Dunno, sounds goofy. On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 4:19 PM, Ray Salemi <[email protected]> wrote:
> Why did Beckett need to approve Lackey's contract? > > On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 2:38 PM, Tom Salemi <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Speaking of injuries, I introduce the following from Nick Cafardo's >> baseball column. It addresses some of Matt's questions about the Sox' >> reluctance to go five years with Bay, and why they would sign JD Drew with >> his injury history. >> >> The Red Sox have really protected themselves the past few years by either >> drawing the line on the number of years they’ll offer a free agent or trying >> to work in protections outside of the normal insurance they take out on >> player contracts. >> >> In *Pedro Martinez*’s case in 2004, the Sox relied on the evaluation of >> their medical staff and fell short of Martinez’s demand for more years. The >> Mets gave him the extra year he desired, and sure enough, Martinez broke >> down less than halfway through his four-year contract. >> >> The Mets, desperate for a righthanded bat, may make the same mistake with >> *Jason Bay *(above) by offering a fifth year. The Sox offered four, >> anticipating Bay’s shoulder history could result in lost time down the road. >> This was the major reason the Sox, according to *Peter Gammons *of MLB >> and NESN, were willing to offer *Matt Holliday *five years and $82.5 >> million, because there are no major preexisting physical issues. >> >> The Sox got protection in *J.D. Drew’s *contract on a preexisting right >> shoulder issue, enabling them to void the contract should Drew miss 35 days >> or more on the disabled list either last season or in 2010. His agent, *Scott >> Boras*, signed off on it. >> >> Apparently, Lackey’s agent, *Steve Hilliard*, gave the Sox protection in >> Lackey’s contract should he incur a major injury and miss significant time. >> Because of this, the Sox were willing to give Lackey a five-year deal after >> the Angels had come after him hard with a four-year proposal. >> >> According to Sox GM *Theo Epstein*, Beckett approved of Lackey’s deal, >> which begs the question of whether Beckett would also agree to give the team >> protection in a new contract if his shoulder issues were to resurface. >> >> The Sox aren’t afraid to let Beckett pitch through this coming season to >> see how he holds up before committing to him. Beckett is pitching for a >> contract, which is always a good thing for the team. It behooves Beckett to >> get back to top form, because then he’ll break the bank in Boston or >> elsewhere. >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Red Sox Citizens" group. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> [email protected]<redsoxcitizens%[email protected]> >> . >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/redsoxcitizens?hl=en. >> > > > > -- > Author of "Leading After a Layoff: Reignite Your Team's Productivity in > Just 12 Weeks" > www.leadingafteralayoff.com > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Red Sox Citizens" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]<redsoxcitizens%[email protected]> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/redsoxcitizens?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Red Sox Citizens" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/redsoxcitizens?hl=en.
