John Lackey extension?
About a month ago:
John Lackey is reportedly confident that he will receive an extension by Opening Day, but will also want some more offense for this team.
From ESPN:
...the Angels' current ace, John Lackey, has been telling friends he's confident he'll have a contract extension in place by Opening Day. Lackey has one year left on the four-year contract he signed before the 2006 season.
From the LA Times:
After Lackey gave up two runs and lost Game 1, he pointed the finger at his offense. After he gave up two runs and got no decision in Game 4, he warned against that line of questioning.
"Don't stir the pot," he said.
Yet, when the questioning turned to whether he would wait to see what the Angels did with their offense this winter before considering an extension, Lackey answered with one word.
"Absolutely," he said.
Now:
Now that Teixeira has officially signed with the Yankees, one of the Angels' best hitters has left, obviously the opposite of what Lackey was hoping would happen. The questions I pose are:
1) Does he sign an extension with the Angels or does he try free agency and move on to another team?
2) How many years and how much money does he sign for?
John Lackey and Derek Lowe have eerily similar numbers over the last three years and, assuming Lackey does hit the free agent market next year, he will be 4 years younger than Lowe is now. Over the years Lackey, with the exception of this past year, has been a very durable and reliable pitcher. The Angels knew exactly what they were going to get from him every time out. That was even true after he missed the first 2 months this past year. This year Lowe seems to be in the market for around a 4 year, $66 million contract at age 35 (It seems he will probably end up with a 3 year contract with a vesting option for a fourth year). Could this be an outline or are the contracts of Sabathia, Zito, Santana, etc. more relevant?
Also, could Burnett's 5 year, $82.5 million contract be the outline. Burnett is also 31 right now. Although one could argue Burnett's "stuff" is better, one cannot argue over his durability concerns which are not there for Lackey. Also, Burnett only seems to pitch well in his "walk" year. Which pitcher would you rather have, Burnett or Lackey?
My projection: 5 year, $90 million with a vesting option for the sixth year.
0 recs |
28
comments
| Add comment
Read Related
Comments
re
I’d take Lackey all day every day over Burnett
by blee1134 on
Dec 26, 2025 2:27 AM EST
reply
0 recs
+1
Not even remotely close.
Lackey is also a far better pitcher than DLowe.
by alskor on
Dec 26, 2025 2:44 AM EST
up
reply
0 recs
2.2 IP, 10 ER
If not for that final start of the regular season vs Texas, Lackey would’ve had a 3.25 ERA.
Now raise your goblet of rock. It's a toast to those who rock!
by Dewey Finn on
Dec 26, 2025 3:36 AM EST
reply
0 recs
Instead it was 3.75
Now raise your goblet of rock. It's a toast to those who rock!
by Dewey Finn on
Dec 26, 2025 3:37 AM EST
up
reply
0 recs
I am smirking
Cause you just said stat cherry picking should’t be considered with Anderson.
by davidsabin on
Dec 26, 2025 10:36 AM EST
up
reply
0 recs
Different context dude...
$$$
Now raise your goblet of rock. It's a toast to those who rock!
by Dewey Finn on
Dec 26, 2025 1:04 PM EST
up
reply
0 recs
Track record
Now raise your goblet of rock. It's a toast to those who rock!
by Dewey Finn on
Dec 26, 2025 6:31 PM EST
up
reply
0 recs
The start in question
was the final start of the season. He was not injured in that start, as Brett Anderson was in a start he allowed 8ER in 1IP that Dewey previously said you couldn’t just throw out, as he does here with Lackey. Inconsistent actions.
"So's your mom"-David Sloane
by gatling on
Dec 26, 2025 10:28 PM EST
up
reply
0 recs
Ahh...
my apologies. I missed the initial Anderson argument… which is why this wasnt making much sense to me.
by alskor on
Dec 26, 2025 10:46 PM EST
up
reply
0 recs
Ridiculous
If you can throw out a non-injury related bad outing, you can certainly throw out an injury related one. The fact of the matter is you don’t want to throw out the start for Anderson because it would further destroy your weak argument against him. That’s fine, I understand trying to protect your position, but you need to be consistent then. Can’t have it both ways.
"So's your mom"-David Sloane
by gatling on
Dec 26, 2025 9:22 PM EST
up
reply
0 recs
Jeez
I’m talking in terms of $$$.
Now raise your goblet of rock. It's a toast to those who rock!
by Dewey Finn on
Dec 26, 2025 10:55 PM EST
up
reply
0 recs
To simplify...
Payday. That’s it.
Now raise your goblet of rock. It's a toast to those who rock!
by Dewey Finn on
Dec 26, 2025 10:59 PM EST
up
reply
0 recs
How much
do you really think that one start would actually cost him? Do you really think he’s going to lose much if any money because he posted a 3.75 ERA instead of 3.25? AJ Burnett just got $82.5M over 5 years, I think Lackey will do just fine.
"So's your mom"-David Sloane
by gatling on
Dec 27, 2025 12:25 AM EST
up
reply
0 recs
Dewey's right
Lackey’s much more proven as a pitcher, and can be given exceptions where Anderson can’t. It’s like comparing A-Rod to a Mark Bellhorn. They will both have times where they strike out every other time. But where A-Rod will keep his starting gig, Bellhorn would be benched.
by J-Gao on
Dec 26, 2025 1:17 PM EST
reply
0 recs
Anderson wasn't benched.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on
Dec 26, 2025 9:34 PM EST
up
reply
0 recs
Umm.
It was an exaggeration. Either way, A-Rod’s - like Lackey - momentary lack of production is far more acceptable than one from a lesser or unproven player.
by J-Gao on
Dec 26, 2025 9:42 PM EST
up
reply
0 recs
Yeah
that’s not really an apt comparison at all. We’re talking about a guy having a bad start(Lackey) and a guy who was injured and had a bad start(Anderson). Your example really doesn’t fit.
"So's your mom"-David Sloane
by gatling on
Dec 26, 2025 9:41 PM EST
up
reply
0 recs
I dont think you grasped what he was trying to say
He is comparing track records. Stop being so ultra-sensitive towards Brett Anderson.
Now raise your goblet of rock. It's a toast to those who rock!
by Dewey Finn on
Dec 26, 2025 10:57 PM EST
up
reply
0 recs
Nope
I’m not being the least bit “ultra-sensitive”. His comparison didn’t fit, plain and simple. Track record had nothing to do with the difference in being able to throw out a Lackey start vs. the aforementioned Anderson start. I wasn’t rude, nor did I overreact. I simply pointed out the comparison didn’t fit.
"So's your mom"-David Sloane
by gatling on
Dec 27, 2025 12:28 AM EST
up
reply
0 recs
re
Inflation is inflation. The only difference I see is that Anderson was actually pitching hurt during his brutal outing
by blee1134 on
Dec 26, 2025 3:11 PM EST
reply
0 recs
Back to the Question
How many years and how much money?
by lions1 on
Dec 26, 2025 11:55 PM EST
reply
0 recs
Depends
I would put him around 5/80 to 5/90, as he’s really not an ace(other than one year). He’s a good 2 or 3. But he’s worth more than Burnett(who wasn’t worth 5/80) so I’m not sure what he gets.
by supermets on
Dec 27, 2025 12:01 AM EST
up
reply
0 recs
Depends
If he stays with the Angels, I’m not sure he’d exceed 5 years, $85M. But the free agent pool of starting pitching after next year isn’t that deep, at least not with safe bets. I could see Lackey getting a contract for 5 years and between $90-95M on the open market conceivably though
"So's your mom"-David Sloane
by gatling on
Dec 27, 2025 12:34 AM EST
up
reply
0 recs
Huge payday
If he is willing to leave the Angels theni thionk he couldget something like 6 years/108 million. He is definitely better than Burnett, their will be fewer alternatives in his free agent class and economy (hopefully) will be better. If he stays an Angel probably no more than 5 years.
Also, I live in his hometown and I am friends with one of his best friends, his friend tells me that he really really wants to stay an Angel and if he were to leave his first choice would be the Rangers.
by wolviex18 on
Dec 27, 2025 6:47 AM EST
reply
0 recs





