Sunday, May 19, 2013
Cafardo: Dustin Pedroia the best second baseman in MLB?
(www.bostonglobe.com)
Sweet spectroscopy! The argument is rolled out again!
Read More...It’s not surprising to hear what two scouts from each league, who both have watched a lot of the American League this year, say about Dustin Pedroia.
“Nobody is playing his position better in baseball right now than Pedroia,” said the AL scout. “He’s playing out of his mind. The plays he’s making — you just don’t see that stuff every day, but you see it with him every day. Honestly, I’m surprised he doesn’t get hurt ...
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
1. eddieot posted on December 07, 2012 at 12:13 PM # hit 0 | hit 0At 3-4 years, I might disown the team if they don't sign him. Unless they're just radically outbid- 30+ or something like that.
I would be absolutely shocked if Hamilton signs for only 3 years.
For the record I agree with this. Have to think Seattle would go to 5 or 6 if that's what it took.
Same. Unless somebody just blew him away with a massive, unprecedented AAV, I'd be shocked if Hamilton took less than 4 years. 5 seems like the most likely number to me.
Pirates were in contention up until August last year. They should definitely give him 5 or 6 years if people are only offering 3 or 4. Having Hamilton in the lineup for even just 100 games would make them a significantly better team.
I don't think so - it is almost unprecedented in the modern era for big stars entering free agency after their first 6 years of service time to sign huge AAV deals for only 1 or 2 years.
There was lots of speculation last year that Fielder wouldn't be offered deals longer than 4 years because of his physique.
Yup, and I thought that was baloney at the time. No way Hamilton signs for less than 5.
Hamilton at 3/70 or something in that neighborhood would be the yin to Fielder's 9/214 yang in terms of shocking contracts, at least for me. Baseball sure loves its player makeup hand-wringing, but that would be a stunning undervaluation of production.
Edited to note that injury concerns are meaningful, but I can't see how they knock Hamilton down to anything under 5 years.
And, as I mentioned, then there's Vernon Wells :)
Yes, and a 3 WAR player for $25M isn't a disaster. I think 5 WAR is a lot more likely than 1 WAR in any of the next 5 years for Hamilton.
Well sure, and Denny Neagle and Mike Hampton and Barry Zito and Carl Crawford, but none of these guys had Hamilton's talent. The only disastrous contracts for a Hamilton-level superstar that I can think of were Albert Belle with the Orioles, Ken Griffey Jr with the Reds, and Alex Rodriguez with the Yankees Part II. Here is a list of the highest paid players in MLB history:
Alex Rodriguez
Derek Jeter
Manny Ramirez
Barry Bonds
Randy Johnson
Gary Sheffield
Chipper Jones
Greg Maddux
Ken Griffey Jr
Todd Helton
Roger Clemens
Carlos Delgado
Pedro Martinez
Mike Mussina
Mariano Rivera
Jim Thome
John Smoltz
Carlos Beltran
Magglio Ordonez
Jason Giambi
Other than Rodriguez and Griffey, I think the biggest contract those guys signed all turned out OK.
Or 0 WAR due to injury.
It is worth noting, though, that Hamilton's actual career WAR numbers (per B-Ref, rounding up or down) are:
2, 5, 0, 8, 4, 3.
That scants him one total because he's got a few .4s in there. But still, to see him a consistent 7-8 WAR player is very optimistic, and it's even tough to project that he'll turn 32 next May, play at 5-6 WAR level for a few years, and then decline normally toward 3 for the last few years of a big contract.
I mean, I hope he does, and I hope he does it in Arlington, but I'm a fan, not a general manager :)
Hamilton-Kemp-Gonzalez would be a very tough lineup stretch to navigate.
His career OPS+ is "just" 135 and, outside of his one amazing year and his one lousy year, he's been consistently around that mark. That's Matt Holliday, not Albert Pujols or Miguel Cabrera. He's done that spending about 60% of his time in CF which is nice but he's not likely a CF going forward.
Of course he will get more than 3-4 years, probably at least 5/$100.
Other than Rodriguez and Griffey, I think the biggest contract those guys signed all turned out OK.
The first AROD contract turned out great. That initial contract would have covered his age 25-34 seasons and he hit 299/394/577, 150 OPS+, 424 HR, averaged 113 R and 124 RBI per season and put up ... wait for it ... 69 WAR. That was about $3.5 M per WAR. And from the Yanks perspective, since Texas was picking up something like $9 M a year, it was a ridiculously good bargain.
The extension? Not so much. And I forget exactly when the opt out was but 2008-10 (ages 32-34) were the worst of that 10 year period so the pre-opt-out years were an even better bargain.
I don't know... the really bad teams -- at least, the bad teams that don't have GMs desperate to throw job-saving hail mary's in 2013 -- really shouldn't have much interest in 3 years.
I wouldn't be upset if the Cubs signed him at 3 years - but seems (likely) pointless... I'd put the Astros in that same category.
Kemp 7/$148
Crawford 5/$102.5
Ethier 5/$85
Gonzalez 6/$127
and you think they're going to add Hamilton? Is the DH coming to the NL?
I'll take a bet that at least the first one of these happens.
So that they can pay Crawford $100M over the next 5 years to be a 4th outfielder? I don't think even the Dodgers can afford that kind of largesse.
Ya, an injury prone Matt Holliday isn't that attractive a proposition for a big contract. That said, I don't think 5/$100 would kill a team that signed him to that even in a 10-15 WAR scenario total. I think I'd go to that level if I needed an OF.
Can Ethier play left and will the Dodgers take Dan Uggla.
Hey, I do Syntax Police around here :-D
They just signed Ethier to the 5/$85 6 months ago and you think they've already soured on him?
And what team wants to give up talent to get Ethier at 5/$85 rather than just sign Hamilton? The Dodgers will, at best, end up giving away Ethier for next to nothing.
If they signed Hamilton, they wouldn't be trading Ethier in order to get back talent, they would just want to open up the slot. They'd be fine only getting someone to take his whole contract. I don't think these events are likely, I was just going along with #24 and that possibility.
I would love it if the Rockies signed him to a 3 yr deal. Who cares if he only helps nudge them towards .500, he's not blocking anyone and would hit a ton and help make the team more fun to watch.
(Looks like 5 years)
Edit: Done and done, per Rosenthal
Pretty bizarre how adamant he was that the Angels rumors were fictitious.
I think he's a Yankees fan.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.