Hamilton Yes No

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from BosoxJoe5. Show BosoxJoe5's posts

    Hamilton Yes No

    Lets say Hamilton is available for a reasonable contract. Would you want him on the team? Upside is clear. Downside his demons and if the signed Ross the team becomes very righty.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from JohnnyLefty. Show JohnnyLefty's posts

    Re: Hamilton Yes No

    No. He already looked like he needed a baby sitter after the Baltimore Texas Wild Card Game... he was looking awful depressed and that's never good.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Hamilton Yes No

    No, as in No WAY!

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bisson1. Show Bisson1's posts

    Re: Hamilton Yes No

    In response to JohnnyLefty's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    No. He already looked like he needed a baby sitter after the Baltimore Texas Wild Card Game... he was looking awful depressed and that's never good.

    [/QUOTE]

    Yes, he should have looked awfuly happy after losing.

     

    He made a crucial error that could have been the reason they were even put in the WC situation, then had an absolutely terrible night at the plate.

     

    I say no though, he looked very unmotivated tonight - as did most of Texas. They kinda reminded me of the Sox.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from stan17. Show stan17's posts

    Re: Hamilton Yes No

    Amazing talent but I would say no. The Sox don't need that headache.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from EnchiladaT. Show EnchiladaT's posts

    Re: Hamilton Yes No

    I say no because I know he would not take a two year deal at $20 million per. Love him and wish him grand success but NO

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from charliedarling. Show charliedarling's posts

    Re: Hamilton Yes No

    I have to say no as well.  Too many problems going in that negate his talents.  Hamilton will be too expensive and over-paying him would be just another case of "big star falls short in Boston".  The ballpark would limit his numbers and he would quickly be labeled as a failure.

    Also, he does not pitch.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from ma6dragon9. Show ma6dragon9's posts

    Re: Hamilton Yes No

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    No, as in No WAY!

    [/QUOTE]


    As in no m f ing way!

    What would be 'reasonable'? While still being 'realistic'? 5/100?

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from iamme17. Show iamme17's posts

    Re: Hamilton Yes No

    Every team in baseball would be a better team with Hamilton than without him period.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from ma6dragon9. Show ma6dragon9's posts

    Re: Hamilton Yes No

    In response to iamme17's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Every team in baseball would be a better team with Hamilton than without him period.

    [/QUOTE]


    If you're terribly short-sighted..I totally agree. But Hamilton isn't signing a 1 or 2 year deal. Whoever signs him is likely going to be left with some bad years on the back end, and paying a premium for them. That is not how to build a team.

    We've seen that, in Boston, with Manny, Schilling getting his 9 mil at the end, Lowell, Beckett, Drew. All created roster problems because of their inflated salaries and lack of production.

    On top of that, Hamilton poses more risk than most players because of his well documented history which likely has taken a toll on his body. I mean, the guy stopped chewing tobacco and fell of the map for a few weeks.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from SinceYaz. Show SinceYaz's posts

    Re: Hamilton Yes No

    I'd love to have him.

     

    But if we, the great fans of baseball that we are, get as torked as we do when Pedey or Papi go on a hitting drought, knowing they always come back but we can't help ourselves from claiming they are over, we would never be able to handle Hamilton's cold streaks.  He can put up a season's power numbers in two months and then "struggle" for the other parts.  He's adored in Texas ... we wouldn't give him that kind of clear support.  That would set off those "demons" mentioned earlier...

     

     So, No.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from jasko2248. Show jasko2248's posts

    Re: Hamilton Yes No

    Hamilton is a once in a generation talent, but "no" for many of the reasons listed on here already.  I think the Sox will have no issue spending big dollars on players, but only on short term deals.  They now have that luxury.  They really wanted Kuroda last off season , but they had no payroll flexibility.  They will now be able to take on a Vernon Wells or Alfonso Soriano type deal for a year or two, especially if it helps them get another player they covet in that type of deal. 

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re: Hamilton Yes No

    In response to iamme17's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Every team in baseball would be a better team with Hamilton than without him period.

    [/QUOTE]

    Sure, but you could say that about every contract ever written.

    We're better off with CC, Beckett and Lackey than we are with Nava, Doubront, and Cook.

    But we're not better off paying them $54M.

    So, imo, the answer is a flat no.  I'd listen if his price dropped enough, but I would go past 4 years with a player option for Y5, and not more than $15M per.  The $15M is derived from his average season of 123 games over the past 4 years ($20M * 75%).

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re: Hamilton Yes No

    Hamilton is a once in a generation talent,

    Part of my reasoning for saying no is that he really isn't a once-in-a-generation talent.

    He is 21st in WAR over the past 4 years.  The biggest mistake that GMs make is signing guys for huge contracts that aren't unique players.

    When SF signed Zito, his K/W was a terrible 1.53, and his whip a pretty poor 1.403.

    When Pujols was signed, his OPS was .903.

    Some contracts just don't work out, but a lot of contracts are predicated more on reputation than numbers.  Hamilton has had a very good .903 OPS over the past four years, with 123 games per year, at an age where his skills should start declining.

    Unique he is not, imo.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Ice-Cream. Show Ice-Cream's posts

    Re: Hamilton Yes No

     

    For the right price, I say "yes". 

    A 4-year, $80 million would be my max offer (I know some team out there will offer more years and dollars). 

    We can talk about his so-called demons all we want, but as a whole, I believe he will be a fine addition to the Red Sox.  We need another big bat in the line-up.

    Besides, the real demons have been players such as Lackey and Dice-K. 

     

     

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from BosoxJoe5. Show BosoxJoe5's posts

    Re: Hamilton Yes No

    In response to Ice-Cream's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    For the right price, I say "yes". 

    A 4-year, $80 million would be my max offer (I know some team out there will offer more years and dollars). 

    We can talk about his so-called demons all we want, but as a whole, I believe he will be a fine addition to the Red Sox.  We need another big bat in the line-up.

    Besides, the real demons have been players such as Lackey and Dice-K. 

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I really can't imagine him getting more than a 4 year deal. Some where between 20-25 million a year. That really does not hurt your team when you are like the Sox with only 38 million committed next year.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from TheExaminer. Show TheExaminer's posts

    Re: Hamilton Yes No

    No. Past his prime and injury prone.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from notin. Show notin's posts

    Re: Hamilton Yes No

    The flip side arguments are:

     

    1. The Sox clearly have a boatload of ready cash and are NOT - despite many fans thinking so - going into rebuilding mode.  Teams rebuild out of financial necessity, not for reasons related to farm systems and roster issues.  The Sox have money, therefore they are not rebuilding.

     

    2. Hamilton is available.  More and more frequently, teams are locking up their star caliber players and preventing them from even reaching free agency.  The old trend was "buy out the first two years."   I doubt the idea of signing a player until he is 39, like Cincy did with Votto last offseason, will ever catch on.  But the giust is, star players are not readily available on the FA market like they used to be.  Check out the 2013 class someday.

     

    3.  The Sox need hitters, and Hamilton can hit.  Also, they will be able to bury him as a DH someday.

     

    I am not wild about the idea, but to think the Sox won't at least do some due diligence is absurd.   In fact, I am not really sure what the market for Hamilton will be.  But if he doesn't return to Texas, the numer of players could be severely limited, and Boston will most defintely be among them.

     

    Personally, I'd rather sign Peavy and Napoli... 

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re: Hamilton Yes No

    I really can't imagine him getting more than a 4 year deal. Some where between 20-25 million a year. That really does not hurt your team when you are like the Sox with only 38 million committed next year.

    It's not so much whether we can afford it as much as whether it is the best use of our money.

    Suppose the choice is between Lee at $25M or Hamilton at $25M.

    Which do you think would help the team more?

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Ice-Cream. Show Ice-Cream's posts

    Re: Hamilton Yes No

     

    I agree with you notin-- Boston is not in a rebuilding mode. 

    Rebuilding exists in organizations such as the Blue Jays, Royals, and Mariners but not for the Red Sox. 

    As for Napoli, Toronto was so stupid to trade him to Texas.   lol

     

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from BosoxJoe5. Show BosoxJoe5's posts

    Re: Hamilton Yes No

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I really can't imagine him getting more than a 4 year deal. Some where between 20-25 million a year. That really does not hurt your team when you are like the Sox with only 38 million committed next year.

    It's not so much whether we can afford it as much as whether it is the best use of our money.

    Suppose the choice is between Lee at $25M or Hamilton at $25M.

    Which do you think would help the team more?

    [/QUOTE]

    At this point between two the Hamilton. I would personally prefer to spend big money on a hitter and spend 15 mill or less on short term pitching. But realistic they would spend big on two players and still keep the payroll fairly low.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Leftfielder61. Show Leftfielder61's posts

    Re: Hamilton Yes No

    No to Hamilton. There are red flags all around this guy. The lazy effort in dropping the flyball, the striking out on 3 pitches in his biggest ab of the season, missing action in the last week because he has too many energy drinks and his well documented substance abuse issues.

    He is a great talent but not worth the risks or drama that surrounds him.

     

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedsoxProspects. Show RedsoxProspects's posts

    Re: Hamilton Yes No

    Hamilton might not get anywhere near $20 mil per year. He might come in closer to $15 mil or $60 mil over 4 years. Those chemical dependency issues cost guys like him a lot of moolah potentially and he has gotten injured a lot and his skill set may well decline more rapidly than most. I'd still consider him though as there is not a lot of available talent out there and we need studs like him.

    Heh, he could also get more than a $100 mil deal and I'd wave bye bye but you never know in situations like his. Maybe a 3 year deal at $18 mil per year gets it done. And it might be worth the risk for us.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from notin. Show notin's posts

    Re: Hamilton Yes No

    If Hamilton is priced under $20mill for 5 or less years, expect him to stay put.  For those terms, the chances he remains a Ranger are about 100%, give or take 0%.

     

    They paid him $13.75 this year and it didn't cripple the team, and Hamilton has said he will give Texas the chance to match any offer (per today's MLBTR)...

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from LloydDobler. Show LloydDobler's posts

    Re: Hamilton Yes No

    Gotta admit, I'm surprised there have been so many nos. But I agree ... high risk, high reward. With emphasis on the high risk.

     

     

Share