Would you want Josh Hamilton back?

[Chip R]

This is not fantasy world where the Angels release him and the Reds could pick him up for the minimum. This would be a legitimate trade where the Reds had to give up something of value and take on at least half the salary and the three years remaining on the contract. When he's on, he's quite a player as we have seen over the past several years. However, he is very injury prone and perhaps because of the injuries or other things his stats have been below par. He hasn't had a drug relapse since he started playing again but if he does relapse, it's adios, Josh. He's also 33 which isn't terribly old in baseball terms but he's no spring chicken. Lord know the Reds need offense but if he's not playing he can't help. Thoughts?

[cumberlandreds]

No. Way too much risk. If you are going to go after someone who might be just as injury prone I would go for Tulowitszki.

[757690]

Reds trade I. Guillon to Pirates for Volquez. Then trade Volquez to Angels for Hamilton.

But seriously, $44M for 3 years of Hamilton still seems a bit pricey.

[PuffyPig]

Depends on the contract and what we have to give up.

But likely no, I think he's done as a good player. He's been pedestrian for 1.5 years.

I'd take him at about $2M without giving up anything.

[BungleBengals]

Hamilton makes $23M in 2015 and $30M in 2016 and 2017. So if we paid half of that, then we would be shelling out more than $40M over those 3 years.

He offense is alright, but not nearly worth the amount he's getting paid, even if we would only have to pay half of it. Especially if we have to give up something of value like top prospects and SP. I think that we could find someone that is younger and better in the FA or trade market if we wanted to pay that amount. Or we could just wait for some of the talent in AA to be ready too.

[RedsManRick]

No, thank you. Firstly, I think we can now look back on his crazy 2010 and see an outlier season, that represented both the peak of his physical talent and a health dose of luck. Outside of 2010's 8.4 WAR, he's peaked at half that level of performance.

Secondly, I think we're seeing the unfortunate legacy of his wasted youth. When he came back, he quickly regained his overwhelming physical talents. But as players age and their physical talents decline, they gain mental ability that allows them to offset this somewhat. For example, they lose reaction speed with the bat, but they gain better pitch recognition and discipline, reducing their need to guess. Most players with his physical talent get 10 years before their body really slows down; Hamilton got 5 or 6. He didn't get the benefit of his approach maturing through his early to mid 20's. And that's now showing in his not having developed in to a more patient hitter (O-Swing% has gone up slight over the years) paired with a cratering rate of making contact with balls out of the zone. As a result, his strikeout rate has spiked and his batting averaged has dropped.

All of that is to say that there's reason to believe he's not likely to bounce back to being an all-star. He may have another 4 WAR season him, but I wouldn't project him at that. Unless he figures something out, he's a 2-3 WAR guy on the decline as he enters his mid-30s.

Contract-wise, he's got $83M coming his way over the next three years ('15:$23M, '16:$30M, '17:$30M). To square up that contract with a reasonable projection of his performance, the Angels would have to eat at least half of that $83M. And if you told me that the Reds were going sign a 33 year old corner OF who projects at 2-3 WAR to a 3 year, $42M contract, I'd be pretty nonplussed. If you told me that they traded say Winker & Lively to make it happen, I'd be quite disappointed.

[westofyou]

Pass

[Rojo]

I'd rather they take a chance on Carlos Gonzalez.

[RedsBaron]

Not for half the cost of his salary for the next three seasons. If the Angels released him, sure, but the risk is much greater than the probable reward if the Reds agreed to pay more than a fraction of his salary.

[cincrazy]

I would rather go after Matt Kemp if we're going to trade for a big-monied outfielder with an injury history. And I wouldn't even want the Reds to acquire Kemp in a trade, let alone Hamilton. He swings at nearly every pitch he sees, and has been trending downwards for a while. No thanks.

[UKFlounder]

If forced (in some crazy fantasy world), would you rather have Hamilton or Pujols now?

[Crumbley]

I can't see LA picking up enough of the money to make it worthwhile.

[RedTeamGo!]

If forced (in some crazy fantasy world), would you rather have Hamilton or Pujols now?

Hamilton.

Hamilton can play LF, Pujols can not. At this point Pujols is basically a DH.

[BungleBengals]

If forced (in some crazy fantasy world), would you rather have Hamilton or Pujols now?

Wow! And I thought Votto's contract was bad at the end. Pujols will make $27M, $28M, $29M, and $30M through ages 38 to 41 respectively. Also, Baseball-reference has a note saying he has a 10 year $10M personal-services contract that kicks in after his player contract.

[reds44]

.739 and .769 OPS the last two years.

Hell no.