Rangers to talk LTC with Josh Hamilton

[AmarilloRed]

Texas Rangers exploring long-term contract for Hamilton

07:31 PM CDT on Thursday, May 22, 2008

By EVAN GRANT / The Dallas Morning News

MINNEAPOLIS – The latest contractual trend in baseball is to lock up players with less than two years' experience to deals that extend well past eventual free agency.

In the wake of several recent deals, the Rangers have started exploring the possibility with Josh Hamilton. Hamilton, who has one year and nearly two months of major league service time, is at the forefront of the AL Triple Crown chase.

There have been some internal discussions and at least one casual conversation with his agent.

"What's meant to happen is going to happen," Hamilton said after acknowledging some conversation. "The more I read the Bible, the more I realize it doesn't make any sense to worry. I'm not going to be able to add one day to my life by worrying. I know God will provide for my family.

"I feel like I'm where I'm supposed to be. I feel like I mix well with these guys and have felt that way since the first day at spring training. Since I started playing baseball, this is the most comfortable I've ever felt."

http://www.wfaa.com/sharedcontent/dw...s.2181b5e.html


A good move by the Rangers. He looks like he could help the Rangers for a long time.

[mbgrayson]

Read today that Hamilton leads the AL in all three 'triple crown' categories, HRs, batting average, and RBIs.

Josh's line is righteous! .335/.377/.611 for an OPS of .988 with 12 HRs, and 53 RBIs. Not too bad for a little over 25% of the season played. He could have 200 RBIs and 45 HRs if he maintains this pace.

And meanwhile, Edinson still leads MLB in ERA, and strikeouts. Very cool deal for both teams so far.

[buckeyenut]

I'm sorry. This is just not smart.

The whole reason Hamilton was available was because he is injury prone and a relapse risk. How does that change after a hot 2 months?

If it was me, this discussion would not happen for at least another year and a half.

[Chip R]

I don't think it's that big of a risk. If he does have a relapse, he's suspended and then he doesn't get paid, IIRC. There is the injury risk but you take that with any player.

[HokieRed]

The only reason Josh Hamilton was available is that the Cincinnati Reds completely failed to estimate his true value, which was part of the general failure of the organization to see what its parts were really worth. The consequences of that kind of failure are now evident, as they always come to be eventually, on the field. Last night's lineup was an utter joke. The only thing that rescues the Hamilton trade--which I did not like at the time--is that Volquez has thus far been so good. But remember--and all you folks who like to say Josh has various liabilities should do so especially--when trading an outstanding position player for a pitcher, you are one arm injury away from getting wiped out in the trade. This trade has the potential to be the second worst in Reds history.

[klw]

Can we just open a Hamilton subforum already and be done with it?

[Degenerate39]

Hamilton's been getting a lot of love on ESPN and for good reasons. But anywho I hope he doesn't sign long term with the Rangers so he can sign with Cincy when he becomes a free agent

[SunDeck]

Originally Posted by HokieRed

The only reason Josh Hamilton was available is that the Cincinnati Reds completely failed to estimate his true value, which was part of the general failure of the organization to see what its parts were really worth. The consequences of that kind of failure are now evident, as they always come to be eventually, on the field. Last night's lineup was an utter joke. The only thing that rescues the Hamilton trade--which I did not like at the time--is that Volquez has thus far been so good. But remember--and all you folks who like to say Josh has various liabilities should do so especially--when trading an outstanding position player for a pitcher, you are one arm injury away from getting wiped out in the trade. This trade has the potential to be the second worst in Reds history.

I'm confused. Getting Volquez was somehow not a good thing? The kid is 7-1 and is leading the NL in ERA. And I do not believe the Reds failed to underestimate Hamilton's value, which is why they were able to get Volquez for him. The way I see it, this deal amounted to two clubs trading very high potential ceilings with each other. At the same time, neither of the players came without risk- Hamilton was tagged as injury prone and Volquez had struggled at the MLB level. So far so good for both clubs IMO.
Sure, I guess it would be great to have Hamilton and Bruce in the OF, but frankly I'll take the deal they made. It was a good trade for both clubs.

[RBA]

Great for Hamliton. I hope he doesn't throw it all away in the toilet again.

[HokieRed]

Pitchers are always greater risks than position players. I love Volquez. If forced to choose between him and Hamilton, I'd rather have Hamilton. This organization did not look to the future, which was an outfield of Hamilton, Bruce, and maybe Dunn, though I'd rather spend his money elsewhere. Long term deals with Hamilton, Bruce, Phillips, Votto, and a stronger catcher would have guaranteed contention for the next ten years. Why did we not see this? In my view, because the team has wrongly considered itself to be organized around Jr. and Dunn. The decision-making has always focused on how this or that would affect Jr. and Dunn. The only hopeful thing is that now Krivsky's gone--his track record looking weaker every day--and maybe Jocketty will still be able to build something around Bruce and the other young players. But it's going to be a whole lot more difficult without Hamilton.

[SunDeck]

I look at it this way- the Reds spent $50,000 to get Volquez. And yes, pitchers are a greater risk than outfielders, but there are also virtually none available at that price. What's more, the likelihood that the Reds will develop outfielders over the next five years is probably greater than the likelihood that they will develop a Volquez simply because outfielders are a dime a dozen compared to quality pitchers.
To compete a team needs to grow their own pitching and the Reds are starting to get the pieces of that puzzle together, but a pick up like Volquez in my opinion was well worth it.
Additionally, the Reds don't need three Jay Bruces in the OF, especially if they decide to stick with Dunn. I'd prefer they hang onto him so that the only OF position to work on for the next 4-5 years will be CF. Others may prefer Dunn/Hamilton/Bruce, but I'd take my chances with trying to fill in the CF gap through a trade if it means I have the certainty of knowing my #2 pitcher is going to throw 6+ innings of one run ball every night out.

[HokieRed]

Actually I'd have preferred Hamilton in left, Bruce in right, a fill-in in center with Dunn's money invested in starting pitching, along with Jr.'s. Krivsky's greatest single blunder can be identified: taking Stubbs over Lincecum.

[guttle11]

Hokie Red, you're all over the place. Seems like you're trying to bash the Reds more than back Hamilton.

Josh Hamilton is a very, very good player. He's be great in Cincinnati. But, when you have a complete lack of starting pitching after your top 2 in the majors, which is where the Reds were at the time of this deal, you need to acquire help by using a strength. Dunn, Griffey, Edwin...these guys weren't going to bring actual or even potential help at the big league level. Josh Hamilton did. That's the game you play.

[HokieRed]

Milt Pappas was an upgrade over what the Reds had when they dealt Frank Robinson. Ernie Broglio looked like an upgrade to the Cubs when they traded Lou Brock to St. L. It's all about what you pay. I'm not all over the place at all. My point is simple. I like having Volquez. Who wouldn't? Hamilton was, in my estimation, way too much to pay.