This is a fun analysis. It doesn't seem right to break up his last twelve starts into two groups, but it certainly does appear that Jon Lester just flipped a switch early this summer and turned into a completely different pitcher.

Since someone will surely say this, I'll note that although there were no sure reports of the Santana trade talks, there were multiple rumors that had Lester in the package the Sox offered.

So after an off-season that was spent arguing tirelessly on Hughes vs. Buchholz, they've both suceeded only being in (a) lousy and (b) hurt. So this off-season I guess we can look forward to endless Joba vs. Lester. Which probably means those two will be chatting in the OF before a game and be hit by simultaneous bolts of lightning.

A friend of mine noted that physically, Lester looks like a beast these days. His neck is the size of a linebacker's. He has obviously recovered from the cancer issues.

I was lucky enough to be at Fenway the night of his no-hitter. His confidence on the mound was palpably different from the times I had seen him pitch in '06 and '07. He works much quicker than he used to and he attacks hitters. It's been a remarkable change.

RB, to be fair, Clay has been healthier and better, so...he definitively wins that battle in '08.

As for this article...I'm fairly certain Joba is the best pitcher in the AL.

/kidding...but not really

A friend of mine noted that physically, Lester looks like a beast these days. His neck is the size of a linebacker's.

I was just thinking that to myself this weekend during his start against Oakland. I had not seen him pitch in a couple months...just randomly had conflicts; I've seen a bunch of hyper-frustrating Dice-K and Beckett starts. Anyway, he does look like a bull out there these days. I wouldn't be surprised if he's a good 10-15 pounds (of muscle) heavier now than he was when he first got called up.

Someone said in chatter during one of Lester's recent starts that Farrell has attributed Lester's improved command to his increased lower-body strength and fitness, which he was still in the process of recovering after chemo.

Also, weren't the offseason wars Hughes v Lester/Joba v Clay/IPK v Bowden? And I guess Cano v Pedroia as well. And we can't forget about Melky v Ellsbury. Looks good for the Sox so far. Why do our teams have to develop young players at the same positions, forcing us to argue amongst ourselves?

Also, weren't the offseason wars Hughes v Lester/Joba v Clay/IPK v Bowden? And I guess Cano v Pedroia as well. And we can't forget about Melky v Ellsbury.

And Jeter vs. Nomar. And Munson vs. Fisk. And they don't even need to be at the same position, since I'm sure we can all imagine the flamewars that would've happened on '40s Primer over DiMaggio vs. Williams.

Predictably, he walk rate has fallen dramatically: he walked 4.58 batters per nine innings in his first ten starts; in his subsequent 12 starts, he has walked only 1.71 per nine. That’s a major improvement.

If these improvements are real – and we have no reason to think they’re not

If he's saying Lester's control has likely improved over the course of the season, sure. If he's saying there's no reason to doubt that Lester's 1.71 BB/9 is his new level of talent, he's completely wrong.

No wonder the Red Sox wouldn’t deal him this offseason.

But they did make sure he was included in every reported offer for Santana.

And BTW, that "laughable" offer of Lester/Lowrie/Crisp for Santana now looks like a boon compared to what we got from the Mets.

Arbitrary endpoints rule!

Oh, and Ziegler is not only the best pitcher in the AL, but the best pitcher in the history of the universe.

Looks good for the Sox so far. Why do our teams have to develop young players at the same positions, forcing us to argue amongst ourselves?

I'd still call it about even at this point. Joba and Lester look roughly equal this year, while Buchholz/Hughes and Melky/Ellsbury have been disappointing. Pedroia's been better than Cano so far too, but that's about it. I expect Cano to bounce back next year. A lot more was expected from Ellsbury though, so that seems like a much bigger disappointment for the Sox.

If Lowrie's for real, then his success might have the Sox looking a little better in the development game.

Or at least the Sox + the Pac 10.

And BTW, that "laughable" offer of Lester/Lowrie/Crisp for Santana now looks like a boon compared to what we got from the Mets.

I was just having that conversation the other day. At the time, it looked like maybe the worst of the proposed deals. Now, it is clearly the best (vs. Kennedy/Jackson/?? and the one they got). I might be wrong, but I thought they also had Masterson in a deal instead of Crisp. If that was the case, the lineup would now be (if healthy):
CF- Span
2B- Casilla
C- Mauer
1B- Morneau
RF- Cuddyer
DH- Kubel
LF- Young
SS- Lowrie
3B- Harris/Buscher
Bench- Redmond, Punto, OF (Pridie?)

with a rotation of: Lester, Liriano, Baker, Slowey, Blackburn
and a bullpen of: Nathan, Crain, Masterson, Perkins, Reyes, Guerrier, Bonser

I know the Twins are playing well, but that trade would have filled their two biggest current holes (mid-INF and 7th inning relief) while preventing the production crater in CF.

And by the way, if you were a team a couple of games out of the playoffs and could add any single AL starter for free for the rest of the year, who would you take ahead of Lester? Felix is close, but I don't know if I would trust him in a tight spot with the way he dances around in tough situations. Halladay maybe, but he has cooled a bit. Beckett is struggling, I don't think anyone would take Dice in this type of situation. Mussina is pitching well, but he has several years of decline indicating that it's somewhat fluky. Lackey is a maybe, but he doesn't have the top-shelf stuff that Lester has. Kazmir has injury problems, but I'd probably ultimately take him over Lester. As much as I would like to have Liriano in the discussion, I realize that I would be jumping the gun stupendously.

I think you have to go with Joba there. He's thrown way less innings than most of those guys, and has looked particularly sharp lately. Duchscherer's been amazing, too.

And Jeter vs. Nomar. And Munson vs. Fisk. And they don't even need to be at the same position, since I'm sure we can all imagine the flamewars that would've happened on '40s Primer over DiMaggio vs. Williams.

Hmmm...we also have Reddick v. Jackson and Lars v. Jesus coming up.

Josh, Dustin, Clay, Jed, Lars, Justin - characters on an early-90s daytime soap? No, they're your, blindingly white Boston Red Sox farm system!

"if you were a team a couple of games out of the playoffs and could add any single AL starter for free for the rest of the year"

Cliff Lee? 167 ERA+, 125 SO, 20 BB, 1.064 WHIP.

Though I can't bring myself to root for Red Sox prospect, I have to admit there's a part of me that hopes Lars suceeds. Baseball is a great game, but like pretty much everything else it can be improved with the addition of a Lars.

Josh, Dustin, Clay, Jed, Lars, Justin - characters on an early-90s daytime soap? No, they're your, blindingly white Boston Red Sox farm system!

Don't forget the new signee Casey.

Then again, even the current top Latin prospect's first name fits with that soap cast: Michael.

Che-Hsuan Lin won't make the cut.

Though I can't bring myself to root for Red Sox prospect, I have to admit there's a part of me that hopes Lars suceeds. Baseball is a great game, but like pretty much everything else it can be improved with the addition of a Lars.

The idea of "Lars!" being shouted in a thick Boston accent is something special.

Josh, Dustin, Clay, Jed, Lars, Justin - characters on an early-90s daytime soap? No, they're your, blindingly white Boston Red Sox farm system!

we also have a Hunter, Dusty, Mitch, Bubba and a Brock!

And let's not forget we just gave away Craig

Then again, even the current top Latin prospect's first name fits with that soap cast: Michael.

Michael Bowden's white face says hi.

It's a really white farm system, especially in the upper levels. What are you gonna do? No one wants their team to look homogeneous, but you need to play the best players.

W/r/t to Lester's new-found on-mound persona: Tewksbury stresses to pitchers throughout the system that no matter what type of person they are off the field, they must, or at least are behooved to, transform into type-A personalities on the mound. Makes sense.

Then again, even the current top Latin prospect's first name fits with that soap cast: Michael.

Michael Bowden's white face says hi.

Michael Bowden's non-Latinness kind of eliminates from consideration as top Latin prospect.

Baseball is a great game, but like pretty much everything else it can be improved with the addition of a Lars.

Worked for Rancid.

No, they're your, blindingly white Boston Red Sox farm system!

That's one heck of a market inefficiency.

Tewksbury stresses to pitchers throughout the system

Bob Tewksbury? Is the Sox minor-league pitching guy? No wonder he ain't walking nobody.

As to Lester, if he maintains a 5/1 K/BB and an HR rate of about 1 per 20-25 IP (which is where he's been the last couple months) then yes I daresay the young man will have a heck of a career.

It is Bob Tewskbury, but he's actually the sports psychologist for the Red Sox. He works with players from the majors on down throughout the system.

It is Bob Tewskbury, but he's actually the sports psychologist for the Red Sox. He works with players from the majors on down throughout the system.

Watch the pendulum...watch it...you are getting sleepy...sleepy...you are under my control...When I snap my fingers you will wake up with an overwhelming desire to pound the strike zone...but never over the plate...always on the corners...the corners

I'd probably take at least Duchscherer, Halladay, King Felix, and Lee before I got to Lester. And then I'd have to seriously consider Danks and Ervin Santana as well.

I was way off on Lester. Before this season I thought he was nothing more than a backend guy, but I've been wowed by how much better he is this year. His fastball and cutter are way better, and he's throwing far more quality strikes.

He really reminds me of Andy Pettitte at his best.

Watch the pendulum...watch it...you are getting sleepy...sleepy...you are under my control...When I snap my fingers you will wake up with an overwhelming desire to pound the strike zone...but never over the plate...always on the corners...the corners

Listen to me . . Palmer . . you will forget all about the Dalkowski file . .

I'll take Halladay.

Lester is nice, but I wouldn't expect him to become more than an above average starter, which is a good thing to be of course. But not great. He is about as good as Manny Parra, who doesn't have the hype machine of the Red Sox behind him.

I agree with Halladay as the AL pitcher I would call upon if I needed to win one game.

He is about as good as Manny Parra, who doesn't have the hype machine of the Red Sox behind him.

Manny Parra 2008: 119 innings of 110 ERA+
Jon Lester 2008: 146.1 innings of 141 ERA+

xFIP pits them much closer together (4.06 vs. 4.30). I don't think it's a terrible suggestion. I like Lester more, though.

My favorite Lester stat this season is this:

(MPH)

Fastball:
2007- 89.9
2008- 91.6

Cutter:
2007- 85.0
2008- 87.8

Curveball:
2007- 72.3
2008- 75.6

Manny Parra 2008: 119 innings of 110 ERA+
Jon Lester 2008: 146.1 innings of 141 ERA+

Thank you, I am quite aware what their numbers are at this moment in time. Numbers are pretty easy to get these days. Care to offer any thoughts?

Thank you, I am quite aware what their numbers are at this moment in time. Numbers are pretty easy to get these days. Care to offer any thoughts?

Those numbers seem sufficient to refute post #35, until that post is itself bolstered by some amount of statistics, observations, and/or analysis. Right?

Those numbers seem sufficient to refute post #35, until that post is itself bolstered by some amount of statistics, observations, and/or analysis. Right?

Correct. Not to mention that Lester plays in the tougher league, and has a defense behind him that has not been rated as particularly effective.

Boston's defense is 5th in DER and Lester receives fairly middle of the pack DER when he pitches.

The writer of this article points out changes in Lester's past 12 starts, Parra has shown similar improvement over the past 2-3 months.

past 12 starts
Parra 69 2/3 IP, 3.10 ERA, 58k
Lester 75 1/3 IP, 2.75 ERA, 56k

These guys are very similar. Even with a scouting eye, they have similar stuff, with Parra having a touch more velocity than Lester. Both are sure to be above average starters for the next several years. I doubt we are looking at greatness from either.

How about I offer Jason Varitek's thoughts via Peter Gammons:
http://www.baseballthinkfactory.org/files/newsstand/discussion/gammons_a_lot_of_upside_in_lester

He said that [Lester] is at about 60 percent of where he is going to be next year and he said that he’s going to be the best left-hander in the American league. He didn’t make it a maybe or an if, it was his belief.

Since then: 5-0, 2.67 ERA, 5-1 K/BB. Yup, maybe Varitek was on to something.

I imagine Lester has arrived, a bit before Varitek expected, but perhaps he knew a thing or two about what he was talking about.

I am rather confident we are looking at something special wit Lester.

Those numbers seem sufficient to refute post #35, until that post is itself bolstered by some amount of statistics, observations, and/or analysis. Right?

Sure, there is a difference in those numbers. But since when are decisions made around here based on a little over 3 months of baseball. As far as post #35, Lester is not great. It is doubtful he will be great, good certainly, but great?

Pitchers always have volatale 100 inning stretches. Going from +140 ERA in one patch, to +85 in another is not unusual. I could cobble together 2 pitchers of any caliber and prove that. It would be absurd to declare that Lester has arrived as a great starter. He hasn't yet. Neither Lester or Parra have ever made it through a full season yet.

It is doubtful he will be great, good certainly, but great?

You keep saying this, but why? Lester, extremly highly thought until he came down with cancer. And with reasonable adjustments for his recovery, he pitched up to that. Not to mention his stuff is considered excellent.

Lester: 101/46 K/BB 6.2 K/9 Good
Halladay: 141/28 K/BB 7.6 K/9 Great

You keep saying this, but why? Lester, extremly highly thought until he came down with cancer. And with reasonable adjustments for his recovery, he pitched up to that. Not to mention his stuff is considered excellent.
Page 1 of 1 pages

Am I really the first person to question Lester's "greatness"? It seems from your response, the only reason people have to justify calling Lester great, is because he is "highly thought of". So in otherwords, because people kept saying it.

It is not too hard to look at the data these days. Lester has a good, not great track record. So what? Nothing wrong with that. Manny Parra is an excellent example of a comparable to Lester. Both good, not great. Both have the exact same career ERA, in fact. 3.90 (yes I get there are differences in the leagues so it is not "the same"). Lester has already thrown 290 innings. It was Parra, not Lester that had a better track record in the Minors, but both were good, not GREAT.

If I had to summarize my two main points here it would be that Lester is not GREAT, he is good. Second, he is comparable to Manny Parra. However, Lester, or Parra, or both, COULD become great, thought that is very unlikely based on prior track record.

Lester wasn't really talked about as a #1 starter. Andy Pettitte was the comp everyone went with - not Steve Carlton or something. His upside was a #2 on a world series team, a very good but not great pitcher. If you take a normal slice off the top of praise from teammates, that's pretty much where Varitek is as well.

If Lester is now seen as someone who can be the best pitcher in baseball, that's a significant change in his assessment. I don't really see it, myself.

EDIT: And add my name to the Halladay list. Being the best in the league in a year other than 2008 counts for a lot. (ie, no Lee, no Lester, no Joba)

Fair points all, Beano. It'll be interesting to see how each of these guys fares over the rest of the season, not to mention next year and beyond.

I'd agree with #49. Lester, Danks, Parra, all can be #2 pitchers on a World Series team. They are unlikely, in fact, very unlikely, to become as good as S Kazmir, J Santana or CC Sabathia.

His upside was a #2 on a world series team, a very good but not great pitcher.

Which generally speaking is one of the top 20-30 starting pitchers in baseball. That is better than "above average" which is what Beano said.

Beano, care to name terms on a lester versus parra bet from 2008-10? I have little doubt that lester will be better.

PJ, I do think that some players that play for the Yankees/Red Sox really rise up to the challenge and meet the demands put out by the fans, media and tradition. Some young studs flame out or find success elsewhere, but sometimes there are players where the spotlight brings the best out of them. Maybe Lester is like this. Maybe he "knows" how to pitch and he will find himself with a very long career and become GREAT that way. Could happen.

Which generally speaking is one of the top 20-30 starting pitchers in baseball. That is better than "above average" which is what Beano said.

In my mind for the above comments, I have average, above average, great. But I suppose I should adopt the 20-80 scouting scale. Where there is 60,70 and 80. I'd say Lester is a 60 today, with upside as a 65. I'm guessing you would put him at 70.

However, Lester, or Parra, or both, COULD become great, thought that is very unlikely based on prior track record.

If you only look at the historical track record of Jon Lester you are under rating him. Of course, if 5 years from now Lester has a couple of top 5 cy-young finnishes and 1000 innings of 130 ERA+ then I will assesment will still be considered wrong, and it was just luck.

But I suppose I should adopt the 20-80 scouting scale.

Can someone explain why it's 20-80 and not 0-60 or 0-100? Did the scouts not want to hurt any feelings by writing zeros? Or build egos by writing 100s? Or did they want the high school kids to be able to compare their throwing arm to their verbal SAT score with ease?

Beano, care to name terms on a lester versus parra bet from 2008-10? I have little doubt that lester will be better.

That would be interesting. I think Parra has more upside to work with, due to his higher BB rate and where it was in the minors. If Parra can bring that down, and there is a lot of room there, he can vault up quite a bit. His HR rate is good/excellent already, K/rate is good, but it has been good/excellent before, so there is some upside there as well.

Parra has more arm injury issues from the past that could show up again. So Lester may prove to be more durable. We will see, but neither has gone a FULL season yet. Some guys can't ever go 200.

Can someone explain why it's 20-80 and not 0-60 or 0-100?

Good question, I don't know the history myself. I look forward to the answer. I do believe there is something there about standard deviations from mean. 50 being mean. Perhaps 3 standard deviations being 80? I doubt a math/stats expert became a scout, there has to be more to story.

And BTW, that "laughable" offer of Lester/Lowrie/Crisp for Santana now looks like a boon compared to what we got from the Mets.

I don't think people who really follow the prospects ever thought this was laughable; what happened is a lot of people who read MSM and know little beyond BA's top 100 list (which, great as it is, is awful dated by the winter meetings) said things like that.

One of the Ricciardi supporters on battersbox suggested that Ricciardi got considerably more value than Epstein in the 2002 draft by taking Bush and putting him in a deal for Overbay, and taking Adam Peterson and trading him for Hillenbrand then for Accardo, than Espstein got with Jon Lester. How do other teams' fans feel? Are Overbay and Accardo worth considerably more than Lester?

I'm fairly certain Joba is the best pitcher in the AL.

Well...I really ###### up there.

W/r/t to Lester's new-found on-mound persona: Tewksbury stresses to pitchers throughout the system that no matter what type of person they are off the field, they must, or at least are behooved to, transform into type-A personalities on the mound. Makes sense.

Do you have a reference for this, Mikael? If it's from a profile piece or something, I'd love to read it.

Good question, I don't know the history myself. I look forward to the answer. I do believe there is something there about standard deviations from mean. 50 being mean. Perhaps 3 standard deviations being 80? I doubt a math/stats expert became a scout, there has to be more to story.

Actually, I'm pretty sure it's something like that. Basically, there's no reason to have 0 to 100, because 20-80 provides enough data points for the purposes of scouting. Nobody has a 100 fastball; likewise, nobody has 0 power. Well, maybe Jason Tyner.