Savin Hillbilly said:
I dunno, this isn't Stephen Drew we're talking about. When was the last time he didn't get what he was looking for when a top-echelon free agent was on the market?
Max Power
- Thread starter Yelling At Clouds
- Start date
I dunno, this isn't Stephen Drew we're talking about. When was the last time he didn't get what he was looking for when a top-echelon free agent was on the market?
What's the difference in value between the third rounder we'd give up and the first rounder other teams who have yet to sign a FA would need to give up? That might put us slightly closer in terms of how different teams are valuing him? I don't think we come close to signing him, but I'm curious how much of a factor the difference in picks is to FOs.
Danny_Darwin said:
Scherzer is patently not Clayton Kershaw's equal. He's three years older and not as good. In every relevant respect, he is much more similar to Lester than to Kershaw. If Boras gets a Kershaw contract for him, some GM has lost his frickin' mind.
Somewhere between 6/165 and 7/185 would be a reasonable market-rate contract for Scherzer. It doesn't seem like the Sox would go into that territory, though stranger things have happened.
Savin Hillbilly said:
I agree with your assessment of what Scherzer should get (and I agree that the Red Sox will not be the team to give him even a market-rate deal), but Boras has induced this particular brand of GM insanity in the past, and I would not be surprised if he was able to do so again.
Savin, your money per year seems about right but small quibble...Savin Hillbilly said:
IF Lester got 6 years + 1 year vesting option, THEN Scherzer being 1 year younger (and better) will get at least 7 years + 1 year vesting option + an opt out.
Boras being Boras.
and hopefully the Sox stay away from Kevin Brown, I mean Max Scherzer...
Because sometimes what they value a player at is what they will sign for. Sticking to the value you've pegged a player at is not the same thing as never being the highest bidder. Plus, there are reports that Hanley approached the Sox about finding a way to get him in a Sox uniform. I don't think his contract works against the idea that the Red Sox are unlikely to value Scherzer highly enough to be the highest bidder.snowmanny said:
Hell, even Panda might not be a great example as there are reports that he turned down very similar money from the Giants.
For what it's worth, he's 6 months younger, but I don't see the comparison between him and Brown, but that said, If you consider them equals you give Max the same contract without second thought given what Brown did over the same years.benhogan said:
I don't see Kershaw being totally relevant given he didn't get his contract on the open market, though.
If the sox really offered 135/6 for Lester & we know they're pretty disciplined, then I think my 135/5 or 150/6 or 160/7 is not crazy to think that's was the sox offer for scherzer, which means probably close to a 0% chance he signs with Boston.
Kershaw is not a great comp b/c he was not a free agent. i.e., he would have gotten even more on the open market.
On the other thread it says we're already $4.5M over the LT with probably another $10M left to spend this offseason (veteran backup catcher & one more decent reliever).
Kershaw is not a great comp b/c he was not a free agent. i.e., he would have gotten even more on the open market.
On the other thread it says we're already $4.5M over the LT with probably another $10M left to spend this offseason (veteran backup catcher & one more decent reliever).
The Brown comment was just a throw away, implying that big/long contracts for pitchers in their 30s doesn't usually work out well.mt8thsw9th said:
You're right Brown was insane in his early 30s, but the big contract he signed with the Dodgers (the first $100MM contract) in his mid 30s was a disaster.
Also the Mitchell Report cited Kevin Brown as a known PED user, but I'll always have a soft spot for him after 2004 ALCS Game 7.
benhogan said:
What was so bad about that contract for Kevin Brown exactly? After signing the deal he turned in two nice seasons in the first two years, 230+ IP, 6th in Cy Young voting each season. Then a just as good 2/3 of a season in the third before presumably getting hurt. He was meh/injured in the fourth, getting just 17 starts, then good again in the fifth with a 2.39 ERA over 211 innings, then traded to the Yankees for prospects (and sucked after that for two seasons to round out the deal).
Seems like a reasonably solid way to spend $100 million to me. Certainly no Mike Hampton contract.
There are a few reasons why this year would be the best year to make a huge run at an elite asset like Scherzer:
1) The Red Sox are already right at or just over the luxury tax level. It doesn't matter how much you exceed the cap, it counts as a "year over the luxury tax level". Now, they have to pay an overage based on how far over the level (189 mil maybe?) they go, but the penalty is minor because they haven't been over that level in several years. Going over the luxury tax level in consecutive years makes the penalty escalate in terms of percentage, but given that the Red Sox have salaries coming off the books for 2016 (Napoli, Victorino), this might be the year to add the big contract.
2) Scherzer, who turned down the QO, would cost the Red Sox a pick, but since they've already signed a few guys with QO attached in Hanley and Panda, they'd lose a 4th round pick if they sign Scherzer. That's not much of a penalty to pay for this kind of addition.
3) He's the best pitcher likely to enter the free agent market for the next 2 seasons. Free agents after 2015 include Price, Iwakuma, Zimmerman, Norris, Latos, Kennedy, Fister, Porcello and Shark. I would rather have Scherzer than any of those guys, and the prices for the pitchers listed are only going to get more expensive. Scherzer at 7/180 might look like a good deal by this time in 2015.
4) He's the best pitcher the Red Sox can acquire. The guys who project to be better than Scherzer over the next 3-4 seasons aren't available in trade, and if they were, it would likely take packages led by the Red Sox top young assets: Betts, Swihart, Bogaerts, Owens, etc. Scherzer will only cost money, and while the contract might look bad if Scherzer ages poorly by the end of the deal, that might be the price of trying to win in the short term.
1) The Red Sox are already right at or just over the luxury tax level. It doesn't matter how much you exceed the cap, it counts as a "year over the luxury tax level". Now, they have to pay an overage based on how far over the level (189 mil maybe?) they go, but the penalty is minor because they haven't been over that level in several years. Going over the luxury tax level in consecutive years makes the penalty escalate in terms of percentage, but given that the Red Sox have salaries coming off the books for 2016 (Napoli, Victorino), this might be the year to add the big contract.
2) Scherzer, who turned down the QO, would cost the Red Sox a pick, but since they've already signed a few guys with QO attached in Hanley and Panda, they'd lose a 4th round pick if they sign Scherzer. That's not much of a penalty to pay for this kind of addition.
3) He's the best pitcher likely to enter the free agent market for the next 2 seasons. Free agents after 2015 include Price, Iwakuma, Zimmerman, Norris, Latos, Kennedy, Fister, Porcello and Shark. I would rather have Scherzer than any of those guys, and the prices for the pitchers listed are only going to get more expensive. Scherzer at 7/180 might look like a good deal by this time in 2015.
4) He's the best pitcher the Red Sox can acquire. The guys who project to be better than Scherzer over the next 3-4 seasons aren't available in trade, and if they were, it would likely take packages led by the Red Sox top young assets: Betts, Swihart, Bogaerts, Owens, etc. Scherzer will only cost money, and while the contract might look bad if Scherzer ages poorly by the end of the deal, that might be the price of trying to win in the short term.
Agreed, he wasn't as bad as my memory recalls.Max Venerable said:
4 of the 7 years he probably earned his pay (not sure how much a WAR win was worth then) with the help of roids.
On the other hand, he was the highest paid pitcher at the time, so he topped out as #6 in Cy Young in the National League (in a pitchers park). Meh...
Not exactly great value, but you're right not nearly as awful as the Hampton deal.
I don't get the assumption that if Boras is the agent the player will cost more. He is reputed to be a jerk, will ask for a ridiculous contract and is willing to hold out until spring, but it still comes down to supply and demand. He wasn't able to pull a rabbit out of a hat for Drew last year. Do people believe that Pablo and Lester would have received even bigger contracts if he had been the agent?Danny_Darwin said:
So whoever gets him, and looks like his market is pretty thin (cant imagine more than 3 teams interested in him, given what he could realistic command, and even 3 might be a stretch given that the Sox wouldnt come close to his demands), is going to massively overpay for him? Bidding against himself? I cant only picture the Yankees as that team with the need, desire, pockets to get him. Dont think the Dodgers would enter his market. Ditto Boston (because of his price tag). So Boras will work his magic again.
I just hate this Yankees' theatre of them saying they are not signing him, their press saying they are out, blah, blah just to get him at the end.
I just hate this Yankees' theatre of them saying they are not signing him, their press saying they are out, blah, blah just to get him at the end.
I see your Mike Hampton deal and raise you a Denny Naigle.
I have absolutely no interest in him.
The only way to stop these stupid contracts from happening for 30+ free agents is for more of them to fail spectacularly, or for large market teams to pass on them. Or for Scott Boras' heart to grow three sizes.
Albert Pujols and Prince Fielder are luckily helping that cause, and Miggy and Verlander may not work out so hot either.
The Red Sox ought to keep going the homegrown route and combine it with sensible shorter term deals for actual prime years. One of their internal guys is due to strike gold at some point.
I have absolutely no interest in him.
The only way to stop these stupid contracts from happening for 30+ free agents is for more of them to fail spectacularly, or for large market teams to pass on them. Or for Scott Boras' heart to grow three sizes.
Albert Pujols and Prince Fielder are luckily helping that cause, and Miggy and Verlander may not work out so hot either.
The Red Sox ought to keep going the homegrown route and combine it with sensible shorter term deals for actual prime years. One of their internal guys is due to strike gold at some point.
ArgentinaSOXfan said:
San Fran is still out there after their failed bid on Lester, and have to be considered in any default speculation imo.
Applying the "this is the only time we'll be able to get them to come play here" logic, i wouldn't discount the possibility of a team like Toronto seizing the potential opportunity there either.
MikeM said:
I would think the Giants are very likely to jump in on Max. They have lost out on Lester, Panda and Headley. If they can't get Shields (who, by all accounts is their primary target) I think they'll go all in on Scherzer, Can't really see the Blue Jays giving a seven year contract to anyone.
But Max's market really would seem to be shrinking. If he can't get the MFY involved then I think it will be down to the Giants , the Tigers and the Red Sox, And in that contest, Max will be spending his summer's in San Francisco. And I don't think he'll get anything close to 200m - probably a 7/170 or 7/180 type contract.
This. Boras, at most, has been clever with the timing of his actions, waiting for conditions to ripen to the point where he can maximize competition. At most. On the flip side, this same tactic hung Drew and Kendrys Morales out to dry. And even his "big splashes" arguably don't have much to do with the identity of the agent. Lester's guys don't have any unusual rep but he just got a record deal. Jay Z was an amateur agent and he got Cano $240 mil. It's about the player.Night of the Keyboard said:
I guess my original point wasn't that Boras automatically equals more money; it was that he usually doesn't settle for less than what he/his client asks for, Drew/Morales situation aside (and neither of those is a good comparison to Scherzer). Granted, that's mostly true for a lot of free agents in the Scherzer tier, regardless of who's representing them, I suppose.chrisfont9 said:
Just the opposite, in fact.Papelbon's Poutine said:
https://twitter.com/BNightengale/status/543969047763615744
The #STLCards say they are NOT active suitors for Max Scherzer. Too expensive for their taste.
Things could change, but as you point out, it would be out of left field for them to sign him.
I included them based on this story, but dropped them to the "might" category" because it does seem out of character:
http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/writer/jon-heyman/24874802/might-fically-conservative-cards-make-run-at-hometown-star-scherzercbs
http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/writer/jon-heyman/24874802/might-fically-conservative-cards-make-run-at-hometown-star-scherzercbs
Am I the only one who's amazed that's it's almost mid-January and there is virtually nothing going on with Max? I get the Scott Boris approach, but it's starting to get late, even for him, no?
We're still over a month away from pitchers and catchers reporting, so he still has some time. I'd imagine he'd want to get things wrapped up in the next 2-3 weeks.ItOnceWasMyLife said:
Well, he has taken some guys late into the winter in the past (Damon, Fielder and others), but Detroit is unlikely to bail him out (again) on Max many believe. Some reports that St. Louis is again kicking the tires after denying interest late last year, but you are right, not alot of news overall on the Max front. If many of the big payroll teams are out, which appears to be the case on Max (at least publicly), then yeah, he is truly going to have to earn his money on this one....
Scherzer is from St. Louis FWIW. And the Cards' need is real as they have serious concerns about Wainwright's health.
glennhoffmania said:
I think the story is from this tweet:
Tony Paul @TonyPaul1984 Source inside #Tigers organization says of Max Scherzer: "Have to have him." Too many Q's with Price's future, JV, Sanchez's health.
adam42381 said:
Just looked it up; Boras took Lohse to March before he signed and got his arm in shape by scheduling simulated games. I suppose Boras could do the same with Scherzer but I would have to think it would up the possibility for arm injuries if Scherzer didn't make spring training.
Reading the "No News" Tea Leaves one could easily come to the conclusion that the possible eventual suitors (Red Sox, MFY?, Cardinals, Tigers , Giants? anyone else?) are simply waiting for news as well. In the absence of a public market they are waiting to see how far his demands drop. I don't think he gets what he wants but a 6/180 would be the absolute (highly unlikely) ceiling - with 6/160 more likely. At that rate I think most of the interested parties would get involved.
He would have cost a 1st round pick, I believe. It killed his market.The Allented Mr Ripley said:
bosox79 said:
Lohse was the first "victim" of the Qualifying Offer process. That he still got 3/$33M even after spring training started is what gave Stephen Drew and Kendry Morales hope last spring.
This has to be coming from the owner's suite - Dave Dombrowski is too smart to be bidding against himself like this.wade boggs chicken dinner said:
I think the story is from this tweet:
Source inside #Tigers organization says of Max Scherzer: "Have to have him." Too many Q's with Price's future, JV, Sanchez's health.
More likely, a groundskeeper., It's just far too stupid for anyone in leadership to say to a member of the pressJimD said:
BCsMightyJoeYoung said:
As far as potential suitors go, it strikes me as strange that after popping up as being super aggressive on Lester and the most talked about team surrounding Shields (i believe the claim he turned down a 5/110m offer from some unnamed team is pure BS, fwiw), there really isn't any smoke there if the Giants were indeed planning to be seriously in on Max. Not even a "the Giants offered Scherzer the same contract they offered Lester" leak.
The silence may, in fact, be legitimate. All the initial talk of a 200m deal put teams off and they are waiting for Boras to come to them.MikeM said:
Probably been summarized before, but here's what I think the comps are for current highest paid pitchers (+/- their exact age):
Kershaw: 7/215 = 30.9 negotiated in 2014 @ age 25
Hernandez: 10/240 = 24 negotiated in 2013 @ age 26
CC: 5/122 = 24.4 negotiated in 2011 @ age 30
Tanaka: 7/155 = 22.1 negotiated in 2014 @ age 25
Lester: 6/155 = 25.8 negotiated in 2014 @ age 30
rumor:
Scherzer: (7) / (200) = 28.6 negotiated in 2015 @ age 30
What's wrong with this picture?
Kershaw: 7/215 = 30.9 negotiated in 2014 @ age 25
Hernandez: 10/240 = 24 negotiated in 2013 @ age 26
CC: 5/122 = 24.4 negotiated in 2011 @ age 30
Tanaka: 7/155 = 22.1 negotiated in 2014 @ age 25
Lester: 6/155 = 25.8 negotiated in 2014 @ age 30
rumor:
Scherzer: (7) / (200) = 28.6 negotiated in 2015 @ age 30
What's wrong with this picture?
For Lohse yes, but I was commenting on how long Boras might keep the Scherzer charade going. Im sure Boras is telling him to stay patient, just like he told Lohse.
geoduck no quahog said:
What's wrong with the picture is that Felix is 7/175, not 10/240.
Anyway, there was an article about the Yankees' potential interest in Scherzer, in which Hal made a shocking statement:
I'm glad to see that NY is finally starting to loosen the purse strings a little bit.
judyb said:
If so, you'd think the Tigers would be testing the waters to see what Price might bring back. But there hasn't been a whisper of that. Which sort of implies that Detroit has moved on.
Not necessarily; the rumor mill has been very quiet all over. We've only had the recent "stare down " rumor about Cole, a tweet that Sheilds has $110M/5yrs on the table, and Dumbrowski's comment about Max. Even the Sox's pitching moves were not preceded by a lot of leaks (other than the obvious speculation about Cespedes for Porcello).Kull said:
It looks like MLB front offices have gotten a lot more tight lipped very quickly
Scherzer will be expensive obviously. He does bring a potential alpha dog figure to the Red Sox rotation. some one to fill this role enhances Buchholz and Kelly not to mention his former teammate Porcello. With a group of young pitchers on the way a leader by example is a valuable commodity. As a home park Max would seem to benefit from Fenway's expansive right center and right field.
He could fill a Schilling type role for this team.
I would prefer to not wait for next winter to get a top of the rotation starter. Max will probably be a better deal than Cueto Greinke or Zimmerman. 7/ 200 sounds about right.
He could fill a Schilling type role for this team.
I would prefer to not wait for next winter to get a top of the rotation starter. Max will probably be a better deal than Cueto Greinke or Zimmerman. 7/ 200 sounds about right.
Doctor G said:
For a 30-year-old with a violent delivery who relies heavily on the elbow-shreddingest pitch in baseball? That sounds absolutely insane. Scherzer is only six months younger than Lester and seems like a much higher injury risk. Higher AAV than Lester is perhaps inevitable given their recent records, but there's zero reason why he should get more years. I'm not eager for the Sox to go there at all, but they certainly should not go higher than 6/170, and if that doesn't do it, well, enjoy your winner's curse, whoever gets him.