The Red Sox have placed right-hander Josh Beckett on waivers, Jon Heyman of CBSSports.com reports (on Twitter). Competing executives don’t expect him to be claimed, Heyman writes.
Beckett, 32, earns $15.75MM per season through 2014. He has posted a 5.23 ERA with 6.6 K/9 and 2.7 BB/9 in 127 1/3 innings this year, while facing considerable scrutiny for his on-field performance and off-field actions.
One unnamed GM recently told Heyman "Boston's first priority has to be to trade Josh Beckett'' this August. The Red Sox and Rangers discussed a trade that would have sent Beckett, Jacoby Ellsbury and Kelly Shoppach to Texas leading up to the trade deadline, so the Rangers could be considered a long-shot suitor.
Teams routinely place players on waivers, even if they don't plan on trading them, so this is not an indication that the Red Sox intend to move Beckett. If he goes unclaimed, the Red Sox will be able to complete a trade just as easily as they could have before the current waiver period began at the beginning of August.
If a team claims Beckett, the Red Sox will have three choices. They can let him (and his contract) go to the claiming team, they can complete a trade with the claiming team, or they can pull him back off of waivers. American League teams will have claiming priority on Beckett.
Carl Crawford and Nick Punto have already cleared waivers this month. Adrian Gonzalez is also on waivers now.
I am just amused that the Sox tried to pawn Crawford off on Miami when they have been talking about surgery from the moment he came back.
I know…Its hilarious that the marlins asked about Crawford and the Red Sox said no thanks.
Silly you. Should have taken it.
Why? You dont know for sure what they offered.
Do you just give up on a guy with a good track record because of a bad season? Should the white sox have traded Dunn when his value was low? Injuries happen, its part of the game. He is a hard working a very good player. HE looked pretty good during his short stint this year. Do you over look 8 very good seasons and assume he will play below avg the rest of his career? My answer: NO
Comparing Dunn and Crawford is apples and oranges. Yes Dunn had a horrific season last year, the difference was he wasn’t injured he just played bad so there’s no durability questions with Dunn. Crawford hasn’t had just one injury shortened season now, this is two in a row. When a player misses two consecutive seasons and he is approaching his early 30’s the odds of them once again becoming the player they were are slim to none. The final difference between Crawford and Dunn is the amounts still owing on their contracts. Crawford still has around 100M left whereas Dunn after last season had under 50M left on his contract. So i guess my point is your argument is bullocks Ben_Cherington, move and and cut bait from Crawford.
He still played in 130 games last year. So its not like he misssed half or more of the season. But I understand where you are coming from.
After last year people were talking about Dunn as a top 5 worst contract. HE hit .156 and had no power. But he came back and is back to his old ways.
My point is, is that Crawford probably will as well. Every knows he is over paid, but you dont sale a 50 cents on the dollar if there is a good chance the next 5 yrs you will get 65 cents on the dollar worth of production.
But what’s better? The upside of maybe receiving .65 on the dollar from a player? Or cutting bait and starting over with that 20M and trying to get surplus production from it? Yeh your right Crawford could certainly come back and be a contributor on a good team but at that price being a contributor isn’t enough, even if your the red sox and can spend upwards of 180M per season.
NO ONE is taking his entire contract!!!!
So thats the problems, if we cut bait, we are not getting all of the money back. So, therefore, we would still pay half of his contract (10m/season), plus another 20mil for someone else. Then get 15mil production for a total of 30mm anually. It does not makes sense.
I would rather pay Crawford and hope for a healthy rebound 2013 season than to do what you are proposing.
Never say never, I could see a team like the dodgers picking up crawford’s entire contract if a decent prospect or two were included. Whether giving up the prospects is worth the savings is a whole other argument i don’t intend on getting into. It’s still possible though…Only a sith deals in absolutes. (then again you are a red sox fan so this starts to make sense)
Crawford did look good during his little cup of coffee. I think if he find a way to maintain confidence he will return to his old ways.
If he can’t the RS should look into trading him, he will get killed by the fans
“When a player misses [parts of] two consecutive seasons and he is approaching his early 30’s the odds of them once again becoming the player they were are slim to none”
show your work
I see your Adam Dunn and raise you a Jason Bay. If Boston was given a “mulligan” then they need to move him and that contract if possible. NOW if they have to eat a bunch of salary to do it, then no.
It was for Heath Bell and HanRam and I can almost guarantee you that it fell thru because the Sox were asked to ear a significant amount of money. Let’s not act as if the Sox covet Crawford at this point and wouldn’t be happy to unload him if it didn’t mean eating too much salary, which would really be defeating the point of moving him in the 1st place.
If Crawford were placed on waiver and claimed I think the Sox would have to think really hard about not letting him walk.
Oh I agree 100% but no one claimed him and for good reason.
@ colt13
I’m amused that anyone would take this seriously at all.The Red Sox are not going to move any of these players from their roster for just the waiver price! This is nothing more than ownership expressing their anger at how things have turned out the last three years. John Henry, Larry & Co. have doled out a lot of money, and as things stand now, will have missed the post season for the third year in a row.
Placing all these players on waivers is nothing more than rattling the players’ cages, if you will. After the disappointing season and the player mutiny a few weeks ago, ownership is sending a message to the players that no one is expendable, even if it’s not entirely true. It also allows interested teams the opportunity to put together a package for the off season, if they’re serious about any of the players.
Could be that some of the big names get moved, but that will certainly be some kind of block buster trade during the winter. No one is making a trade of huge magnitude at this time of the season.
It’s not even that, literally almost every player in the game is put on waivers this time of year, it’s really nothing more than a formality in most cases.
Agreed. I would think the owners are smart enough NOT to make the situation worse by playing mind games. I’m sure the Yanks put players on waiver they had absolutely no desire to move. It’s protocol.
Oh god, please someone claim him…
No chance he gets claimed, but I could see a team trying to work out a trade for him if Boston pays at least half his salary for the remainder of his contract.
I will take him.
The Orioles can’t march Tommy Hunter out there ever again as far as I am concerned.
If you’re Boston and someone claims Beckett what would you do? Would you say “Thanks a mil…as in the $36 mil or so left, and just let him walk or would you pull him back and try and work out a trade with that team in the offseason”?
As a Sox fan, I think they have to shed the contract if someone claims him. Just let the team have him. Assuming Lackey doesn’t turn it around when he comes back that’s 32M tied up next season which is a staggering number for two underachieving pitchers who are moving out of their primes.
Tough call, dc is right tho it might be nice to clear up some money. With Crawford, Lackey and Beckett already, but with a chance of redeeming themselves, with bad contracts it might be prudent to just let him go.
c) pull him back and do not try to trade him in the offseason
d) 5 year 90 million extension
Really? Is that sarcasm I’m missing or would you really hold on to him? Just curious.
no sarcasm. i don’t sell low
Took them long enough!
please someone claim him i don’t even care if it’s the Yankees I just want him off the team, he is a cancer to the team and he must be sent packing.
Many of you might disagree, but I thought AJ Burnett would thrive last year after getting out of the American League East, and I think if Josh Beckett can make it back to the National League, he is going to be AJ Burnett part 2. You listening Theo? Any chance of moving Marmol or Soriano to the Red Sox? I guess it depends on whether or not they want to resign Ortiz next year if Soriano gets involved.
Oakland.
Since Johan is shut down for the rest of the year, why not Sandy? Another aged overpaid fading star
I think he would do pretty well in the NL West…
If somebody claims him, don’t even try trading. Just ship the guy out of here.
Wow I wonder who Texas was giving up in that rumored trade…But any trade with Ellsbury in it should include at least a top 3 prospect from texas. So probably Profar since the Sox have no room for Olt.
lol.
Try, Andrus. Ells only has 1 year left. No way they trade us a 19 yr old with tons of control.
Angle,A’s,Rangers,White Sox’s,Yankees,Baltimore.