Lucas Giolito signs 2 year, 38.5M contract with Red Sox (opt-out after 1 year, potential 3rd year option)
- Thread starter DeadlySplitter
- Start date
I think people are missing a potentially very important part of this signing.
If Giolito is good this season it impacts the entire pitching staff. Big if? Maybe. To be able to have 180+ quality innings to go along with Bello removes strain on the bullpen. N
If Giolito is good this season it impacts the entire pitching staff. Big if? Maybe. To be able to have 180+ quality innings to go along with Bello removes strain on the bullpen. N
Breslow signing Giolito (over Montgomery?) is probably what prompted Boras to feed Cotillo that quote about us acting like a small market team.
If Boras is leaking stuff like that to writers, it means no one else is meeting his ask for Montgomery either.
And this move doesn’t prevent the Red Sox from signing him.
I really don't think people are missing the concept of "if this pitcher is good, it's good for the team."
What’s your deal?
People commented on a 1 year and out like it was a bad thing.
Feel free to disregard my post if you like.
I like this. Get him here and worry about the opt out later. We need innings eaters with high upside, albeit a low floor if he can’t get back to his potential. This is exactly why we have Breslow/ Bailey… But for crying out loud he is 29, not 37 like Kluber was. Imanaga for 4/yr 85m area should be the next domino. I’ve been saying this for weeks if you look back.. it was never gonna be JM or BS, they can‘t wait for Boras and his gamesmanship to overpay for those guys.. sorry, but we need innings w/ high upside and Lucas and Kota bring just that at the price of ONE of the Boras guys.
Underwhelming compared to our needs, but it is a start and hopefully an upgrade.
Even of they wind up re-signing Paxton, Giolito has to be better than Kluber. So there, now you have something positive to think about.
It is a bad deal
If he’s good, (which is good) he leaves, so the reward stops
If he’s bad, we get him for another year (so the risk/negative reward keeps going)
So if he’s good - 2024 doesn’t count?
Sign me up for a fun 2024 season. I’ll take my chances next offseason.
Last edited:
Keeping in mind that the Sox need 2 pitchers, please suggest someone else then (and let us know who signing Giolito prevents them from signing).
You tell us.
I like the deal, although I don’t like the opt out. As noted above, Gio is exactly the type of guy you go after if you hire Breslow / Bailey. Let’s see if he can regain his old form, and if he does, we’ll be able to negotiate before anyone else. One thing about playing in Boston, is guys that come here, especially reclamation projects that perform well tend to fall in love with this place. Going from a half empty Guarenteed Rate Field and a 2nd class organization to an electric Fenway Park could be eye opening.
Yep. As someone mentioned, this is sort of like the Paxton deal in the general concept. He gets a safe place to rebuild.
If he catches fire, he can opt out of the deal. But we then have the inside track on resigning him or extending him.
And yes, 2024 will absolutely count.
Or he could be good and they trade him.
Or he could be good and they keep him because he's helping them compete in 2024 and they have the option to QO him
Or he's mediocre enough in 2024 that he doesn't think he can beat his option and then has a good 2025
The key difference is that with that Paxton deal, the Sox got to share in the upside while also minimizing the downside risk. If Paxton was great in year one, the team could exercise the club option and have him back. If he was terrible/injured (which happened), they could decline the 2nd year and Paxton would have a modest 2nd year player option of $4 million (which he exercised).
I don't understand short term deals like this for the Sox. Your window is not right now, it's hopefully within 2-5 years. You're either stuck with a crappy Giolito, or he leaves you/sucks you into an extension so you have him during a competitive window. It seems like the only upside to this deal is if the sox have a surprisingly competitive year this year.
Paxton was also coming off injury. At least Giolito is health… hopefully he returns to form.
I would also settle for Paxton with a healthier offseason to build off of.
Oh, they're certainly not the same. And Giolito isn't strictly coming back from rehabbing an injury. But they are smiliar in that they give the player a bit of certainty/security, and incentivize them not to rest on their laurels.
It’s due to the state of the FA pitching market. I don’t see a pitcher worth signing to a big long-term deal at this point, besides maybe Imanga for 4/5.
Feels like we gave him a 3 year option - if he is good he opts out and if he is bad he gets another year at $18 million.
Is he’s good and opts out , the Sox can QO him . I guess that’s a bit of assurance. According to Ian Cundell’s Tweet up thread
A MLB team plays roughly 1472 innings in a season. They need pitchers on the mound for all of them.
There’s at least some possibility here the Giolito is better than other alternatives.
In which case, at no real financial risk, you give him the ball and hope he is on the mound for 180 of those innings.
Seems like signing Giolito was a good chance to bolster the rotation for 2024 at least. Which is not the problem some here are making it out to be. Still a chance to sign Imanaga or trade for a starter. Don't really see the downside to this deal.
Window. Nonsense. Rangers won the World Series with a 90 win roster. Diamondbacks won the NL pregnant with an 84 win roster. Red Sox could easily be as good as either team next year.
Probably the same reasons that any team that isn't one of the top few sign players to short term deals, to try to help them win games.
Exactly. Banking on the value of that familiarity. $18M for 5+ ERA is nice work though. Inflation hasn’t slowed a jot in MLB.
Hope it's just one, otherwise Minnesota will have them for a trademark violation.
Not sure I like this as it feels like yet another reclamation project, rather than just signing someone who has been - lately - both good and healthy. But tyring to see the positive here. Best case is Giolito gives them a good year and then opts out. And I feel like if they couple this with signing Teo Hernandez, it puts them in a very good position to make a juicy trade.
Yeah, how dare fans wish to be satiated with wins on the field. Psyched to be once more winning the value off-season. Woo.
A thoroughly underwhelming move by (what has become) a thoroughly underwhelming franchise. Full throttle, baby!
Geez, folks.
So, the majority hated Giolito and didn’t want to get suckered into a 5 year $120M deal for him, but now that Breslow / Bailey have a shot to turn around a 29 year old former #2 on a 1-year deal where they can QO him (and extend if wanted), people are still upset? I just don’t get it.
This feels like exactly the kind of deal you should be giving to Lucas Giolito. It’s a “prove it” deal where both sides have some upside (Red Sox: He’s a #2 or #3 who gives you 180 IP and you get a QO pick out of it or extend him — Giolito: You pitch well, opt out, get an extension from Sox or big payday in FA) with limited downside ($19M in 2025 for Red Sox is nothing).
I get that this isn’t the #1 or #2 starter move everyone wants — but, there is a LOT of offseason left. Sit back, relax, enjoy.
So, the majority hated Giolito and didn’t want to get suckered into a 5 year $120M deal for him, but now that Breslow / Bailey have a shot to turn around a 29 year old former #2 on a 1-year deal where they can QO him (and extend if wanted), people are still upset? I just don’t get it.
This feels like exactly the kind of deal you should be giving to Lucas Giolito. It’s a “prove it” deal where both sides have some upside (Red Sox: He’s a #2 or #3 who gives you 180 IP and you get a QO pick out of it or extend him — Giolito: You pitch well, opt out, get an extension from Sox or big payday in FA) with limited downside ($19M in 2025 for Red Sox is nothing).
I get that this isn’t the #1 or #2 starter move everyone wants — but, there is a LOT of offseason left. Sit back, relax, enjoy.
He was literally waiver wire fodder last year. Actually went on waivers and was picked up.
The positive - Lucas Gioloto is an interesting reclamation piece. He seems to understand where his issues lie and could have a decent season.
The negative - Oh boy *Shaking Head* this contract is awful. Embarrassingly awful. If on the off chance Gioloto does get himself together, he is gone in a year. If not you are paying 40 million for a guy someone let go for free months ago. I don't understand why you would do this. You are not going to win next year. You aren't even close. So why let him run if he gets himself together?
This contract is a white flag that the Red Sox do not expect to compete for this year. If you are going to do this, why are you doing it in December? Why are you giving Gioloto 20 million AAV with his own personal outs? Is it so you can say you spend money but it doesn't work so why bother? The best case scenario is Gioloto turns it around and a competing team gives you great A/AA player or two for him that turns into every day player.
Shitty teams give large contracts to marginal talent.
That the potential offer of a QO is seen as a significant factor here (coupled with the rumors that the team didn’t want to sign any players who were offered one) leads me to think that the organization is prioritizing future years over the upcoming one. Which is fine, but I feel like we keep hearing that this is the year the team is going to flex that financial muscle, and then for whatever reason, it’s delayed another year at least.
The organization doesn’t want to give out long term deals, doesn’t want to sign players of a certain age, doesn’t want to acquire players with little control left, doesn’t want to trade prospects….that’s a lot of limitations and you end up acquiring lots of lottery tickets- hopefully this is a year in which a bunch of them hit, and of course, lots of time left.
The organization doesn’t want to give out long term deals, doesn’t want to sign players of a certain age, doesn’t want to acquire players with little control left, doesn’t want to trade prospects….that’s a lot of limitations and you end up acquiring lots of lottery tickets- hopefully this is a year in which a bunch of them hit, and of course, lots of time left.
The irony is that Cora is a manager who tries to win with his bullpen, and has the weapons to do it, but the starters last year were so bad they couldn’t even keep the team in the game long enough for the bullpen to be leveraged into wins.
I think this is why going out to overpay for an ace—which seems to mean nothing more than “a pitcher better than what we have” these days—doesn’t fit what the Red Sox try to do philosophically. You want to pay Montgomery 6/$150M to get pulled in the 6th inning when the order cycles through a third time? Quantity and stability are what they need. If they can eat more up front, then Cora can at least push back the bullpen chess for another inning or so and they aren’t throwing their eighth-best reliever up in a high-leverage inning because the starter couldn’t make it through five.
Giolito fits this idea in theory, but on the flip side he’s not going to get to 140 innings—or whatever point would end up making a difference—if he simply sucks.
This is where Bailey (and presumably Breslow) come in. I’ll be happy if they can help him find what he had before the end of last year. But I think it’s indicative of a soberer truth, that the team views starting pitching nowadays to be almost as fickle as relief pitching. They might be right. The team might prefer to trust its ability to develop or fix pitchers than buy them.
I think this is why going out to overpay for an ace—which seems to mean nothing more than “a pitcher better than what we have” these days—doesn’t fit what the Red Sox try to do philosophically. You want to pay Montgomery 6/$150M to get pulled in the 6th inning when the order cycles through a third time? Quantity and stability are what they need. If they can eat more up front, then Cora can at least push back the bullpen chess for another inning or so and they aren’t throwing their eighth-best reliever up in a high-leverage inning because the starter couldn’t make it through five.
Giolito fits this idea in theory, but on the flip side he’s not going to get to 140 innings—or whatever point would end up making a difference—if he simply sucks.
This is where Bailey (and presumably Breslow) come in. I’ll be happy if they can help him find what he had before the end of last year. But I think it’s indicative of a soberer truth, that the team views starting pitching nowadays to be almost as fickle as relief pitching. They might be right. The team might prefer to trust its ability to develop or fix pitchers than buy them.
I really like this idea, and I'm not sure Luzardo would take as much as others here have speculated lately.
Probably not the right thread for this comment, but I've been thinking about this for a few weeks now... Luzardo was reportedly almost dealt for... Vinnie Pasquantino? And the Royals walked away from that? If the reports were wrong, and there was something significantly different about that deal that we don't know about, then this is all admittedly moot. But Pasquantino isn't worth as much as any of the packages that people have been speculating here. I've seen multiple posters throw out that it would take at least two of the Mayer/Anthony/Teel trio. All three of those guys are consensus top 100 prospects, in the 19-22 age range, at premium positions (if you buy Anthony as a CF and Mayer as a SS). Truly blue chip prospects. For context, though, our closest analog to Pasquantino is definitely Jarren Duran... 26/27 years old, peaked as prospects as fringe top-100 guys (depending on who you believe), shown some promise in the majors in short stints despite some worrying warts, same amount of club control, etc. ZiPS even has them pretty comparable going forward. Pasquantino as an all-bat 1.6 WAR next year, and, with Duran at a 98 OPS+ 1.5 WAR.
This is literally true but not really fair, the Angels were out of it and doing anything they could to desperately get under the tax line (which they barely did in the end), that's all it was. If LAA had ten more wins at the time, he would not have been released so not really sure that can be held against him.
The year Bert Blyleven gave up 50 he was the #2 SP on a World Series championship team.
that team sucked
They won the next year when he gave up 46 and got lucky with the home field advantage
The reports of KC walking away from the Luzardo trade did make me wonder if something was wrong with him. He had a velocity drop of 1.5-2 MPH across all his pitches from August 22nd to Sept 11. Looked like he mostly bounced back in his final 3 starts after that, but it could still be a health issue?
He has way more upside than Kluber did. He's not that far removed from being a good pitcher once upon a time. Also could be interesting if Bailey fixes him... there might be a lot of broken guys willing to come to the Sox if they think Bailey's the guy who can help them earn more money getting their shit fixed.
This one's a B- to me. They don't have anyone in the minors who I'd feel comfortable replacing those innings with despite his poor season. And they have put themselves in a position to have to pay a lot of money for mediocrity.
But if he's good, then maybe they compete for a playoff spot.
And hey, they don't need to defend balls over the fence.
But if he's good, then maybe they compete for a playoff spot.
And hey, they don't need to defend balls over the fence.
Manny Ramirez was put on waivers (before 2004, I don’t recall exactly when) and nobody wanted to pick up that contract…so I guess he was waiver wire fodder too?
That seems about right. Probably there aren’t any A moves to be had at this point.
We have #3 starters... we just spent $19 mil a year on another one. This very much appears to be one of the two starters we're targeting. The good thing here is it's a relatively low risk move, but those types of similar moves have resulted in us finishing in last place far more often than I'd like recently.
The best thing you can say about Giolito is that he was one of 25 guys last year to throw 180 IP. That has value, but I'd hardly consider him a #2 starter.
Other than Jason Varitek, I don't remember a situation where Boras' inaction really hurt his client.
Last edited: