|
|
|
Transaction Oracle— A Timely Look at Transactions as They Happen
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Red Sox - Signed Lackey
Boston Red Sox - Signed P John Lackey to a 5-year, $85 million contract.
This one is pretty similar to the Burnett signing last year, both for the financial terms and the quality of the pitcher. As with Burnett, there are serious risks involved. Lackey hasn’t been completely healthy in either of the last two season and his strikeout rate, close to 9 in his breakout season, has been slowly sliding and is now around 7 per 9 innings. Now, it’s normal for strikeout rate to slowly decline for pitchers, but it’s usually compensated for by an improved walk rate and compensating enough to keep the pitcher from being easier to hit. Lackey has gotten a bit easier to hit, however.
However, as long as the expectations aren’t unrealistic (Lackey’s not someone who should go into seasons as one of the Cy Young favorites), the Red Sox shouldn’t be too disappointed with the results.
ZiPS Projection - John Lackey ————————————————————————————————-
W L G GS IP H ER HR BB SO ERA ERA+ ————————————————————————————————-
2010 13 9 30 30 194.2 197 87 21 55 151 4.02 113
2011 12 9 29 29 187.0 191 87 22 55 146 4.19 109
2012 11 9 28 28 180.0 184 84 21 53 140 4.20 108
2013 11 9 28 28 179.2 185 85 21 53 139 4.26 107
2014 10 9 26 26 168.0 175 82 21 51 130 4.39 104 ————————————————————————————————-
Top Comps: Mike Mussina, Bret Saberhagen, Aaron Harang
ERA
Top 1/3 56%
Mid 1/3 41%
Bot 1/3 3%
ERA+ BB
>150 3% <1.5 1%
> 140 7% <2.0 12%
> 130 15% <2.5 51%
> 120 34% <3.0 87%
> 110 56% <3.5 98%
> 100 81% <4.0 100%
> 90 97%
>80 100% HR
>70 100% <0.7 16%
<1.0 61%
K/9 <1.3 89%
>9 1% <1.6 99%
>8 10%
>7 49%
>6 89%
(Based on Projected IP)
Dan Szymborski
Posted: December 15, 2009 at 05:32 PM | 27 comment(s)
Login to Bookmark
Related News:
|
Support BBTF
Thanks to Adam S for his generous support.
Bookmarks
You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.
Hot Topics
2012 ZiPS Projections, Final Edition (23 - 11:21am, May 31)Last: craigsaboe2012 ZiPS/RBI Baseball (20 - 10:58am, May 03)Last: tjans2012 ZiPS Projections Spreadsheets, v. 1 (62 - 4:38pm, Apr 10)Last: nemodomi2012 ZiPS Projections - Oakland A's (69 - 5:57am, Apr 10)Last: Athletic Supporter gangnam style2012 ZiPS Projections - Kansas City Royals (31 - 1:51pm, Mar 23)Last: hokieneerPirates - Acquire Burnett (10 - 12:09am, Feb 21)Last: YR Misses Reggie Bars2012 ZiPS Projections - Pittsburgh Pirates (41 - 11:02am, Feb 20)Last: Dangerous Dean2012 ZiPS Projections - Minnesota Twins (31 - 9:53pm, Feb 17)Last: A Random 8-Year-Old Eskimo2012 ZiPS Projections - Boston Red Sox (46 - 5:41pm, Feb 17)Last: Jose Can Still Seabiscuit2012 ZiPS Projections - San Diego Padres (29 - 3:33pm, Feb 17)Last: Dan Szymborski2012 ZiPS Projections - Arizona Diamondbacks (31 - 3:03am, Feb 14)Last: Dan Szymborski2012 ZiPS Projections - Texas Rangers (21 - 1:43pm, Feb 10)Last: DEF: NPW (WWRJD)2012 ZiPS Projections - Miami Marlins (31 - 9:16pm, Feb 07)Last: Misirlou is bad, he's nationwide2012 ZiPS Projections - Cleveland Indians (19 - 11:18pm, Feb 02)Last: DevinM2012 ZiPS Projections - Atlanta Braves (28 - 7:25pm, Jan 31)Last: Gern Blanston
|
|
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. Willie Mayspedes Posted: December 15, 2009 at 05:53 PM (#3413393)Unrealistic Red Sox fans? Unpossible.
yep, 17M just ain't what it used to be...
However, since he's taking the innings from the previous #5 guy AND the Sox have plenty of cash, it's a solid(though as quoted above, somewhat uninspiring move)
Do you see Lackey as a strong candidate for injury/collapse or are you just speaking generally about long term deals for pitchers?
Somewhat related, Epstein's take on the injury issue was one of the more interesting parts of yesterday's presser:
The first bolded bit is about as close to throwing the Angels training staff under the bus as you can get without throwing the Angels training staff under the bus. The second bolded bit is probably just trying to give journalists a nice mental image, but (as a Sox fan) I hope it didn't actually figure too strongly in the decision to sign Lackey.
Yeah, but that ERA+ projection drops in the AL to 101.
I don't know, I think even the training staff would probably agree that in retrospect, he rushed a little bit. I think they addressed it pretty nicely, all in the imperfect tense, not pointing any fingers, just saying they'd do things differently, which is what the Angels trainers would probably do too if Lackey was in LA.
No, because only a stupid team gives a pitcher a five year $82.5m contract based on the guy's last start.
I'll admit that with Passions, Guiding Light, and soon As the World Turns going off the air, I'm a bit starved for drama and might be injecting it where it doesn't belong. But the main function of the imperfect tense is to make judgments without technically making judgments.
Are you implying Theo and the Sox did this? Surely you can't be so narrowminded as to have this opinion of the Boston FO, regardless of whether you are a fan or not. Their track record over the past 7 seasons is impressive and the results speak for themselves.
Must have, sorry.
Yeah, that changes everything.
Don't you have someone's address to leak?
Somewhat strong. Obviously not overwhelmingly strong.
or are you just speaking generally about long term deals for pitchers?
Yeah, that too.
Lackey is a good but not great pitcher with injury issues each of the last two seasons. Certainly Boston did their due diligence and they have all the information. But I can't shake the feeling that Lackey is actually in the early stages of decline, and he is still an injury risk in the immediate future.
His K rate graph is not encouraging, especially pitching in a tougher ballpark and in a tougher division more often. He'll probably walk a few more guys and give up a few more homers. If he doesn't counterbalance that with more K's or more ground balls, he's likely to struggle more than most would expect. I don't see anything in his profile that would lead me to believe he will increase either his K's or his GB rate going forward.
His BABIP actually showed worse luck this year, his FIP was significantly better (back toward/under his career #), and he brought the HRs back down. His ERA+ was just a point lower than in 2008. Just seems odd that it's going to drop 5 or 6 points from 2009 and drop beneath his career average already.
Is this one worth rechecking as well (Like the Hawpe one)? Although, i can see this as much more realistic than that instance. I can see how people feel he's in for a decline, but wondered if the numbers really calculated as such.. due to what... slightly lower K rate (very slightly), and slightly higher BB rate?
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main