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 11:41 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 12:00 PM (#4307424)Offer him six figures. Maybe it will work.
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.
I can't think of a player I suspect of using PEDs LESS than Josh Hamilton.
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?
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.
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.
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: sure, there are risks, and sometimes luck goes against you. My concern is the number of red flags Hamilton appears to have.
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.
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.
I'm sick and tired of you caffeine apologists.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
I think this hits the nail on the head. No one really has any clue.
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.
I mean, I'm not a fan of Ross either, but if the alternative answer to the RF problem was Gomes... Ugh.
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?
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.
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.
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.
If they get Hamilton or an Upton they won't need any more OF's after that.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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. :-)
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."
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.
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.
...of course, this crossed my mind too... They could just be making very poor decisions.
[sigh] We'll always have 2004 & 2007, right?
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