Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Wednesday, November 21, 2012

Minihane: Red Sox should stay away from Josh Hamilton

Minihane: Mini bar to Mac mini…

And with that we return to Hamilton (not to accuse him of PEDs, though it’s always fair to harbor some suspicion). Josh Hamilton is older than any of those guys when they signed their deals. I’d give you the names of players who signed seven-figure deals in their 30s and were worth the money, but it has never happened. This isn’t an anti-Hamilton stance, I’d be shocked if he isn’t an MVP candidate the next couple of years, but his contract eventually will be an albatross for the team that signs him.

There may come a time in this offseason where the fans around here get a little impatient. Cherington and the Sox cannot give in to that, cannot give in to the temptation of what Hamilton could do for this lineup next year and the year after that. Don’t think about NESN ratings and ticket sales and merchandise. None of that will help when Josh Hamilton is being paid $22 million in 2017 after playing 96 games with a .768 OPS in 2016.

Put it another way: The Red Sox can’t put themselves in the position they were in last year, because what happened with the Dodgers will never happen again. Hamilton is the next test, and one that comes with an answer. We already know how it will end. What’s past is prologue and all that stuff. Josh Hamilton would be a long-term mistake, and Cherington knows it.

We’re about to find out if Ben Cherington, fiscal disciplinarian is fact or fiction. If you’re a Sox fan, hope that Hamilton doesn’t sign in Boston, because if he does it will show that the organization learned nothing over the last couple of years. And that’s twice as terrifying as the thought of Hamilton in pinstripes.

Repoz Posted: November 21, 2012 at 10:41 AM | 64 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: red sox

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. Hello Rusty Kuntz, Goodbye Rusty Cars Posted: November 21, 2012 at 11:00 AM (#4307424)
I'd give you the names of players who signed seven-figure deals in their 30s and were worth the money, but it has never happened.


Offer him six figures. Maybe it will work.
   2. Nasty Nate Posted: November 21, 2012 at 11:07 AM (#4307436)
He must have meant 7-year deal or nine-figure deal, because seven figures is nothing in baseball, and there have been plenty of players who signed 8-figure deals in there 30s and been worth the money.
   3. buddaley Posted: November 21, 2012 at 11:14 AM (#4307443)
"Quick, name me a shortstop with zero power...."

Perhaps this is a quibble rather than a criticism, but I think authors should be careful not to misrepresent in order to appear to strengthen their argument. Reyes is a shortstop who can be expected, if healthy, to hit 30+ doubles and double figures in home runs and triples most seasons. You may expect his slugging % to be between .430-.450 and his ISO between .145-.155. For a shortstop, that represents good power. Over the past 3 years, his high in HRs is 11 (twice), in doubles 37, in triples 16, in ISO .156 and in Slugging .493. And except for slugging and doubles, he has exceeded each of those figures in other seasons, in some significantly more.
   4. Jose Is The Most Absurd Thing on the Site Posted: November 21, 2012 at 11:20 AM (#4307451)
I was pretty anti-Hamilton early on in large part because of the deal I thought he'd get. As time has gone forward I'm thinking it might be feasible to land him with a five year deal and if the Sox can do that I think they should. Darren noted yesterday that it looked like Prince Fielder might be in a similar spot a year ago and then the Tigers blew everyone out of the water and that is a distinct possibility with Hamilton.
   5. karlmagnus Posted: November 21, 2012 at 11:21 AM (#4307452)
I don't think his assumption that $75 million for 3 years won't do it is correct. The FA market has been very quiet this year, and I suspect with attendance still 8% below 2008 levels it will go on being so. In that case, there may be no 7/140 bidders.
   6. Rusty Priske Posted: November 21, 2012 at 11:21 AM (#4307455)
(not to accuse him of PEDs, though it’s always fair to harbor some suspicion).


I can't think of a player I suspect of using PEDs LESS than Josh Hamilton.
   7. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: November 21, 2012 at 11:24 AM (#4307458)
We’re about to find out if Ben Cherington, fiscal disciplinarian is fact or fiction.
Being a fiscal disciplinarian is easy. Don't spend money, wait for years before you're really competitive.

What I want is for Cherington to do the actually difficult thing and build a pennant-quality team by 2014 while also eeping the club in line to be competitive for the long haul. Not spending money is easy. Spending money well is the goal.

I'd like to see the plans of the "fiscal disciplinarians" for an 85-win team in 2013 and a pennant contender in 2014. How do you get there? Or is it just about hope and acceptance if hope fails?
   8. Swedish Chef Posted: November 21, 2012 at 11:36 AM (#4307469)
Also, Josh Hamilton should probably stay away from the Red Sox.

It's not Cherington's job to be a fiscal disciplinarian. His job is to convert money into wins. The beancounters are elsewhere in the organization.
   9. Jose Is The Most Absurd Thing on the Site Posted: November 21, 2012 at 11:37 AM (#4307471)
I think "Ben Cherington - Fiscal Disciplinarian" is already being seen with the Cody Ross situation. The easy and popular thing to do would have been to get a deal done for Ross quickly. The incremental difference between a reasonable 3/21 and a 3/30 is small enough that it would be easy for Cherington to justify as goodwill. That extra $3mil per year wouldn't have really impacted the Sox but I think it would have been unnecessary spending.
   10. bachslunch Posted: November 21, 2012 at 11:57 AM (#4307498)
I wouldn't want to sign Josh Hamilton either as of now. He has had issues staying healthy (and has had some problems keeping clean and sober), he's not especially good in the field, he's on the wrong side of 30, and he wants a big long-term contract. Some FAs also have had problems adjusting to a high-pressure environment like Boston's (Edgar Renteria for one), and if Hamilton had the same problem adapting, I can't say it would be surprising.

If all goes right, my guess is he may provide 2-3 years of good hitting numbers -- and if you can sign him to a 2-3 year contract, it might be worth the risk in a low-pressure market. He may not settle for that short a contract, though.
   11. Nasty Nate Posted: November 21, 2012 at 12:05 PM (#4307504)
If all goes right, my guess is he may provide 2-3 years of good hitting numbers


That's not "if all goes right" - that's much closer to worst-case scenario of a 7-year deal than best-case scenario.
   12. Darren Posted: November 21, 2012 at 12:08 PM (#4307506)
Yes, what Matt said. It's very, very easy to say to stay away from Hamilton or any other high-priced guy because hey, they're risky. But you're not building a good team without taking some risks and actually being right about players. The result of the Punto trade cannot be that the Red Sox never again enter into a contract with a top-priced star. They are well-equipped to pay the price for those.
   13. Darren Posted: November 21, 2012 at 12:25 PM (#4307515)
To expand a bit, any article like this either needs to say what they should do instead, and if the answer is "rebuild on the cheap for years" explain how that's going to work with a high-revenue, high ticket-price team.
   14. bachslunch Posted: November 21, 2012 at 12:26 PM (#4307517)
@#11: by "if all goes right," I mean he stays healthy, remains clean and sober, and can handle the pressure of an environment like Boston's or New York's.

@#12: sure, there are risks, and sometimes luck goes against you. My concern is the number of red flags Hamilton appears to have.
   15. villageidiom Posted: November 21, 2012 at 12:27 PM (#4307519)
I'd like to see the plans of the "fiscal disciplinarians" for an 85-win team in 2013 and a pennant contender in 2014. How do you get there?

1. Don't sign anyone.
2. Around July, point out all the players having breakout seasons. Say Boston should have signed all of them.

It's a remarkably simple plan.
   16. Nasty Nate Posted: November 21, 2012 at 12:34 PM (#4307523)
@#11: by "if all goes right," I mean he stays healthy, remains clean and sober, and can handle the pressure of an environment like Boston's or New York's.


I guess my quibble was that if he remains healthy and sober and can handle the pressure, he will likely have more than just 2-3 good seasons in the future.
   17. valuearbitrageur Posted: November 21, 2012 at 12:37 PM (#4307524)
I can't think of a player I suspect of using PEDs LESS than Josh Hamilton.


I'm sick and tired of you caffeine apologists.
   18. Ray (RDP) Posted: November 21, 2012 at 12:48 PM (#4307532)
I'd give him a huge contract for a lot of years, based on what he can be expected to produce on the field using pure baseball-related analysis/projections. Those who are focusing on his off-field problems are missing the boat, IMO.

Top players with overhyped off-field issues are the new market inefficiency. Josh Hamilton. Zack Greinke. Melky Cabrera (just $16 million over two years from the Jays). It is insane for organizations to not understand this.
   19. Jose Is The Most Absurd Thing on the Site Posted: November 21, 2012 at 12:59 PM (#4307536)
I'd give him a huge contract for a lot of years, based on what he can be expected to produce on the field using pure baseball-related analysis/projections. Those who are focusing on his off-field problems are missing the boat, IMO.


It's not just his off-field problems. He's 32 in May and has missed on average 32 games a year the last five years. While it's tempting to say the injuries those years were flukes (e.g. the separated shoulder on the slide into home) I don't think you can just dismiss it out of hand either. Additionally, because of his age it is highly unlikely that he will produce in the next five years what he has produced in the last five.
   20. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: November 21, 2012 at 01:05 PM (#4307539)
Still, a guy capable of Hamilton's 2011 is a no-brainer on a contract under 5/100. It's when you start climbing toward $130M, $150M that it gets complicated. I think there's a chance that Ray is right, and Hamilton will not get the contract he wants.

As with all of these issues, it's not a matter of whether or not you want the guy - everyone is a good deal at the right price. The question is how your maximum bid and the likely market compare. I've been expecting with Hamilton that his market will move toward the top of the Holliday/Crawford range. I don't think I want him at that price.
   21. RJ in TO Posted: November 21, 2012 at 01:06 PM (#4307543)
What does the 2014 FA market look like? Is there likely to be anyone better than Hamilton available then? If not, if the Red Sox don't sign Hamilton (or someone like him) this offseason, where are they likely to be able to find the help they apparently need to contend next year, or the year after, and so on?

I'd be concerned about Hamilton's long term health too, but he's likely to be damn good for at least several more seasons, and the Red Sox could probably use some damn good players. If he tanks in the last couple seasons, the only thing it costs the Red Sox is money, and they should have plenty of that available.
   22. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: November 21, 2012 at 01:14 PM (#4307550)
What does the 2014 FA market look like? Is there likely to be anyone better than Hamilton available then?
Pretty much no. Once Cano re-signs with the Yankees, the best free agents for 2014 will be Jacoby Ellsbury, Josh Johnson, and Curtis Granderson.
If not, if the Red Sox don't sign Hamilton (or someone like him) this offseason, where are they likely to be able to find the help they apparently need to contend next year, or the year after, and so on?
The trade market. The Sox have a solid farm system, and they have money to spend. Cherington has been clear that the club is looking to improve the major league roster through trade as well as free agency.
   23. Jose Is The Most Absurd Thing on the Site Posted: November 21, 2012 at 01:19 PM (#4307553)
Here's MLBTR's pass at the 2013/14 class. It's from back in March so a bit dated (Kinsler, Jones and Votto have signed extensions) but right now the top of the list looks like Cano then Wright, Ellsbury and Granderson. It wouldn't be shocking for Lincecum to pitch himself back into big money territory.
   24. RJ in TO Posted: November 21, 2012 at 01:23 PM (#4307555)
It's from back in March so a bit dated (Kinsler, Jones and Votto have signed extensions) but right now the top of the list looks like Cano then Wright, Ellsbury and Granderson. It wouldn't be shocking for Lincecum to pitch himself back into big money territory.

Of those, I'd expect Cano and Wright to resign with their current teams. I have absolutely no idea what the Red Sox organization thinks about Ellsbury, and I suspect they're not entirely sure what they think either. For Granderson, I'd be very, very concerned about signing him to a big money deal given his increasing age, declining defense and good but not outstanding offense, and Lincecum would absolutely terrify me, even if he has a good rebound season.
   25. Darren Posted: November 21, 2012 at 01:25 PM (#4307557)
Sox don't need this guy--they're apparently getting Jonny Gomes instead. Ya.
   26. JJ1986 Posted: November 21, 2012 at 01:26 PM (#4307558)
I think Choo is the guy if they wait until next year's FA class.
   27. Jose Is The Most Absurd Thing on the Site Posted: November 21, 2012 at 01:30 PM (#4307562)
Two years on Gomes? Presumably that ends the Cody Ross era.

I have absolutely no idea what the Red Sox organization thinks about Ellsbury, and I suspect they're not entirely sure what they think either.


I think this hits the nail on the head. No one really has any clue.
   28. MHS Posted: November 21, 2012 at 01:32 PM (#4307564)
I am not for or against the Red Sox acquiring Josh Hamilton. He is a good player, and a fundamental task of an organization is to acquire good players. The problem is the Red Sox organization, particularly the major league team, is short of good players. The addition of Josh Hamiltons 3 to 5 WAR does not project to get them into the sweet spot of the win distribution so they will not be justified in making an in-efficient transaction on a pure value basis.

The Red Sox more so than anything else this year, need to make efficient transactions that nudge them closer to 80 to 85 projected wins so that if things break right they can capture a playoff birth.

The issue with acquiring Josh Hamilton, is that I don't expect their to be an efficient transaction available for the Red Sox to make.
   29. Textbook Editor Posted: November 21, 2012 at 01:35 PM (#4307566)
Bleh on Gomes. My dislike for him goes back to his meathead days with the Rays. Not a fan.

I mean, I'm not a fan of Ross either, but if the alternative answer to the RF problem was Gomes... Ugh.
   30. RJ in TO Posted: November 21, 2012 at 01:37 PM (#4307567)
Sox don't need this guy--they're apparently getting Jonny Gomes instead. Ya.

I would have very much liked it if the Jays could have added Gomes. The guy can hit, and would have made a nice part-time DH/part-time OF. He's going to love hitting in Boston.

What sort of money are they reporting for the deal?
   31. Jose Is The Most Absurd Thing on the Site Posted: November 21, 2012 at 01:43 PM (#4307570)
Not seeing money anywhere yet. I like Gomes though the two year aspect of it seems unnecessary, somewhat similar to Punto last year. I think if he's the RHB side of a platoon with Kalish that I can live with that.
   32. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: November 21, 2012 at 01:50 PM (#4307578)
Gomes as a bench bat who can play acceptable defense in left and maybe poke a few extra homers over the monster, sure, fine by me. I'd expect the contract to run in the David Ross range.

I'll be shocked if the Sox plan to make Gomes either (a) a regular or (b) someone who plays more than 25 innings in right field.

The Sox still need a right fielder and they still need 60% of a left fielder.
   33. Dale Sams Posted: November 21, 2012 at 01:58 PM (#4307584)
And A SS and a pitcher and a 1B and...
   34. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: November 21, 2012 at 02:06 PM (#4307588)
The Sox haven't meaningfully started the offseason yet. That was my point. Jonny Gomes and David Ross are useful minor additions, but don't really change anything. They need a two outfielders (maybe one and a half now), a SS, a 1B, and one or two starting pitchers. And maybe a bench bat.
   35. Dale Sams Posted: November 21, 2012 at 02:19 PM (#4307596)
Our BP scares me, but...what can ya do?
   36. Ray (RDP) Posted: November 21, 2012 at 02:19 PM (#4307597)
As the Sox/Dodgers and Marlins/Jays show, talented players with huge contracts can be offloaded, even if the players are injured or underperforming or in their 30s. There will be teams out there willing to acquire them, due to the fact that fewer top players hit free agency in this era.

This new world needs to be recognized and adapted to, which means signing a Hamilton at the top of his true market value and either taking the good years from him and then trading him, or suffering bad years from him and then trading him. Or just keeping him.

Vernon Wells's contract was offloaded, for crying out loud.
   37. Ray (RDP) Posted: November 21, 2012 at 02:20 PM (#4307598)
Our BP scares me, but...what can ya do?


Sign, trade for, or call up a bunch of cheap arms who can strike people out. Aside from the top level of relievers, relief pitchers are a crapshoot.

Anyone can give you anything in 60 innings.
   38. Nasty Nate Posted: November 21, 2012 at 02:23 PM (#4307599)
They need a two outfielders (maybe one and a half now)


If they get Hamilton or an Upton they won't need any more OF's after that.
   39. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: November 21, 2012 at 02:24 PM (#4307601)
I really like our bullpen.

Andrew Bailey and Junichi Tazawa should be a strong 8th-9th inning pair. Then mix and match Andrew Miller, Mark Melancon, Scott Atchison, Franklin Morales, Craig Breslow, and Clayton Mortenson for the remaining jobs.
   40. Dale Sams Posted: November 21, 2012 at 02:24 PM (#4307602)
This new world needs to be recognized and adapted to, which means signing a Hamilton at the top of his true market value and either taking the good years from him and then trading him, or suffering bad years from him and then trading him. Or just keeping him.


Ray, I approve of this, but tell me this: If the Sox had kept Crawford, AGon and Beckett...would you still want to sign Hamilton?
   41. Jose Is The Most Absurd Thing on the Site Posted: November 21, 2012 at 02:24 PM (#4307603)
Our BP scares me, but...what can ya do?


Really? I would say the bullpen looks like it should be pretty good. I think there are a lot of good arms out there and one of things the Sox had a ton of success with when Farrell was here before was bullpen construction. Bailey, Bard, Melancon, Tazawa, Miller, Breslow and Mortensen looks like the makings of a solid bullpen. As Ray notes it's a crapshoot out there and what I see are a lot of guys with really good arms who can miss bats. I won't be at all surprised if the Sox have a very good bullpen from that group in 2013.

EDIT: Coke to MCoA. Twice this thread, type slower Mikael.
   42. Dale Sams Posted: November 21, 2012 at 02:26 PM (#4307605)
MCOA, I'm hoping that Bailey's 2012 work was due to rust or injury, cause he looked all the world like Gagne to me.
   43. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: November 21, 2012 at 03:09 PM (#4307652)
MCOA, I'm hoping that Bailey's 2012 work was due to rust or injury, cause he looked all the world like Gagne to me.
Maybe. I admit I didn't see more than five or six pitches Bailey threw for the Sox in September. His pitching line looks like a pretty normal 20 inning fluke, with a terrible BABIP leading the way and the underlying components only mediocre to poor.
   44. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: November 21, 2012 at 03:19 PM (#4307664)
The somewhat frighteningly indefatiguable MLBTR says that Gomes was looking for $3-4M per season. So this should be something like a second David Ross contract - a bit more money for a bit more certainty on the bench.
   45. RJ in TO Posted: November 21, 2012 at 03:27 PM (#4307679)
The somewhat frighteningly indefatiguable MLBTR says that Gomes was looking for $3-4M per season. So this should be something like a second David Ross contract - a bit more money for a bit more certainty on the bench.

That's a bit more than I'd like to pay for the lefty-killing side of a platoon, but it's probably well within the range of reasonable.
   46. MHS Posted: November 21, 2012 at 04:11 PM (#4307720)
Seems fine, likely to provide a reasonable amount of production for the cost.
   47. Dan Posted: November 21, 2012 at 04:56 PM (#4307729)
I fully support the Red Sox signing Hamilton. They have plenty of money, and need more very good players (especially in RF). Josh Hamilton is a very good player who can play RF. Make it happen.
   48. Joe Bivens, Minor Genius Posted: November 21, 2012 at 05:06 PM (#4307731)
Gomes? Really?
   49. Dale Sams Posted: November 21, 2012 at 05:11 PM (#4307733)
Really? I would say the bullpen looks like it should be pretty good. I think there are a lot of good arms out there and one of things the Sox had a ton of success with when Farrell was here before was bullpen construction. Bailey, Bard, Melancon, Tazawa, Miller, Breslow and Mortensen looks like the makings of a solid bullpen


And I think the possiblity of Bard and Melancon being broken are not infinitesmial. Then throw in Bailey being average. Ugh.
   50. Jose Is The Most Absurd Thing on the Site Posted: November 21, 2012 at 05:23 PM (#4307740)
And I think the possiblity of Bard and Melancon being broken are not infinitesmial. Then throw in Bailey being average. Ugh.


And if all that happens there are still a bunch of guys that I think can contribute. I don't think everyone I mentioned is going to be successful but I think a reasonable split of better than expected/worse than expected from that group builds a decent bullpen. Add in the fact that the Sox have holes virtually everywhere else on the diamond and I think singling out the bullpen is elevating what I think should be one of the lesser concerns.
   51. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: November 21, 2012 at 05:54 PM (#4307753)
If you take the projected best pitcher out of a bullpen, along with two projected contributors, that bullpen will look bad.

Likewise, if next year Pedroia's injuries drag him down to average and Lavarnway/Ross and Middlebrooks collapse, the Sox will probably have a bad lineup.
   52. Darren Posted: November 21, 2012 at 07:39 PM (#4307799)
This is a really uninspiring move. This sounds like just enough money to cut into efforts to get actually good players.
   53. OCD SS Posted: November 21, 2012 at 08:00 PM (#4307807)
I don't think it's the money, it's the roster spot for 2 years.
   54. Walt Davis Posted: November 21, 2012 at 08:44 PM (#4307827)
As Ray says, there's really no such thing as a bullpen you can be comfortable with. There are only about 30 reliable relievers in the game, other than that you've got guys who have been good for a short bit or guys who K a ton of people but all might blow up and all are badly injury prone.

The Cubs recently re-signed Shawn Camp. He'll be 37. Over the last 3 seasons he has 216 IP with a 115 ERA+, under 110 the last two years. He is probably at best an average reliever (given the standard reliever boost) ... and he's 37. It's hard to imagine a less-inspiring signing.

But over the last 3 seasons, there are only 45 relievers (95% relief appearances) with at least 180 IP. Camp is #34 by ERA+, #5 by IP and #28 by WAR (2.2). Shawn Camp seems both perfectly fungible and one of the better reliable relievers in the game.

Chances are if you have one guy with a track record at least as good as Camp plus one guy who projects better than Camp plus one guy who was better than Camp two years ago but got hurt (or some kid who K's 10/9) then you've got a pretty good offseason bullpen. You've also got a bullpen you should have zero faith in. :-)

   55. Darren Posted: November 21, 2012 at 09:23 PM (#4307845)
   56. Jose Is The Most Absurd Thing on the Site Posted: November 21, 2012 at 09:33 PM (#4307848)
Yeah, that's a bit more money than I would have spent on Jonny Gomes. Still, I don't hate the deal. Gomes should project as a reasonable right-handed hitting outfielder in a platoon and the money, while more than he's probably worth, should not be something that keeps the Sox from making other moves.

One way to leverage the big spending advantage is to make sure you get solid depth. Just to ballpark it if Gomes is truly worth 2/6 does the extra 2 million per year hurt the Sox in anyway? I don't think it does. It's not such a big number that if he's hitting .210 and Hassan is hitting .350 at Pawtucket that they won't make a move and I can't imagine the Sox getting to a #### or get off the pot point with a guy like Hamilton or Anibal and saying "geez, if we could just scrounge up an extra $4 million."
   57. Jose Is The Most Absurd Thing on the Site Posted: November 21, 2012 at 09:50 PM (#4307858)
To contradict myself a bit I'm not convinced that Gomes is worth a two year deal. When I heard about this my first thought was signing Punto a year ago. Signing the guy isn't a big deal but it seems a bit unnecessary to put two years toward the type of player who is available on an annual basis.
   58. Darren Posted: November 21, 2012 at 09:50 PM (#4307859)
Bill James, the most optimistic projection system ever, says .236 .337 .441 for Gomes next year. That plus a lead glove equals WTF?
   59. Dale Sams Posted: November 21, 2012 at 09:54 PM (#4307862)
This is the team that gave a fatass in the person of Bobby Jenks (coming off a below average season) 12 mill. The Sox and sense do not mix.
   60. PreservedFish Posted: November 21, 2012 at 09:54 PM (#4307863)
Dante Bichette hit 19 homeruns in 137 games for the Red Sox. He had 0.6 WAR. That is my prediction for Gomes.
   61. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: November 21, 2012 at 10:07 PM (#4307869)
$10m? I mean, it's only two million per year more than I'd want. That isn't world changing money. The Sox are fine either way.

But Johnny Gomes is not a league average regular, and of they think he should be paid like one, I'm concerned about the decision making in the Sox front office. Which, obviously, has been a big problem for a couple years now.
   62. Textbook Editor Posted: November 21, 2012 at 10:51 PM (#4307887)
I'm wondering if the 2-year deal isn't so that Boston has a trade chip through 2013 and the off-season next year.

Here's why: a guy on a 1-year deal is worth almost nothing (aside from performance) to a club acquiring him mid-year. But if they get 1 year/2 months of him (and the $ for that remaining year is reasonable), then the acquiring club has some cost certainty--which in an unpredictable FA market with crazy gobs of cash slushing around may be a very big deal to some clubs.

Is Gomes worth $10 million? I don't think so. But if he performs decently/doesn't crater and the FA market goes ape-#### crazy this offseason, suddenly Gomes on a 1 year/$5 million deal won't look so bad, either before the trade deadline or next off-season.

I still wouldn't do the deal, mind you, but I wonder if some of this isn't performance-based, but based instead on making his value as a trade chip worthwhile going forward.

But Johnny Gomes is not a league average regular, and of they think he should be paid like one, I'm concerned about the decision making in the Sox front office. Which, obviously, has been a big problem for a couple years now.


...of course, this crossed my mind too... They could just be making very poor decisions.

[sigh] We'll always have 2004 & 2007, right?
   63. Jack Carter, calling Beleaguered Castle Posted: November 21, 2012 at 10:51 PM (#4307888)
What's the market for a 32 year old who plays 130 games a year in a corner with an OPS+ in the 130s? It can't be that high, can it? He had the one fantastically lucky year, which he'll repeat one year in 20. He's a 4 win player who won't be in the league in any capacity at age 38.
   64. Walt Davis Posted: November 22, 2012 at 01:42 AM (#4307943)
Bill James, the most optimistic projection system ever, says .236 .337 .441 for Gomes next year.

God only know what offensive context that projection is for (the general problem with silly BJ projectsion) but assuming that is his projection IN OAKLAND, that would have been a 115 OPS+ last year. That's darn good for 4th OF/1B/DH.

But Johnny Gomes is not a league average regular, and of they think he should be paid like one,

They're paying him for about 1 WAR. While it's true that league average OF are often had pretty cheap (see Cody Ross's career), we're still talking less money than Jeromy Burnitz made in 2005-6 (that's 8 years ago folks!). So, rest assured that Cherington is no worse than Hendry or Littlefield. :-)

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
TedBerg
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogGiants acquire McGehee to fill third-base spot
(5 - 8:33am, Dec 21)
Last: Greg K

NewsblogOT: Politics - December 2014: Baseball & Politics Collide in New Thriller
(5142 - 8:26am, Dec 21)
Last: The Id of SugarBear Blanks

NewsblogThe Jeff Jacobs HOF Ballot: Keep The Voting Serious And Fair
(19 - 8:24am, Dec 21)
Last: McCoy

NewsblogThe 2015 HOF Ballot Collecting Gizmo!
(157 - 8:19am, Dec 21)
Last: McCoy

NewsblogMarty Noble's HOF Ballot
(2 - 7:57am, Dec 21)
Last: NattyBoh

NewsblogOT: Soccer December 2014
(319 - 7:16am, Dec 21)
Last: ursus arctos

NewsblogAP sources: Umpires, MLB reach 5-year agreement
(3 - 5:48am, Dec 21)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogAngels, Red Sox discontinue pension plans for non-uniformed personnel - LA Times
(23 - 4:00am, Dec 21)
Last: The TVerik of Lordly Might

NewsblogOT: Monthly NBA Thread - December 2014
(762 - 3:19am, Dec 21)
Last: Win Big Stein's Money

NewsblogOT: NFL/NHL thread
(9189 - 1:38am, Dec 21)
Last: AuntBea

NewsblogThe right — and wrong — way for Mets to get Tulowitzki | New York Post
(12 - 1:09am, Dec 21)
Last: Cargo Cultist

Newsblog2014 Disabled List Information and So Much More – The Hardball Times
(4 - 12:59am, Dec 21)
Last: Batman

NewsblogDodgers biggest spenders in payroll
(7 - 12:42am, Dec 21)
Last: You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR)

NewsblogRuben Amaro Jr. says it would be best if Phillies move on from Ryan Howard
(35 - 12:16am, Dec 21)
Last: John Northey

Hall of Merit2015 Hall of Merit Ballot Discussion
(105 - 11:14pm, Dec 20)
Last: Dr. Chaleeko

Page rendered in 0.5169 seconds
48 querie(s) executed