Jon Lester signs with Cubs

[rxmeister]

Six years 155 million, seventh year option. Bobby Evans was very quotable yesterday, saying, "we weren't handed a rose," and then later when asked about finishing second again, "we don't finish second when it counts." It probably would have bothered me more if he signed with the Red Sox because they also beat us for Pablo, and of course it would have been horrible if he chose the Dodgers, so it's ok he's in Chicago. Rather then get in a battle with the big market teams over FA's like Scherzer and Shields and go through this again, I hope the Giants now go to middle tier FA's and trades.

[Rog]

The Cubs are really building something. They have an abundance of young position prospects, and now they've added the #2 (and possibly #1) pitcher on the free agent market.

The Giants are now said to be pursuing Justin Upton via trade. A rumored trade for Upton and third baseman Chris Johnson is now considered to be dead, but not the Giants' interest in Upton. I'm not sure what the Braves need, or what the Giants have to give up.

[sfgdood]

so that's where our expectations are now? Middle tier and bargain basements? Sorry that doesn't tickle my fancy not one little bit. It blows my mind that nobody else here is pissed off about these developments. It doesn't even sound like the Giants really care that the team gets worse with every FA that slips through their fingers. It's like "oh well, we get to keep more of the money now instead of paying players." It feels like the good ole Candlestick days when the teams were pretty good but never had the expectations we do now. I'll still enjoy watching the season but always underneath there will be the undercurrent of discontent knowing the opportunity that is slipping away.

[Islandboagie]

Not sure the Giants could have done much more in trying to get Lester. I just heard they were the team that was willing to go 7 years. Lester just preferred the idea of pitching in Chicago. So be it.

[klaiggeb]

Randy--so that's where our expectations are now? Middle tier and bargain basements? Sorry that doesn't tickle my fancy not one little bit. It blows my mind that nobody else here is pissed off about these developments.

---boly says---

I'm as ticked as you are, Randy. No, not just ticked... disgusted and furious.

Once again, we're left sucking hind teat. That gets old, and I'm concerned about the 'flotsam' that's left, just like you.

We have Bumgarner, and maybe... maybe Cain, who could be considered top tier or elite. Everyone after them? 2nd, 3rd, or 5th tier.

With THIS staff, we're not going anywhere. Remember, you all heard it first here.

And adding Santana? Swell. Be still my heart. He's "just a guy."



Randy---It's like "oh well, we get to keep more of the money now instead of paying players."

---boly says---I really don't agree with this part, Randy. It's not like they didn't give it a major effort. They obviously had a "we won't go any further," point.

I am simply not happy with 'that' point. I mean, the guy signed with the Cubs. Even with the signing of Montero, they aren't going anywhere for a couple of seasons.

With US, he had a legit shot at the World Series this year and the next and the next.


What it came down to was greed, IMHO. No other reason to sign with the Cubs.

IMHO, what he did was ridiculous. Nuts. Estupido!

166 million or 150 million; more money than he could EVER spend!

If it was me? I'd want the ring, and a 16 MILLION dollar difference, with that much money on the table, AIN'T a big deal

As Monica once said in Friends; "Bite me, paper boy!"



As Mark pointed out, signing Lester would have made us an elite staff. Potentially 3 # 1 guys.

Evin Santana? a #3 at best. Not my idea of a 'big game' guy.

boly

[sfgdood]

I have a lot to say about why we keep missing out on all these FAs but I'll save that for another thread. For now it just seems like the FO is just fine with missing out and have no interest in doing better. We need a greater sense of urgency. They seem to be resting on their laurels. If what you're doing isn't working, you need to change something. I'm not good with "sorry, we tried"...I want results.

[rxmeister]

Peter Gammons is saying that the Giants are going hard after James Shields. I have to admit that I'm mystified by Dood's and Boly's disgust. WE WON THE WORLD SERIES!!! What the heck, guys? Three rings in five years? I'm on board with anything out front office does. I think it's pretty easy to give them the benefit of the doubt.

[sfgdood]

Rx...if we cannot lure FAs here with competitive offers when we have that sort of postseason success rate to offer, what happens when we try to lure them after a season of pure crap, such as it appears we are headed for?

[Rog]

Boly -- With US, he had a legit shot at the World Series this year and the next and the next.


What it came down to was greed, IMHO. No other reason to sign with the Cubs.

Rog -- I would like to bring up three points here:

First, and possibly most important, the Cubs just hired former pitcher and Lester teammate Ryan Dempster as a special assistant. From what I heard, Dempster and Lester are extremely good friends. One of the guys said when the Cubs hired Dempster four days ago he was afraid Lester was going to go to the Cubbies.

Second, it appears the Giants were willing to pay at least as much money as the Cubs. That would indicate money wasn't the biggest factor.

Third, the Cubs are an up and coming team. They have some of the best position prospects around, and now they're adding pitching. They and the White Sox are considered by many to have had the best off-season of all the major league teams, significantly improving the quality of baseball in Chicago. Sadly, the Dodgers today may be joining the two Chicago teams at the top of the off-season conga line.

So it appears greed wasn't the deciding factor. If it had been, Lester might be a Giant.

It doesn't appear greed was the deciding factor with Pablo, either. Perhaps it was with Tomas, although I don't know enough about the situation to be sure. I simply believe he took the top offer, but that might not have been his only reason for accepting it.

It doesn't seem fair to me to cry out "greed, greed, greed" when we don't know the facts. Perhaps we could see no other reason for Lester to decide the way he did, but it appears there were indeed other reasons. It was certainly stated as an opinion, not a fact, but I don't like to reach negative opinions without fairly significant backup for the opinion. If it's a positive opinion and is clearly expressed as only an opinion, I don't have a problem.

But to me, a negative opinion seems to require a higher burden of proof than a positive one.

We criticize reporters for reporting rumors that don't turn out to be factual (at least not in the final result). We might also hold ourselves to a higher standard when it comes to expressing NEGATIVE opinions.

Just my opinion (and unfortunately, a negative one). Looked at another way, is expressing a negative opinion about a negative opinion truly a negative opinion or a positive one? Not sure, but I thought I'd ask!

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2614/jon-lester-signs-cubs#ixzz3LYfQrbYk

[Rog]

Boly -- Evin Santana? a #3 at best. Not my idea of a 'big game' guy.

Rog -- Santana has had a lower ERA than Justin Verlander in each of the past two seasons. I'm not saying Ervin is a #1, but he's better than a #3. Let's just call him a #2.

And if Matt Cain returns to his previous form, Santana would be the Giants' #3 starter anyway. Having Bumgarner, Cain and Santana as the Giants' first three starters would be pretty good if Hudson and Lincecum can rebound some.

I realize it depends on whether Cain can return to form, but he just turned 30 years old. Isn't it more likely than not that he will return closer to his pre-2013 form than his form of the past two seasons, both of which appear to have been injury-hampered?

But Bumgarner (who had a lot of pitches on his arm last season and might not be quite as good in 2015), Cain (who should be much improved) and Santana (who has been good, not great the past two seasons and wasn't very good at all in 2012) as the Giants' top three starters would likely put them in an above-average position.

If the Giants had signed Lester, they likely wouldn't have gotten their money's worth in the second half of the contract. At least with Santana, they might be able to get a 3- or 4-year contract instead of a 6-year pact (or perhaps a 7-year pact if they had won out in a financial war).

I don't think there is any doubt we would rather have Jon Lester than Ervin Santana. But the Giants might be able to sign Ervin for about $100 million less than Lester. This isn't quite a fair comparison, but since Pablo signed for just under $100 million, wouldn't we rather have Santana and Sandoval than Lester alone?

I think Santana is a pitcher who might come close to earning what he will be paid. Over the full course of his contract, I don't think that will be the case with Lester.

Hey, it's all an educated guess. But the guys on KNBR this morning weren't all that disappointed the Giants didn't land Lester, and even Mike Krukow said he thought a six- or seven-year contract for a pitcher was crazy. Now, I have to admit that Mike would likely feel differently if he were still pitching today!

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2614/jon-lester-signs-cubs?page=1#ixzz3LYjGkrR9

[Rog]

Randy -- if we cannot lure FAs here with competitive offers when we have that sort of postseason success rate to offer, what happens when we try to lure them after a season of pure crap, such as it appears we are headed for?

Rog -- I don't mean to beat a dead horse here, but why are you so negative, Randy? Remember, you gave up on the Giants in early August of 2012, and how did that turn out?

Wouldn't it be more prudent for us to wait and see what the Giants do before we criticize for something that hasn't happened yet?



Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2614/jon-lester-signs-cubs?page=1#ixzz3LYnwxlfQ

[sfgdood]

Bottom line is the Giants have accomplished exactly nada in the month+ of the offseason thus far. They have missed out on the three players they coveted most. Why exactly should we be excited about 2015 when all that is left to fill the holes of the team are players the team itself didn't regard as priorities?

[Rog]

Randy -- Bottom line is the Giants have accomplished exactly nada in the month+ of the offseason thus far. They have missed out on the three players they coveted most. Why exactly should we be excited about 2015 when all that is left to fill the holes of the team are players the team itself didn't regard as priorities?

Rog -- A year ago this time the Giants had already made four important signings -- Tim Hudson, Tim Lincecum, Ryan Vogelsong and Javier Lopez. That's three-fifths of their rotation and an important reliever. Sounds pretty good, doesn't it?

Until we look at the details.

The four guys combined to go 30-36. The rest of the pitchers on their staff went a combined 58-38. The four guys the Giants had signed went just .455 -- .150 lower than the other pitchers, who went .605. The four guys signed went six under .500, while the rest of the staff went 20 games over.

In other words, for $38 million -- about $8 million more than the Giants have to spend this off-season -- the Giants had signed four pitchers who combined for a LOSING record and a combined ERA of about 4.00.
The four combineed to provide 2.5 Wins Above Replacement. They hadn't really helped the team all that much.

Yet they went on to win the World Series.

The Giants haven't signed anyone of note -- but they still have $30 million or so to spend. Think they can use that money to provide more than 2.5 WAR as they used the $38 million last season?

The Giants have a lot less money to spend this off-season than last. About $14 million less than they spent on the four free agents mentioned above plus Mike Morse. Yet the chances are pretty good that they'll improve their team more this off-season than last.

The problem, of course, is that they're LOSING more. But my guess is that they'll spend the $30 million they have this off-season better than they spent the $45 million or so last winter. And isn't that all we can reasonably ask?

To simplify, the Giants haven't signed a single player of note this off-season, compared to four at this time last season. But they still have about $30 million left to spend, which should provide more than the 2.5 WAR they had signed at this time last off-season.

The Giants had made four more signings a year ago, but they had added less to their roster than they will likely add this winter.

We're disappointed with the results thus far, but there is every possibility this winter will turn out better than it had so far a year ago.

Wouldn't it make more sense to wait and see what the Giants DO than to criticize a work in progress because it hasn't yet done anything?

Maybe signing Jon Lester for six or seven years would have worked out well. But it would have been fighting the odds. As a rule, long-term contracts for pitchers haven't worked out well.

Isn't criticizing something before it's done a fool's paradise?

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2614/jon-lester-signs-cubs#ixzz3LYxkSt9B

[Rog]

Once again I ask: How would we spend our $30 million for the 2015 season if we were the Giants? If they had signed Pablo, they would have about a third of that left. If they had signed Lester, they would have about a sixth left.

At least they still have all the $30 million left to work with. As an example, they could perhaps sign Ervin Santana and Melky Cabrera for that amount. That pair combined to provide 4.3 Wins Above Replacement last season. The five primary players the Giants signed last season combined for about a win less -- at a cost of about 50% more.

From what the Giants have indicated, we're probably looking at a free agent pitcher and traded-for third baseman. Based on their desire to trade for Jason Upton, perhaps the left fielder will come via trade as well.

So what do they trade?

[Rog]

Justin Upton.

[sfgdood]

Last year was obviously not a great job but at least we didn't have to wait for it to happen. Now, we're at the point where if we don't make moves soon, what happens next? Everyone shuts down for the holidays and then where are we? We're a month before pitchers and catchers reporting and still waiting for Sabean to get off his fat ass. And by that time nothing will be left but the bottom of the barrel.

That's why we should be worried now.

[Rog]

Randy -- Now, we're at the point where if we don't make moves soon, what happens next?

Rog -- We make moves later. At least that would be my guess.

A year ago the Giants hadn't signed Mike Morse yet. And the free agent signings are going more slowly than last year. There are still good players out there. Still four of the top 10 as rated by Jon Heyman.

Cup half empty: The Giants haven't signed anyone close to noteworthy.

Cup half full: There are still plenty of good players to sign.

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2614/jon-lester-signs-cubs#ixzz3LZJXHtkS

[Rog]

Randy -- Now, we're at the point where if we don't make moves soon, what happens next? Everyone shuts down for the holidays and then where are we? We're a month before pitchers and catchers reporting and still waiting for Sabean to get off his fat ass. And by that time nothing will be left but the bottom of the barrel.

Rog -- The question I would ask is if everyone will be shutting down soon for the holidays, how will there suddenly be nothing left but the bottom of the barrel?

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2614/jon-lester-signs-cubs?page=1#ixzz3LZLWwa85

[sfgdood]

Randy -- Now, we're at the point where if we don't make moves soon, what happens next? Everyone shuts down for the holidays and then where are we? We're a month before pitchers and catchers reporting and still waiting for Sabean to get off his fat ass. And by that time nothing will be left but the bottom of the barrel.

Rog -- The question I would ask is if everyone will be shutting down soon for the holidays, how will there suddenly be nothing left but the bottom of the barrel?

Dood - we're nearly there already

[Rog]

Randy -- Now, we're at the point where if we don't make moves soon, what happens next? Everyone shuts down for the holidays and then where are we? We're a month before pitchers and catchers reporting and still waiting for Sabean to get off his fat ass. And by that time nothing will be left but the bottom of the barrel.

Rog -- The question I would ask is if everyone will be shutting down soon for the holidays, how will there suddenly be nothing left but the bottom of the barrel?

Dood - we're nearly there already

Rog -- I have just 7 answers, although I could expand: Max Scherzer, James Shields, Melky Cabrera, Edinson Volquez, Chase Headley, Jed Lowrie and trade possibilities including Cole Hamels.

One would think this is the 2012 season all over again!

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2614/jon-lester-signs-cubs#ixzz3LbL5Mfv5

[Rog]

Make that 8 answers. How could I forget Ervin Santana, who reportedly has received a 4/$50 offer. That's not what I think he'll sign for, but it does indicate he could be affordable.

When the Giants failed to sign Pablo Sandoval, multiple posters here said Pablo may have saved the Giants from themselves.

When the Giants failed to sign Yasmany Tomas, some cited how unknown and risky he was.

When the Giants failed to sign Jon Lester, many in the Bay Area media (including Mike Krukow) are saying Lester saved the Giants from themselves.

Much of the talk isn't that the Giants haven't made too few moves, but rather haven't made too many.

Glass half full. Glass half empty.

Sometimes the glass half full crowd is right; sometimes it is the half empty crowd. Either way though, it has been shown that the half full crowd lives longer. Of course, that's mostly because they live longer, so there are more of them doing the voting!

[klaiggeb]

Randy--Bottom line is the Giants have accomplished exactly nada in the month+ of the offseason thus far. They have missed out on the three players they coveted most. Why exactly should we be excited about 2015 when all that is left to fill the holes of the team are players the team itself didn't regard as priorities?

---boly says---

BINGO! Randy, it hit the bulls eye dead center!

There is NOTHING to GET excited about.

NADA!

The 2014 win is behind us, and now we all look forward.

But what do we have to look forward to?

RIGHT NOW... RIGHT NOW, zip!

Everyone else in our division is making plans for next year. They are betting themselves.

We are NOT.

That's why I'm unhappy.

THAT'S why I'm disgusted with management.

all that could change, but RIGHT THE STINK NOW? I'm ticked.

Yeah, 3 wins in 5 years in UNHEARD of.

But that very success makes ME, want to do it again.

What I DON'T want is to feel that management is giving up before we even start.

And that's what it 'LOOKS LIKE' right now.

boly

[Rog]

Boly -- What I DON'T want is to feel that management is giving up before we even start.

And that's what it 'LOOKS LIKE' right now.

Rog -- Does it look any different now that the Giants are said to be in on James Shields?

Here's the thing. I was thinking of what Randy had written when I read it, but it also applies here. Yogi Berra pretty much covered it when he asked "How can you say this and that when this and that hasn't happened yet?"

I have to say I don't have a good answer for Yogi here. In a month or so, we'll likely have a better idea what this and that are.

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2614/jon-lester-signs-cubs#ixzz3LeHhL57q

[Rog]

Off the top of my head I would say I liked Ervin Santana, Jason Hammel, Brandon McCarthy and Max Scherzer as the best values among pitchers. All but Scherzer are now gone, although clearly Scherzer is the top-rated of this group.

Apparently Santana is signing with the Twins for 4/$55 with an option for a 5th year. To me, that sounds like a nice value.

[rxmeister]

I would substitute Shields for Hammel on your list, but I see what you're saying. I think Shields will take awhile to sign, and Bobby Evans already alluded to this. I think most teams see Shields as part of the McCarthy, Santana, Hammel group, while Shields and his agents undoubtedly see him as part of the Lester, Scherzer elite group. I think he's actually in between those two groups in his own little niche. I think 4/70 is about what he deserves, but I'm sure he wants more and the Giants probably would want him for less. The Red Sox are the major competition for his services, and needless to say they're loaded. The question is how badly they want him after already adding Miley and Masterson.

[Rog]

Mark -- I would substitute Shields for Hammel on your list, but I see what you're saying. I think Shields will take awhile to sign, and Bobby Evans already alluded to this. I think most teams see Shields as part of the McCarthy, Santana, Hammel group, while Shields and his agents undoubtedly see him as part of the Lester, Scherzer elite group. I think he's actually in between those two groups in his own little niche.

Rog -- I think James is closer to Scherzer and Lister than to the other group, but you're right that he's in between. Part of that reason is that he's a couple of years older than either Max or Jon and has more miles on his arm.

If teams are looking at James as closer to the other group, perhaps the Giants can get a good deal on him. Let's suppose we go halfway between Lester's 6/$155 and Santana's 4/$48 and say 5/$95. That's essentially Pablo Sandoval's contract, and I think I would rather have James.

I'd go with James, although that might be offset by Pablo's being four years the younger and the drop off below Pablo seemingly being larger than that below Shields. For instance, I would probably rather have Ervin Santana than Chase Headley (due to Chase's injury history), and it appears Chase will cost at least as much. If Chase's price drops enough, the Giants might indeed be interested, but that scenario now seems unlikely.

The likely price of Shields (who might wind up being closer to 5/$115 than to 5/$95) shows how Andrew Friedman fared well by trading James two years before free agency. Friedman essentially got a combined 14 cost controlled seasons from 2013 Rookie of the Year Wil Myers and starter Jake Odorizzi for two years of Shields.

The Royals may not feel all that bad about the deal themselves, since Shields was highly instrumental in bringing them to this year's World Series.

Myers suffered from injury and slumped off in this his sophomore season. Teams are asking about him though, and I'm sure Tampa Bay considers both him and Odorizzi to be significant parts of their future. This past season Odorizzi posted a 4.13 ERA in 168 innings in his first full season.

The Giants may be the favorite to land Shields. But they're going to have to pay a lot to get him.

He may be the MLB leader in innings pitched over the past four seasons though, and over that time he's posted 15.3 WAR according to Baseball-Reference and 16.6 by Fan Graphs. That's consistent performance and well worth what he'll make. But he's also past what would normally be his prime pitching years, so it would be unrealistic to expect that same level of performance.

Here's the tough thing: The Giants just don't have the money budgeted to replace Sandoval, Peavy, Morse, Romo AND Vogelsong. What they do have though is the return of Matt Cain, a full year from Joe Panik and the hoped-for health of Angel Pagan and Brandon Belt. Plus some young relievers on the way and a greater appreciation of the talents of Yusmeiro Petit.

It would be too much to expect the Giants to fully replace their five (potentially) departing free agents. But they may be able to replace from within some of the level of performance.

We should also remember though that the expectation should realistically be a little less from the returning players who were healthy last season.

Few teams though had as many injuries as the Giants last season, so better health could be one of the biggest factors in replacing and even improving the team.

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2614/jon-lester-signs-cubs#ixzz3LidjM0hh

[Rog]

Oops! Santana's contract was 4/$55, not 4/$48 as I mentioned with regard to Shields. Halfway between Santana and Lester would be more like 5/$100, and I'll still be he'll get more than that.

As Mark (I believe) said, the Giants are said to be wanting to move quickly. If Shields isn't quickly responsive, he likely will get left behind. The average projection between the GM, the agent and Jon Heyman was a 5/$102.5 contract. The consensus for Lester was 6/$140.

It might be an overpay, but if I were the Giants I would say take my 5/$115 offer or we'll move on. I would structure the contact at $110 plus a $15 million vesting option for a sixth year, with a $5 million buyout. The contract would be in line with the contract Lester got, compared to the projected contract for each.

If I were Shields and wanted to play for the Giants, I would jump right on it. And if I were the Giants, I wouldn't feel bad about pulling it if Shields didn't react within the time frame.

Shields' ERA over the past four years has averaged about 3.17. Lester's has averaged about 3.40. This past season though, Lester's highly impressive 2.46 ERA was three-quarters of a run less than Shields'.

Over the past four seasons, Shields' ERA has been the best among him, Lester and Max Scherzer. He's also been by far the most consistent. If James' arm is durable enough, at 5/$115 with a $15 million option for a sixth year might be the best contract for the Giants among the three.

At age 32, how much will Shields fall off over the next five or six seasons? He'll be 37 or 38 when that contract would expire.