SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
Should the Red Sox sign Josh Hamilton?
|
Post by seadogs34 on Dec 5, 2012 15:39:16 GMT -5
Sox will go 4 IMO at 25 mill a year an not a year or dollar more. The market for him could dry up if Upton ends up in Texas an make it so he takes a shorter deal then 4 but I think he gets 4. I'd make that offer, but I seriously doubt the Sox would. Doesn't seem to fit their MO. Agreed, it seems like their new MO is to severely overpay avg players instead of Superstars. I can hardly wait until spring training. #sarcasm
|
|
|
Post by brentl on Dec 5, 2012 15:45:52 GMT -5
Sox will go 4 IMO at 25 mill a year an not a year or dollar more. The market for him could dry up if Upton ends up in Texas an make it so he takes a shorter deal then 4 but I think he gets 4. I'd make that offer, but I seriously doubt the Sox would. Doesn't seem to fit their MO. I dont no they seem willing to spend but obviously short term which I love. I think 4 years is max this team would go but mybe not mybe they wont go more then 3. I think they are out to prove they will compete now an set them self's up nicely for the future an deff seems Cher wants to make a big splash or too an feels he has lots to prove. I think they are sitting back exploring trades an once they make some deals or come to terms with them selfs there is nothing that will happen going that route then Hamilton will get a serious offer or not. Seem to be really patient right now an I like that. But hope a big deal happens soon.
|
|
|
Post by elguapo on Dec 5, 2012 16:03:18 GMT -5
Sounds like the bidding has surpassed 4x$25. I think that's fine for the Rangers but I'm not too interested in upping the ante. Likewise, Greinke is reportedly looking at well beyond the 5x$24 I originally suggested.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Dec 5, 2012 16:55:09 GMT -5
I'd make that offer, but I seriously doubt the Sox would. Doesn't seem to fit their MO. Agreed, it seems like their new MO is to severely overpay avg players instead of Superstars. I can hardly wait until spring training. #sarcasm Yeah, the Red Sox should only severely overpay for superstars like Carl Crawford, Josh Beckett, and Adrian Gonzalez!
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Dec 5, 2012 18:58:40 GMT -5
4 x $25M to Hamilton? I would do that in a heartbeat.
|
|
|
Post by mredsox89 on Dec 5, 2012 19:03:32 GMT -5
4 x $25M to Hamilton? I would do that in a heartbeat. Agreed. I'd even be in favor of 4x30 to stay away from the 5+ year commitment
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Dec 5, 2012 19:29:06 GMT -5
4 x $25M to Hamilton? I would do that in a heartbeat. Agreed. I'd even be in favor of 4x30 to stay away from the 5+ year commitment The $5 million for his 2017 season is where you draw the line? I can't imagine him pulling more than $25m AAV on 5 years.
|
|
|
Post by welovewally on Dec 6, 2012 7:20:21 GMT -5
Someone is going to give him 4 years for $110 million. might be the Red Sox, might be Texas
|
|
|
Post by adiospaydro2005 on Dec 6, 2012 7:50:51 GMT -5
Geoff Baker þ@gbakermariners Mariners said to be "very close" to landing Josh Hamilton. Depends on what happens with Zack Greinke over
So, if Texas gets Greinke than they are likely out of the Hamilton bidding. The Red Sox can certainly outbid the Mariners. I would go to 4 years, $115 million.
|
|
|
Post by bluechip on Dec 6, 2012 8:42:53 GMT -5
Geoff Baker þ@gbakermariners Mariners said to be "very close" to landing Josh Hamilton. Depends on what happens with Zack Greinke over So, if Texas gets Greinke than they are likely out of the Hamilton bidding. The Red Sox can certainly outbid the Mariners. I would go to 4 years, $115 million. It sounds like its either the M's or the Rangers. In fact, rumor has it, Seattle is getting in on the Arizona/Rangers trade so the Rangers do not sign Hamilton.
|
|
|
Post by sibbysisti on Dec 6, 2012 9:19:10 GMT -5
Agreed, it seems like their new MO is to severely overpay avg players instead of Superstars. I can hardly wait until spring training. #sarcasm Yeah, the Red Sox should only severely overpay for superstars like Carl Crawford, Josh Beckett, and Adrian Gonzalez!Hey, you forgot Nick Punto!
|
|
|
Post by seadogs34 on Dec 6, 2012 9:26:00 GMT -5
Agreed, it seems like their new MO is to severely overpay avg players instead of Superstars. I can hardly wait until spring training. #sarcasm Yeah, the Red Sox should only severely overpay for superstars like Carl Crawford, Josh Beckett, and Adrian Gonzalez!Rather overpay Adrian Gonzalez than Shane Victorino.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Dec 6, 2012 9:41:12 GMT -5
That trade wasn't made to get rid of Gonzalez. Gonzalez was what allowed the Sox to dump Becket and Crawford PLUS get back good pitching prospects in return. It was unfortunate he had to go - he wasn't overpaid and is going to be worth every penny, but you need to give up to get.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Dec 6, 2012 9:57:19 GMT -5
Are you sure Adrian won't be overpaid? His walk rates (17.5% - 13.4% - 10.3% - 6.1%) and ISOs (.274 - .213 - .210 - .164) have declined four years in a row. He's in the decline phase of his career now and will be paid $21m+ per year through his age-36 season. The overall deal may end up as fair since he might outproduce his contract in the first year or two of his extension, but that tail end will probably end up as an albatross.
|
|
|
Post by seadogs34 on Dec 6, 2012 10:00:10 GMT -5
That trade wasn't made to get rid of Gonzalez. Gonzalez was what allowed the Sox to dump Becket and Crawford PLUS get back good pitching prospects in return. It was unfortunate he had to go - he wasn't overpaid and is going to be worth every penny, but you need to give up to get. Not to be snarky but its pretty obvious that the deal wasn't to get rid of Gonzalez, and I do agree with you that Gonzalez was worth what we were paying him last year. Who knows though in 4-5 years. I guess my original point is that they just just took the 270 million they saved from the trade and blew a decent chunk of it on avg players that are being over paid for 3 years. Of course you cant sign two superstars every year a la 2010. But I feel like getting a player of Hamilton's caliber is a rare opportunity and 5 years for a superstar is fairly short term considering what other players of his caliber have gotten. Especially considering our need for a LH hitter with power and the scarcity of that type of players availability.
|
|
|
Post by buffs4444 on Dec 6, 2012 10:17:48 GMT -5
I feel like getting a player of Hamilton's caliber is a rare opportunity and 5 years for a superstar is fairly short term considering what other players of his caliber have gotten. Especially considering our need for a LH hitter with power and the scarcity of that type of players availability. Agree. For his age 32-36 seasons, paying $25M/yr for a .930OPS hitter isn't bad in this market. I think the park itself will help him (his previous two years when he was taking the ball the other way were some of his best, and Fenway should force him to do that). He'll most likely regress over that span, but the eventual move to DH in 2-3 years should help his body, and I don't have an issue with his past as I think the model for a support structure is already in place and just needs to be implemented wherever he lands. This team needs talent, and he's one of the few I'd surrender a second round pick to acquire. Without him, I really wonder how this team adds an impact bat without surrendering the farm....
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Dec 6, 2012 12:38:41 GMT -5
I'm very pessimistic about Hamilton but I still think there's a decent chance he ends up in Boston on a deal I can tolerate. The Rangers are looking like they'll end up with Greinke and Upton, and the only other team really pursuing Hamilton is the Mariners (dark horses are the Phillies and Brewers, but are unlikely for budget reasons). Meanwhile, Cherington and Farrell met directly with Hamilton, which is fairly unusual and indicates more than just cursory interest by the Red Sox. If Hamilton for whatever reason doesn't want to go to Seattle (wants to compete, doesn't like the West Coast, etc.), a competitive three- or four-year deal at a higher AAV might be enough to sign him. Despite how risky of a player I think he is, if he actually signs for a deal like four years, $100m, it would be pretty good value in the current salary environment, at least for the first year or two.
Such a deal would probably foreclose signing one of the higher-end starters (Sanchez, Jackson, Dempster, etc.), but you then have the option of directly or indirectly trading Ellsbury for a starter (I'm thinking along the lines of a three-team deal netting the Red Sox Matt Garza). Boston's hard-won financial flexibility would basically disappear entirely, but the Red Sox would be an instant 2013 contender with the farm system relatively intact and still some wiggle room under the luxury tax (on the order of $15m this season and next).
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Dec 6, 2012 13:14:39 GMT -5
Agreed. I'd even be in favor of 4x30 to stay away from the 5+ year commitment The $5 million for his 2017 season is where you draw the line? I can't imagine him pulling more than $25m AAV on 5 years. There is a huge different between a 4 and 5 year contract in this instance that goes well beyond the extra 5M dollars. It's not as simple as "hey the Sox get Hamilton for 5M in year 5, lets do it". It's all about payroll flexibility and putting a competitive team on the field while staying within a certain luxury tax budget. If Hamilton is junk during that 5th year, then you have a $25M salary slot going towards a below average player. It's a huge concern that this front office is really starting to pay attention to.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Dec 6, 2012 13:47:16 GMT -5
Agreed, it seems like their new MO is to severely overpay avg players instead of Superstars. I can hardly wait until spring training. #sarcasm Yeah, the Red Sox should only severely overpay for superstars like Carl Crawford, Josh Beckett, and Adrian Gonzalez!Since when was Carl Crawford or Josh Beckett a superstar? That was a case of the Red Sox signing good player to bigger contracts than they were worth. Shane Victorino is a case of the Red Sox signing a mediocre player for more than he's worth, but at least they didn't do it for a very long time. With Hamilton, you'd be signing a "superstar" for only 4 years and very big bucks. That would not hamstring the Sox in the future. He'd be paid his last $ in 2016, right around the time Stanton becomes a free agent, coincidentally enough. If you want the Sox to go to war with this lineup in 2013, that's fine: Ellsbury Victorino Pedroia Ortiz Napoli Middlebrooks Gomes Lavarnway (I assume Salty gets dealt?) Iglesias/(Drew?) Or do you prefer: Ellsbury Pedroia Hamilton (LF - with Gomes on the bench) Napoli Ortiz Middlebrooks Victorino Lavarnway Iglesias (Drew) I like this lineup way better - particularly given the fact that the Sox won't be able to impact their starting pitching too much given the lack of options available to them. This team needs to really rake to make up for their mediocre pitching. Doesn't seem to matter anyways as it sounds like they'll let the Mariners outbid them now that Texas has dropped out of the running, which I think is foolish. And to top off things, my guess is that Tampa Bay walks away with Will Myers when the Sox could have had him.
|
|
|
Post by patrmac04 on Dec 6, 2012 14:17:42 GMT -5
I feel like getting a player of Hamilton's caliber is a rare opportunity and 5 years for a superstar is fairly short term considering what other players of his caliber have gotten. Especially considering our need for a LH hitter with power and the scarcity of that type of players availability. Agree. For his age 32-36 seasons, paying $25M/yr for a .930OPS hitter isn't bad in this market. I think the park itself will help him (his previous two years when he was taking the ball the other way were some of his best, and Fenway should force him to do that). He'll most likely regress over that span, but the eventual move to DH in 2-3 years should help his body, and I don't have an issue with his past as I think the model for a support structure is already in place and just needs to be implemented wherever he lands. This team needs talent, and he's one of the few I'd surrender a second round pick to acquire. Without him, I really wonder how this team adds an impact bat without surrendering the farm.... I agree to your agreement and reasoning.
|
|
|
Post by masquerade on Dec 6, 2012 14:34:56 GMT -5
I'd make that offer, but I seriously doubt the Sox would. Doesn't seem to fit their MO. Agreed, it seems like their new MO is to severely overpay avg players instead of Superstars. I can hardly wait until spring training. #sarcasm Hamilton isn't a superstar. He's a 4WAR player with severe off-field issues, declining health, and an increasing strikeout rate.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Dec 6, 2012 15:28:51 GMT -5
Yeah, the Red Sox should only severely overpay for superstars like Carl Crawford, Josh Beckett, and Adrian Gonzalez! Since when was Carl Crawford or Josh Beckett a superstar? That was a case of the Red Sox signing good player to bigger contracts than they were worth. Shane Victorino is a case of the Red Sox signing a mediocre player for more than he's worth, but at least they didn't do it for a very long time. With Hamilton, you'd be signing a "superstar" for only 4 years and very big bucks. That would not hamstring the Sox in the future. He'd be paid his last $ in 2016, right around the time Stanton becomes a free agent, coincidentally enough. If you want the Sox to go to war with this lineup in 2013, that's fine: Ellsbury Victorino Pedroia Ortiz Napoli Middlebrooks Gomes Lavarnway (I assume Salty gets dealt?) Iglesias/(Drew?) Or do you prefer: Ellsbury Pedroia Hamilton (LF - with Gomes on the bench) Napoli Ortiz Middlebrooks Victorino Lavarnway Iglesias (Drew) I like this lineup way better - particularly given the fact that the Sox won't be able to impact their starting pitching too much given the lack of options available to them. This team needs to really rake to make up for their mediocre pitching. Doesn't seem to matter anyways as it sounds like they'll let the Mariners outbid them now that Texas has dropped out of the running, which I think is foolish. And to top off things, my guess is that Tampa Bay walks away with Will Myers when the Sox could have had him. One lineup has at least $25m more dollars allocated to it. If you wanted to be reasonably fair, make it Hamilton and Iglesias vs. Swisher and Drew plus a bit more freedom to spend more on pitching this season (not to mention assuming less long term risk). You're also assuming four years, which is still a very large assumption, unless you're willing to go above the $25m AAV.
|
|
|
Post by dcri on Dec 6, 2012 16:13:17 GMT -5
I think jmei may be right. The Hamilton winds seem to be shifting towards Boston. I'm in favor of signing Hamilton in the right kind of deal, one that does not prevent the signing of another SP or two, or trading one one and signing one.
If the Rangers get Upton they almost certainly are not signing Hamilton.
However, there is another potential opportunity: Bourn. Virtually every team looking for a CF has found one, and he's still out there. Obviously, his demands were too much. He may get a bit more realistic. I think he is the best of the possible replacements for Ellsbury.
It appears, however, that the Sox are not going to trade Ellsbury right now.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Dec 6, 2012 16:29:54 GMT -5
The $5 million for his 2017 season is where you draw the line? I can't imagine him pulling more than $25m AAV on 5 years. There is a huge different between a 4 and 5 year contract in this instance that goes well beyond the extra 5M dollars. It's not as simple as "hey the Sox get Hamilton for 5M in year 5, lets do it". It's all about payroll flexibility and putting a competitive team on the field while staying within a certain luxury tax budget. If Hamilton is junk during that 5th year, then you have a $25M salary slot going towards a below average player. It's a huge concern that this front office is really starting to pay attention to. Huh? Read the original conversation, you took away all context. He advocated paying $120m over four years to "avoid" paying the fifth year. If the common thought is 5X25 would be necessary to land Hamilton, he is essentially drawing the line at paying $5m for 2017, and I was asking why. As for the tax stuff, paying 4/120 instead of 5/125 gives a clean slate in 2017 (yay) but adds an additional $5m to the lux tax from 2013-2016. I don't want either deal for the record, I just found the logic interesting and was asking a question about it.
|
|
|
Post by mjammz on Dec 6, 2012 16:33:37 GMT -5
Ken Rosenthal @ken_Rosenthal Sources: #Mariners have discussed three-year deals with Hamilton in range of $20M to $25M per season.
If thats the best Hamilton can do, then the Red Sox are definitely in this. I see no reason why the Red Sox wouldn't do a three year deal between 25-30.
|
|
|