BBTF's Newsblog Discussion :: Boston Herald: Bradford: Beckett lives in present

Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Thursday, February 14, 2008

Boston Herald: Bradford: Beckett lives in present

Well you’d better let him out! (Hat tip Rufus Leakin)

Josh Beckett hadn’t heard about the ESPN.com report quoting an unnamed Red Sox official stating: “We’d better enjoy Josh Beckett the next three years. Because we won’t be able to sign him after his deal is up after 2010.”

No matter. The right-hander had stretching to do.

“Six hundred innings from now,” Beckett said, “we’ll talk about it. We’ll see how that works. First of all I don’t even like to look into the future. Like I’m going to stretch my shoulder, which is what I’m thinking about right now. I’m not really thinking about three years from now. I haven’t even thought about it.”

Repoz Posted: February 14, 2008 at 01:37 PM | 15 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
Tags: red sox

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

1. PASTE is not impressed by Albert Pujols (Zeth) Posted: February 14, 2008 at 02:23 PM (#2690864)

Heh. "We won't be able to sign him." That's a bold-faced lie. There's not a baseball player on earth the Boston Red Sox can't afford to sign. Actually, given the current state of baseball revenues and the way they're split up, I have serious doubts there's a baseball player on earth the Pittsburgh Pirates would not "be able to sign", in the sense that doing so would push their balance sheet into the red.

2. PASTE is not impressed by Albert Pujols (Zeth) Posted: February 14, 2008 at 03:07 PM (#2690890)

Well, the truth is that Beckett will be 30 in 2010, he's had injury issues, and the Red Sox are pretty certain they won't be interested in signing him.

Anyway, the quote says "We won't be able to re-sign him." Maybe the Red Sox did something to piss Beckett off, or he just hates Boston? Such attempts to create stories to fill column space are always lean on actual information.

3. bibigon Posted: February 14, 2008 at 04:12 PM (#2690937)

Well, the truth is that Beckett will be 30 in 2010, he's had injury issues, and the Red Sox are pretty certain they won't be interested in signing him.

The Red Sox are pretty certain they won't be interested in re-signing Beckett 3 years from now? What now?

4. PASTE is not impressed by Albert Pujols (Zeth) Posted: February 14, 2008 at 04:30 PM (#2690958)

Don't ask me. I didn't write the article, and I promise I didn't give the quote. The sooner some actual baseball games start being played and these kind of non-stories stop, the better.

5. OCD SS Posted: February 14, 2008 at 04:51 PM (#2690965)

Wasn't the "unnamed Red Sox source" a quote from Gammons? He's still beating the "if the Sox had gotten Santana they would've had to give Beckett a new contract" drum which seems just as silly.

Until there's a name associated with the quote I don't see why we should consider this any more than Beckett has.

6. Walt Davis Posted: February 14, 2008 at 08:00 PM (#2691197)

“Six hundred innings from now,”

What's everybody worried about ... Beckett clearly is planning on being in Boston through at least 2012.

7. Skip Jutzes OPS Posted: February 14, 2008 at 08:31 PM (#2691252)

What's everybody worried about ... Beckett clearly is planning on being in Boston through at least 2012.

Yeah, because, you know he's pitched over 200 innings for each of his two years in Boston so obviously it's going to take him five more seasons to compile 600 innings.

8. Chip Posted: February 14, 2008 at 08:43 PM (#2691260)

Wasn't the "unnamed Red Sox source" a quote from Gammons? He's still beating the "if the Sox had gotten Santana they would've had to give Beckett a new contract" drum which seems just as silly.

Yes, it was a Gammons column.

Until there's a name associated with the quote I don't see why we should consider this any more than Beckett has.

Is there any doubt this was Lucchino, getting an early start on the Sox opening lowball bid?

9. larkin4HoF Posted: February 15, 2008 at 08:05 AM (#2691785)

If it is true that the Red Sox, with the second highest revenues in the sport, can't afford to sign a player that they want, then who is going to be the first player who has to retire because no team can afford to pay him enough to play.

10. Fly, the most judgment-free human being on Earth Posted: February 15, 2008 at 01:51 PM (#2691808)

Maybe the Red Sox did something to piss Beckett off, or he just hates Boston?

He hasn't been there most of the winter, he signed a lowball deal to stay in Boston, he was a hero on the World Champion Red Sox, everything he's said publicly has been hugely pro-Boston...I don't think he is unhappy with the Sox.

11. Josh Posted: February 15, 2008 at 02:13 PM (#2691813)

7/2006: Beckett signed for 3/30 with a 12mm team option, 1.5 years prior to FA status and in the middle of a 5 ERA season having never pitched (at that point) 200 innings and never receiving a Cy Young vote.

2/2005: Santana signed for 4/40, 2 years prior FA status having, having just won the Cy, having thrown 228 innings the prior season, and coming off two prior-prior seasons of ERA+ close to 150 (though ~270 total innings).

Beckett's deal was not below market when it was signed. There was risk all around.

12. willcarrolldoesnotsuk Posted: February 15, 2008 at 02:26 PM (#2691817)

There's not a baseball player on earth the Boston Red Sox can't afford to sign.

Today is day 2150 of Operation Shutdown, and Derek Bell has remained steadfast.

13. mcopeland Posted: February 15, 2008 at 02:34 PM (#2691823)

There's a link in the article to this recent article, as well:

Belly bulge belies buffing up by Beckett

14. willcarrolldoesnotsuk Posted: February 15, 2008 at 02:44 PM (#2691829)

Because of buffet binging.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

<< Back to main

Thursday, February 14, 2008

Boston Herald: Bradford: Beckett lives in present

Reader Comments and Retorts

Support BBTF

Bookmarks

Hot Topics