BBTF's Newsblog Discussion :: Galloway: Josh Hamilton might be Rangers’ best prospect ever

Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Wednesday, March 05, 2008

Galloway: Josh Hamilton might be Rangers’ best prospect ever

How soon they drop Shelton McMath from the equation…

Even so, not once in spring training since the Texas portion of the franchise’s history began in 1972 can I remember one player so quickly captivating teammates and team officials because of his ample display of skills.

Juan Gonzalez as a 19-year-old rookie was something to see. So was Pudge at the same age. Hitting coach Rudy Jaramillo, a longtime Rangers’ employee, called Ruben Sierra “the most polished young player I’ve ever seen.”

But after working with Hamilton this spring, Rudy Jaramillo noted, “This kid is off the charts when it comes to the complete package of talent.”

Manager Ron Washington, a baseball lifer, dealt with some immense talent that came through the A’s system. “For having all the skills, I never saw one like Josh,” he said. “He has all the somethings you are looking for. Now we’ve got to find out what it all means.”

...“I’ve never worked with anyone who can hit a baseball as far as Josh can,” said Jaramillo, “and I’ve had some big bombers along the way. Just nothing like him.”

Rangers catcher Gerald Laird was speaking of Hamilton on Tuesday, and he was stuck for the proper description. “I see him do something, and go, ‘Wow.’ About five times a day, I say, ‘Wow.’”

Repoz Posted: March 05, 2008 at 02:06 PM | 18 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
Tags: rangers, reds

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. retro-shiite Posted: March 05, 2008 at 02:44 PM (#2706488)

Not that Hamilton isn't seriously talented, but I'd say he's a little old for the "best Ranger prospect ever" bit. Sounds like something Sparky Anderson would've said.

2. CraigK Posted: March 05, 2008 at 03:33 PM (#2706516)

Ummmmmmmm... David Clyde?

3. The Essex Snead Posted: March 05, 2008 at 03:40 PM (#2706522)

Ummmmmmmmmmmm... Nolan Ryan?

4. Kiko Sakata

Posted: March 05, 2008 at 03:52 PM (#2706530)

Not that Hamilton isn't seriously talented, but I'd say he's a little old for the "best Ranger prospect ever" bit.

Exactly. The 27-year-old Josh Hamilton is much more fully formed than a 19-year-old Juan Gonzalez or Ivan Rodriguez or Sammy Sosa or somebody like that. Hamilton is making such an impressive first impression on the Rangers because he's never been a Ranger before.

5. The Good Face Posted: March 05, 2008 at 04:04 PM (#2706541)

Not that Hamilton isn't seriously talented, but I'd say he's a little old for the "best Ranger prospect ever" bit. Sounds like something Sparky Anderson would've said.

Chronologically, yes. But in terms of his accomplishments careerwise, he's about where you might expect a spectacularly talented 21 year old prospect to be.

6. retro-shiite Posted: March 05, 2008 at 04:12 PM (#2706549)

Chronologically, yes. But in terms of his accomplishments careerwise, he's about where you might expect a spectacularly talented 21 year old prospect to be.

Right, and given his time spent being an addict/recovering addict, he's probably got about the same amount of actual development time as a 21 year old, but of course his chronological age is a big deal in terms of estimating his future value. It's not like a young pitcher, where you can argue that limited use in his early 20s saved his arm.

7. Danny Posted: March 05, 2008 at 04:17 PM (#2706550)

Chronologically, yes. But in terms of his accomplishments careerwise, he's about where you might expect a spectacularly talented 21 year old prospect to be.

I dunno. The list of players who had 200+ PA as good as Hamilton's 2007 at age 20 in MLB is very short and almost universally HOFers.

8. TDF, situational idiot Posted: March 05, 2008 at 04:20 PM (#2706551)

Good thing the Reds didn't have to pick up a CF off the scrap heap to replace him. Oh, wait....

9. retro-shiite Posted: March 05, 2008 at 04:33 PM (#2706559)

Yeah, I have to say, I'm impressed with the way the Reds have handled their CF situation. Trade Hamilton, then block Bruce with Corey Patterson. Well done.

10. The Good Face Posted: March 05, 2008 at 04:43 PM (#2706561)

I dunno. The list of players who had 200+ PA as good as Hamilton's 2007 at age 20 in MLB is very short and almost universally HOFers.

That's what makes the Hamilton saga so sad. His brief MLB performance, combined with the way other players talk about his abilities really makes you wonder what might have been. An A-Rod/Griffey type career could have been possible. Now, who knows, but losing all those years plus the damage to his health from the years of drug abuse doesn't bode well. I'm guessing best case he's a fragile Jim Edmonds (St. Louis version) for a few years. That's damn valuable, but it's not a young Ken Griffey Jr.

11. Poster Nutbag Posted: March 05, 2008 at 04:55 PM (#2706571)

Yeah, I have to say, I'm impressed with the way the Reds have handled their CF situation. Trade Hamilton, then block Bruce with Corey Patterson. Well done.

You mean, Dusty Baker's in town?

12. Aaron S. Posted: March 06, 2008 at 02:09 AM (#2707017)

People don't give the Reds any credit here...there's a reason they traded Hamilton and it has little to do with his past. From what I've heard he's a religious fantatic and wasn't loved around the clubhouse like his story was loved by the media. He was also chronically injured. That sort of addiciton takes a toll on your body. I bet he'll be hard-pressed to ever play 130 games in a season. Best prospect ever? That's a joke.

13. Crispix Attacks Posted: March 06, 2008 at 02:14 AM (#2707022)

They didn't trade him for nothing, either.

The Rangers pitching lost one of its few hopes for non-horribleness with Volquez gone.

14. galaxieboi Posted: March 06, 2008 at 02:17 AM (#2707024)

From what I've heard he's a religious fantatic

Like, 'he should play for the Rockies' fanatic or 'recruits women to be suicide bombers' fanatic? I can live with the first, but the second? One needs to draw the line somewhere.

15. base ball chick Posted: March 06, 2008 at 02:42 AM (#2707033)

aaron

of for goodness sakes half of ballplayes are religious fanatics. big deal.

but thing is that josh hamilton is not a prospect by ANY definition and he should not be talked about like he is.

too bad he took performance detracting drugs for so long. poor guy....

16. Aaron S. Posted: March 06, 2008 at 03:15 AM (#2707047)

I think a lot of baseball players are fanatics, but if it becomes a distraction it won't work. Even if in Colorado. I'm sure those guys draw the line somewhere. Hard to say exactly what was going on in Cincy, but they obviously were ok with dumping him. Volquez is a decent prospect, but not a great one. I don't think they were just dumb or missed the memo on Hamilton.

17. base ball chick Posted: March 06, 2008 at 03:33 AM (#2707057)

aaron

i wouldn't be real too surprised if there was a personal reason they traded hamilton. that happens with a LOT of trades - like with luke scott and houston. the management absolutely HATED the poor guy, not sure why, and spread all sorts of lies and crap about him

it could be something like him disapproving of porn/adultery and making, um, a fuss about it you know what i'm saying

18. BeanoCook Posted: March 06, 2008 at 03:56 AM (#2707064)

Colorado is mentioned here as being a quasi-Christian organization, put the Astros on that list too. Not that there is anything wrong with it.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

<< Back to main

Wednesday, March 05, 2008

Galloway: Josh Hamilton might be Rangers’ best prospect ever

Reader Comments and Retorts

Support BBTF

Bookmarks

Hot Topics