What is your opinion of the A.J. Pierzynski signing?
MJH on accountability
so there's this whole CD to LF, hamilton to CF and Cruz to RF, or MM etc.... basically the theory being that, and joey referenced this in his post a few days ago, that theyre gonna let hamilton do whatever, obliterate his body and once his contract is up all of his injuries, blue eye syndrome etc would be someone elses problem.
My question is, if this is remotely true, why arent the rangers trying to trade hamilton? his value isnt as hight as it would be last year or beginning of this year, but him packaged w like borbon or CD/Muprh and one prospect could probably get you a decent starting pitcher.
basically why go through all the trouble to basically put a player in a position to be perpetually injured cuz you know youre covered in CF for the future, and you dont want to sign an oft injured player long term, instead of using his value now in a trade to get some value from him instead of just kicking his ass out the door with nothing to show for it?
i think it's because he still has a lot of value to the rangers. it's not that they don't want him, but they are not prepared to give him an enormous multi-year huge money contract, but this year and next year he still is an integral part of this team. they're not going to kick him out the door, it'll probably be like the cliff lee negotiations, the rangers would be willing to spend a lot per year, but not as many years as hamilton wants, and if that's the case, they're not going to worry about what his health is when he's 35, they're just going to use him as much as they can and hope he doesn't miss substantial time before he leaves. or maybe they realize that he can get hurt anywhere on the field so might as well optimize the lineup (whether or not this actually is optimizing the lineup) and hope for the best...i have no idea
Has anyone broken down the numbers of the Rangers' offensive production when Hamilton is on the DL vs. offensive production of the rest of the team when he is playing? It seems every time he goes down the team takes a psychological hit and production falls off, but I haven't run the numbers.
But that's why I would think you've got to keep Hamilton, even if it requires the Rangers gambling a little bit with the number of years.
This is insane. It actually makes me question other things I have read on this site. Hamilton is not being intentionally used up...he's simply the best CF we have. Also, Hamilton + anyone would get you more than a "decent starting pitcher." He's the reigning MVP and one of the most talented players in the game. Does he have his faults? Sure, but they are far outweighed by his talents. The Rangers will make every attempt to sign him, and, in the meantime, there isn't some nefarious plot in the works. Asinine.
Hold the phone on questioning the original site content that Joey produces, as you seem to be throwing the baby out with the bath water. Joey's exact statement that Dcaggie is referencing:
"This also suggests that the Rangers feel they can live with the increased risk that follows playing Hamilton on a more frequent basis in center field, which, depending on your opinion of whether Texas should pony up huge cash to retain him beyond 2012, is either foolish or prudent. Well, provided that the Rangers follow through on their considerations."
Joey simply says that depending on your individual opinion of what the Rangers should do with Josh long-term, you can look at this possible scenario as either foolish or prudent. Nowhere does he state that the Rangers intend to "intentionally use up Josh".
I do certainly agree with questioning the credibility of the comments made on here (either in articles or forums). However, the nature of practically all online comments is effectively water cooler-esque, if you will. So heavy reliance on their validity/credibility is likely not wise.
Agreed. I read the original site content, and saw nothing wrong with it. This post, however, reads a bit more into the original content than was actually there, and I was responding to that. That's why I never mentioned Joey. "Other things I have read on this site" may or may not include comments by Joey - and in this case, they do not. Anyhow, rather than defending someone that probably doesn't need defending, how about responding to my assertion re: Hamilton?
I agree that Hamilton is the best CF we have at this time. However thsi presents a whole new conundrum because he is also our best LF as well, and his defense is outstanding in LF as opposed to just above average in CF. My hope is that Martin will pan out soon (like September) and then we can hopefully roll into the postseason with Cruz and Hammy manning the corners and Martin hopefully providing plus defense and some semblance of something other than a noodle in his hands at the plate (see Borbon, Julio).
As far as Josh's long-term contract situation. I have made my feelings on that clear before - Josh is obviously an unbelievable talent, but IMO you have to approach him with more caution than even the Cliff Lee deal. Somebody on here has posted a couple of times that they think his story is woderful, appreciate his talent, etc - but they distrust him too much too give him a long-term contract that is not heavily incentivized because of his inability to0 leave home with more than $5 in his pocket for fear of falling off the wagon.
It's hard for me to argue agianst that logic. Personally, my max (non-incentivized) would be 4 years. However, I would be willing to go into the $20MM range per season.
I agree on the Hamilton contract issue. Just curious - on what are you basing your assertion that he is just above average in CF? Not saying that you're wrong, just wondering.
I am basing it mostly on his UZR respective to each position. However, I realize that he does not have the obligatory three full MLB seasons of data available at each position. Therefore, I supplement the remainder of my assertion with the eyeball. The eyeball tells me that Josh is a top 5 defensive LF and more like a top 15 defensive CF. He is perfectly servieable in CF, but certainly not as rangey as a Bourjos, Bourn, or even Borbon.
First off, I wanna apologize for any assumptions made on my behalf, referencing Joey's article. They were merely my interpretation of a combination of joey's article and recent comments made by nolan ryan that give the impression that at this point atleast Ryan has appeared to be highly critical of both Hamilton's ability to stay healthy, and some of the excuses he tends to make when he is not doing well.
Look Nolan is old school, when youre sturggling, he wants to hear the words "i'm just struggling right now" not excuses needed. The more in tune this team gets with nolan's style the better off they will be.
Now if my post was a poor reflection upon this website or joey's article in general i aplogize for my misrepresentation, and was not my intention. However one could read into what joey said, as my assertion, could be JD/Ryan might have made the decision already that they are not going to retain hamilton, thus are giving up on the whole "protection" theory of leaving him in left. The other side of the coin is just maybe Wash got it through their heads that "thats how baseball go" and he wants his best optioin in CF. Regardless, let me note, that this is just my opinion, decent to good OFs are easy to find and replace. And often times those decent to good OF can have a GREAT year... look at Curtis Granderson right now. 30 yrs old, and probably gonna win the AL MVP, (if it wasnt for the baseballs writers continual split on whether a pticher can win MVP since they get CY as well i'd say your MVP is Verlander) separate topic though.
Regardless my point is, if we lost Josh its not the end of the world. He can be replaced. And yes, it coudl come back and bite us in the ass. However Josh could have the same issues he's had hear and never live up to his potential. (by that i mean a string of consecutive years at a 10 level or slightly below). The way it has appeared since he became clean is this. Josh Hamilton can only stay healthy for an extended length of time every other year. His first year in Cincy wasnt so great, 2nd better hence why we made the trade. look at 09,10, and now. If he blows up next year like he did in 10 we'll know i'm on to something.
So lets level this out to two things. one of which i wanted some sort of opinion on, not to start a fire storm. IF ( SUPER BIG IF *for Zach*) theyve pre determined theyre effectively done with Josh, why not trade him? Yes, he still has value to us. However the rangers woudlntve spent what they did on Leonys if they dont plan to use him. At this point is it officially deterrmined that Josh is better in LF and not in CF? i dunno. My point of saying that OFs are easier to find and replace is mainly because good pitchers are so damn hard to find. so why not leverage our best chip for someone else best chip. Would our offense be weaker, For this year definately. But look at the Giants. They had a workable OF at best, and pitching that blew us away. So if we could leverage josh for a ACE pitcher, and OF of Davis/Murphy, Gentry/Martin, Cruz/Moreland (if cruz gets hurt) may not look like much, but its going to be servicable. Not to mention we still would have a potent offense of Moreland, Cruz, Beltre, and possibly Davis. But again, you only trade Josh for an Ace. Weaver, Felix, Verlander, Gallardo, Ubaldo, etc. but thats only if the decision has been predetermined not to retain him after his contract up.
Second option is it is just a move, until Martin and then we have to find a contract that fits Josh. Without a doubt right now the best CF is Granderson. 5yr/30.25mil 6th year option. I think we could do something similar for josh as in a 4yr/22-25mil with a 5th year option based on innings in years 4 similar to beltres. for josh i think thats hard to pass up. for us its a gamble of him staying healthy, but nobody knows. he could bomb. or he maybe could string together some years of health.
I know i've been rambling for a while, but i'll finish w this. He're the thing that scares me about Josh. He quit the junk, what 4-5 yrs ago now? but he was on it for what?about the same? i wonder, if as the years go by if his body is going to begin to naturally strenthen up each year you get away from the junk. so If we get rid of him because he's so oft injured, what happens when in 2 years he becomes superman again and for a very long time.
Anyways thats enough from me, again i apologize zach for the misunderstanding, and to joey if i made any poor reflection on your website or article in general.
It sounds like we are on the same page about Josh. Happy 4th, and let's pray that Rhodes and Bush are gone by the 5th.
Just one more thing...I do hate to imagine this team without Josh Hamilton, oft-injured or not.
No need to apologize Dc - Zach is right as I likely jumped the gun there. I merely wanted to make the point that (paraphrasing dear old Dad here) "opinions are like assholes..." nevermind...
Anyway, not sure on the trade of Josh right now. I personally think he probably has more value to us over the next season and a half + 2 compensatory draft picks after that if he signs elsewhere.
Of the guys you mentioned, only Felix and Verlander have the history of or legitamite potential to put up an 8 WAR season as Josh did in 2010. Regardless, I think (given health) you can consistently expect somethign like 6-7, potentially 8 WAR from either of Felix or Verlander. I don't think you can say the same about Weaver, Gallardo or Jimenez. So realistically, IMO you only consider trading Josh for one of those two guys, and Detoit is not going to move Verlander anytime in the next 1.5 years and I doubt Seattle is going to move Felix in that time either. So it's likely a moot point, especially when you consider that any team trading for Josh is not going to want to give up the king's ransom for 1.5 years of Josh (so now the extension comes into play) and the other team likely has the same concerns we do about long-term health/contract, etc.
Josh is just a very unique case with regard to his talent level vs. potential risk involved in signing him long-term. Which may actually be a blessing in disguise, as at least we are fully aware of the potential risk (thinking of the Reds and Griffey, JR in the 2000's).
I second your notion on the 5 lol. unless its kazmir taking their place blech! look i love hambone, and he's a great story, but you might change your mind if we could swing a deal for a real Ace. like i said, Verlander, King Felix, Gallardo, etc. its tough. cuz you can say without lee (the ACE) we wouldntve beat TB. but without Hambone and a combination of Colby we wouldntve beat the Yanks. however with a double whammy our ACE got rocked, and our stud hitter got shut down by the giants. so thats like a washed theory. its like the primordial question, the chicken or the egg, do you want a stud pitcher or a stud batter? some will say the stud pitcher will out wit the stud batter, while others say the stud batter can figure out the stud pitcher, so who the hell knows. i think confucious says something about it, but pots involved.... i dont remember.
Umm, maybe because he's a HUGE National & Local Fan Favorite. He SELLS tickets.A Bad Story-Gone Good. He's handsome, athletic and an American Hero to many. Any Press is Good Press.... the Rangers reap the rewards, even if Josh Hamilton winks.Then the reality that Josh Hamilton is one of the Best Players in AL, if not Baseball.The Rangers can live with the "Enigma Factor" and probably pay for it another 3-4 years.
If the Rangers are committed to an annual payroll range of $100-$110 million per season, than they can only sign an extension for either CJ Wilson or Josh Hamilton.... an interesting dilemma that will be played out this winter.
I don't think "ONLY" is anywhere in the Rangers thinking. I do think "World Series Return" is.That means making the playoffs. That also translates to making the team better, which hasbeen repeated multiple times, by the Club. There's been few legitimate windows to do so... especially finding Big Arms or pitching in general. The windows will open up soon, but we won't be the only Buyers. It'll be interesting to see how confident the Club views Team on paper.What's transpired up to now, is a .500 team struggling from major injuries and poor rudiment play.
Notify me of follow-up comments via email.