iamshack Posted November 6, 2012 Share Posted November 6, 2012 QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Nov 5, 2012 -> 06:40 PM) And both those deals were stupid and irresponsible. I'd rather burn a few good prospects by trading for a talented OF than dig myself in to a massive contractual obligation just because he is the only great FA outfielder. Even if the Rays had a $120M+ payroll, you would never see Andrew Friedman making an insane deal like the one Hamilton wants. Fortunately for Josh, there are teams like the Yankees, Red Sox, Rangers, and Dodgers who give no f***s about overspending for players, and he may just end up getting what he wants from them. There will always be at least one stupid and irresponsible team out there though...pressure to win now, pressure for a marketable player, or just someone who gets a bit desperate and reckless... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted November 6, 2012 Share Posted November 6, 2012 Josh Bell's a minor league free agent. He's been absolutely horrendous in the Majors, but has put up some good numbers in the minors recently and, if nothing else, would be nice to have around as someone to push for competition and provide depth in the minors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted November 6, 2012 Author Share Posted November 6, 2012 QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Nov 5, 2012 -> 05:40 PM) And both those deals were stupid and irresponsible. I'd rather burn a few good prospects by trading for a talented OF than dig myself in to a massive contractual obligation just because he is the only great FA outfielder. Even if the Rays had a $120M+ payroll, you would never see Andrew Friedman making an insane deal like the one Hamilton wants. Fortunately for Josh, there are teams like the Yankees, Red Sox, Rangers, and Dodgers who give no f***s about overspending for players, and he may just end up getting what he wants from them. People used to say the same garbage about Jim Hendry and Theo Epstein. GM's spend what they get. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted November 6, 2012 Author Share Posted November 6, 2012 QUOTE (iamshack @ Nov 5, 2012 -> 06:28 PM) There will always be at least one stupid and irresponsible team out there though...pressure to win now, pressure for a marketable player, or just someone who gets a bit desperate and reckless... And when it comes to Hamilton, $25 million a year isn't even that crazy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiliIrishHammock24 Posted November 6, 2012 Share Posted November 6, 2012 (edited) QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 5, 2012 -> 07:45 PM) And when it comes to Hamilton, $25 million a year isn't even that crazy. It's not crazy if you ignore the fact that even during his prime seasons, he was only worth that much ONE TIME in 6 major league seasons, 5 of those in possibly the most hitter friendly park in baseball. Not crazy at all. Edited November 6, 2012 by JoeCoolMan24 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted November 6, 2012 Author Share Posted November 6, 2012 QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Nov 5, 2012 -> 07:39 PM) It's not crazy if you ignore the fact that even during his prime seasons, he was only worth that much ONE TIME in 6 major league seasons, 5 of those in possibly the most hitter friendly park in baseball. Not crazy at all. Trying to apply a statistical number to "worth" for an irrational free agent market is the only crazy thing here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiliIrishHammock24 Posted November 6, 2012 Share Posted November 6, 2012 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 5, 2012 -> 09:32 PM) Trying to apply a statistical number to "worth" for an irrational free agent market is the only crazy thing here. Well the clearly you don't apply to the statement I started with earlier "If you are in to WAR, and market value per win". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted November 6, 2012 Share Posted November 6, 2012 QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Nov 5, 2012 -> 08:35 PM) Well the clearly you don't apply to the statement I started with earlier "If you are in to WAR, and market value per win". I'm sure he understands it quite clearly. The fact of the matter is, GMs not only see money in the production a player puts on the field (which is all FGs WAR does), but they also see money in marketing plus money in a potential playoff appearance. If spending $25 million on one player for one year makes an owner $45 million because of additional attendance plus an extended playoff run, how does that play in, even if he is "only" worth $21 million per FanGraphs WAR? This is not as black and white as you make it seem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted November 6, 2012 Author Share Posted November 6, 2012 QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Nov 6, 2012 -> 02:39 AM) I'm sure he understands it quite clearly. The fact of the matter is, GMs not only see money in the production a player puts on the field (which is all FGs WAR does), but they also see money in marketing plus money in a potential playoff appearance. If spending $25 million on one player for one year makes an owner $45 million because of additional attendance plus an extended playoff run, how does that play in, even if he is "only" worth $21 million per FanGraphs WAR? This is not as black and white as you make it seem. Now we are talking baseball reality. At the end of the day it is about winning. Josh Hamilton is probably the best position player out there to help a team win now. That has value above any other statistical number out there. And like it or not, comparative salary is a relative statistic for free agents and their agents. They are absolutely going to look at what comparable players got in terms of dollars per year in the last year. Those Prince and Pujols contracts will be the guidelines to some extent for the elite players in MLB's contract offers and requests, until other elite player signings reset the market. It doesn't matter how "bad" they are, they happened, and they are reality. In the free agent market, those contracts are more important than WAR or any other relative statistic. In free agency it is all about the comps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted November 6, 2012 Share Posted November 6, 2012 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 6, 2012 -> 07:54 AM) Now we are talking baseball reality. At the end of the day it is about winning. Josh Hamilton is probably the best position player out there to help a team win now. That has value above any other statistical number out there. And like it or not, comparative salary is a relative statistic for free agents and their agents. They are absolutely going to look at what comparable players got in terms of dollars per year in the last year. Those Prince and Pujols contracts will be the guidelines to some extent for the elite players in MLB's contract offers and requests, until other elite player signings reset the market. It doesn't matter how "bad" they are, they happened, and they are reality. In the free agent market, those contracts are more important than WAR or any other relative statistic. In free agency it is all about the comps. There are also other factors to consider, such as proving to other FA's that you are serious about winning, which in turn attracts them to your organization, often times for cheaper than what you might have got them without the marquee signing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted November 6, 2012 Author Share Posted November 6, 2012 An interesting look at the Hamilton contract situation... http://mlb.sbnation.com/2012/11/5/3603412/...-rumors-rangers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2Jimmy0 Posted November 6, 2012 Share Posted November 6, 2012 QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Nov 6, 2012 -> 02:39 AM) I'm sure he understands it quite clearly. The fact of the matter is, GMs not only see money in the production a player puts on the field (which is all FGs WAR does), but they also see money in marketing plus money in a potential playoff appearance. If spending $25 million on one player for one year makes an owner $45 million because of additional attendance plus an extended playoff run, how does that play in, even if he is "only" worth $21 million per FanGraphs WAR? This is not as black and white as you make it seem. I understand and agree with you guys on this. There is an inherent risk with signing Hamilton though. All of the substance abuse problems would sway me the other way. I just never thought the man was ready to take on the lifestyle of a MLB player. Any owner that signs Hamilton has to know that there's a chance of relapse and the contract being a complete waste. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted November 6, 2012 Share Posted November 6, 2012 QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Nov 6, 2012 -> 01:10 PM) I understand and agree with you guys on this. There is an inherent risk with signing Hamilton though. All of the substance abuse problems would sway me the other way. I just never thought the man was ready to take on the lifestyle of a MLB player. Any owner that signs Hamilton has to know that there's a chance of relapse and the contract being a complete waste. Other writers have alluded to it, but I don't worry about relapse, I worry about the toll those drugs have taken on his body. That contract, even at 5 years in length, could turn Alfonso Soriano-esque very quickly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Nov 6, 2012 -> 02:19 PM) Other writers have alluded to it, but I don't worry about relapse, I worry about the toll those drugs have taken on his body. That contract, even at 5 years in length, could turn Alfonso Soriano-esque very quickly. I have to think all that time not playing much baseball probably extends his career a bit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
claydude14 Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Yea I mean, alcohol and crack cocaine abuse is bad. But are there studies out there that show they directly lead to a more injury prone athlete? I get the assumptions. That s*** ain't healthy, but what data is there to back it up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2Jimmy0 Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 QUOTE (ROC Sox Fan @ Nov 6, 2012 -> 08:36 PM) Yea I mean, alcohol and crack cocaine abuse is bad. But are there studies out there that show they directly lead to a more injury prone athlete? I get the assumptions. That s*** ain't healthy, but what data is there to back it up? It's not always an injury though with him. Sometimes, he does something that he shouldn't be doing and goes in a 2 week funk. I just don't trust his mental state. He's very fragile. Every road trip, there is a chance that he'd wonder off and find himself somewhere he shouldn't be. It has happened before. He's a hell of a talent. So much risk though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted November 7, 2012 Author Share Posted November 7, 2012 Jeff Passan @JeffPassan MLB spokesman: No change to the league's drug plan based on weed legalization in Colorado, Washington. Positive pot test still = 50 games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 7, 2012 -> 10:06 AM) Jeff Passan @JeffPassan MLB spokesman: No change to the league's drug plan based on weed legalization in Colorado, Washington. Positive pot test still = 50 games. A friend and I were discussing the merits of this in the workplace setting last night. Good to see an immediate example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Nov 7, 2012 -> 10:31 AM) A friend and I were discussing the merits of this in the workplace setting last night. Good to see an immediate example. I really dont know if it changes. You cant show up to work drunk, you can get fired for that. I doubt a lot of businesses change the drug test policy even if it becomes legal everywhere Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabiness42 Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 I really dont know if it changes. You cant show up to work drunk, you can get fired for that. I doubt a lot of businesses change the drug test policy even if it becomes legal everywhere How long does pot stay in your system compared to how long its effects last? You can't show up to work drunk because it impairs your performance. If a Monday morning drug test shows that you smoked a joint Friday night and it's way past affecting you, are there grounds to fire you in a state where pot is legal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Nov 7, 2012 -> 10:43 AM) I really dont know if it changes. You cant show up to work drunk, you can get fired for that. I doubt a lot of businesses change the drug test policy even if it becomes legal everywhere Yeah, but marijuana stays in your system for weeks...you could be using it on a Saturday and be perfectly capable of working on a Monday morning. Then they test you that Thursday and you are positive for marijuana use without ever impacting yourself during working hours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiliIrishHammock24 Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 7, 2012 -> 11:06 AM) Jeff Passan @JeffPassan MLB spokesman: No change to the league's drug plan based on weed legalization in Colorado, Washington. Positive pot test still = 50 games. I guess Lincecum will retract his trade request to the Rockies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 QUOTE (iamshack @ Nov 7, 2012 -> 10:50 AM) Yeah, but marijuana stays in your system for weeks...you could be using it on a Saturday and be perfectly capable of working on a Monday morning. Then they test you that Thursday and you are positive for marijuana use without ever impacting yourself during working hours. Before this gets Filibuster'd and to state the obvious, I see this ultimately being a Federal decision, regardless of branch. If It's legalized nationally, I'm sure workplaces are going to do what they can to still drug test either pre-employment or during employment, and at that point, it'll ultimately come down to a Supreme Court decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted November 7, 2012 Author Share Posted November 7, 2012 QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Nov 7, 2012 -> 11:47 AM) Before this gets Filibuster'd and to state the obvious, I see this ultimately being a Federal decision, regardless of branch. If It's legalized nationally, I'm sure workplaces are going to do what they can to still drug test either pre-employment or during employment, and at that point, it'll ultimately come down to a Supreme Court decision. The Gov of Colo had this to say... “The voters have spoken and we have to respect their will,” Hickenlooper said. “This will be a complicated process, but we intend to follow through. That said, federal law still says marijuana is an illegal drug, so don’t break out the Cheetos or Goldfish too quickly.” Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/11/07...g#ixzz2BYsrkLSK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted November 7, 2012 Author Share Posted November 7, 2012 Jon Heyman @JonHeymanCBS interesting to see #mets have parted ways with jason bay by mutual agreement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts