Price "promises" not to exercise opt out

[RedOctober3829]

But Price is so convinced he can succeed in Boston that he unconditionally promised to remain with the Sox for the remaining six years of his contract and not exercise an opt-out clause after the 2018 season.

Not convinced? He plans to win you over.

“I’m staying right here,” Price said. “There was a reason I signed here and there’s a reason I’ll stay for six more years. I came here to win and we’re going to win. If I go out there and pitch well, they’ll support me.

“I’m not trying to prove anybody wrong. I want to prove myself right. I know I can handle Boston. I know I can be successful in Boston. I’ve been successful my entire career. Going to Boston ain’t going to change that.”

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/redsox/2017/01/13/david-price-has-doubt-can-succeed-boston/NDaBB3sqD7I5WLFUJ0hpVN/story.html

 

[Doc Zero]

So why negotiate an opt-out clause to begin with? This seems like run-of-the-mill, talking-to-the-media speak.

 

[Papelbon's Poutine]

So why negotiate an opt-out clause to begin with? This seems like run-of-the-mill, talking-to-the-media speak.

It was pretty widely reported that JWH was the one who suggested and negotiated for the opt out.

 

[E5 Yaz]

If I had that much money coming, and my first season produced less than expected, I'd say this as well

 

[cornwalls@6]

Disgusted to read that he had some racially tinged taunts directed at him while warming up in the bullpen last year. I hope the idiots were tossed out on the spot. Not naive enough to doubt that those kind of assholes exist in the fan base, but thought we were past anybody having the utter lack of decency to air that garbage in person/ at the ballpark. Really hoping the addition of Sale allows him to settle in a little more under the radar, and thrive as a result. Shutting up the imbecile corner of the fan base would be nice added value.

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

Since when is the opt-out about not being able to handle Boston rather than about hitting the free agent market again and scoring a larger contract than the one he's opting out of?

 

[Cesar Crespo]

Didn't JD Drew tell the same thing to the Dodgers?

 

[Devizier]

but thought we were past anybody having the utter lack of decency to air that garbage in person/ at the ballpark.

Well if last year has taught us anything...

 

[curly2]

I have no idea whether he'll actually keep to this -- and Price doesn't either -- but I think the new CBA makes it more likely for him to stay. The very small increase in the level before the tax kicks in actually has the Sox and the Yankees pinching pennies (yes, with an eye on future signings).

If there had been a big increase in the tax threshold, he might lean for an opt-out, depending on health and performance. But with even free-spending teams reining it in, at 33 it might be hard to top 4/$127M.

 

[DJnVa]

Disgusted to read that he had some racially tinged taunts directed at him while warming up in the bullpen last year. I hope the idiots were tossed out on the spot. Not naive enough to doubt that those kind of assholes exist in the fan base, but thought we were past anybody having the utter lack of decency to air that garbage in person/ at the ballpark.

This happens in every single ballpark.

 

[dbn]

It's about time we discussed Price's opt-out.

 

[Sampo Gida]

If he can lower his HR rate and stop being the Yankees patsy he should be fine here. I don't hold a lot of stock in what players say in public, but I seem to remember a couple of years ago (can't find link though) that he said he would never sign in Boston because he did not want to play in a place where 50% of the fans hate him (might have talked to Crawford). Changed his tune but I think he came here with some preconceived notions and unfortunately for him he didn't perform as expected (like Crawford) and those notions were reinforced. Not going to win over a fan base when you don't perform as expected.

I do think if he has a chance to fly out of here he does, but what the market for his services will be in 2 years nobody can say. As someone said above, the new CBA did not do players any favors, and his first season here will be remembered by other teams. Plus he has reinforced his image as one who does not get it done in the post season. He has a lot of ground to make up before he can even consider opting out and doing as well or better than whats left on the final 4 years of his deal. Not sure him talking like its not even possible (different spin) bodes well.

 

[Buzzkill Pauley]

This happens in every single ballpark.

And it's disgusting in every single ballpark.

 

[Bob Montgomerys Helmet Hat]

I knew the opt out was good for the team

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

he didn't perform as expected (like Crawford)

This comparison seems a bit over the top. I mean, sure, you can say "he didn't perform as expected," in the sense that we expected him to be elite and instead he was just good. But Carl Crawford came here and absolutely sucked.

 

[wade boggs chicken dinner]

It was pretty widely reported that JWH was the one who suggested and negotiated for the opt out.

wasn't it DD who insisted?

And my fifth-dimensional chess instincts say that DD did this so to make other teams give an opt-out in other contracts that are more likely to exercise it.

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

This comparison seems a bit over the top. I mean, sure, you can say "he didn't perform as expected," in the sense that we expected him to be elite and instead he was just good. But Carl Crawford came here and absolutely sucked.

Agreed. Huge difference between Price and Crawford. Price actually if you look at the complete picture pitched very respectable. Crawford just didn't give a shit and it showed. But the racial stuff has no business in any ballpark.

 

[Rasputin]

What an astonishingly stupid thing to say. He gains nothing, and makes the opt-out a bigger issue.

If he pitches well, people will love him regardless of his contract and if he pitches poorly they'll want him to take the damn opt-out.

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

Crawford just didn't give a shit and it showed.

Please don't agree with me if you're going to follow it with stuff like this. What possible grounds do you have for saying "Crawford just didn't give a shit"? Is that always the explanation when players underperform, and if not, why is it the explanation for this player underperforming in this situation? How would you know if it were true? And if you have no way of knowing whether it's true or not, why do you say it?

 

[Papelbon's Poutine]

wasn't it DD who insisted?

And my fifth-dimensional chess instincts say that DD did this so to make other teams give an opt-out in other contracts that are more likely to exercise it.

You may be correct and I'm mixing it up. My intended point was that "why did he negate for it and then?" seems misplaced.

 

[m0ckduck]

What an astonishingly stupid thing to say. He gains nothing, and makes the opt-out a bigger issue.

If he pitches well, people will love him regardless of his contract and if he pitches poorly they'll want him to take the damn opt-out.

The only reason you'd say this is if you actually, you know, felt bad about underperforming your first season. Which is sort of refreshing, even if it's a tactical blunder to say any of this.

 

[Papelbon's Poutine]

Or, you know, you actually genuinely mean it. There is that.

 

[YTF]

It's about time we discussed Price's opt-out.

Wait......he's got an opt out in his contract?

 

[wade boggs chicken dinner]

Wait......he's got an opt out in his contract?

Actually, I think it's an "opt-in" - after three tears, he can opt-in to the club's chicken and beer program.

 

[Snodgrass'Muff]

This comparison seems a bit over the top. I mean, sure, you can say "he didn't perform as expected," in the sense that we expected him to be elite and instead he was just good. But Carl Crawford came here and absolutely sucked.

Among starters:

IP: 1st
FIP: 17th
xFIP: 11th
K/BB: 9th
BABIP: 14th highest
E-F: 15th highest (difference between ERA and FIP)

He was still a very good pitcher last year. Now, part of the "bad luck" you might see in these numbers is that he had the 7th highest hard hit percentage in baseball last year, so you can't write the difference between his ERA and his FIP and xFIP off entirely, but there's every reason to believe he's going to be a very good starter next year.

 

[phenweigh]

Now, part of the "bad luck" you might see in these numbers is that he had the 7th highest hard hit percentage in baseball last year, so you can't write the difference between his ERA and his FIP and xFIP off entirely, but there's every reason to believe he's going to be a very good starter next year.

Thanks for this, as I didn't get the sense that there were an unusual amount of bloopers and seeing eye grounders, which are the kind of things that I classify as bad luck. It's nice when data and my observation match.

 

[Soxfan in Fla]

Actually, I think it's an "opt-in" - after three tears, he can opt-in to the club's chicken and beer program.

This is perfect coming from a guy with chicken dinner in his name.

 

[Cesar Crespo]

What an astonishingly stupid thing to say. He gains nothing, and makes the opt-out a bigger issue.

If he pitches well, people will love him regardless of his contract and if he pitches poorly they'll want him to take the damn opt-out.

The only reason you'd say this is if you actually, you know, felt bad about underperforming your first season. Which is sort of refreshing, even if it's a tactical blunder to say any of this.

Or, you know, you actually genuinely mean it. There is that.

Or he was specifically asked about it so he gave a canned response.

 

[Rovin Romine]

So I missed the part where Price announced he had his attorney amend his contract. Oh wait. Guess this means nothing.

 

[reggiecleveland]

He could switch it a team option.

 

[ToeKneeArmAss]

Crawford was one of the game's worst overpays ever. Price at least had a prayer of earning his salary.

 

[dhappy42]

...unfortunately for him he didn't perform as expected (like Crawford) and those notions were reinforced. Not going to win over a fan base when you don't perform as expected...

What was expected?

According to Fangraphs, Price was the 12th best pitcher in baseball last year, by WAR, ranking just higher than Kyle Hendricks and Jon Lester. By xFIP, he was 11th best, just ahead of Keuchel and Bumgarner. (Chris Sale was 14th. Porcello 32nd.)

What's it take to win over the Fenway fan base?

 

[dhappy42]

Or he was specifically asked about it so he gave a canned response.

Or a sincere response.

There's a long tradition in Boston sports writing (probably all sports writing) of asking a player a spicy question then, when he answers it, making it sound as if he brought up the subject.

Reporter: "So, David, with Porcello winning the Cy Young and Sale coming to town, are you worried about being demoted to #3 starter in the rotation?"

Price: "No. I don't worry about things like that. I've always been a winner and I expect to be a winner here in Boston."

Headline: "Price says he's better than Sale and Porcello."

 

[Papelbon's Poutine]

Crawford was one of the game's worst overpays ever. Price at least had a prayer of earning his salary.

If that a typo and should say 'has' instead of 'had' ignore the following.


Jesus fuck, it's been one year. Can we lay off the hyperbole? He still has plenty of time to earn his salary and he didn't fall all that short last year when you look past superficial stats.

I know people are bored this time of year, but this thread is as stupid as the one about trading Isaiah Thomas.

Athlete said something. News at eleven.

 

[Devizier]

Not for nothing, but Fangraphs has Price's value pegged at $35.9 million last year.

 

[EddieYost]

If that a typo and should say 'has' instead of 'had' ignore the following.


Jesus fuck, it's been one year. Can we lay off the hyperbole? He still has plenty of time to earn his salary and he didn't fall all that short last year when you look past superficial stats.

I know people are bored this time of year, but this thread is as stupid as the one about trading Isaiah Thomas.

Athlete said something. News at eleven.

Maybe it makes sense to assume that he meant "has" instead of "had" rather than offering a preemptive apology and then chewing the guy out anyway?

 

[Max Power]

What was expected?

According to Fangraphs, Price was the 12th best pitcher in baseball last year, by WAR, ranking just higher than Kyle Hendricks and Jon Lester. By xFIP, he was 11th best, just ahead of Keuchel and Bumgarner. (Chris Sale was 14th. Porcello 32nd.)

What's it take to win over the Fenway fan base?

A season where he doesn't have 9 games where he gave up 5 or more runs. Those are the kinds of starts that give the team very little chance to win and he had way too many of them.

It's nice that the advanced stats say he wasn't that bad, that means he's likely to be good this season. But he really did give up all those hits and runs last year, even if his K rate says he shouldn't have.

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

Maybe it makes sense to assume that he meant "has" instead of "had" rather than offering a preemptive apology and then chewing the guy out anyway?

I thought the point of "had" was more a dig at the Crawford signing than any kind of statement about Price's performance: i.e., that he meant "it was reasonable to expect Price to be worth the money they offered him, but not Crawford". Which is, at best, highly debatable. The immediate, total cratering of value that happened to Crawford (and Sandoval) is not what usually happens to free agents signed to long-term deals while still in or close to their prime. It's a possibility that has to be considered, but if teams assumed that it was a strong likelihood, they'd never sign any big-ticket free agents at all.

EDIT: On further examination, I'm going to walk back a bit from "is not what usually happens". It actually happens more often than I thought, especially in recent years, and especially if you expand the definition of "immediate, total cratering of value" just a bit. But I still see no particular grounds for seeing it as inherently likely to happen in Crawford's case, but not in Price's.

 

[Average Reds]

What was expected?

According to Fangraphs, Price was the 12th best pitcher in baseball last year, by WAR, ranking just higher than Kyle Hendricks and Jon Lester. By xFIP, he was 11th best, just ahead of Keuchel and Bumgarner. (Chris Sale was 14th. Porcello 32nd.)

What's it take to win over the Fenway fan base?

A victory in the postseason.

I don't really have an issue with the Price signing and I think he'll be fine for the Sox. But (assuming we get there again with him) he has to perform in the postseason to win the fan base over.

 

[dhappy42]

A season where he doesn't have 9 games where he gave up 5 or more runs. Those are the kinds of starts that give the team very little chance to win and he had way too many of them.

It's nice that the advanced stats say he wasn't that bad, that means he's likely to be good this season. But he really did give up all those hits and runs last year, even if his K rate says he shouldn't have.

Not just "advanced stats." He was 17-9.

Look, I understand Price wasn't a "lights out" starter last year. Didn't win the Cy Young. Had some bad games. Pitched like 2013 David Price, not 2014 David Price. Continued his post-season suckitude. But he was still one of top 20 pitchers in baseball.

Wish we could conduct an experiment: offer Price to other teams for $30-32 mil/year, the remainder of his contract. Think there'd be any takers?

 

[MikeM]

I thought the point of "had" was more a dig at the Crawford signing than any kind of statement about Price's performance: i.e., that he meant "it was reasonable to expect Price to be worth the money they offered him, but not Crawford". Which is, at best, highly debatable.

I took it as a dig at Crawford. As far as direct comparisons go though:

You also can't completely ignore the the surrounding circumstances of each signing imo. David Price was brought in to fill a crater sized hole in the roster, and one which we've struggled heavily for years now in our attempt to supply internal options. He also had a strong track record of sustained/elite success and plays *the* premium value position when it comes to competitive free agency. Overpaying in that scenario was/is warranted by Boston (and their payroll capability), evident by the fact that despite Price's down year this board is still mostly sitting on a 100% non-regret note of that signing.

Carl Crawford was brought in coming of a career year, and to play LF on a roster that many felt at the time was already fairly stacked enough as a whole without him. As far as positional value in free agency goes some would argue it's not even possible to have a legitimate "crater sized hole" in LF to begin with, much less one worthy of dropping $140m on 29yo with a speed based tool set. In essence it was min/max'ing and overvaluing the WAR stat at it's very worst. Even without the complete and utter bottom out in year 1 it was still going to be fairly wasteful signing going forward that left a bad taste in a lot of mouths.

Other then them both being big money free agent signings, I really don't see them being all that similar.

 

[Hoodie Sleeves]

Crawford was one of the game's worst overpays ever. Price at least had a prayer of earning his salary.

Crawford had to be about a 3 win player to earn his salary. He put up 16.5 wins in the preceding 3 years.

Dude blew out his arm. Shit happens.

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

Carl Crawford was brought in coming of a career year, and to play LF on a roster that many felt at the time was already fairly stacked enough as a whole without him. As far as positional value in free agency goes some would argue it's not even possible to have a legitimate "crater sized hole" in LF to begin with, much less one worthy of dropping $140m on 29yo with a speed based tool set. In essence it was min/max'ing and overvaluing the WAR stat at it's very worst. Even without the complete and utter bottom out in year 1 it was still going to be fairly wasteful signing going forward that left a bad taste in a lot of mouths.

It seems like a fallacy to say that because left field is easier to play than most other positions, therefore a hole in LF can't be a major problem that a team needs to spend resources to address. There's one respect in which every position is absolutely equal to every other one: somebody's gotta play it every night. And the guy you have playing it can be better or worse than average for your league just the same way as at any other position. Having a left fielder who is better than most other teams' left fielders is just as useful and just as likely to help a team win as having a shortstop who is better than most other teams' shortstops. In that sense, it's just as possible to have a "crater sized hole" in LF as it is at any other position.

 

[MikeM]

It seems like a fallacy to say that because left field is easier to play than most other positions, therefore a hole in LF can't be a major problem that a team needs to spend resources to address. There's one respect in which every position is absolutely equal to every other one: somebody's gotta play it every night. And the guy you have playing it can be better or worse than average for your league just the same way as at any other position. Having a left fielder who is better than most other teams' left fielders is just as useful and just as likely to help a team win as having a shortstop who is better than most other teams' shortstops. In that sense, it's just as possible to have a "crater sized hole" in LF as it is at any other position.

I didn't mean it couldn't be a major problem that a team should never spend resources on to address (given the right player). All things considered there I just don't view LF as being very high on the team's alternative options concern list in comparison to having that 1/2 starting pitcher. The existing "somebody's gotta play it every night" factor certainly didn't warrant paying a Carl Crawford that money either.

But yeah I guess, you can also count me among those that will never lose much long term sleep over having a hole at LF. Cool thing about needing a leftfielder...not only is it one of the easier positions to play (and therefore generally makes it easier to find decent player options) but you don't necessarily need one that has to be X amount of good to provide us with an adequate or better solution. You can also essentially use what is built around that to help compensate.

The same really doesn't apply to frontline starter types imo. You basically either have them or you don't, and it's not like waiting an extra 6 months or even stopgaping it to the following offseason changes much in terms of you chances to dig a solid one up at a reasonable acquisition rate.

 

[reggiecleveland]

Crawford had to be about a 3 win player to earn his salary. He put up 16.5 wins in the preceding 3 years.

Dude blew out his arm. Shit happens.

Whoa, wait, stop!

There is a lot I will put up with and stay silent, A Fascist Russian stooge with the nuclear codes, people in public saying "The Hunger Games" is literature, a ten minute feature on the Leafs, every night on all the channels, etc.

But. but, I will not stand by while Carl Crawford is let off the hook for his only full year in Boston. He got hurt in the off season after his suck of 2011. He put up .289 on base average, and the two consistent things about his 2011 were him sucking, and him complaining about his spot in the batting order. He whined, and whined, and whined, and went out, went out, and went out. He then dropped an easy fly to cap off the crappy season. Then since he left he has blamed Boston, the media, the Red Sox, pressure, blah blah, blah. As bad as all this was you have add in the intangible suckitude, mopeyness, sad eyed defeatism he oozed, even through the TV screen.Like the Great Wall, the Pyamids, a Blue Whale, you had to witness his suck to understand the magnitude.

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

Please don't agree with me if you're going to follow it with stuff like this. What possible grounds do you have for saying "Crawford just didn't give a shit"? Is that always the explanation when players underperform, and if not, why is it the explanation for this player underperforming in this situation? How would you know if it were true? And if you have no way of knowing whether it's true or not, why do you say it?

Not trying to look at one play but the one at the end of the season was kind of lackadaisical. He was just bad and when he came back he was a shell of himself. Whether he stopped putting the work in no one knows. But it's very difficult for a player with his tools to fall off a cliff that quick if he's still putting in the work.

Look at the team he was on as well. Can you truly say that anyone on that team gave a shit about the season in September?

 

[Rasputin]

Look at the team he was on as well. Can you truly say that anyone on that team gave a shit about the season in September?

Yes.

This notion that the collapse that season came from players who didn't want to play really needs to fucking die but it won't because it's continually perpetuated by people like you.

 

[Wayapman]

A victory in the postseason.

I don't really have an issue with the Price signing and I think he'll be fine for the Sox. But (assuming we get there again with him) he has to perform in the postseason to win the fan base over.

I know the idea of "clutch" is not well embraced by the statistically minded but it does exist. Some people thrive under pressure and bright lights of the postseason, some do not. At a certain point things can no longer be chalked up to SSS

See: Kershaw, Clayton; Ortiz, David

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

Not trying to look at one play but the one at the end of the season was kind of lackadaisical. He was just bad and when he came back he was a shell of himself. Whether he stopped putting the work in no one knows. But it's very difficult for a player with his tools to fall off a cliff that quick if he's still putting in the work.

Is it really? So confidence plays no role? Adjusting to a new team, a new city, a new park, can't possibly throw a guy off his game even though he's still working as hard as ever? And it's not possible for some guys to have a kind of personality that bounces back and recovers confidence in that situation less easily than others? In short, it's not possible for a player to give too much of a shit for his own good, and his teammates'?

Mind you, I have no idea whether the above is any closer to the truth about what happened to Carl Crawford in 2011 than "he didn't give a shit". But I feel pretty sure that makes two of us.

Look at the team he was on as well. Can you truly say that anyone on that team gave a shit about the season in September?

Are you really saying that whenever teams (or players) underperform it must be because they don't give a shit? Because it seems like you are.

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

Yes.

This notion that the collapse that season came from players who didn't want to play really needs to fucking die but it won't because it's continually perpetuated by people like you.

Tough to say that. Players were fucking around with chicken and beer. Whether that had any merit on games and such the perception was an embarrassment. Guys like Gonzalez blaming God and shit like that. Then the following year you can absolutely say no one wanted to play for the Sox. Most of that due to the Bobby V clownshow but still.