RealGM

well that settles that... now to make the coco crisp for santana trade

Mike Lowell considered some better offers, and ended up choosing his comfortable situation with the Red Sox.

And Boston's offer was pretty good, too.

"I can't say that I'm upset with the situation. How can you be upset with the money I'm going to be making in the next three years," the World Series MVP said during a conference call.

The Red Sox third baseman finalized a $37.5 million, three-year contract Tuesday and said the "fit and comfort" level he has in Boston helped keep him with the champions.

Lowell filed for free agency after the playoffs and had been seeking a four-year deal. The 33-year-old made $9 million this past season.

AP (via Yahoo) Link

Good to see Lowell back in Boston, and not leave for the money and Philly or elsewhere. He loves the game, and there's maybe 1 or 2 other cities that will present Mike the atmosphere/stage to play the game the way it was meant to be.

Seems like a pretty fair deal for Lowell. Nice to see a guy turn down a bigger contract to return to where he likes to play.

Barf. Nothing like getting slightly above average production for 12 million a year.

Bleeding Green wrote:Barf. Nothing like getting slightly above average production for 12 million a year.

your nuts. your gonna whine about a guy who takes less years to stay in boston?? he gave up 12 mil to stay, how many guys would do that? and im far from the biggest Lowell supporter out there, but thats a GREAT deal from the red sox side. hes a more than suitable no.5 hitter for the next 2-3 years and thats all hes signed for. if your gonna get upset about anybody, JD Drew is your man, far below average at 15 mil per year. and trash away, it aint like this FO knows how to win a championship, right?

That's nice, but he's still not going to be very good.

I think I'm being optimistic when I say he'll be slightly above average. He has the potential to be brutal as soon as next year since so much of his value it tied to his batting average which was fluky high last year.

Bleeding Green wrote:That's nice, but he's still not going to be very good.

I think I'm being optimistic when I say he'll be slightly above average. He has the potential to be brutal as soon as next year since so much of his value it tied to his batting average which was fluky high last year.

I think his swing is relatively immune to decline, and suited to Fenway.
He's still going to be Mikey Doubles for the next three years.

People do realize that OPS wise...Manny was better this year right?

In 3 years...Lowell's defense will be god awful(still not as bad as braun's though) and his offense will be average if not below average.

His defense won't be godawful. C'mon, he's very surehanded and he knows what he's doing at third. What athleticism he loses won't affect his defense much.

Also, his swing isn't immune to decline. His power fell a lot this year, for instance.

But who knows, maybe he'll hit .320 next year too.

There really aren't (m)any better options to play third out there. I'm fine with this.

Jed Lowrie, A-Rod, Miguel Cabrera, Kevin Youkilis (and sign a 1B), trade for some blocked player like Chase Headley/Kevin Kouzmanoff, etc.

I see plenty of options. Spend the 37 million on elite talent.

Bleeding Green wrote:Jed Lowrie, A-Rod, Miguel Cabrera, Kevin Youkilis (and sign a 1B), trade for some blocked player like Chase Headley/Kevin Kouzmanoff, etc.

I see plenty of options. Spend the 37 million on elite talent.

Lowrie's better for short, ARod was never seriously considered, the Marlins want a king's ransom for Cabrera (who is better suited for LF at this point anyway), moving Youk to third just creates another hole over at first (plus his defense is better for first) and neither Headly nor Kouz are being actively shopped.

Hell, why not try for Alex Gordon or Ryan Zimmerman?

Bleeding Green wrote:Also, his swing isn't immune to decline. His power fell a lot this year, for instance.

But who knows, maybe he'll hit .320 next year too.

His power fell a lot? How? Explain.

2006 Isolated Power: .191
2007: .177

Maybe not a lot, but he doesn't have as much power.

Bleeding Green wrote:2006 Isolated Power: .191
2007: .177

Maybe not a lot, but he doesn't have as much power.

That's an example of stat-dropping that baffles me, the difference is meh.
Do you really think he's losing power, BG? Really? Using your eyes.
You think he won't be capable of 20-25 HR and 35-45 2B the next 3 years?

Yeah, he definitely doesn't have as much power as he once did. He's all singles and doubles down the lines with 15-20 HR power. His batting average is gonna need to stay above .300 for him to be valuable and I don't see how that's possible.

I think Jed Lowrie gives you 80% of the production (at least) at 3% the cost.

Bleeding Green wrote:Yeah, he definitely doesn't have as much power as he once did. He's all singles and doubles down the lines with 15-20 HR power. His batting average is gonna need to stay above .300 for him to be valuable and I don't see how that's possible.

I think Jed Lowrie gives you 80% of the production (at least) at 3% the cost.

I might agree with you if half his games weren't at Fenway. Whatever decline he might suffer is balanced by his Fenway suitability, and also his extraordinarily short (read: immune) swing -- which he has improved by learning to go the other way more and I think by intentionally going down the lines more (don't laugh it's a real tactic, ask Pedroia), and which he'll continue to adjust as he ages. The next three years he'll be a 20-25 HR, 35-45 2B guy, per usual.

I know it's a real tactic. I just find it hard to believe that he found a new level of performance at age 32. That just doesn't happen very often; you hear about people having great years and it being attributed to a swing change or a new batting stance or something, when in actuality it was just a fluke year.

Hope I'm wrong.

Bleeding Green wrote:I know it's a real tactic. I just find it hard to believe that he found a new level of performance at age 32. That just doesn't happen very often; you hear about people having great years and it being attributed to a swing change or a new batting stance or something, when in actuality it was just a fluke year.

Hope I'm wrong.

But how flukey was his 2007, actually?

Take his 2003 for example. Particularly the 1st half.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/pi/bs ... &year=2003
.275/.351/.586 28 HR 76 RBI in 399 PA and...a .255 BABIP

Take the 1st half of his 2004, too.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/pi/bs ... &year=2004
.305/.384/.571 20 HR 55 RBI in 378 PA and a normal .296 BABIP

Forget 2005. .244 BABIP in the 1st half, .255 BABIP in the 2nd.

Now take the 1st half of his 2006.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/pi/bs ... &year=2006
.307/.359/.516 11 HR 46 RBI in 345 PA and a normal .310 BABIP

And now we come to the 1st half of his 2007.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/pi/bs ... &year=2007
.300/.351/.518 14 HR 63 RBI in 336 PA and a normal .294 BABIP

His 2nd half was the only flukey thing about last year. Traditionally he's a bad 2nd half hitter, for whatever reason. Neutralize his 2nd half high BABIP and you might get his typical slump, but maybe not. He avoided that slump somehow, and it's not just luck. I think it's because of his adjustments. You often hear about flukes misattributed to adjustments...sure. But sometimes it's actually because of an adjustment. The game is still played by humans, not computers.

This is a perfect example of where a guy like Billy Beane would excel....he would find a guy who would pepper that wall in left field and give you Lowell's defense for $5million a year instead of overpaying. I like Lowell, a lot. I just think he's expendable because of the type of hitter he is, someone who is a product of the wall.

I'm an eyes guy, not a stats guy and even I can see that.