Bloggers Assemble to battle John Lackey!

First let me give you my Bottom Line on Lackey: He makes the 2010 rotation potentially nasty, but owing him $17.5 million in 2013 and 2014 is going to bite us in the ass.

There. Now, let's dig into the details.

Buster Onley is reporting that the deal is finalized at $17.5 million per year for a total of $87.5 mil' over five years. Here's why this is bad for the Sox:

1. With this deal, Theo has set the bar for Josh Beckett in 2011. As if Commander Kickass of the Fuck-Yeah Brigade needed any more motivation, he will now have Lackey, Lester and possibly Matsuzaka challenging him for the title of staff ace while pitching in a contract year. If he out performs Lackey and wins us another ring, he'll be looking for no less than $20M per year... and you know the Sox aren't going to pay that.

2. The Red Sox will owe Lackey $17M, Drew $14M, $Youkilis $12M, Matsuzaka $10M and $6M to Lester, Pedroia and Scutaro in 2010. That's $70 mil' for seven players.

Assuming Theo Esptein and John Henry are willing to spend at least $130M, they will have $60M with which to sign a new catcher, a new DH, a new third baseman (if they don't sign one this winter) and some pitching depth. The Sox could sign V-Mart (31 in 2010) for something like 4 years and $32M and have the option of sliding him to first base or even DH in the future. But Joe Mauer (27 in 2010) is likely to at least test the free agent market and you know the Sox will be bidding on his services... which will probably cost more than 100 million dollars.

By signing Lackey they can afford to let Beckett walk. And by extending Martinez they could afford to pass on Mauer... but guess who else needs catcher... and an ace... and has $200M to spend?

The Yankees.

That's the money, but what about possible trades and open roster spots?

Evan from Firebrand of the AL wonders if Lackey's new deal will enable the Red Sox to trade the previously untouchable Clay Buchholz. Evan wonders if Seattle can afford to sign both Felix Hernandez and Cliff Lee (who the acquired in a three-way deal with Toronto and Philly this week) at $15M-$20M per year and thinks Seattle could look to keep Lee and trade King Felix for a bucket-full of elite prospects currently in our system.

He also mentions a possible trade for Adrian Gonzalez, but thinks that Jed Hoyer will take some time to evaluate the talent in San Diego before he makes a move.

Here's my two cents: Trading Buchholz and prospects for Felix makes sense because it enables the Sox to let Beckett walk in 2011 while keeping the rotation stacked with four potential "aces" - one of the being just 24 years old.

I just don't see why Seattle would keep Cliff Lee and not Felix. Trading Felix would net them a ton of young talent, but trading Lee to a contender in July could do the same.

As for A-Gon... if the Sox pull this trade off now, they can replace Buchholz with a FA pitcher like Justin Duchscherer, Erik Bedard or Ben Sheets. Or they could roll the dice and hope that Tim Wakefield and Boof Bonser can ge the job done at the back of the rotation. Hell, maybe that' why Theo grabbed Boof in the first place?

I'd be okay with that, if it meant having Youk and A-Gon at the corners, but it's risky.

But consider this: What will it cost to extend Gonzalez (28 in 2010)? And can you offer him AND Joe Mauer $100M contracts at the same time? I doubt it.

That's a look at how Lackey effects the bigger picture. Now let's take a look at the stats.

ESPN's Gordon Edes is not a fan of the Lackey deal had one of his minions pull an interesting tid-bit to make his case:

ESPN researcher Mark Simon notes that since 1990, there have been 16 pitchers to sign deals for five years or more. Only two pitchers on that list -- Greg Maddux and Mike Mussina -- averaged 30 or more starts per season over the life of their contracts. Kevin Millwood and Gil Meche are likely to add to that number, and eventually so could CC Sabathia, Matsuzaka and Burnett, but none are a guarantee.

Despite playing on good Angel teams, Lackey has only won more than 14 games once in his career (19-9 in 2007). The stats suggest Lackey will give the Sox 13-14 wins per year. That's a couple more than Tim Wakefield gets... but the Sox will be paying Lackey several [14 to be exact] million dollars more per year for the couple extra W's.

Big John’s recent opponent contact rates are middle-of-the-pack (80-81 percent, right around the league average), and his 8.55 swinging strike percentage over the past three seasons is above-average, but not elite (the average for starters is 7.8 percent).

Lackey’s contact rates have been trending upward lately, too:

In-Zone Contact% 2005: 86.3
2006: 88.9
2007: 90.6
2008: 91.3
2009: 91.3
(87-88% MLB average) Overall Contact% 2005: 76.5
2006: 79.4
2007: 80.3
2008: 81.5
2009: 80.4
Because of the extra contact, it would be wise to expect a few less punch outs in the years to come.

Brian notes that despite a fastball in the low 90s, Lackey is at his best when he throws the FB often and is picking his spots. Brian uses a good start against Seattle and a bad start against Detroit to illustrate his point, but I would argue that the Tigers were at least in the middle of the pack in OBP (.331) while the Mariners were second to last at .314... Lackey might have simply been better vs. Seattle because Seattle's lineup is much weaker than Detroit's.

That said, Lackey had his best season in 2007, posting a 19-9 record and a career best 3.01 ERA while throwing the fastball 62% of the time and the curve ball 20% of the time. In '08 and '09, he threw the fastball less (59%) and the curve more (25%). It's tough to say if the injuries played a part in Lackey's pitch selection, but the results were an increased ERA around 3.80... an increase in his BB/K rate, up from .290 (52/179) in '07 to .323 (87/269) in '08 and '09... and a steady decrease in swings and misses in the strike zone (Z-swing): 66.6% in '07, 64.9% in '08 and 62.1% in '09.

Lastly, the mysterious 015H757, makes a few good points at Over the Monster:

"Let's be clear about this: Lackey is good, not great. His career FIP is 3.83; by comparison, Beckett's is 3.61, Sabathia's is 3.59, and Halladay's is 3.47. A more comparable player is A. J. Burnett, whose FIP is also 3.83, although Burnett is a better strikeout pitcher (career 8.37 K / 9, vs. Lackey's 7.2 K / 9).

Lackey may be worth his [$17.5M] in years 1 and 2 of the deal, but years 3, 4 and 5 could be quite ugly.

But it could prove disastrous in the near future if he A) gets hurt (see Matsuzaka) B) Under-preforms, especially in the postseason C) Thwarts us from making more important moves down the road like adding a catcher, a new DH or a power bat.

I think 2010 will be a very exciting year, but all bets are off after that...