"Not that Hamels is quite up there with Lester or Scherzer." Stopped paying attention to the article at that point.

Trent Steele wrote:http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/lets-design-a-red-sox-cole-hamels-trade/

read in case you want to shoot yourself in the face today

I'd rather shoot the author in the face. Because that article is fucking retarded.

The delta on any prospect--ANY prospect--is so much bigger than it is for any established MLB player, let alone a superstar, that the whole "surplus value" argument is stupid. It's quite possible that even Boston's best prospects will fall way short of their hype. That he just blithely assumes Boston's prospects will be "worth" X millions per year, with no hedge against all the things that can and usually do go wrong, makes the analysis so puerile as to be worthless. It's Hot Stove porn for degraded saber types who, in their mindless acceptance of concepts smarter minds posited as hypotheses, have become mirror images of the Marcus Hayes tribe they so hate.

I hope Amaro gives him a swirlie.

RT

dajafi wrote:It's Hot Stove porn for degraded saber types who, in their mindless acceptance of concepts smarter minds posited as hypotheses, have become mirror images of the Marcus Hayes tribe they so hate.

rolex wrote:"Not that Hamels is quite up there with Lester or Scherzer." Stopped paying attention to the article at that point.

Yeah that is pretty laughable.

Grotewold wrote:I reject his methodology but support his conclusion. Hamels isn't that much better than the alternatives that you would give up elite prospects in this marketplace. And eating salary probably won't sway high-revenue teams eg Boston

I hate to run the risk of him getting hurt or regressing, but the highest upside play is to hang on to him for now I think

I see your logic here, but I think you have to wait to see just what the other arms get in FA before you can make that conclusion.

The contracts we've already seen suggest the game is swimming in money. Hamels' deal could look really, really good by comparison, even if a team has to guarantee the fifth year. I guess there's a chance Lester takes a below-market deal to go back to Boston… but otherwise he could get something like 6 years, $160m. With Boras repping Scherzer, he either gets an even bigger deal or hangs out so late into the winter that he becomes almost a non-factor as teams want to set their rosters.

Bottom line, I think there's a real chance they can get one elite (top 20) prospect and two other guys with upside. I do agree that if not, they shouldn't bother.

rolex wrote:"Not that Hamels is quite up there with Lester or Scherzer." Stopped paying attention to the article at that point.

I found this to be totally bizarre. Since 2011, Hamels ranks 8 in fWAR, 0.1 behind Lester and 2.2 behind Scherzer. He's an elite pitcher. Lester had a career year in a contract year - I know that doesn't factor in quantitatively, but it's worth noting.

Wheels Tupay wrote:

rolex wrote:"Not that Hamels is quite up there with Lester or Scherzer." Stopped paying attention to the article at that point.

Yeah that is pretty laughable.

Hamels ERA+, last five years: 133, 137, 132, 104, 151
Lester ERA+, last five years: 134, 124, 87, 110, 155

Hamels, bWAR: 5.4, 6.6, 4.6, 4.6, 6.6
Lester, bWAR: 5.2, 4.4, 0.7, 3.0, 4.6

Hamels, IP: 208.2, 216, 215.1, 220, 204.2
Lester, IP: 208, 191.2, 205.1, 213.1, 219.2

Cole is two weeks older. They're pretty much the same guy; if anything, Hamels has been more valuable, and Lester's stronger opposition evens it out.

Hamels straight up for Henry Owens! Phillies 2015!

CFP wrote:Hamels straight up for Henry Owens! Phillies 2015!

According to the author, that is a little steep for the Red Sox so we have to keep our fingers crossed that they will give in.

Just hoping for Schilling's bloody sock and the ghost of Tim Wakefield at this point.

Access to Manny Ramirez' outfield bathroom every other trip to Boston may be too steep, but it's the type of thing you HAVE to get included if you're RAJ

CFP wrote:Just hoping for Schilling's bloody sock and the ghost of Tim Wakefield at this point.

you just made me think about schillingfan. wondering her thoughts on Curt's new-found creationism thoughts? a heh

Trent Steele wrote:http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/lets-design-a-red-sox-cole-hamels-trade/

read in case you want to shoot yourself in the face today

He treats it as a given that Cole will force them to pick up his player option which is ridiculous. That would be $14 million to waive a no trade clause.

(posted this in the wrong thread before, oops)

bleh wrote:He treats it as a given that Cole will force them to pick up his player option which is ridiculous. That would be $14 million to waive a no trade clause

Not to mention the concurrent reports that he's dying to get out of here

pacino wrote:

CFP wrote:Just hoping for Schilling's bloody sock and the ghost of Tim Wakefield at this point.

you just made me think about schillingfan. wondering her thoughts on Curt's new-found creationism thoughts? a heh

I'm holding out for Splended Splintercicles

bleh wrote:

Trent Steele wrote:http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/lets-design-a-red-sox-cole-hamels-trade/

read in case you want to shoot yourself in the face today

He treats it as a given that Cole will force them to pick up his player option which is ridiculous. That would be $14 million to waive a no trade clause.

Why did Cole include Boston on his list of teams that he wouldn't accept a trade to unless it was to force Boston to pick up his option?

Maybe he hates the boston accent

Grotewold wrote:

bleh wrote:He treats it as a given that Cole will force them to pick up his player option which is ridiculous. That would be $14 million to waive a no trade clause

Not to mention the concurrent reports that he's dying to get out of here

The two don't have to be mutually exclusive. Just because he (allegedly) wants to leave doesn't mean he wouldn't try to leverage himself an extra guaranteed year.

ashton wrote:

bleh wrote:

Trent Steele wrote:http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/lets-design-a-red-sox-cole-hamels-trade/

read in case you want to shoot yourself in the face today

He treats it as a given that Cole will force them to pick up his player option which is ridiculous. That would be $14 million to waive a no trade clause.

Why did Cole include Boston on his list of teams that he wouldn't accept a trade to unless it was to force Boston to pick up his option?

He can block trades to 20 teams. He negotiated for that in his contract so there's no reason not to give a list of 20 teams since he can always waive it later. And since there's 20 teams, Boston could be his 10th favored team and it would still make the list, or maybe it's his preferred destination but he just put it there for other strategic purposes. Like he could ask for cash to waive the no trade clause like Abreu did.

RichmondPhilsFan wrote:

Grotewold wrote:

bleh wrote:He treats it as a given that Cole will force them to pick up his player option which is ridiculous. That would be $14 million to waive a no trade clause

Not to mention the concurrent reports that he's dying to get out of here

The two don't have to be mutually exclusive. Just because he (allegedly) wants to leave doesn't mean he wouldn't try to leverage himself an extra guaranteed year.

I understand that. But the acquiring team on his NTL could call his bluff. Then we'll find out if he really wants to go