Josh Hamilton

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

    Re: Josh Hamilton

    Indians offered 4/44 for SV. so we had to anti up to get 3 years. It is what it is.

    We didn't "have to" do anything. We could have let SV go to the Indians and better off.

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

    Re: Josh Hamilton

     

    I have a feeling that a team like the O's or Mariners will surprise us all and sign Hamilton. 

    One of those teams will give Hamilton a lot of years and money.

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

    Re: Josh Hamilton

    I remember myself, softy, and maybe 2-3 other posters agsinst the CC signing. Some said he was overpaid, but "loved the signing anyway".

    Not many are saying they love the Vic signing, so it is different than CC.

    I can understand the Naps deal, but the Vic signing was foolish. We could have gotten Pagan instead, or signed 2 pitchers and traded Doubront for a cheaper and better OF'er.

    [/QUOTE]

    Theres not much out there in FA with pitching Moon. Guys like Dempster and Lohse, who are mid 30's, want 3 years and north of 12M per. Thats insane! To say we couldve picked up 2 pitchers, trade our young cost controlled LHP for an OF'er and be more improved seems easier said than done.

     

    As it turned out, there wasn't much out there in FA with positional players either.

    Here's an example of my position for argument's sake:

    Instead of signing SV and Gomes for $18M/yr, we could have signed McCarthy and Pagan, or MCCarthy and Marcum, or Sanchez with money left over.

    Then, we trade all our FAs to be Salty, Ells, Breslow along with Doubront and get a RF'er who is light years better than SV, costs less, and is under team control for 3 or more years. Same cost: better players. (Even if you think Doubront is better tahn M & M, my plan is still better.)

     

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from GoUconn13. Show GoUconn13's posts

    Re: Josh Hamilton

    Here is the likely scenarios:

    Grienke to sign with the Rangers.

    Hamilton to sign with the Red Sox.

    Red Sox trade Ellsbury, Lavarnway, Iggy and Doubront for Harrison and Andrus.

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

    Re: Josh Hamilton

    Upton is going to the Rangers in a 3-Way deal.

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

    Re: Josh Hamilton

    Hamilton/Napoli/Ortiz/Middlebrooks is a nice 3-6

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

    Re: Josh Hamilton

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    In response to TitleTown11's comment:

    I look at this differently than the Crawford signing. Yes, I won't deny I was excited, but many agreed that it seemed like risky business giving a 30+ lefty speedster $20M for 7 years - myself included. To boot that his defensive intangibles seemed mitigated by the small left field in Boston. People all over the city claimed it was a better idea to give big contracts to sluggers and aces. Well now we have an opportunity to add a bonafide slugger on a short term deal for that same price (or thereabouts). Napoli is already in town to provide him with some comfort level, but the risk is much lower given that he will only yield a 4 year deal and Texas seems more interested in Upton/Greinke. No one else can pay him like the Sox. I truly see it as a competition between Texas and Boston and with Texas back turned at the moment as they pursue other avenues of team building - the Sox should strike and bring him in on a 4 year deal at a higher salary than what Texas will spend. At that point, the lineup is basically complete pending trades of catchers or Ellsbury and then Cherington can turn to pitching upgrades. Pedroia-Hamilton-Napoli-Ortiz-Middlebrooks for the 2-6 sounds dam* good to me.



    I disagree. I remember myself, softy, and maybe 2-3 other posters agsinst the CC signing. Some said he was overpaid, but "loved the signing anyway".

    Not many are saying they love the Vic signing, so it is different than CC.

    I can understand the Naps deal, but the Vic signing was foolish. We could have gotten Pagan instead, or signed 2 pitchers and traded Doubront for a cheaper and better OF'er.



    moon - A voice of reason. The Victorino signing was follish and not necessary. With the team going nowhere this year, why not give it a shot with Kalish or even Brentz, or re-sign Ross for a lot less money. They not only overpaid, but he's tied in for the next three years.
    Everyone thought this signing was foolish and I'm in the front of the line.

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

    Re: Josh Hamilton

    Everyone thought this signing was foolish and I'm in the front of the line.

    Nope, I was there first!

    ;)

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

    Re: Josh Hamilton

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    Upton is going to the Rangers in a 3-Way deal.




    If that is the case, then the Rangers will not pursue Hamilton.  I hope a useless team like the Mariners overpay for him.  LOL

    In a perfect world, I want Boston to sign McCarthy, Marcum and then make a trade with Oakland for Anderson. 

    If Boston signs all three, then I see them as a 90 to 93-win ballclub in 2013. 

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

    Re: Josh Hamilton

    Two different discussions going on here.....Victorino was overpaid....no one disgarees with that.....whther or not he should have been signed at all is a point of contention....I think the signing is ok, but only if you plan on moving Ells and using the superior player to get you a more pressing need , like a starting pitcher. As for Hamilton....I have said all along , he is a perfect fit for the Sox....RF....we need one.....Power hitter....we need one.....Middle of the Order.....we need one....Left Handed Hitter.....we need one. I said before the Winter meetings that the Sox needed to be proactive with hamilton.....The Rangers waiting to see if they can spend the Money on Greinke and then Hamilton as a Fall back has to be annoying to Hamilton....if the Sox had been aggresive and showed Hamilton the love....they could have gotten him wrapped up. I think he is aware that his addiction is baggage that teams worry about, so i think he would be willing to sign a 4 year deal....albeit at a little higher AAV....I would have went 4/80mm....I think he would have gone for that and that is probably less than Ells would want next year. With the signing of Uehara.....the Sox BP is overloaded....I think a package of Ells, Salty, and Bard(despite his horrible year, teams no what type of stuff he has) and perhaps a top Prospect cpuld get the Sox a Top Tier pitcher.....so you add a Pitcher to the Rotation, Hamilton costs you a draft pick(not even a #1)....you move Victorino to Center, where is defense helps carry the weaker bat and you strengthen your team all around.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from 111SoxFan111. Show 111SoxFan111's posts

    Re: Josh Hamilton

    In response to tomnev's comment:

    I think the signing is ok, but only if you plan on moving Ells and using the superior player to get you a more pressing need , like a starting pitcher. 



    Amen to moving Ells to get starting pitching (and also using some of that money to get Hamilton if he can be had for 4 years) but I think many of us tend to view things in shorter terms than the FO.  We have SV on a three year deal and Ells is gone next year.  If a good deal comes up in the off-season, great.  If not, we have flexibility to trade during the season.  If not, SV for center next year.  Maybe JBJ is ready in 2014 and we don't need him, but counting on that is a risk.  Even if JBJ is MLB ready next year, having someone else who can play center is still necessary. I think sometimes you just need to make a move that isn't perfect in order to allow for the best aggregate outcome in multiple possible situations.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share