Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Thursday, July 31, 2014

Cardinals Acquire John Lackey

My mouth is open in shock!

The Cardinals acquired John Lackey from the Red Sox, according to Jon Heyman of CBS Sports.

The District Attorney Posted: July 31, 2014 at 12:39 PM | 98 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: cardinals, john lackey, red sox, trades, transactions

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. Best Regards, President of Comfort, Esq. Posted: July 31, 2014 at 12:43 PM (#4761418)
Considering that Lackey is essentially free next year, Boston better have gotten a pretty good haul.
   2. The District Attorney Posted: July 31, 2014 at 12:48 PM (#4761425)
According to Gammo, they did: Allen Craig and Joe Kelly.
   3. Ray (RDP) Posted: July 31, 2014 at 12:51 PM (#4761432)
According to Gammo, they did: Allen Craig and Joe Kelly.


Blech. They might as well have hung on to him, as with Doubront.

What's with the sudden rush to acquire 29 year old outfielders having down years who may have already peaked?
   4. The Anthony Kennedy of BBTF (Scott) Posted: July 31, 2014 at 12:51 PM (#4761434)
Boston has to be planning to sign Lester this offseason. They wouldn't be trading for Craig and Cespedes if they weren't going to try to go worst to first to worst to first.
   5. cardsfanboy Posted: July 31, 2014 at 12:52 PM (#4761435)
I'm fine with this deal. Frees up playing time for Taveras, adds Grichuk to the bench(although it wouldn't surprise me if they recall Robinson first)

   6. Pleasant Nate (Upgraded from 'Nate') Posted: July 31, 2014 at 12:53 PM (#4761436)
From the other thread:

That's a bad deal for the Sox. Craig is owed $26M guaranteed over the next three years, can't stay healthy, isn't a good defensive outfielder, and hasn't hit at all this year. He's also now 30.
   7. Sonic Youk Posted: July 31, 2014 at 12:55 PM (#4761442)
This looks pretty weak. And Craig does not fit on this roster whatsoever.
   8. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: July 31, 2014 at 12:58 PM (#4761448)
Boston has to be planning to sign Lester this offseason.

Or Shields or Scherzer. But, I'm sure way more than 3 teams are planning on signing one of those 3, so a lot of teams will be disappointed.
   9. Swedish Chef Posted: July 31, 2014 at 12:59 PM (#4761449)
Not a huge haul. I wonder if the suitors were allowed to talk to Lackey about his contract.
   10. Best Regards, President of Comfort, Esq. Posted: July 31, 2014 at 12:59 PM (#4761450)
Boston has to be planning to sign Lester this offseason.


I don't think anyone doubts that they'll try, but I don't think it's the certainty that some Sox fans seem to think it is. He'll go where the money is, just like everyone else does.
   11. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: July 31, 2014 at 12:59 PM (#4761451)
Red Sox are giving the Cards $1.75 mill too. That's kinda odd.
   12. Spahn Insane Posted: July 31, 2014 at 01:01 PM (#4761457)
Red Sox are giving the Cards $1.75 mill too. That's kinda odd.

Seeing's how the guy they dealt is the one making league minimum next year, yeah.
   13. JJ1986 Posted: July 31, 2014 at 01:04 PM (#4761462)
The Red Sox have given exactly 2/3's of their starts to pitchers traded away within the past week.
   14. tfbg9 Posted: July 31, 2014 at 01:05 PM (#4761463)
Well, I know its buy low and sell high and all that jazz, but I dunno about these deals. Are Cespesdes and Craig fly ball hitters at least? Gimmee something here...
   15. Dale Sams Posted: July 31, 2014 at 01:08 PM (#4761469)
Or Shields or Scherzer.


Signing Scherzer and not signing Lester makes no sense unfortunately. Personally I say sign all three.
   16. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: July 31, 2014 at 01:10 PM (#4761472)

The Red Sox have given exactly 2/3's of their starts to pitchers traded away within the past week.


Rotation is now Clay Buchholz/Joe Kelly/Rubby de la Rosa/Brandon Workman/Oil Can Boyd with that ball girl that fielded the double a few weeks ago on hand to take the mound if someone gets hurt.
   17. PreservedFish Posted: July 31, 2014 at 01:12 PM (#4761479)
I like the Joe Kelly pickup a lot. Wouldn't be surprised if he started outperforming Lackey immediately.

But I didn't realize how terrible Allen Craig has been.
   18. Textbook Editor Posted: July 31, 2014 at 01:15 PM (#4761486)
Signing Scherzer and not signing Lester makes no sense unfortunately. Personally I say sign all three.


Yeah, this is where I'm at. I'd much rather have Lester if the $ is basically equal.

I think clearing the SP decks also gives them ~50 games to sort out the AAA option on-hand and maybe even give Owens a few starts in September. That has some value, I think, towards figuring out who stays/who goes for 2015. There's a hell of a SP logjam (or rather there was...); moving 3/5th of last week's rotation goes a long way towards clearing that with an eye to 2015.

Even if they lose 25 in a row it basically doesn't matter... And in fact, you could argue there's a lot of incentive to actively tank and just play kids from here on out. Maybe tanking is the new market inefficiency?
   19. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: July 31, 2014 at 01:15 PM (#4761487)
Signing Scherzer and not signing Lester makes no sense unfortunately. Personally I say sign all three.

Depends on the market, doesn't it?

If the Yankees or Cubs or Dodgers go nuts on Lester, one of the other guys could be a beter buy.
   20. Textbook Editor Posted: July 31, 2014 at 01:20 PM (#4761496)
Rotation is now Clay Buchholz/Joe Kelly/Rubby de la Rosa/Brandon Workman/Oil Can Boyd with that ball girl that fielded the double a few weeks ago on hand to take the mound if someone gets hurt.


Not quite.

Buchholz
Kelly
de la Rosa
Anthony Ranaudo (who I'm 95% sure will be called up)
Allen Webster or Steven Wright

Henry Owens I could see getting some September starts as well. Workman will probably move to the bullpen to take the long man role now that Dubront's gone.

Of course, this all presupposes Buchholz is still with the team at 4pm...
   21. Davo's Favorite Tacos Are Moose Tacos Posted: July 31, 2014 at 01:20 PM (#4761499)
Rotation is now Clay Buchholz/Joe Kelly/Rubby de la Rosa/Brandon Workman/Oil Can Boyd with that ball girl that fielded the double a few weeks ago on hand to take the mound if someone gets hurt.
RDF
   22. Davo's Favorite Tacos Are Moose Tacos Posted: July 31, 2014 at 01:22 PM (#4761502)
Anthony Ranaudo and Allen Webster are having good years in AAA for Boston. Webster I recognize from that mega-deal with the Dodgers in 2012; Ranaudo's name has been popping up on my "Prospects Whose Names You Should Know!" on and off this year.
   23. Jose Is The Most Absurd Thing on the Site Posted: July 31, 2014 at 01:25 PM (#4761506)
Ranaudo was rescheduled from tonight to tomorrow at Pawtucket with the assumption being he'd take Lackey's spot.

I don't love this deal. Craig and Kelly look like damaged goods and I'm moderately high on the kid the Sox are sending to St. Louis (Corey Littrell).
   24. I Am Not a Number Posted: July 31, 2014 at 01:26 PM (#4761508)
Considering that Lackey is essentially free next year

It's been discussed here a fair bit, but I don't see Lackey pitching for $500K. He'll pretend to retire to negotiate a more realistic contract. Not sure what Boston was ever hoping for having the $500K clause added to Lackey's contract in the first place. It was not likely to ever be honoured.
   25. salvomania Posted: July 31, 2014 at 01:29 PM (#4761513)
I like the Joe Kelly pickup a lot. Wouldn't be surprised if he started outperforming Lackey immediately.

I'd not only be surprised, I'd be shocked.

Kelly has a decent arm, but doesn't seem to be able to harness it to pitch in Major League baseball games. Maddeningly inconsistent, and ineffective. His low ERA last year was a complete fluke.
   26. Ray (RDP) Posted: July 31, 2014 at 01:32 PM (#4761522)
I'd not only be surprised, I'd be shocked.


I'd be more than shocked.
   27. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: July 31, 2014 at 01:33 PM (#4761525)

It's been discussed here a fair bit, but I don't see Lackey pitching for $500K. He'll pretend to retire to negotiate a more realistic contract. Not sure what Boston was ever hoping for having the $500K clause added to Lackey's contract in the first place. It was not likely to ever be honoured.


He'll almost certainly be cheap though, he has very little leverage. I see the Cards extending him another year and giving him reasonable, but undermarket deal.
   28. DKDC Posted: July 31, 2014 at 01:34 PM (#4761529)
I assume Lackey will refuse to pitch if Peralta takes the field behind him.
   29. Ray (RDP) Posted: July 31, 2014 at 01:34 PM (#4761530)
It's been discussed here a fair bit, but I don't see Lackey pitching for $500K. He'll pretend to retire to negotiate a more realistic contract. Not sure what Boston was ever hoping for having the $500K clause added to Lackey's contract in the first place. It was not likely to ever be honoured.


It was probably going to be a mess, but that's where the Sox could have told him to go F himself and either honor his contract or retire. Last I checked he didn't give them any money back when he missed the time for the elbow injury, nor for when he sucked prior thereto.

He signed the k knowing it had that clause in it.
   30. Nasty Nate Posted: July 31, 2014 at 01:34 PM (#4761532)
Not sure what Boston was ever hoping for having the $500K clause added to Lackey's contract in the first place.


They were hoping that if the clause came into effect and if his retirement at that point in time became improbable, they would have an asset. Didn't that come true?
   31. Pujols Shot Ya Posted: July 31, 2014 at 01:35 PM (#4761533)
Would liked to have seen the Cards send Pierzynski back the other way...
   32. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: July 31, 2014 at 01:35 PM (#4761534)
He'll almost certainly be cheap though, he has very little leverage. I see the Cards extending him another year and giving him reasonable, but undermarket deal.

Concur. I'd guess something like a 2/25 extension, or rip up the current deal and give him 3/30. He won't pitch for minimum, but he will be a bargain.
   33. salvomania Posted: July 31, 2014 at 01:36 PM (#4761536)
Kelly's made 38 starts in the majors, and his career-long outing is 7 innings, accomplished twice. It's not going to get easier in the DH league.

Then again he is 24, he's very athletic, super enthusiastic (and a little goofy), and he does have a live arm; he could certainly put it together and be a decent mid-rotation starter.
   34. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: July 31, 2014 at 01:36 PM (#4761538)
They were hoping that if the clause came into effect and if his retirement at that point in time became improbable, they would have an asset. Didn't that come true?

Given the iffy return they got in Craig and Kelly, I'm not sure how much that extra year helped them.
   35. PreservedFish Posted: July 31, 2014 at 01:39 PM (#4761544)
I'd not only be surprised, I'd be shocked.

I'd be more than shocked.


Seriously? Haven't you guys watched baseball before? Not a lot of things shock me anymore.

Kelly throws 95. No reason he can't start producing as well as, say, Henderson Alvarez or Nathan Eovaldi.
   36. Nasty Nate Posted: July 31, 2014 at 01:39 PM (#4761545)

Given the iffy return they got in Craig and Kelly, I'm not sure how much that extra year helped them.


Don't you think Craig+Kelly has positive trade value? Or are you trolling me again?
   37. I Am Not a Number Posted: July 31, 2014 at 01:41 PM (#4761550)
They were hoping that if the clause came into effect and if his retirement at that point in time became improbable, they would have an asset. Didn't that come true

Probably right. Lackey will turn 36 in the fall and will be coming off two decent seasons so it would be hard to imagine he'd really be of a mind to retire. So he probably will be forced, as speculated above, to accept a renegotiated 2015 contract but still at lower than market value. And I can see now that this albatross clause would be seen as quite valuable to St. Louis.
   38. Swedish Chef Posted: July 31, 2014 at 01:43 PM (#4761554)
He'll almost certainly be cheap though, he has very little leverage. I see the Cards extending him another year and giving him reasonable, but undermarket deal.

He's at the tail end of his career and has a bank account filled to the brim. As long as he doesn't appear desperate to pitch he has excellent leverage, retirement is a very realistic option for him.
   39. J. Sosa Posted: July 31, 2014 at 01:46 PM (#4761561)
I like the trade for the Red Sox, it was more than I thought they would get. Lackey isn't worth as much as his contract would suggest, because simply put, he isn't going to pitch for one year without an extension.

I do think Kelly might struggle as a starter going forward. I've always had him pegged as a max effort relief guy, but I could be wrong. I like him though.
   40. GuyM Posted: July 31, 2014 at 01:47 PM (#4761563)
If Lackey retired and sat out all of 2015, could he return as a free agent in 2016? Or would he still owe StL one year at $500K?
   41. salvomania Posted: July 31, 2014 at 01:48 PM (#4761565)
Haven't you guys watched baseball before?

I wouldn't be surprised if Kelly eventually becomes a decent ML pitcher.

Yes, I'd be shocked if Kelly immediately began outperforming the better pitcher coming to the easier league. Well, I wouldn't walk around continuously with my jaw hanging open for several weeks as it was happening, although my jaw might drop if I'd heard Kelly fanned double digits (career-high, 6) or threw a complete-game shutout (career-high game score, 68) or something equally far-fetched.
   42. Nasty Nate Posted: July 31, 2014 at 01:49 PM (#4761568)
He's at the tail end of his career and have bank account filled to the brim. As long as he doesn't appear desperate to pitch he has excellent leverage, retirement is a very realistic option for him.


He seems like a guy who likes to compete and has pride in his career record. If he doesn't care about money, he has plenty of reason to keep pitching. If he does care about money, retiring costs him millions of potential earnings from 2016 onward.
   43. SoSHially Unacceptable Posted: July 31, 2014 at 01:50 PM (#4761570)
If Lackey retired and sat out all of 2015, could he return as a free agent in 2016? Or would he still owe StL one year at $500K?


He'd still owe St. Louis the one year.
   44. cardsfanboy Posted: July 31, 2014 at 01:54 PM (#4761578)
Kelly throws 95. No reason he can't start producing as well as, say, Henderson Alvarez or Nathan Eovaldi.


I think Kelly will out perform Lester in September, and maybe even the second half of August(at least on a rate basis) but he's effectively just exiting spring training right now, his control is inconsistent and he's lacking a little confidence when behind a bit, but he's a legit 110 era+ pitcher when fully healthy with upside.
   45. DKDC Posted: July 31, 2014 at 01:55 PM (#4761580)
Lackey doesn’t need to actually retire, he just needs to make the Cards believe he is willing to retire rather than play for the minimum.

The Cards have a lot to lose if they call his bluff and he follows through, so this probably gets done with a 1 or 2 year extension that is below market but not zero.

If anyone here were in Mozeliak's shoes, would you really call Lackey’s bluff if he comes in saying I won’t play for 1/$550K, but I’ll play for 2/$25M?
   46. Davo's Favorite Tacos Are Moose Tacos Posted: July 31, 2014 at 01:55 PM (#4761583)
Enough of this speculation, let's get some facts:

People who own the latest OOTP simulation, what does John Lackey do for the 2015 season?
   47. GuyM Posted: July 31, 2014 at 01:55 PM (#4761585)
He'd still owe St. Louis the one year

Then it doesn't seem like he has a whole lot of leverage here, unless we assume he had already planned to retire after 2015. Maybe he can extract an extension, but probably not for much more than he'd get without the threat of retirement.
   48. cardsfanboy Posted: July 31, 2014 at 01:57 PM (#4761588)
As far as Craig goes, send him down(I think he has options) for a few weeks to either heal up or get his head together, he's going to be a plus player for the life of his contract, and don't let the naysayers fool you, his defense isn't bad. It's about average either at first or in the outfield.
   49. Nasty Nate Posted: July 31, 2014 at 01:57 PM (#4761592)
The Cards have a lot to lose if they call his bluff and he follows through, so this probably gets done with a 1 or 2 year extension that is below market but not zero.

Lackey has more to lose. The Cards can get other pitchers, Lackey can't find another MLB or another reputation.
If anyone here were in the Cards shoes, would you really call Lackey’s bluff, if he comes in saying I won’t play for 1/$550K, but I’ll play for 2/$25M?

Yes, but only because the 2/$25m is too high. I would work on a smaller extension.
   50. cardsfanboy Posted: July 31, 2014 at 01:58 PM (#4761595)
The Cards have a lot to lose if they call his bluff and he follows through, so this probably gets done with a 1 or 2 year extension that is below market but not zero.


Cardinals are a team who paid Chris Carpenter(a guy who never played with the team at that point in time) 500k for a season he wasn't going to pitch, just to have him for the next year at a decent rate. They will do what is right for Lackey and the team, I fully expect him to basically get Craig's 2015 salary.
   51. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: July 31, 2014 at 01:59 PM (#4761597)
@Ken_Rosenthal

Source: Lackey has told #STLCards he plans to honor his club option. No extension at this time.



Yes, but only because the 2/$25m is too high. I would work on a smaller extension.


Yea, I was thinking 2/$15-20
   52. valuearbitrageur Posted: July 31, 2014 at 02:00 PM (#4761602)
He's at the tail end of his career and has a bank account filled to the brim. As long as he doesn't appear desperate to pitch he has excellent leverage, retirement is a very realistic option for him.


He has zero leverage. All he can do is either play out the year to be a free agent or sign a very team friendly extension, essentially whatever he thinks he's losing by playing for the minimum he will be forced to give away in his extension.

Or he can permanently retire. The team can easily out wait him.
   53. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: July 31, 2014 at 02:00 PM (#4761604)
Don't you think Craig+Kelly has positive trade value? Or are you trolling me again?

Sure. But John Lackey for 2014 has positive trade value.
   54. SoSHially Unacceptable Posted: July 31, 2014 at 02:00 PM (#4761605)
Then it doesn't seem like he has a whole lot of leverage here, unless we assume he had already planned to retire after 2015. Maybe he can extract an extension, but probably not for much more than he'd get without the threat of retirement.


As DKDC said, it's the threat to retire that works, and the believability of that claim. From what I can tell, he could announce his retirement now, skip spring training and come back for a partial season next year and that would fulfill the obligation (as long as he unretires before Aug. 1).


If anyone here were in Mozeliak's shoes, would you really call Lackey’s bluff if he comes in saying I won’t play for 1/$550K, but I’ll play for 2/$25M?


That seems too player-friendly to me, and there's no reason for the Cards to give so much. Something around 2/$15-20 seems far more likely.
   55. Sonic Youk Posted: July 31, 2014 at 02:02 PM (#4761610)


"@Ken_Rosenthal

Source: Lackey has told #STLCards he plans to honor his club option. No extension at this time."


This is a heist, in that case. Lackey and his contract are probably more valuable than either Lester or Samardjiza.
   56. valuearbitrageur Posted: July 31, 2014 at 02:03 PM (#4761611)
If anyone here were in Mozeliak's shoes, would you really call Lackey’s bluff if he comes in saying I won’t play for 1/$550K, but I’ll play for 2/$25M?


There isn't a GM in the game dumb enough to give Lackey 25 million for one extra year
   57. I Am Not a Number Posted: July 31, 2014 at 02:03 PM (#4761612)
Lackey has told #STLCards he plans to honor his club option. No extension at this time.

Sure, why stir up #### now when you're chasing a playoff spot and wanting to fit in with your new team? Plenty of time for the gamesmanship once the season is done.
   58. Nasty Nate Posted: July 31, 2014 at 02:04 PM (#4761619)
As DKDC said, it's the threat to retire that works, and the believability of that claim. From what I can tell, he could announce his retirement now, skip spring training and come back for a partial season next year and that would fulfill the obligation (as long as he unretires before Aug. 1).


I don't think he has the motive for all these shenanigans, though. I'm assuming he doesn't have amnesia about 2012.

Lots and lots of pending free agents could hypothetically do that move. But it doesn't happen.
   59. SouthSideRyan Posted: July 31, 2014 at 02:07 PM (#4761622)
I don't think Lackey at 1.3/5 is worth more than Samardzija at 1.5/12.5
   60. cardsfanboy Posted: July 31, 2014 at 02:07 PM (#4761623)
There isn't a GM in the game dumb enough to give Lackey 25 million for one extra year


Agree, if they do something, it will probably be more in line with post 54, a $3-5mil for 2015 and a second year for around $12-15(or whatever is about 80% of the going rate)
   61. Pleasant Nate (Upgraded from 'Nate') Posted: July 31, 2014 at 02:08 PM (#4761626)
And everyone who said he wouldn't honor it was wrong. Talk about pants pissing.
   62. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: July 31, 2014 at 02:10 PM (#4761633)
There isn't a GM in the game dumb enough to give Lackey 25 million for one extra year

I was suggesting a 2/25 extension; so 3/25.5 with the existing deal included.
   63. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: July 31, 2014 at 02:11 PM (#4761635)
And everyone who said he wouldn't honor it was wrong. Talk about pants pissing.

There's a long time between now and opening day. I'd still expect the Cardinals to extend him.
   64. valuearbitrageur Posted: July 31, 2014 at 02:12 PM (#4761637)
As DKDC said, it's the threat to retire that works, and the believability of that claim. From what I can tell, he could announce his retirement now, skip spring training and come back for a partial season next year and that would fulfill the obligation (as long as he unretires before Aug. 1).


i'm sure the arbitrator or judge tasked with deciding whether less than two months is a season and whether Lackey was intentionally trying to avoid fulfilling its obligations, will be happy to give the Cardinals another season of Lackey at the minimum, so he can become a free-agent another year older and exposed as untrustworthy and unworthy of any expensive commitment.
   65. Pleasant Nate (Upgraded from 'Nate') Posted: July 31, 2014 at 02:13 PM (#4761640)
And everyone who said he wouldn't honor it was wrong. Talk about pants pissing.

There's a long time between now and opening day. I'd still expect the Cardinals to extend him.


Sure, hold out hope until the very last minute. But all signs point to not.
   66. Joe Bivens, Minor Genius Posted: July 31, 2014 at 02:14 PM (#4761641)
I like this trade, and the Lester trade. Shake it up baby, now. This years team was dead. Watch the offense take off now. Cespedes will make a huge difference.
   67. SoSHially Unacceptable Posted: July 31, 2014 at 02:14 PM (#4761642)
Lots and lots of pending free agents could hypothetically do that move. But it doesn't happen.


Very few pending free agents are scheduled to play for the league minimum. That's kind of changes the equation.


And everyone who said he wouldn't honor it was wrong. Talk about pants pissing.


No one said he would stop playing before the end of 2014. So, if you don't mind, I'm going to wait until he honors the less rosy side of the deal before I offer a "my bad."
   68. SoSHially Unacceptable Posted: July 31, 2014 at 02:17 PM (#4761647)
i'm sure the arbitrator or judge tasked with deciding whether less than two months is a season and whether Lackey was intentionally trying to avoid fulfilling its obligations, will be happy to give the Cardinals another season of Lackey at the minimum, so he can become a free-agent another year older and exposed as untrustworthy and unworthy of any expensive commitment.


The CBA has rules regarding retiring/unretiring, and that's the most logical reading at the moment. Even so, I'm pretty sure his agent would have the matter fairly well researched before Lackey commits himself to an extra year at the minimum.

And I don't necessarily think he'd have to push it all the way to Aug. 1. But if he's not there on Opening Day, then the retirement threat certainly becomes a little more real.
   69. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: July 31, 2014 at 02:17 PM (#4761648)
Sure, hold out hope until the very last minute. But all signs point to not.

I think the Cardinals are smart enough to know they are better off with a fully happy and motivated Lackey going into 2015, and throw him a bone.

Why not spread the excess value of the Lackey contract over 2 years instead of one, and remove any possibility that he enters the winter unmotivated and bitter?
   70. Pleasant Nate (Upgraded from 'Nate') Posted: July 31, 2014 at 02:19 PM (#4761652)
No one said he would stop playing before the end of 2014. So, if you don't mind, I'm going to wait until he honors the less rosy side of the deal before I offer a "my bad."


There's a report that the player in question just said he would honor it. And you, and others, are not even flinching. I find that odd. I guess he could be lying to get out of Boston. Is that what you believe?
   71. Crispix reaches boiling point with lackluster play Posted: July 31, 2014 at 02:19 PM (#4761653)
Cardinals are a team who paid Chris Carpenter(a guy who never played with the team at that point in time) 500k for a season he wasn't going to pitch, just to have him for the next year at a decent rate. They will do what is right for Lackey and the team,


So, he gets 500k. That's a pretty big salary.
   72. Pleasant Nate (Upgraded from 'Nate') Posted: July 31, 2014 at 02:21 PM (#4761656)
I think the Cardinals are smart enough to know they are better off with a fully happy and motivated Lackey going into 2015, and throw him a bone.

Why not spread the excess value of the Lackey contract over 2 years instead of one, and remove any possibility that he enters the winter unmotivated and bitter?


He is still playing for a new contract. I'd think he would be more motivated without an extension, no?

The bitter angle is some serious cognitive dissonance, but I guess it is possible, Lackey isn't very bright.
   73. SoSHially Unacceptable Posted: July 31, 2014 at 02:28 PM (#4761665)
There's a report that the player in question just said he would honor it. And you, and others, are not even flinching. I find that odd. I guess he could be lying to get out of Boston. Is that what you believe?


What does Boston have to do with it? Whether he's in Boston or St. Loo, the extension exists.

Here, he's going to a new team in a pennant race. He likely wants to show he's a team guy, so he says he intends to honor the team option. It would be stupid to say anything else.

But, just like guys who say they're going to retire after their next deal to spend more time with their families, it's not exactly binding.
   74. Nasty Nate Posted: July 31, 2014 at 02:40 PM (#4761683)
So, if you don't mind, I'm going to wait until he honors the less rosy side of the deal before I offer a "my bad."


I think this is entirely fair.

Not directed at you specifically: I think we also should wait until we have any actual sign of Lackey being unhappy or bitter before assuming it to be so. Especially because he has no reason to be bitter.
   75. Pleasant Nate (Upgraded from 'Nate') Posted: July 31, 2014 at 02:44 PM (#4761689)

What does Boston have to do with it? Whether he's in Boston or St. Loo, the extension exists.


I'm reading this as the Cardinals asked him and his 'yes' answer was contingent for the trade to work. If so, then he had a 'where do I want to play' moment and picked St. Louis. Perhaps you're right and he'll make a stink this winter, but that means he lied to get to St. Louis (again, assuming the report is right). Or, he plans on honoring it.

   76. SoSHially Unacceptable Posted: July 31, 2014 at 02:45 PM (#4761691)
Not directed at you specifically: I think we also should wait until we have any actual sign of Lackey being unhappy or bitter before assuming it to be so. Especially because he has no reason to be bitter.


I don't think unhappiness or bitterness has anything to do with. I just don't see a 13-year-major league veteran coming off an above average year playing for the league minimum. When it happens, I'll believe it.



I'm reading this as the Cardinals asked him and his 'yes' answer was contingent for the trade to work.


If the trade was contingent on that happening, OK. I haven't seen enough to see that was actually part of the deal.
   77. Barry`s_Lazy_Boy Posted: July 31, 2014 at 02:55 PM (#4761708)
I guess everyone believes Lackey's word is complete horseshit. Which is fitting.
   78. Nasty Nate Posted: July 31, 2014 at 02:56 PM (#4761711)
I don't think unhappiness or bitterness has anything to do with. I just don't see a 13-year-major league veteran coming off an above average year playing for the league minimum.


If he's not unhappy, and he doesn't want to retire, and the deal was front-loaded so in essence he already got his $15m for the season, what is so implausible about it?
   79. SoSHially Unacceptable Posted: July 31, 2014 at 03:08 PM (#4761731)
If he's not unhappy, and he doesn't want to retire, and the deal was front-loaded so in essence he already got his $15m for the season, what is so implausible about it?


Because I haven't seen any evidence MLB players look at things that way.

Obviously, you and I (and a few others) covered this exact ground a month ago. My opinion hasn't changed, and yours hasn't either. So we'd probably be better leaving it there than going all YR on the thread.

   80. Pleasant Nate (Upgraded from 'Nate') Posted: July 31, 2014 at 03:13 PM (#4761736)
Andrew Miller for Eduardo Rodriguez. Another 'meh' deal. Come on Cherrington.
   81. Nasty Nate Posted: July 31, 2014 at 03:15 PM (#4761739)
Obviously, you and I (and a few others) covered this exact ground a month ago.


haha we did. And we probably will again in 2 months!
   82. jdennis Posted: July 31, 2014 at 03:16 PM (#4761740)
I'm kind of baffled that people think Lackey can still command a $10 mil + py contract after next year. If I'm extending him, it's for like $3 mil a year.
   83. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: July 31, 2014 at 03:20 PM (#4761747)
I'm kind of baffled that people think Lackey can still command a $10 mil + py contract after next year. If I'm extending him, it's for like $3 mil a year.

He's a healthy SP with a 113 ERA+ the last 2 seasons. Rickey Nolasco got 4/49.

I think you need to re-calibrate your salary expectations. He's was worth $3M in like 1993.
   84. esseff Posted: July 31, 2014 at 03:21 PM (#4761749)
I like the Joe Kelly pickup a lot. Wouldn't be surprised if he started outperforming Lackey immediately.


The teams play each other next week. How 'bout a Kelly vs. Lackey challenge matchup?

On a side note, it will give Craig a chance to take a bow in St. Louis.
   85. valuearbitrageur Posted: July 31, 2014 at 03:55 PM (#4761814)
I have a very good source inside Cards organization that says Lackey and the Cardinals have already agreed to add three-year extension turning remaining contract into $40m/4 year deal starting 2015. The only sticking point is how the money is paid out. The Cardinals proposed $10M a year for four years but Lackeys's agent counter proposed $20 million/year for two seasons ending with 2 years at league minimum.

The Cardinals almost accepted the counter, but pulled back when they found Lackey had just made a reservation for massive party at local nightclub just after end of 2016 season.
   86. Barry`s_Lazy_Boy Posted: July 31, 2014 at 03:57 PM (#4761818)
Nolasco was going into his age 31 season, Lackey will be going into age 37. 2/16 or 2/20 sounds reasonable.

Which means he'll get 3/36.
   87. esseff Posted: July 31, 2014 at 04:05 PM (#4761841)
And in his first post-Craig AB as, presumably, the everyday right fielder, Taveras homers.
   88. cardsfanboy Posted: July 31, 2014 at 06:03 PM (#4762064)
And in his first post-Craig AB as, presumably, the everyday right fielder, Taveras homers.


The cascading effect on how this alters the roster is why I liked this trade. I think Craig will bounce back (although it might not be until next season) and that Kelly will be a 110 era+ pitcher over the next 3+ years and will probably be better than Lackey even by the end of this year. But Kelly won't reach the 7th inning of a game until September, (with Miller also not doing that, our pen is taxed on days when Wainwright doesn't pitch) Adding a couple of guys who can go 7 helps strengthen the rotation. Getting rid of Craig gets rid of the "which player who isn't performing is going to play today" that has been the Taveras/Craig debate for the past month+. Now there is no doubt, Taveras plays. And hopefully this means we call up Grichuk, a power bat off the bench capable of playing all three outfield positions well. (Taveras, Jay and Bourjos all can play center, but Grichuk is a better fielder than all but Bourjos and a better hitter than Bourjos and possibly Jay---or at least more power than Jay)

This is absolutely a move made to get this team through August and hopefully to give Taveras confidence that the team has faith in him.
   89. greenback calls it soccer Posted: July 31, 2014 at 07:03 PM (#4762103)
On a side note, it will give Craig a chance to take a bow in St. Louis.

Damn, I may have to go to a Red Sox game. Allen Craig was so understated in St. Louis that it'll be kinda interesting to see how he handles the circus.

I have to be the only person whose initial response to this trade was to identify Corey Littrell's dad. And his dad is JD Littrell, who was something of a legend where I grew up. Looking at JD's numbers, either his arm fell off, or the minors are just obscenely good (or both).
   90. Walt Davis Posted: July 31, 2014 at 09:43 PM (#4762207)
To me, it's just that the Cards have no real incentive to try to force Lackey to play for the minimum next year. Even less incentive than the Sox who could at least feel betrayed or something.

That is, if you can have Lackey for 2/$15 or run the risk of him retiring, the 2/$15 looks like a big enough bargain to take the path of least resistance.

But I'm not as confident as some here that Lackey won't be the one to give in if the Cards do decide to play chicken. Without a suspension, I suspect he'll hold out for as long as he can but I'm not sure he makes it past opening day. Another decent year next year and he's probably looking at at least Colon's 2/$20 for 2016-17. That's still good cash to leave on the table.
   91. Walt Davis Posted: July 31, 2014 at 09:49 PM (#4762210)
Are Cespesdes and Craig fly ball hitters at least?

I'll wildly generalize from a sample of one and note that Cespedes' hitting looks a fair bit like Adrian Beltre in Seattle. And yes, he's a FB hitter.

Craig ... fills the Gomes role. And lord knows I never quite understood how but he is a guy who posted a 136 OPS+ from 2011-13. Talk about buying low.
   92. Jim Kaat on a hot Gene Roof Posted: August 01, 2014 at 01:45 AM (#4762318)
I'm not sure what's up with Craig's options. I've read in the PD that he has one, but I've read elsewhere in the PD that the team would have had to ask Craig to take a demotion to sort out his swing, with the implication that the team didn't want to be so 'rude.' I think his bat speed is toast. FG had a good post about the subject a while back. He can't catch up to fastballs, hits everything on the ground up the middle and to the right, has spent the year trying to compensate by uppercutting, has only ended up grounding out more. Can someone ever regain bat speed? Kelly has value but Boston's a bad fit for him. I'm glad we're rid of Craig, and Lackey is definitely worth something, but I absolutely hate the guy. Pierogie, now Lackey; I expect Mozeliak to pick-up Charlie Manson on August waivers. Cards are better now, but suddenly very douchey.
   93. bjhanke Posted: August 01, 2014 at 01:57 AM (#4762320)
Kelly, I have no handle on. He's a prospect who hasn't ever been steady for a long period. Craig's bat problems may derive from having to play the outfield. He's not really an outfielder, and the stress of trying to be one may have affected his bat. But the Cards can't move him to 1B because Matt Adams is hitting well (although he will not take a walk at any price), and REALLY can't play anywhere but 1B. Last I checked, though, the Bosox were in good shape at 1B and DH, so I don't know what they're going to do with Craig. As to the fly ball question, yes, Craig is historically a fly ball hitter, but he's a righty. It's also true that the Cardinals are currently drowning in highly-ranked outfielders in their farm system. Craig was the most likely outfielder to let go of. Now we get to see if Oscar Taveras can really play. If not, there's a waiting line behind him. - Brock Hanke
   94. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: August 01, 2014 at 06:41 AM (#4762338)
As to the fly ball question, yes, Craig is historically a fly ball hitter

what? that's craig's problem. he cannot turn on a pitch to save his life and his fly ball rate just continues to tank

craig's fly ball percentages since 2011: 37, 33, 28, 24

if he's a fly ball hitter i am the king of siam

as to wehter he could bounce back sure. he's hit just about every season of his career majors or minors. but he's also slower than h8ll and plays defense like he's playing a game of whack a mole.

he's a rich man's pat tabler.

   95. bjhanke Posted: August 01, 2014 at 01:39 PM (#4762575)
Harvey's - You have a point. When I was thinking about Craig and fly ball hitting, I was remembering 2011-2012. I've been trying not to remember the 2013-2014 Craig. There's also an injury tossed in there in those last 2 seasons. I still think he could recover the good years if he could just get out of the outfield and onto 1B. - Brock
   96. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: August 01, 2014 at 02:00 PM (#4762594)

Andrew Miller for Eduardo Rodriguez. Another 'meh' deal. Come on Cherrington.


That's a fantastic haul for two months of a very good reliever.
   97. Jim Furtado Posted: August 01, 2014 at 02:13 PM (#4762615)
This reminds me of the deal when the Red Sox got Mike Lowell along with Beckett. Craig may not be hitting this year. As other have noted, he does have a pretty good track record. He's a great bounce back candidate. With his salary and the revenues in Boston, even if he doesn't, his failure won't really impact payroll enough to make that failure anything more than a nuisance.
   98. My name is Votto, and I love to get blotto Posted: August 01, 2014 at 02:38 PM (#4762641)
I guess everyone believes Lackey's word is complete horseshit. Which is fitting.


I see what you did there

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Chicago Joe
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogNo, Alex Gordon wouldn't have scored an inside the park home run
(137 - 7:43am, Oct 31)
Last: Brian White

NewsblogAngell: The Best
(19 - 7:29am, Oct 31)
Last: Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip

NewsblogOT: Politics, October 2014: Sunshine, Baseball, and Etch A Sketch: How Politicians Use Analogies
(4786 - 7:22am, Oct 31)
Last: Bitter Mouse

NewsblogThe Players' Tribune: Jeter: The Clean Up
(3 - 6:56am, Oct 31)
Last: villageidiom

NewsblogFull Count » Red Sox sign Koji Uehara to 2-year contract
(11 - 6:56am, Oct 31)
Last: Darren

NewsblogOT: Monthly NBA Thread - October 2014
(631 - 6:39am, Oct 31)
Last: Norcan

Hall of MeritMost Meritorious Player: 1960 Discussion
(10 - 6:15am, Oct 31)
Last: AndrewJ

NewsblogSend Alex Gordon! | FiveThirtyEight
(83 - 4:02am, Oct 31)
Last: Maxwn

NewsblogNewest Hall of Fame Candidates Announced
(52 - 2:35am, Oct 31)
Last: Sunday silence

NewsblogOT: NBC.news: Valve isn’t making one gaming console, but multiple ‘Steam machines’
(1021 - 1:53am, Oct 31)
Last: The Anthony Kennedy of BBTF (Scott)

NewsblogJoe Maddon is to become Cubs manager, sources say
(108 - 1:49am, Oct 31)
Last: Sunday silence

NewsblogThings we learned from the 2014 playoffs
(11 - 12:17am, Oct 31)
Last: bobm

NewsblogMadison Bumgarner, World Series legend - McCovey Chronicles
(103 - 12:15am, Oct 31)
Last: SoSHially Unacceptable

NewsblogFielding Bible
(2 - 11:24pm, Oct 30)
Last: Russlan is fond of Dillon Gee

NewsblogOT:  October 2014 - College Football thread
(544 - 11:11pm, Oct 30)
Last: Lance Reddick! Lance him!

Page rendered in 0.7276 seconds
52 querie(s) executed