Skip to content

There’s “lots of interest in John Lackey”

Jul 9, 2014, 12:30 PM EST

Maybe not by Buck Showalter or Nelson Cruz, but by other people:

Fun, but I can’t imagine the Red Sox would want to trade Lackey. Because of the famous clause in his contract that gave the Sox a team option on him for 2015 if he missed significant time to an elbow injury during the deal — which he did in 2012 — the Sox can have him next year for the major league veteran minimum. There’s a great chance that the Sox tear that up and do a different deal with Lackey, but they do have some leverage with him on that score.

More to the point, though: Lackey has been a pretty darn effective starter for the Sox this season and last and has, somewhat remarkably, turned into a guy Sox fans really like. Boston likely does not believe that this apparently lost season is something that will bleed over to next year and, as such, they likely picture him contributing to the 2015 Sox.

Anything can happen, but I’d be surprised if he were dealt.

  1. proudlycanadian - Jul 9, 2014 at 12:36 PM

    Just Nick Cafado wasting more printers ink. Why does anyone take this buffoon seriously?

  2. xpensivewinos - Jul 9, 2014 at 12:45 PM

    I, on the other hand, would not be the least bit surprised if he’s dealt.

    He could actually bring more back in trade than most of the other garbage on their roster and his salary for next year becomes someone else’s problem because he’s already started the passive aggressive “i’ll have to evaluate things at the end of the season” crap……

  3. unclemosesgreen - Jul 9, 2014 at 12:46 PM

    Lackey has promised to retire rather than honor the league minimum option in his contract. To me, that makes it the Sawks’ responsibility to keep him, never negotiate, and force him to retire. Do the right thing, Larry Lucchino. End this.

    • playball - Jul 9, 2014 at 1:34 PM

      Just curious, when exactly did he say he’d retire rather than play at the league minimum? I know he gave the vague, ‘evaluate’ remark, but that could constitute a number of things. I never assumed that he would retire. I must have missed the discussion he had.
      I know when the possibility of John Lackey retiring next year was brought up to Ben, he cut that conversation short. He had no awareness of it and would expect nothing other than Lackey signing a contract and completing that contract. This interview was done on a pre-game show on NESN. So, viewers saw that.

      I’d love a good read on John Lackey’s retirement.

      Personally, I’d hate to think he’d do that. I’d also hate to see him go. Sign him to an extension, don’t trade him.

      • willyssox - Jul 10, 2014 at 11:39 AM

        Lackey never said publicly that he would retire. Reporters said retirement for a year could be an option of his. But in my opinion he will Not pitch for league min-

    • 18thstreet - Jul 9, 2014 at 2:00 PM

      My guess is that it’s a bluff from Lackey. He doesn’t have many cards to play, and he’d be a fool not to play what he has.

      I’m guessing he wants 3 years, $45 million. And if he were a free agent, he’d get it. The Red Sox could probably keep him by ripping up the contract and giving him 2 years, $25 million. Just a guess.

  4. scorpiox1960 - Jul 9, 2014 at 12:53 PM

    Will his new team like fried chicken?

    • sabatimus - Jul 9, 2014 at 2:45 PM

      There’s no way Lackey plays for the league minimum next year. Maybe he’ll pull a Bartolo Colon and walk and void the rest of his contract. Or maybe he’s already demanding a trade and nobody knows about it. As good as Lackey has been this year, maybe if they trade him they’ll get people who can actually hit.

    • SocraticGadfly - Jul 9, 2014 at 2:46 PM

      Hey, yeah, trade him to the Dodgers, since Beckett and his bucket o’chicken are on the DL right now.

    • sabatimus - Jul 9, 2014 at 2:47 PM

      Oops, meant to reply generally, but since I replied to this comment by accident I may as well reply on purpose too: That joke is well past the sell date, and smells like rancid poultry.

  5. Andee - Jul 9, 2014 at 12:55 PM

    Is there a reason this is tagged with Nelson Cruz and the Baltimore Orioles?

  6. Eutaw's Finest - Jul 9, 2014 at 2:58 PM

    Lackeys no trade list includes any team with convicted and/or accused and/or suspected PED users.

  7. bats13 - Jul 10, 2014 at 4:41 PM

    John Lackey will be in a Red Sox uniform next year. He signed that contract and he owes Boston. They did not take money away from him when he could not pitch.

  8. jaywp388 - Jul 10, 2014 at 9:49 PM

    Even if he where to retire for a year wouldn’t he still be under contract with the sox for the league minimum when he returned….i think hell keep his end of the bargain and the sox will ultimately take care of him

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Featured video

Cubs shore up rotation with Jon Lester
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. C. Gonzalez (2172)
  2. D. Ross (2074)
  3. J. Grilli (2042)
  4. A. Pierzynski (1957)
  5. D. Young (1918)
  1. M. Scutaro (1880)
  2. S. Smith (1860)
  3. T. Stauffer (1847)
  4. W. Myers (1826)
  5. D. Haren (1818)