29 replies to this topic

[BSLChrisStoner]

A 1-2 year extension for Hammel has been discussed often on this board.

I'm surprised it appears that it hasn't been a priority for the O's.

We know how expensive FA pitching is. We saw how overwhelming Hammel looked for most of '12 with his 2 seamer eating up bats. We know that even though he only made 20 starts for Baltimore, he has typically been durable (average of about 175ip during '09-'11).

Going into '13, you are hoping he leads the staff.

So, if you are the O's... is there rationale for not pursuing an extension this Winter?

If you are Hammel, and you are coming off a year where you were limited to 20 starts, are you turning down a 1-2 year extension? Do you want to roll the dice that you will put up a big year, and get to Free Agency?

[RichardZ]

If Hammel feels his knees are healthy, I doubt a one year extension gets it done. Maybe not even a two gets it done. From the O's perspective, I get the feeling they want to see how his knee(s) look in ST, once he starts throwing some regular innings. If they feel confident in his health, I expect an attempt to extend him.

[Can_of_corn]

Extending Wieters should be a priority.

I like Hammel but:
1-Injury issues
2-SSS of his improved level of performance
3-First/Second half splits
4-Bundy and Gausman waiting in the wings

[SportsGuy]

One of the many head scratching moves(or non moves) has seemingly been our reluctance to extend Hammel or Wieters. Now, maybe they have tried and it has never come out but they recently said they hadn't exchanged numbers with Wieters.

2 years with a 3rd year option for Hammel.

[SportsGuy]

Extending Wieters should be a priority.

I like Hammel but:
1-Injury issues
2-SSS of his improved level of performance
3-First/Second half splits
4-Bundy and Gausman waiting in the wings

His stuff was great..he missed bats, got ks, etc....Clearly had the stuff of a #2.

Putting him with the other 2 gives us some real talent at the top of the rotation.

[You Play to Win the Game]

Extending Wieters should be a priority.

I like Hammel but:
1-Injury issues
2-SSS of his improved level of performance
3-First/Second half splits
4-Bundy and Gausman waiting in the wings

It would be financially beneficial to the organization to extend him while the sample size is small, thus getting him at a potential discount before he "does it again", which I have every bit of confidence he will given all of the peripherals.

[Can_of_corn]

His stuff was great..he missed bats, got ks, etc....Clearly had the stuff of a #2.

Putting him with the other 2 gives us some real talent at the top of the rotation.

He didn't actually pitch healthy for all that long last season. It is questionable if he could have continued at that level especially when you look at his career splits.

If they feel like they have the payroll room then sure, do it. I won't mind. But Hammel shouldn't be a priority.

[RichardZ]

I agree that Hammel looked like a solid #2 last year. I was impressed with his stuff. However, I believe he previously had a problem with one knee and then the other knee last year. Health has to be a concern. I would imagine there is at least some uncertainty going forward. There was some thought that he might need some additional surgery after he had pitched last September but then it was decided he didn't so again, I think his health is not a slam dunk. They might want to see how he looks this spring or they might just feel that he's a bad healthy risk for a multi year, multi million dollar deal.

[SportsGuy]

He didn't actually pitch healthy for all that long last season. It is questionable if he could have continued at that level especially when you look at his career splits.

If they feel like they have the payroll room then sure, do it. I won't mind. But Hammel shouldn't be a priority.

His career splits don't matter as much since he added the 2 seamer.

And even if you won't t look at that, he was a 3.9 WaR pitcher twice.

Even last year, in limited innings, his WAR was around 2.5 IIRC.

I would offer him a 2 year extension in the 16-20M range, with a third year option for 15 million.

[Can_of_corn]

His career splits don't matter as much since he added the 2 seamer.

And even if you won't t look at that, he was a 3.9 WaR pitcher twice.

Even last year, in limited innings, his WAR was around 2.5 IIRC.

I would offer him a 2 year extension in the 16-20M range, with a third year option for 15 million.

He didn't add a 2 seamer. He just started throwing it more often.

Once again I have no problem with extending him, if they can fit it into the budget. The OP asked if he should be a "priority". I don't think that he should be.

[SportsGuy]

BTW, the previous 3 seasons, he had 27 or more starts and in 2 of those years, he appeared in some games as a reliever.

So, healthy hadn't been a huge issue for him. He also pitched at least 170 innings in those 3 seasons....never got to 180 though.

[You Play to Win the Game]

He didn't add a 2 seamer. He just started throwing it more often.

Once again I have no problem with extending him, if they can fit it into the budget. The OP asked if he should be a "priority". I don't think that he should be.

Do you think Jones should have been a priority last May?

[SportsGuy]

He didn't add a 2 seamer. He just started throwing it more often.

Once again I have no problem with extending him, if they can fit it into the budget. The OP asked if he should be a "priority". I don't think that he should be.

Extending a #2 starter for a relatively cheap contract for a team that doesn't have any established pitching is absolutely a priority. On the open market, that costs you 80-90 million and a 5 or 6 year deal.

Let me ask you and other something...do you think the Hardy extension was a good idea?

[Can_of_corn]

Do you think Jones should have been a priority last May?

Hell no. I was willing to flip him for prospects if the team had tanked.

[You Play to Win the Game]

Hell no. I was willing to flip him for prospects if the team had tanked.

OK, I agree with you then on Jones.

My point was going to be that NOW should be the time to extend Hammel and make him a priority... yes, there's risk... so what, there's always going to be risk. There's also risk that the O's pull a "Jonesy" and let Hammel dominate the league in April and May and then pay him much more than they had to.

I hate to keep harping on Jones, but it's an interesting case because the Orioles completely botched those negotiations, and Jones had all the leverage on May 27th when the Orioles could have locked him up before, or waited until after the season. From Opening Day until his extension was signed on May 27th, Jones hit 14 homers and OPS'd 944. Following his extension he hit 18 homers and OPS'd 794.

[Can_of_corn]

OK, I agree with you then on Jones.

My point was going to be that NOW should be the time to extend Hammel and make him a priority... yes, there's risk... so what, there's always going to be risk. There's also risk that the O's pull a "Jonesy" and let Hammel dominate the league in April and May and then pay him much more than they had to.

I hate to keep harping on Jones, but it's an interesting case because the Orioles completely botched those negotiations, and Jones had all the leverage on May 27th when the Orioles could have locked him up before, or waited until after the season. From Opening Day until his extension was signed on May 27th, Jones hit 14 homers and OPS'd 944. Following his extension he hit 18 homers and OPS'd 794.

I don't think we are that far off, I just balk at the word "priority". I don't think extending Hammel is essential to the long term fortunes of the team.

[You Play to Win the Game]

I don't think we are that far off, I just balk at the word "priority". I don't think extending Hammel is essential to the long term fortunes of the team.

That's fair. I do think it's good practice, if he can be had at fair value currently, which I would bet that he could.

[SportsGuy]

I don't think we are that far off, I just balk at the word "priority". I don't think extending Hammel is essential to the long term fortunes of the team.

I just don't get this thinking. Cheap to relatively cheap upper level talent is essential to any team's long term fortunes.

[Can_of_corn]

I just don't get this thinking. Cheap to relatively cheap upper level talent is essential to any team's long term fortunes.

I am not convinced he will qualify as "Cheap to relatively cheap upper level talent".

[You Play to Win the Game]

I am not convinced he will qualify as "Cheap to relatively cheap upper level talent".

Right... this is really the key here for me too. There are reasons why he should be, but that's far from a sure thing. For all we know, Hammel has informed the O's he wants to go to free agency. Maybe a question to ask Roch or Steve Melewski or someone like that.