42 replies to this topic

[JeremyStrain]

I'd be much more concerned with # of years than amount in his case. I think he's going to be a FORCE in the AL for at least 4 more years with the bat, and quite possibly a little longer since he took time off from the game and doesn't have as much wear and tear. I'd give him 4/80 in a second. Don't think he settles for that though.

I don't think so either - he's shooting for squeezing the most he can possibly get out of this contract. Especially since it will be the last big one for him when you consider his age.

It'll probably take a 4/90, if not a 4/100, to get him to sign on the dotted line IF there are other offers comparable to that.

Yeah I figure as others have said, he's going to shoot for the 6-7 year deal, but if enough teams have reservations because of his history, maybe he gets forced into the 4-5 year range. I guess a way to look at it is 4 years at $25m is the same as 5 years at $20m, so finding a balance in there is the key.

[LanceRinker]

Yeah I figure as others have said, he's going to shoot for the 6-7 year deal, but if enough teams have reservations because of his history, maybe he gets forced into the 4-5 year range. I guess a way to look at it is 4 years at $25m is the same as 5 years at $20m, so finding a balance in there is the key.

Yep. That's why my thinking is, if I were the GM, that I'd offer vesting options for a 5th and 6th year based on plate appearances, games played, or whatever to protect against him completely falling apart by the time he's 35 or 36 years old.

I have no problem paying him $20+ million a year, the issue is how long he's going to want to be paid that much.

[JeremyStrain]

Yeah I figure as others have said, he's going to shoot for the 6-7 year deal, but if enough teams have reservations because of his history, maybe he gets forced into the 4-5 year range. I guess a way to look at it is 4 years at $25m is the same as 5 years at $20m, so finding a balance in there is the key.

Yep. That's why my thinking is, if I were the GM, that I'd offer vesting options for a 5th and 6th year based on plate appearances, games played, or whatever to protect against him completely falling apart by the time he's 35 or 36 years old.

I have no problem paying him $20+ million a year, the issue is how long he's going to want to be paid that much.

I figure if he slows down in the OF (and I doubt he does, I see him holding up like Jim Edmunds) his bat would play at 1B in the worst case. But more likely he shifts to RF when Kakes' contract is up.

[LanceRinker]

I figure if he slows down in the OF (and I doubt he does, I see him holding up like Jim Edmunds) his bat would play at 1B in the worst case. But more likely he shifts to RF when Kakes' contract is up.

I actually like him better as a 1B/DH type myself. It's not that I don't admire his hustle in the outfield and going all out to get to balls (and making the catches) that many players wouldn't attempt on their best day, but when he's not making a lights out play he's kind of sub par in the outfield, IMO.

He doesn't make a ton of mistakes or anything like that but for his size and how often his injuries occur because of how he plays in the outfield...if I'm investing the kind of money it would take to sign him then I'd slowly begin the transition to 1B. It'll help preserve his body better and it'll also allow the team that signs him (hopefully) to reap more value out of him in regards to the contract he'll be signed too.

[DJ MC]

There is no way I'm giving him more than four years guaranteed.

He's going to be 32 next year. He's on pace to play in 151 games this season, which would be the second time he's done that in his six years in the majors; every other season he played in 82% or less of his teams' games. He is already a left fielder playing center field. There are five left fielders making at least $18 million in 2012: all of them are considered albatross contracts, and historically the only two left fielders who made that kind of money and weren't considered terrible signings through their deals were Manny Ramirez and Barry Bonds.

Then there is the addiction issue, especially coming to a city considered the poster child for the drug problem in America.

I would give him the cash, but not the years. He'll want both, so I will wish him well.

[Oriole85]

Not sure if this has been mentioned, but wouldn't this be one of the more expensive outfields in the bigs? Markakis and Jones and obviously, Hamilton's contract would blow them out of the water. Obviously this leaves less flexibility. If the team thinks he's the "missing piece" to get the O's to the playoffs, sure. I think the likelihood in any event isn't so great. I'm guessing he'll be back in Texas, but there should be some other suitors as well.

[LanceRinker]

Not sure if this has been mentioned, but wouldn't this be one of the more expensive outfields in the bigs? Markakis and Jones and obviously, Hamilton's contract would blow them out of the water. Obviously this leaves less flexibility. If the team thinks he's the "missing piece" to get the O's to the playoffs, sure. I think the likelihood in any event isn't so great. I'm guessing he'll be back in Texas, but there should be some other suitors as well.

I expect him to be back with the Rangers as well, but you have to keep in mind that he's looking for the most money. Period.

You also have to take into consideration that there won't be that many teams that could comfortably afford him anyway - as well as have a place for him.

Yankees
Red Sox (although they're shying away from the spend at all costs approach)
Dodgers
Cubs
Mets (if they don't re-sign Wright)
Seattle (maybe...)

The Orioles I would put at the bottom of this list of six teams because it could very well hamstring them to an extent - especially when you consider that Wieters will command a salary north of $13/14 million a year and you absolutely have to keep him long term. Matusz will need an extension during the life of the Hamilton contract IF he proves he truly deserves one (which I think he will).

Then you have to take into consideration that the Orioles will surely have some hole that will need to be filled via free agency along the way. I'm not saying this team can't handle a $100 million dollar payroll, because it can, but I'm not confident the O's could handle going north of a $120 million dollar payroll with as much ease as some people believe.

The link below is to a spreadsheet from Cot's Baseball Contracts that lists the Orioles payroll obligations over the next few seasons.

Matt Wieters and Chris Davis are both arbitration eligible and could see decent sized raises for next season. Brian Roberts is also still on the books for $10 million next year.

Not saying I don't want Hamilton, just saying that we've got some in-house stuff coming up over the next two seasons that we will have to take care of.

https://spreadsheets...3gQ&output=html

[RShack]

I expect him to be back with the Rangers as well, but you have to keep in mind that he's looking for the most money. Period.

People always say that about any big time FA, but I don't believe it. If you're making the large number of millions of dollars that level of FA will get, then they'd have to be idiots if they all choose plenty-of-millions-plus-2-million to play someplace they don't wanna be vs. someplace they do. I can believe that different guys will have different preferences about where they do and don't wanna be. But I bet most of them consider more than "just the money period".

Not saying this is true for all of them, but to assume that it's not true for every one of them, well, I just don't believe that at all...

[Oriole85]

I expect him to be back with the Rangers as well, but you have to keep in mind that he's looking for the most money. Period.

People always say that about any big time FA, but I don't believe it. If you're making the large number of millions of dollars that level of FA will get, then they'd have to be idiots if they all choose plenty-of-millions-plus-2-million to play someplace they don't wanna be vs. someplace they do. I can believe that different guys will have different preferences about where they do and don't wanna be. But I bet most of them consider more than "just the money period".

Not saying this is true for all of them, but to assume that it's not true for every one of them, well, I just don't believe that at all...

I think it varies somewhat from player-to-player, but bad teams have to pay a "suck tax." Look at the Jayson Werth deal, many criticize the Nats for "overpaying" him, something they didn't deny. The thing is if they don't severely overpay him, they don't get him. So as much as people criticize the Orioles for not going after big name FAs, i'll bet those same people would then turn around and say the same thing if they then went after a Werth-type player.

The last player of significance I can recall who took a discount to go to a non-prominent team(not an extension or re-signing) was Ken Griffey Jr. and that was his father's team.

Back to Josh Hamilton, I think the Orioles would have to blow the other teams out of the water particularly the Rangers. They can't just go "a dollar or two over." In addition, they'd have to offer significantly more than other prominent teams. I think players in addition to money want to play for winners, in a decent market, if possible, close to home, among other factors.

[SportsGuy]

Injury issues plus age plus relapse potential makes a risky sign. Otoh, this team needs to add legit talent. I wonder if he would go for a 3/70 type deal?

[LanceRinker]

People always say that about any big time FA, but I don't believe it. If you're making the large number of millions of dollars that level of FA will get, then they'd have to be idiots if they all choose plenty-of-millions-plus-2-million to play someplace they don't wanna be vs. someplace they do. I can believe that different guys will have different preferences about where they do and don't wanna be. But I bet most of them consider more than "just the money period".

Not saying this is true for all of them, but to assume that it's not true for every one of them, well, I just don't believe that at all...

I'm not trying to say that every big time free agent is seeking the most money possible, but in this case I kind of believe it for Hamilton. This is the only long-term/big money contract he's going to get and his wife came out and said recently that they were looking for the most money because they had "big plans" for it.

The reason I say I think he'll be back with the Rangers is because they'll probably offer him the most money and/or years.

[JeremyStrain]

People always say that about any big time FA, but I don't believe it. If you're making the large number of millions of dollars that level of FA will get, then they'd have to be idiots if they all choose plenty-of-millions-plus-2-million to play someplace they don't wanna be vs. someplace they do. I can believe that different guys will have different preferences about where they do and don't wanna be. But I bet most of them consider more than "just the money period".

Not saying this is true for all of them, but to assume that it's not true for every one of them, well, I just don't believe that at all...

I'm not trying to say that every big time free agent is seeking the most money possible, but in this case I kind of believe it for Hamilton. This is the only long-term/big money contract he's going to get and his wife came out and said recently that they were looking for the most money because they had "big plans" for it.

The reason I say I think he'll be back with the Rangers is because they'll probably offer him the most money and/or years.

Shack is right on this one. You have to remember that there is a range involved for both sides. A player isn't going to play somewhere he doesn't want to be for 5 years because of $3m more total, but for $10-20m yeah you can buy them.

In the Tex saga, this figured in a bit, he had WAS and BAL on his list because he liked being close to his family. He had NYM and NYY on his list because he liked being close to his wife's family. In the end he wasn't going to take less or like $5m extra to play here (as the Nats found out), but if they'd have blown NYY's offer out by like $15-20m like they did with Werth, he'd have signed there, same with BAL.

Some players put more weight on location than others, some have other intangibles (I've heard things from good local fishing, to good schools, to good nightlife) as reasons for signing places.

[Zwolfe0]

I think Hamilton is worth $20 million a year, but only for 5 years. He comes with a lot of question marks. There are the obvious substance abuse questions and he's also good for about 30 days on the DL each season.

Do you ever step back and think how much better he would be if he didn't lose 5 seasons at the beginning of his career?

[Oriole85]

I think Hamilton is worth $20 million a year, but only for 5 years. He comes with a lot of question marks. There are the obvious substance abuse questions and he's also good for about 30 days on the DL each season.

Do you ever step back and think how much better he would be if he didn't lose 5 seasons at the beginning of his career?

His career numbers would be better, but I'm not sure he would be any better right now with five more years of playing time. Different circumstances, but were all those war-time players like Ted Williams any worse from their service who returned to the bigs?

[Zwolfe0]

Good point about players leaving for WW I and WW II service. I think DiMaggio and Williams were hindered by being in the service. DiMaggio and Williams lost 4 years between the ages of about 28 and 32. I think DiMaggio's numbers would have been better for sure. DiMaggio probably could have been a 500 home run hitter instead of 350 or so. He does have the streak, but outside of that he only has good stats at the plate. Williams did hit over 500 home runs, batted .400 and still considered to be not as good as DiMaggio.

[Oriole85]

Good point about players leaving for WW I and WW II service. I think DiMaggio and Williams were hindered by being in the service. DiMaggio and Williams lost 4 years between the ages of about 28 and 32. I think DiMaggio's numbers would have been better for sure. DiMaggio probably could have been a 500 home run hitter instead of 350 or so. He does have the streak, but outside of that he only has good stats at the plate. Williams did hit over 500 home runs, batted .400 and still considered to be not as good as DiMaggio.

Well what I was trying to say, not sure if you got this is once they returned were they any worse than they would've been had they been able to play during those seasons? I know they lost stats but did the war impact their stats upon their return?

[RShack]

Different circumstances, but were all those war-time players like Ted Williams any worse from their service who returned to the bigs?

I think lots of them were, maybe most. Using Ted Williams as a yardstick for missed years is like addressing whether being fat hurts by asking about Babe Ruth...

[LanceRinker]

I think lots of them were, maybe most. Using Ted Williams as a yardstick for missed years is like addressing whether being fat hurts by asking about Babe Ruth...

[DJ MC]

Good point about players leaving for WW I and WW II service. I think DiMaggio and Williams were hindered by being in the service. DiMaggio and Williams lost 4 years between the ages of about 28 and 32. I think DiMaggio's numbers would have been better for sure. DiMaggio probably could have been a 500 home run hitter instead of 350 or so. He does have the streak, but outside of that he only has good stats at the plate. Williams did hit over 500 home runs, batted .400 and still considered to be not as good as DiMaggio.

DiMaggio's problems were his leg injuries. Even counting the war years, he only played over a stretch of 16 seasons. His numbers wouldn't have been that much MORE impressive with those three years in; he probably ends up around 450 homers and closer to a .330 career BA. However, he might also have had to retire earlier with further injuries.

DiMaggio is only considered better than Williams because of their respective defensive positions and abilities. Even so, a lot of people would call Williams better, and he missed most of FIVE seasons to war.

[RShack]

Even so, a lot of people would call Williams better, and he missed most of FIVE seasons to war.

Plus, it was a big deal to Williams to study P's... and when he came back (twice) he was facing a bunch of P's he never saw before..