That comes to...88 wins.

This is my point. The other point is what Sean Forman said the other day. You need about 42 WAR to get to the playoffs. the Sox are not getting there with this free agent class.

I think the biggest single improvement the Sox could make is getting Lester not to suck. If he pitches as if he wasn't a jerk, he alone adds about 4 bWAR to the team. Buchholz not sucking gives you maybe another 1 bWAR.

Voxter, guy on the internet, obviously knows more about baseball than the Red Sox GM.

If we are not here to call GMs dumb, why the heck are we here? :)

Hamilton and Greinke are pretty darn expensive, but....

The Red Sox could have signed Hamilton/Greinke/Pagan for the same luxury tax number that they had Crawford/Beckett/Gonzalez for, a hair more in total money, and they would have better projections than those guys.

Haren signed with the Nats, not the Cubs, right?

Over the past 3 seasons, he has an ERA+ of 102 in 590 IP, bWAR of 6.5

Greinke: 604 IP, bWAR of 7.9, 6/$150
Shields: 680 IP (very nice), bWAR of 5.1 (not so much), Myers plus 2/$20
Sanchez: 590 IP, bWAR of 9, 5/$75 and climbing
Peavy: 437 IP, bWAR of 7.3, 2/$29 plus vesting player option (great deal if he's healthy but he wasn't really an FA/available)
Haren: 650 IP, bWAR of 6.2, 1/$13 I think it was, coming off a terrible year
Jackson: 599 IP, bWAR of 6.1, unsigned
Marcum: 520 IP, bWAR of 8, unsigned ... hurt last year I assume

or....

Guthrie: 599 IP, bWAR of 7, 3/$25

Moore might have gotten one right. :-)

I'd agree, it doesn't qualify as a "bargain" as it's close enough to non-Greinke market price. But there are also only 43 pitchers with more WAR than Dempster over the last 3 seasons and getting him for just 2 years is good given his age and possibly a bit of a "bargain." But also, other than Guthrie, anybody else available is either more expensive or coming off a bad/injured year (and probably every bit as expensive).

Of these pitchers, personally I think Sanchez is the one who might really bust out and I'd rather have Jackson at the same price and probably even 3 years at the same AAV as Dempster.

Of these pitchers, personally I think Sanchez is the one who might really bust out and I'd rather have Jackson at the same price and probably even 3 years at the same AAV as Dempster.

I've been preaching this since the end of the season. For about $28 mil AAV, you could have had Sanchez and Jackson. If Lester pitches somewhat normally and Buchholz does his thing, then you'd have a real solid rotation for the next few years.

We all have our own ideas on how to build a better team. I'm a pitching whore, so I'd sign as many decent, young starters that I can find. Good SP is always needed at the trade deadline, seems easier to acquire a bat if you have good arms to trade.

Quick bet: Carl Crawford will have a better OPS+ than Hamilton in 2017.

Well hey, that's no fair. A player can hit anything in 60 PA.

Haren signed with the Nats, not the Cubs, right?

You missed my (admittedly middling) joke. Haren to the Cubs was reported as a done deal as well, and didn't happen.

Also agreeing: 30 Helens.

Thanks DA! Youtube is blocked by my employer, but the reference alone made me laugh.

The Red Sox could have signed Hamilton/Greinke/Pagan for the same luxury tax number that they had Crawford/Beckett/Gonzalez for, a hair more in total money, and they would have better projections than those guys.

That strikes me as an insane way to make a decision. Somewhat better than the giant pile of overpaid suck we just got out under from, is a pretty low bar.

The Red sox should not be trying to make slightly less disastrous decisions than last time. They should be trying to make good ones.

The Red sox should not be trying to make slightly less disastrous decisions than last time. They should be trying to make good ones.

Yes, but they also need to win games. Waiting out favorable contracts in order to maximize $$/win has to be balanced with the need to field a competitive team.

For me, I don't think Zack Greinke is an elite pitcher, so I wanted no part of that contract. Josh Hamilton I could really go either way on, at this money, and the determinative questions (all health related) are both questions I don't have the ability to answer and questions I don't trust the Red Sox to answer. So I am pretty much entirely agnostic on Hamilton. The Sox will need to find some way to add talent before 2014, but I have trouble saying that the fact that they haven't added impact talent before mid-December 2012 is particularly damning.

The Sox will need to find some way to add talent before 2014, but I have trouble saying that the fact that they haven't added impact talent before mid-December 2012 is particularly damning.

This is fair, but I'd be more positive about it if they hadn't also committed $39ish million per year for non-impact talent.

For about $28 mil AAV, you could have had Sanchez and Jackson.

Just as a warning, I may turn into a raving, KM-style trolling lunatic if the only two above average youngish starters left on the market sign for 5/75 or less and Boston ends up with neither of them.

This is fair, but I'd be more positive about it if they hadn't also committed $39ish million per year for non-impact talent.

Well, they had something like $70M to spend. You can spend all of it on impact talent.

If the Sox haven't added some sort of impact talent by March 2014, I think I'll class that a failure. But there's still time and money for it.

Sanchez at 5 years doesn't excite me. He's a good pitcher, not a great one or anywhere close to it. The reason to sign him to a five year deal is you think he's going to break out. His career to date does not warrant a five year deal.

Sanchez at 5 years doesn't excite me. He's a good pitcher, not a great one or anywhere close to it. The reason to sign him to a five year deal is you think he's going to break out. His career to date does not warrant a five year deal.

I get that, but he's also as consistent and projectable as you're going to find on the open market, right? These guys just aren't hitting the market anymore.

Jackson's pretty surely getting less than that, right?

Just as a warning, I may turn into a raving, KM-style trolling lunatic if the only two above average youngish starters left on the market sign for 5/75 or less and Boston ends up with neither of them.

Jackson's a solid deal at 3/39, but I don't like him with any more years than that. 4/60 is pushing it for Sanchez. Age isn't so determinative for pitchers, and pitchers break. These are 2.5-3 win pitchers. If you want "impact" talent, these aren't your guys.

I mean, having watched Anibal Sanchez pitch, I'm not seeing "projectible". He's a solid innings eater, but there isn't a big plus pitch there waiting to break out. I can see projectible with Jackson given his fastball. I can wish on Jackson a lot more easily than I can wish on Sanchez.

I get that, but he's also as consistent and projectable as you're going to find on the open market, right? These guys just aren't hitting the market anymore.

That's true but that's why you stay away from him. I'm not a fan of the Dempster move but on a two year deal I think there is a very real chance his deal proves to be much better than Sanchez'.

Sanchez at 5 years doesn't excite me. He's a good pitcher, not a great one or anywhere close to it. The reason to sign him to a five year deal is you think he's going to break out. His career to date does not warrant a five year deal.

Excite, no. But it seems like a perfectly reasonable deal.

The guy's only gonna be 29, and has averaged 195 IP of 109 ERA+ (9 total bWAR) the last 3 seasons, with nice peripherals. That guy is not coming cheap.

Sanchez' deal is still not official with anyone, right? mlbtraderumors.com says Tigers' latest offer is 5/77.5...

Nightengale is reporting 5/80 to the Tigers (just about precisely Burnett/Lackey money), but I'm going to wait until someone with competence confirms.

Nightengale is reporting 5/80 to the Tigers (just about precisely Burnett/Lackey money), but I'm going to wait until someone with competence confirms.

Years seem right, AAV a bit high for my liking.

Teams need above average, durable starting pitching. These two guys are as safe a bet as any other pitcher that's going to reach free agency to be both above average and durable. I said at the beginning of the off-season that I would prefer that they spent money on these guys and attempt to find the impact bats through trade. Nothing that has unfolded has me thinking that idea was the wrong one.

I've touted Sanchez a bit all offseason and said I thought he'd get Burnett money (5/$80 ... whaddya know).

Now, I've never seen the guy pitch (NZ, Australia ... not conducive) so my liking him is strictly on the numbers. It's of course the K/9 of 8.1 and the K/BB of nearly 3 and the HR/9 under 1 over the last 3 years. In terms of projectibility, bWAR is 9 and fWAR is 12 ... it's a shame they don't have the same replacement level (why? why? why? stop it you silly nerds) ... and fWAR might have more predictive value.

Now it's fair enough to tell me I'm living in the past -- NL starter averages last year were 7.3 K/9 and 2.6 K/BB so Sanchez isn't exactly blowing those numbers out of the water.

EDIT: Oops, meant to add that 5/$80 is at or close to my breaking point for Sanchez. I can certainly see arguments that Dempster at 2/$27 or Jackson at 3/$42 (to make up a number) are better options. I have no great love for 5-year pitcher contracts.