Hamels: Nothing Is Happening Right Now

[theapportioner]

If this was about 12 years ago, we hadn't won 3 World Series', and the Yankees were still our "rival", I think this negotiation ploy would maybe work. However, with all that's transpired in the meantime, and how bad the Yankees' roster construction is, I can't imagine the Red Sox flinching.

 
Yeah, and there is no short window that would perhaps force the Sox to GFIN. This isn't 2004, when Pedro, Nomar, Lowe, etc. were about to become free agents. Ortiz is done in a couple of years, but he is nowhere near as important to the team as say, Brady is to the Patriots. Cherington and Farrell have been extended, so the pressure is theoretically off of them. Amaro has no leverage against the Red Sox.

 

[Rasputin]

 
Yeah, and there is no short window that would perhaps force the Sox to GFIN. This isn't 2004, when Pedro, Nomar, Lowe, etc. were about to become free agents. Ortiz is done in a couple of years, but he is nowhere near as important to the team as say, Brady is to the Patriots. Cherington and Farrell have been extended, so the pressure is theoretically off of them. Amaro has no leverage against the Red Sox.

Well, we do kind of need what he has to offer.

 

[MikeM]

 
LOL ... wouldn't you buy beers to find out what other GMs say about Amaro?

 
As far as Cole Hamels goes, i'm guessing at this point they'd probably be asking among themselves who has actually been having any serious discussions on making a trade with him. Since it's starting to seem the speculation on this happening is mostly being driven by the Boston media. 

 

[OnWisc]

 
As far as Cole Hamels goes, i'm guessing at this point they'd probably be asking among themselves who has actually been having any serious discussions on making a trade with him. Since it's starting to seem the speculation on this happening is mostly being driven by the Boston media. 

And by Amaro. He is the one making (or authorizing) comments about the Yankees offering the best package and someone else showing increased interest the last few days. I view Amaro's comments with substantial suspicion but think they show that the media isn't simply trying to create a story where none exists.

Of course whatever substance there is to these comments remains to be seen. Could well be Amaro just trying to flip every switch and pull every lever he sees in an attempt to salvage the situation after botching it so badly (for reasons mentioned upthread) earlier this offseason.

 

[NDame616]

Well, we do kind of need what he has to offer.

 
Not really, We can wait a year and sign one of these pitchers when they are a FA. 
 
EDIT: Every team "needs" Cole Hamels, I get that. But the long term decision of keeping our core group of prospects far outweigh a year of Hamels, when we can simply sign a guy next year (if they will break the bank for them is entirely another story)

 

[Mugsy's Walk-Off Bunt]

And again, if we were forced to deal one of our prized top three-ish assets, wouldn't we prefer doing so for a younger stud pitcher like Gray or Cueto?

 

[Minneapolis Millers]

Yes, possibly, for Gray.  No for Cueto, as he's an FA next year.  Don't give up 6 yrs of elite prospect control (plus lesser prospects) for 1 year of established talent (plus the QO).

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

And again, if we were forced to deal one of our prized top three-ish assets, wouldn't we prefer doing so for a younger stud pitcher like Gray or Cueto?

Grey sure but pass on Cueto. Hamels has a better track record and less injury prone. Plus he isn't going to cost 160-180 million.

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

Yes, possibly, for Gray.  No for Cueto, as he's an FA next year.  Don't give up 6 yrs of elite prospect control (plus lesser prospects) for 1 year of established talent (plus the QO).

 
And he's not even that much younger--only two years, which is a small enough gap that it's hard to feel sure he has a real shelf-life advantage over Hamels to offset the fact that he'll almost certainly cost a lot more in 2016-18.

 

[Harry Hooper]

And again, if we were forced to deal one of our prized top three-ish assets, wouldn't we prefer doing so for a younger stud pitcher like Gray or Cueto?

 
 
Yes, Hamels is clearly on the trading block. Top three-ish assets are used to acquire talent that would otherwise not be considered available. They are proffered to get other GMs to listen to what would otherwise be seen as an outlandish proposal.

 

[MikeM]

And by Amaro. He is the one making (or authorizing) comments about the Yankees offering the best package and someone else showing increased interest the last few days. I view Amaro's comments with substantial suspicion but think they show that the media isn't simply trying to create a story where none exists.

Of course whatever substance there is to these comments remains to be seen. Could well be Amaro just trying to flip every switch and pull every lever he sees in an attempt to salvage the situation after botching it so badly (for reasons mentioned upthread) earlier this offseason.

 
Was it confirmed anywhere that Amaro was the one making/authorizing that Yankees comment? I seemed to have missed it if so. All i read out of that was yet another stir of the pot coming of Cafardo.
 
I don't even like Amaro, but some of the surrounding criticism on him is starting to get a little silly imo. I mean what comments out of Amaro do you view with "suspicion"? Considering he likely has a mic in his face anytime somebody gets the chance to ask about Hamels, it seems to me Amaro has pretty much been straightforward about any possibility there since the get go. He has a valuable asset he'll move if the price is right. If the price isn't right he plans to keep him (which i'll again point out is a perfectly viable option). Yes, a team got a little more serious about asking as of late. Yadda yadda yadda. 
 
The fact Ruben isn't going to hand Hamels over on terms we find favorable, combined with Ben essentially cementing the decision months ago to enter the season without an "ace", does not make him the bad guy/GM in all this. If anything and despite the many surface proclamations claiming otherwise, it seems the second part of the equation is the real core issue in play there that some (starting with the media) are having such a hard time coming to grips with.  

 

[OnWisc]

Was it confirmed anywhere that Amaro was the one making/authorizing that Yankees comment? I seemed to have missed it if so. All i read out of that was yet another stir of the pot coming of Cafardo.
 
I don't even like Amaro, but some of the surrounding criticism on him is starting to get a little silly imo. I mean what comments out of Amaro do you view with "suspicion"? Considering he likely has a mic in his face anytime somebody gets the chance to ask about Hamels, it seems to me Amaro has pretty much been straightforward about any possibility there since the get go. He has a valuable asset he'll move if the price is right. If the price isn't right he plans to keep him (which i'll again point out is a perfectly viable option). Yes, a team got a little more serious about asking as of late. Yadda yadda yadda. 
 
The fact Ruben isn't going to hand Hamels over on terms we find favorable, combined with Ben essentially cementing the decision months ago to enter the season without an "ace", does not make him the bad guy/GM in all this. If anything and despite the many surface proclamations claiming otherwise, it seems the second part of the equation is the real core issue in play there that some (starting with the media) are having such a hard time coming to grips with.

The Yankees quote was attributed to a Phillies source. While I'd like to think that this would mean someone elevated enough to have knowledge of the details of any Yankee offer as well as the Phillies thoughts on it, given the state of journalism today it could just as easily be the parking lot attendant at Citizens Bank. Fair enough. But Amaro still isn't "no commenting" on the matter. As far as viewing his comments with suspicion, I mean that I'm viewing them in light of Amaro being anxious to trade Hamels and get as high of a return as possible. I don't think the Yankees are a realistic destination, nor does the assertion of another team stepping up and really showing interest make me think that we're entering any sort of endgame.

Amaro's unwillingness to deal Hamels to the Sox at a price Ben finds palatable doesn't make him a bad guy or a bad GM. But as E5 Yaz pointed out upthread, the expectations he set for the Hamels trade months ago may result in him turning down the best offer he's going to get because he's holding out for something that's not going to happen.

Personally, my preference would be not to deal for Hamels at any of the prices that are being tossed around. And given the Sox reported final offer to Lester, I don't really expect Boston to be near Amaro's asking price in terms of prospects when Hamels is at a near market deal. I wouldn't be surprised to see some contender lose a front half of the rotation guy in the next couple months and give Amaro that one prospect that he feels he needs to "win" the trade. But in the meantime he's holding onto a depreciating asset with the chance of injury always there.

 

[MikeM]

That people have spent so much time/energy attempting to paint out the scenario where Hamels does not get traded as a "bad thing" is kind of my point there though. In essence it's the outside need for that to be the case that's driving most of this speculation...not vice versa. With stretch after stretch being made and repeated-until-it's-fact to make the fits where that outside agenda deems it necessary. 
 
Hamels' contract isn't going to cripple the Phillies rebuild effort. Not every team is as overly concerned as we seemingly are over the concept of a healthy starting pitcher with a 3 in front of his age. Gillick isn't going to stretch the rebuilding effort timeline back further then it needs to be just to better accommodate the outside logic suggesting a trade needs to happen now. Owens didn't suddenly develop into a higher quality prospect because of a desire to not trade Betts/Swihart. Ect ect... 
 
Furthermore, people keep bringing up the surface concept that Amaro needs to trade Hamels to keep his job. But is anything short of a cinderella season where the team shows itself to be both mildly competitive in the W/L column and at least partially poised to start making the progressive jump forward realistically going to do that? It's one thing to dump off your aging and more expensive pieces who don't/can't fit an optimistic 2-3 year plan that potentially gets presented in his defense at the end of this season. Barring impact type players ready to make the immediate contribution coming back, it's quite another to more or less stab your already longshot and one year window chance in the foot by dealing the one player on the roster you have the worst probability chance of adequately replacing. 
 
 
 
 

 

[Rasputin]

That people have spent so much time/energy attempting to paint out the scenario where Hamels does not get traded as a "bad thing" is kind of my point there though. In essence it's the outside need for that to be the case that's driving most of this speculation...not vice versa. With stretch after stretch being made and repeated-until-it's-fact to make the fits where that outside agenda deems it necessary. 
 
Hamels' contract isn't going to cripple the Phillies rebuild effort. Not every team is as overly concerned as we seemingly are over the concept of a healthy starting pitcher with a 3 in front of his age. Gillick isn't going to stretch the rebuilding effort timeline back further then it needs to be just to better accommodate the outside logic suggesting a trade needs to happen now. Owens didn't suddenly develop into a higher quality prospect because of a desire to not trade Betts/Swihart. Ect ect... 
 
Furthermore, people keep bringing up the surface concept that Amaro needs to trade Hamels to keep his job. But is anything short of a cinderella season where the team shows itself to be both mildly competitive in the W/L column and at least partially poised to start making the progressive jump forward realistically going to do that? It's one thing to dump off your aging and more expensive pieces who don't/can't fit an optimistic 2-3 year plan that potentially gets presented in his defense at the end of this season. Barring impact type players ready to make the immediate contribution coming back, it's quite another to more or less stab your already longshot and one year window chance in the foot by dealing the one player on the roster you have the worst probability chance of adequately replacing. 
 
 
 
 

 
Huh, of course it's bad if Hamels isn't traded. The Phillies are rebuilding. They have vets on the roster who aren't going to be there when the Phillies are good again. He should be getting rid of as many of them as he can and bringing in as many good prospects as he can.
 
I don't get how people can argue otherwise.

 

[Yelling At Clouds]

 
Huh, of course it's bad if Hamels isn't traded. The Phillies are rebuilding. They have vets on the roster who aren't going to be there when the Phillies are good again. He should be getting rid of as many of them as he can and bringing in as many good prospects as he can.
 
I don't get how people can argue otherwise.

 
Hamels is 31, not 36. It's not inconceivable that he's still around and good when the Phillies are decent again. A team acquiring him would sort of be banking on the fact that he'll probably still be good in 3-4 years...
 
EDIT: Are people really thinking this?
 

 
[SIZE=11.9999990463257px]Not really, We can wait a year and sign one of these pitchers when they are a FA. [/SIZE]
 

 

 
Because, on hte one hand, yes, they can, but that hardly seems like a safe strategy. Gone are the days when the Red Sox could just show up with a huge offer and expect to sign whomever they chose. If those days even ever existed.

 

[P'tucket rhymes with...]

 
Hamels is 31, not 36. It's not inconceivable that he's still around and good when the Phillies are decent again. A team acquiring him would sort of be banking on the fact that he'll probably still be good in 3-4 years...

Teams interested in Hamels right now are mostly going to be interested in the next few years, with the last few being gravy if he holds up.  The best chance for the Phillies to be ready to contend again in the time frame you're talking about would be to trade Hamels (in addition to a bunch of other things that RAJ isn't very good at).
 
Reuben's middle name should be that sad trombone sound.

 

[MikeM]

 
Huh, of course it's bad if Hamels isn't traded. The Phillies are rebuilding. They have vets on the roster who aren't going to be there when the Phillies are good again. He should be getting rid of as many of them as he can and bringing in as many good prospects as he can.
 
I don't get how people can argue otherwise.

 
Again, the fact they are rebuilding right now does not automatically push the timeline factor on Hamels to a critical "must trade now!" stage.
 
If Gillick feels there is a chance the team could be back in contention in 2017, there is logic in keeping him. Or at the very least, not selling any lower then what Ruben is reportedly asking for now. 

 

[Reverend]

The Phillies won two more games than the Red Sox did last year... in a season where they basically gave up, traded away all their pieces, and held regular season tryouts for the rookies.

 

[mt8thsw9th]

Honest question: Why does this keep getting bumped without any smoke regarding a Hamels trade? Aren't we past the mental masturbation point now given there's plenty of ST stuff to talk about? I understand I may not be adding anything here, but the same can be said of most since the thread title was updated. 
 
It's been a fact for years that the Phillies should be rebuilding, and Amaro has left the Phillies in a really bad spot. This isn't really news. Nor is that teams are scouting one of the better pitchers in baseball. Perhaps this is best asked in Backwash, and move away, but given the fact that this thread is still alive due to speculative fluff Spring Training pieces being posted as news/updates makes me wonder what exactly is going on here.

 

[Bob Montgomerys Helmet Hat]

The Phillies won two more games than the Red Sox did last year... in a season where they basically gave up, traded away all their pieces, and held regular season tryouts for the rookies.

And Keith Law ranked the Phillies' minor league system #25.
 
This rebuild could take a while.

 

[TigerBlood]

Suppose roles were reversed. Boston has Hamels on that contract, and Philadelphia has, say, Owens, Margot, and Johnson in their system (and nobody to really replace them). It would be preposterous to suggest that Philadelphia trade these precious prospects for 31 y/o pitcher, no matter how good, at these earliest stages of rebuilding.
 
In the end, the only thing up for debate is whether Philadelphia benefits more from getting a B+ package now (headlined by an Owens or Johnson), which has been offered to them, or whether RAJ should gamble and hang on to Hamels in hopes of an A+ package in 6 months or a year, while risking an injury to Hamels, paying him ~market rate to lead a losing team, and prolonging Philadelphia's rebuild. The band-aid rip vs. slow-peel analogy is almost too perfect.