Did Theo mess up on Pedro?

[CubfaninCA]

Clement, Wells and Wakefield is a pretty weak threesome to throw @ the ChiSox. I'm not sure of the details between Boston and Pedro last offseason, but they sure could have used Pedro in the White Sox series. Nice to see a good pitching team sweep a big budget great obp team.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Schilling, Clement, Wells, Wakefield, Arroyo isn't bad at all.

[ZMovieman]

Agreed. With the exception of Clement's performance, the Boston staff wasn't that bad (at least kept their big offense within striking distance). The shame was that Boston was unable to stagger their rotation to allow for Schilling to get one crack at it.

[CubinNY]

No Theo didn't mess up. Sometimes it best just to part ways. Pedro was more of a distraction than anything else. And he was using Boston to get the best deal he could get. NY way overpaid for his services.

[CubfaninCA]

Schilling, Clement, Wells, Wakefield, Arroyo isn't bad at all.

 

Considering Schilling's health @ the end of last year, they should have went to war w/ something better than that. They obviously have the money to blow. If this is what they go w/ next year, they'll be in the same situation next year as well. They didn't win anything until Schilling was added to Pedro.

[RockTheIvy]

I think not signing Pedro was a mistake. I believe their disagreement was over a 4th year. In my opinion, I would have rather signed Pedro for four than Varitek for four. Or Renteria for 10m a year. Pedro might not have allowed them to beat the WSox, but it couldn't have hurt.

[Mark Priors Calves]

When Pedro signed with Mets, I thought they really overpaid for him. But after seeing his numbers this season, I have definitely changed my mind.

 

.95 WHIP, 2.85 ERA.

 

They might regret the deal in a few years when he finally starts to wear down but in the meantime he's been fantastic.

[Tim]

I think Theo knew there was a big risk to look foolish by not signing Pedro for the first year or two of the deal. It's the third and fourth years of the deal that are questionable. If Pedro would have been willing to take a shorter deal, I'm sure Theo would have loved to have re-signed him.

 

It's much like people were blasting Hendry for not signing Thome to a five year deal before 2003. For all of 2003 and 2004, many fans were saying it was a horrible decision. It's funny, but I don't hear so many complaints about that choice any longer.

 

Now, if you want to question Theo's decisions on how to fill the rotation once it was decided not to re-sign Pedro, I think that's another matter. I'm interested to see if they go big money to fill the rotation in 2006 as the fans will want them to, or if they give Papelbon, Lester or Sanchez a shot at the rotation.

[TB_11]

Pedro wanted a four-year contract, and got it with the Mets. He pitched great in year 1, but we won't know whether it was a mistake for three more years.

[Neuby]

I think Theo knew there was a big risk to look foolish by not signing Pedro for the first year or two of the deal. It's the third and fourth years of the deal that are questionable. If Pedro would have been willing to take a shorter deal, I'm sure Theo would have loved to have re-signed him.

 

It's much like people were blasting Hendry for not signing Thome to a five year deal before 2003. For all of 2003 and 2004, many fans were saying it was a horrible decision. It's funny, but I don't hear so many complaints about that choice any longer.

 

Now, if you want to question Theo's decisions on how to fill the rotation once it was decided not to re-sign Pedro, I think that's another matter. I'm interested to see if they go big money to fill the rotation in 2006 as the fans will want them to, or if they give Papelbon, Lester or Sanchez a shot at the rotation.

 

I disagree with the Thome comparison because he was possibly prepared to give the Cubs a hometown discount, Pedro wasn't going to give the Red Sox anything.You would still be hearing Fans complaining if the Cubs where still running Choi out there everyday instead of making the deal for Derek Lee. But would Thome have made a difference in 2003 instead of having to use Randall Simon at first base?

[Cubfanintheknow]

I think Theo knew there was a big risk to look foolish by not signing Pedro for the first year or two of the deal. It's the third and fourth years of the deal that are questionable. If Pedro would have been willing to take a shorter deal' date=' I'm sure Theo would have loved to have re-signed him.

 

It's much like people were blasting Hendry for not signing Thome to a five year deal before 2003. For all of 2003 and 2004, many fans were saying it was a horrible decision. It's funny, but I don't hear so many complaints about that choice any longer.

 

Now, if you want to question Theo's decisions on how to fill the rotation once it was decided not to re-sign Pedro, I think that's another matter. I'm interested to see if they go big money to fill the rotation in 2006 as the fans will want them to, or if they give Papelbon, Lester or Sanchez a shot at the rotation.[/quote']

 

I disagree with the Thome comparison because he was possibly prepared to give the Cubs a hometown discount, Pedro wasn't going to give the Red Sox anything.You would still be hearing Fans complaining if the Cubs where still running Choi out there everyday instead of making the deal for Derek Lee. But would Thome have made a difference in 2003 instead of having to use Randall Simon at first base?

 

IIRC, Thome signed for $15/year for 6 years, but was prepared to go as low as $12/year for 6 years with the Cubs. Do you think that would have made for a good contract for the Cubs now? I don't.

[RyCubsFan]

I think Theo knew there was a big risk to look foolish by not signing Pedro for the first year or two of the deal. It's the third and fourth years of the deal that are questionable. If Pedro would have been willing to take a shorter deal, I'm sure Theo would have loved to have re-signed him.

 

That's a solid point, Tim. But sometimes teams have to be willing to have a bad contract for a year or two in order to have the services of a player before the team's window of opportunity closes.

 

Take the Cubs this offseason. Many of us (including you) want the Cubs to sign Giles even if it means the Cubs give him 4 years. He's unlikely to earn his money the fourth year of that contract, but we'd be willing to give him the money anyway. We'd be willing to do so b/c we recognize that the Cubs time should be now. With Wood, Prior, Zambrano, Lee, Aramis, the Cubs have the pieces to contend for a World Series title in the next two years. We need Giles to do that.

 

I think that Theo made a mistate by not resigning Pedro. He spent a lot of money on Clement, who just is nowhere nearly as good as Pedro. Yes, Pedro might not be worth the money by the 4th year of the contact. But the Red Sox would have won the division this year with Martinez and they may still be playing in the playoffs. This should have been the Red Sox time to win before players like Manny, Damon, etc move on...

[Transmogrified Tiger]

I think Theo knew there was a big risk to look foolish by not signing Pedro for the first year or two of the deal. It's the third and fourth years of the deal that are questionable. If Pedro would have been willing to take a shorter deal, I'm sure Theo would have loved to have re-signed him.

 

That's a solid point, Tim. But sometimes teams have to be willing to have a bad contract for a year or two in order to have the services of a player before the team's window of opportunity closes.

 

Take the Cubs this offseason. Many of us (including you) want the Cubs to sign Giles even if it means the Cubs give him 4 years. He's unlikely to earn his money the fourth year of that contract, but we'd be willing to give him the money anyway. We'd be willing to do so b/c we recognize that the Cubs time should be now. With Wood, Prior, Zambrano, Lee, Aramis, the Cubs have the pieces to contend for a World Series title in the next two years. We need Giles to do that.

 

I think that Theo made a mistate by not resigning Pedro. He spent a lot of money on Clement, who just is nowhere nearly as good as Pedro. Yes, Pedro might not be worth the money by the 4th year of the contact. But the Red Sox would have won the division this year with Martinez and they may still be playing in the playoffs. This should have been the Red Sox time to win before players like Manny, Damon, etc move on...

 

There's a difference in the Pedro-Giles comparison. Giles is producing at a very high level this year, especially outside of Petco. Pedro, while still effective, was coming off of his worst season since the mid-90s last year. There were legitimate doubts of whether he would return to form or continue to decline.

[Tim]

I think Theo knew there was a big risk to look foolish by not signing Pedro for the first year or two of the deal. It's the third and fourth years of the deal that are questionable. If Pedro would have been willing to take a shorter deal, I'm sure Theo would have loved to have re-signed him.

 

That's a solid point, Tim. But sometimes teams have to be willing to have a bad contract for a year or two in order to have the services of a player before the team's window of opportunity closes.

 

Take the Cubs this offseason. Many of us (including you) want the Cubs to sign Giles even if it means the Cubs give him 4 years. He's unlikely to earn his money the fourth year of that contract, but we'd be willing to give him the money anyway. We'd be willing to do so b/c we recognize that the Cubs time should be now. With Wood, Prior, Zambrano, Lee, Aramis, the Cubs have the pieces to contend for a World Series title in the next two years. We need Giles to do that.

 

I think that Theo made a mistate by not resigning Pedro. He spent a lot of money on Clement, who just is nowhere nearly as good as Pedro. Yes, Pedro might not be worth the money by the 4th year of the contact. But the Red Sox would have won the division this year with Martinez and they may still be playing in the playoffs. This should have been the Red Sox time to win before players like Manny, Damon, etc move on...

The argument with Giles is a bit different, in my opinion. I see Giles as being a guy that is likely to decline by the end of the contract, but I think he'll still be a serviceable player. The risk with Thome and Pedro is different. With those guys, the danger is that they will completely blow up and provide absolutely nothing to the team and will be completely untradeable, as well. There hasn't been much talk about Pedro's shoulder this year, but he's still a major health risk that could just blow out at any point. Given his past shoulder issues, I'm pretty sure that's an uninsurable contract, too. At least if he goes down with shoulder issues, anyway.

[don_kessinger_was_good]

IIRC, Thome signed for $15/year for 6 years, but was prepared to go as low as $12/year for 6 years with the Cubs. Do you think that would have made for a good contract for the Cubs now? I don't.

 

I do. Because if he had signed that contract and come to the Cubs, we likely would have won the 2003 World Series. Let's see....Thome vs. Hee K Me and Eric Karros. That's a tough one..... :roll:

[Transmogrified Tiger]

IIRC, Thome signed for $15/year for 6 years, but was prepared to go as low as $12/year for 6 years with the Cubs. Do you think that would have made for a good contract for the Cubs now? I don't.

 

I do. Because if he had signed that contract and come to the Cubs, we likely would have won the 2003 World Series.

 

Wildly untrue.

[MeatampPotatoesMan]

I don't know if letting pedro go was so bad if Theo would have replaced him with a legit ace (a healthy one at that).

 

Clement is a solid pitcher. Wells still gets it done. Schilling was known at the beginning of the season to miss significant time (he still isn't 100%). Two horses aren't going to cut it.

 

I guess Theo decided not to be held hostage by Pedro, but he should have done better with his '05 rotation. That was the weak spot on his team, not the bp. A crappy starting rotation wore out an average bp. He needed another horse to take the pressure off, preferably a dominant horse. he had plenty in the farm system to offer in trade.

 

The playoffs may be a crapshoot, but you need a good rotation to compete, even if you do have the best offense in your league.

[badger1679666666]

Two horses aren't going to cut it.

 

 

Two horses cut it for the D-backs.

[TB_11]

The argument with Giles is a bit different, in my opinion. I see Giles as being a guy that is likely to decline by the end of the contract, but I think he'll still be a serviceable player. The risk with Thome and Pedro is different. With those guys, the danger is that they will completely blow up and provide absolutely nothing to the team and will be completely untradeable, as well. There hasn't been much talk about Pedro's shoulder this year, but he's still a major health risk that could just blow out at any point. Given his past shoulder issues, I'm pretty sure that's an uninsurable contract, too. At least if he goes down with shoulder issues, anyway.

 

Pedro has battled nagging injuries just about every year he's been in Boston - he was able to start 30 games in 3 of his 7 seasons there. There was the risk that those yearly injuries that usually knocked him out for 5 or so starts would eventually become injuries that would keep him out for 10+ starts. Remember Pedro is still only 180 lbs with a wet sweatshirt on - not a big body like Clemens. A four-year contract for a pitcher like that after he came off his worst season in nearly a decade wasn't worth it.

[RyCubsFan]

Two horses aren't going to cut it.

 

 

Two horses cut it for the D-backs.

 

But the D-backs had two strong horses. The Red Sox, on the other hand, had one injured horse and four ponies. Clement, Wells, Arroyo, Wakefield are all #3 starters at best. Schilling was injured.

 

The Red Sox lacked a number starter this year. I believe that was their downfall.

[MeatampPotatoesMan]

Two horses aren't going to cut it.

 

 

Two horses cut it for the D-backs.

 

two dominant stud horses cut it for the d-backs. wells and clement are horses (innings eaters), but they don't dominate with any regularity.

[Larry Horse]

I think Theo knew there was a big risk to look foolish by not signing Pedro for the first year or two of the deal. It's the third and fourth years of the deal that are questionable. If Pedro would have been willing to take a shorter deal' date=' I'm sure Theo would have loved to have re-signed him.

 

It's much like people were blasting Hendry for not signing Thome to a five year deal before 2003. For all of 2003 and 2004, many fans were saying it was a horrible decision. It's funny, but I don't hear so many complaints about that choice any longer.

 

Now, if you want to question Theo's decisions on how to fill the rotation once it was decided not to re-sign Pedro, I think that's another matter. I'm interested to see if they go big money to fill the rotation in 2006 as the fans will want them to, or if they give Papelbon, Lester or Sanchez a shot at the rotation.[/quote']

 

I disagree with the Thome comparison because he was possibly prepared to give the Cubs a hometown discount, Pedro wasn't going to give the Red Sox anything.You would still be hearing Fans complaining if the Cubs where still running Choi out there everyday instead of making the deal for Derek Lee. But would Thome have made a difference in 2003 instead of having to use Randall Simon at first base?

 

IIRC, Thome signed for $15/year for 6 years, but was prepared to go as low as $12/year for 6 years with the Cubs. Do you think that would have made for a good contract for the Cubs now? I don't.

 

Thome went to JUCO around here, and he told some buddies that he told the Cubs 5 years at 10 mil per. Second hand info, whatever it's worth.

[Tim]

I think Theo knew there was a big risk to look foolish by not signing Pedro for the first year or two of the deal. It's the third and fourth years of the deal that are questionable. If Pedro would have been willing to take a shorter deal' date=' I'm sure Theo would have loved to have re-signed him.

 

It's much like people were blasting Hendry for not signing Thome to a five year deal before 2003. For all of 2003 and 2004, many fans were saying it was a horrible decision. It's funny, but I don't hear so many complaints about that choice any longer.

 

Now, if you want to question Theo's decisions on how to fill the rotation once it was decided not to re-sign Pedro, I think that's another matter. I'm interested to see if they go big money to fill the rotation in 2006 as the fans will want them to, or if they give Papelbon, Lester or Sanchez a shot at the rotation.[/quote']

 

I disagree with the Thome comparison because he was possibly prepared to give the Cubs a hometown discount, Pedro wasn't going to give the Red Sox anything.You would still be hearing Fans complaining if the Cubs where still running Choi out there everyday instead of making the deal for Derek Lee. But would Thome have made a difference in 2003 instead of having to use Randall Simon at first base?

 

IIRC, Thome signed for $15/year for 6 years, but was prepared to go as low as $12/year for 6 years with the Cubs. Do you think that would have made for a good contract for the Cubs now? I don't.

 

Thome went to JUCO around here, and he told some buddies that he told the Cubs 5 years at 10 mil per. Second hand info, whatever it's worth.

The "hometown" discount info on Thome came out when the competition was Cleveland's offer. When Philly came in with 6/90, I think the discounts went out the window.

[CubfaninCA]

Boston is one of the few teams who can risk resigning someone for a deal they're not necessarily worth. Great pitcher's are pretty scarce and I think they'll regret letting Martinez walk. Theo did make a good pickup in Wells, who's a solid #3 in a series.

 

I think the Pedro and Giles situations are similar. You gotta roll the dice on a 4 year deal w/ both. Yes Pedro's ERA went up quite a bit last year compared to previous seasons, but it was 3.90, which is good for the AL. He pitched 217 innings too.

 

I just wonder if Theo's kicking himself for signing Renteria to a huge deal when they have Hanley Ramirez waiting in the wings.

[reggiemiller rules]

I think you can look at Pedros stats this year and say it might have been a mistake, but I think you may have to wait until that 3rd year to see how it really works out. The mets could be paying an awful lot for and old aging pitcher that 4th year.