract guys with upside (i.e. Ankiel and Johnson)
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
Bosoxwest |
#95 | |||
|
Veteran Member
Posts: 263 12/14/09 6:08 PM |
And/or they realized that a Lackey signing gives them the win-win position of either signing Beckett to an extension they can live with or trading him for a
king's ransom while still leaving them with a pretty sweet Lester/Lackey/Buck/DiceK/X rotation. There is a defensible position that Clay, considering
upside and cost, is more valuable to the team than Beckett in an on-paper situation - but Beckett as a proven commodity could bring back quite a bit of talent.
Having the option to deal him for young talent is a nice card to hold if in fact 2010 looks more "bridgy" than less (and assuming his HR/9
doesn't somehow get worse).
It occurred to me that one possible downside of the signing is that Lackey is awfully comparable to Beckett in terms of attitude and where he fits in the rotation, and one wonders whether he and Beckett can co-exist. They'll either be kissing cousins or the Hatfields and the McCoys. Yes: I unsubtly mock.
Just wanted to say that Singer has disallowed me from posting new topics ever since my Freddy Guzman thread. He seemed very upset about my opinions and was
almost hostile in his responses. He must have been upset about something else, I don't know, it was strange. Anyway, apparently he has deemed me unworthy
of starting new discussions. Do I mind? I do mind, the Dude minds. This will not stand, ya know, this aggression will not stand, man.
-- Youngcheese, making my day |
|||
|
|
||||
|
templeUsox |
#96 | |||
|
Posts: 15156 12/14/09 6:10 PM Veteran Member Podcast Panelist
|
I don't think Beckett cares about that stuff. Has he ever, once, let out a peep about his contract, his spot in the rotation, power within the
organization, etc.? At some level, I think he's almost too aloof and self-involved to care about that stuff. Just give him the ball and he'll take care
of business.
And by the way, Beckett and Lackey are both fighting for the #2 starter spot. Not #1. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
FenwayTheHardWay |
#97 | |||
|
Veteran Member
Posts: 1733 12/14/09 6:13 PM Veteran Member |
It depends on the cost of course, but I'm not that excited to see Beckett get extended. His conditioning is questionable, and he's been broken down by
the end of the season more often than not. That's not a guy I really want to see on the wrong side of 30.
"Jonathan Papelbon, not wasting any time, going to his bread and butter there, and that's the
cheese."- Buck Martinez
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
hletterhart |
#98 | |||
|
Veteran Member
Posts: 30 12/14/09 7:13 PM |
I can't wait till he gets Tommy John.
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
farmball |
#99 | |||
|
Rookie
Posts: 4 12/14/09 7:17 PM |
Bosoxwest wrote:This is a good point. I hadn't even thought of the idea of trading Beckett but this gives them the option. The advantage of Lackey over Beckett is that Beckett is a power pitcher and Lackey is more effective with his breaking stuff. I suppose that lends to the idea that Lackey would perform better over the next 5 years as the two players age into their mid-30s. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
basestealer21 |
#100 | |||
|
Veteran Member
Posts: 84 12/14/09 7:20 PM |
To everybody who cried about Scutaro costing a first round pick, Lackey is the higher rated type A so we give up our second for Scutaro with our first going to
the Angels. However, now when Bay leaves the Sox and we sign Cameron, we have 2 first round picks and 2 supplemental round picks. Good day for Beantown.
|
|||
|
|
||||
