As reported on MLBTR:
Tim Hudson Likely To Choose Free Agency
What is he likely to ask for? It seems he is more concerned over years than amount per year. Would he take a 3/24 instead of a 1 year option at 12? Should the Mets be interested?
Oct 13
Tim Hudson Available After All?
Leave a Reply
MLBTradeRumors
- Orioles To Promote Kevin Gausman
- Quick Hits: White Sox, Reds, Red Sox, Phillies
- NL East Notes: Phillies, Lee, Nationals, Mets
- Commenting Policy
- AL East Notes: Yankees, Red Sox, Ellsbury
- Blue Jays Release Miguel Batista
- Minor Moves: Cotts, Boyer, Barton
- Draft Notes: Manaea, Outfielders
- MLBTR Chat Transcript
- Cubs Claim Eduardo Sanchez
49 comments
stickguy
10/13/2009-5:54pm at 5:54 pm (UTC -4)
sign ‘em all and hope a couple stick. WOrked for the Red Sox, didn’t it?
Oh wait, never mind…
Try Harden instead, but hudson for 3/24, if some of it maybe was performanc3 based? At some $$ figure it becomes worth the risk.
I’m good with 1 solid guy + 1 risk/reward guy coming in.
GravediggerHebner
10/13/2009-5:56pm at 5:56 pm (UTC -4)
I don’t think there is any slam-dunk answer.
I am wary of a 3 year contract when those years are ages 34, 35 & 36 especially since Hudson has already had 4 of his full 10 seasons in which he’s made fewer than 30 starts.
But, it’s also apparent that he’s more talented than any of the starting pitchers the Mets brought in last off season. If (isn’t there always an “if”?) things broke right, he could slide into the #2 spot in the rotation and while not quite providing Halladay performance, he could be our “poor-man’s Lackey.” His numbers seem quite comparable to Lackey’s at first glance.
Kingman 26
10/13/2009-6:38pm at 6:38 pm (UTC -4)
I think that if he was available at the numbers TRS suggests, they would absolutely have to take a serious look at him.
Johan, a healthy Hudson, and Lackey?
That would be a good start.
trs86
10/13/2009-6:43pm at 6:43 pm (UTC -4)
I really have no idea. Just trying to figure out why he would not take the option. I would assume it’s because he is afraid to wait another year? Has someone in Atlanta pissed him off? Is he doing this just to try and get more money and years out of Atlanta?
CaseStreet
10/13/2009-6:53pm at 6:53 pm (UTC -4)
the article states he’s afraid of being traded, so he REALLY wants to be able to control where he goes. Prob wouldn’t want to be traded to the West Coast if he plans on keeping his family in ATL.
trs86
10/13/2009-6:54pm at 6:54 pm (UTC -4)
True. He has a NTC now but not with the option I guess?
CaseStreet
10/13/2009-6:48pm at 6:48 pm (UTC -4)
lackey as the sure thing and Hudson as the risky guy? Wow. That’s mucho dinero invested in the rotation.
That’d mean no Holliday, but would that preclude other LFers?
BTW, anyone see the fangraphs article on how to build a team? Mentions the Mets and how all of our Super Players went down at the same time.
trs86
10/13/2009-6:50pm at 6:50 pm (UTC -4)
They would have about 6M left for LF, MIF reserve and bullpen. Risky for sure.
whataputz
10/13/2009-7:23pm at 7:23 pm (UTC -4)
I wouldn’t be totally disillusioned if they spent all the money bringing in two top guys and giving us a ridiculous rotation. Either way this team MUST add an actual #2 pitcher. If they want us to buy into their new pitchers park concept, lets actually get some good pitchers.
trs86
10/13/2009-7:31pm at 7:31 pm (UTC -4)
The problem I have this offseason no matter what, is that there will be no room for the following year. So the contracts you sign this year for the first time in a long time will have a direct impact on the following year. Signing Castillo hurt but did not damage who we could sign really. Signing Perez hurt but will not limit us that much this offseason. Signing Lackey or Holliday AND another big name ties us up for sure.
CaseStreet
10/13/2009-6:40pm at 6:40 pm (UTC -4)
New Rule: Stay away from pitchers older than me! otherwise, I agree w/ stick.
trs86
10/13/2009-6:45pm at 6:45 pm (UTC -4)
If it were 3/24 with a lot of incentives that would be very trade-able contract and even if not it would not cramp you significantly. I guess I could see them getting him and say Wolf and then using the money on a hitter?
wannybackstra
10/13/2009-6:45pm at 6:45 pm (UTC -4)
I can’t see Hudson doing any better than the $12m he has coming to him. The fact that he would turn that down in favor of a mutli-year deal for less money per year signals to me that he does not have a lot of confidence in his health and/or ability at this point. And I can’t imagine anyone offers him 3 guaranteed years. I’d be surprised if he gets two guaranteed years (more like one year with attainable options for 2 or 3 years).
If he pitches to his ability this season he wouldn’t have a problem getting another deal next year.
trs86
10/13/2009-6:49pm at 6:49 pm (UTC -4)
Yeah, it does make me wonder. Perhaps he thinks that at 35 he would be less likely to get a multiyear offer. Of course we heard the same with Lowe last year, maybe these pitchers over 30 are much more likely to worry about that potential injury. Maybe he would rather have a Garland type deal where he gets 8M next year but has a player option for 12 the next? Giving him 20 guaranteed instead of just 12?
trs86
10/13/2009-6:46pm at 6:46 pm (UTC -4)
I have also heard reports that Marquis might not get but 2 years as well. I think if the Mets don’t get Lackey there will be a glut of options just like last year. Hopefully if they don’t get Lackey they don’t just jump at what the media says is the next best guy and get stuck again.
trs86
10/13/2009-6:54pm at 6:54 pm (UTC -4)
Guys, do you think the Mets should still entertain offers for Beltran? IF they could get a CF and a SP in return?
wannybackstra
10/13/2009-7:00pm at 7:00 pm (UTC -4)
Kind of have to fill in the blanks first.
trs86
10/13/2009-7:01pm at 7:01 pm (UTC -4)
Perhaps the Redsox for Ellsbury and DiceK? Would give the Mets a mid-rotation starter (assuming you checked to make sure he is healthy, he looked good in September) and a young CF replacement with lots of speed. It would also free up 8M to spend on the offense or bring in another pitcher.
Would the Redsox do it though?
Would
Ellsbury
Reyes
Wright
Holliday
Murphy
Frenchy
Santos
Castillo
Be good enough?
trs86
10/13/2009-7:05pm at 7:05 pm (UTC -4)
With that in mind, you did have 32M to spend, now you would have 40 to spend. So you could most likely get Lackey, Holliday and a good BP guy.
Johan
Lackey
DiceK
Pelfrey
Perez
With that lineup looks pretty damn good.
wannybackstra
10/13/2009-7:35pm at 7:35 pm (UTC -4)
And a bullpen of K-Rod, Maine, Parnell, Feliciano and one of the top free agents from among Soriano, Gonzalez, Rodney, etc.
trs86
10/13/2009-7:51pm at 7:51 pm (UTC -4)
Yeah, you could get your dream Gonzalez if he would take a setup role. But don’t forget Nieve and Misch as bullpen filler too and of course I don’t want to start the Stokes debate again, but if he is pushed to back end guy he does have value to ME>
wannybackstra
10/13/2009-8:01pm at 8:01 pm (UTC -4)
Gonzalez isn’t so much a dream as it is a love/hate relationship.
I’m not sure who will be shopping for closers this offseason. But there are a few available options.
trs86
10/13/2009-7:08pm at 7:08 pm (UTC -4)
Question to me is still, would the Sox do it? It makes sense for them to be able to upgrade the offense for only 8M more at the cost of a pitcher that is not clearly in their plans anyway. However, how much do they value Ellsbury?
CaseStreet
10/13/2009-7:22pm at 7:22 pm (UTC -4)
hmm, I can see Holliday leading the league in intentional walks.
trs86
10/13/2009-7:27pm at 7:27 pm (UTC -4)
OK, then switch Holliday and Wright. LOL.
wannybackstra
10/13/2009-7:30pm at 7:30 pm (UTC -4)
An interesting idea. Worth thinking about… Would think you could also get a pretty good prospect in the deal from Boston.
The suitors for Beltran would be few considering his contract. That might reduce the value of the return.
trs86
10/13/2009-7:33pm at 7:33 pm (UTC -4)
Agreed, you MAY be able to get a prospect in return but I would think that not having to pay any money and getting 2 decent players might be enough. Anyone else on Boston we might be interested in?
Also, do you think just as it is, that the Sox would do it?
wannybackstra
10/13/2009-7:37pm at 7:37 pm (UTC -4)
Not sure. But I think they’d strongly consider it given Dice-K’s health, the prominence of pitching prospects they have and the fact that their offense could use a boost.
Dice K is not the easiest guy to watch but he gets the job done when he’s healthy.
CaseStreet
10/13/2009-7:12pm at 7:12 pm (UTC -4)
nah, at best you get a mid rotation pitcher w/ a year or two left on his contract. NO one will trade a young top rotation pitcher.
YOu’re not getting his hitting or fielding production back.
MIght as well just get that mid rotation guy via FA or trade.
IOW, pay money for a mid-rotation pitcher and still have Beltran’s bat and glove, OR
you do the trade and get a mid-rotation guy, but also get a decline in bat and glove from the new CFer.
trs86
10/13/2009-7:29pm at 7:29 pm (UTC -4)
I would think that if healthy DiceK fits the mid-rotation guy. But it also frees up another 8M. 40M is a lot of money to spend in a lot of different ways.
wannybackstra
10/13/2009-7:33pm at 7:33 pm (UTC -4)
The problem is unless Lackey and Holliday both come, I can’t find $40m worth of free agents worth spending on!
trs86
10/13/2009-7:48pm at 7:48 pm (UTC -4)
True, you could leave that money open for later. Something like Piniero, Bay and LaRoche would (according to reports, yes I am now ducking) cost you around 32.
trs86
10/13/2009-7:52pm at 7:52 pm (UTC -4)
Something we are missing with my trade is that Ellsbury is a pretty good young player. Not much HR potential but the guy did have 10 3B playing in Boston and 70 steals. Certainly would take some pressure off Reyes to be the SB guy.
CaseStreet
10/13/2009-8:23pm at 8:23 pm (UTC -4)
sounds like Angel Pagan, LOL
stickguy
10/13/2009-10:03pm at 10:03 pm (UTC -4)
Interesting idea. I would have a gret time spending all winter dreaming up creative ways to remake the team into a winner, and set up for future success. hell, I probably will!
but it still frustrates me to know (ok, I don’t know, but I suspect real hard!) that none of them have a chance of coming true with this FO crew in charge!
Oh, and with Beltran, the NTC is going to be an issue, but lets pretend for a sec that he waives it, no charge.
Interesting trade, especially if they throw in a prospect.
it does build the team into a younger, speed dominated vision. No idea though if DIce K will thrive or not in the NL (or stay healthy).
But, if you added Lackey and Holliday (not helping the speed and D model there), it is a pretty good lineup. and potentially a very good rotation.
fongy2
10/13/2009-11:40pm at 11:40 pm (UTC -4)
Thanks but no thanks on Hudson!, Over 2000 IPs on a 170lb frame,about to be 35,hurt alot
of the past 2 seasons. Thanks BUT no thanks! Same with Harden, whos spent his entire
career on the DL AND Wolf as well. He’ll be 34 next season,has had 8or9 DL visits over
the yrs and has already thrown 220+ IPs this yr and ain’t finished.
Look, at this point in our history with the players we know are coming back, we simply
can’t afford to make any mistakes or gamble on guys we HOPE will stay healthy.
This team must go hard,early after Lackey AND go all out for him.
He is w/o question a top of the rotation (#1or2),in his prime and a horse.
Is that not exactly what we need?
And as for this debate about whether or not Lackey is an ace, are there 20 pitchers in
the game better than him? And except for the redsox,the giants,and the cards he is
at least a number 2 on any staff AND on about half the teams in the game, hes the staff
ace the second he walks through the door. Now, its gonna cost, no doubt BUT what do
you guys and our FO want to do here? Do we want to be serious and make a real attempt
to win a ring next yr OR waste our time w/guys who we have to hope and pray aren’t
about done(Hudson),are always injured(Harden) won’t revert back to being ordinary and/or
injured(Wolf) or become better than they’ve ever been except for 3 months like Marquis?
trs86
10/14/2009-9:47am at 9:47 am (UTC -4)
I agree that we should make a run on Lackey. But lets be clear that he does not come with any workhorse label at all. He has injury concerns as well. In fact the last 2 seasons he has put up 163 and 171 innings. Far from a workhorse by MY definition.
If we get him, that’s great. But buyer beware if you are going to go 4 years for a guy who has not been healthy to start a season since 2007.
wannybackstra
10/14/2009-10:38am at 10:38 am (UTC -4)
He’s definitely an injury risk but although he didn’t start either season on time he finished both seasons without missing starts once he was healthy (at least not that I can tell from his game logs).
His injuries also appear to be separate (tricpes in 2008 and forearm in 2009) but they could very well both be related to his right elbow.
His IP/Start of 6.5-6.7 in the last two years is consistent with what he did previously and would put him right in line with Santana.
I assume (but do not trust) that the Mets docs would give him a thorough looksee before signing him. Then again, I assumed the same thing with Putz.
For the sake of comparison, Joel Pineiro began the 2008 season on the DL with a right shoulder injury (and came bakc to pithc horribly for much of that season).
I don’t think there’s a perfect solution. We know the histories of Harden and Wolf. And we know the rest of the guys are not very good.
I wonder if Harden’s success v. the Mets might influence them in his direction: he struck out 10 in five innings and 16 in 12 career innings.
CaseStreet
10/14/2009-9:52am at 9:52 am (UTC -4)
I agree, except I wonder if we can go w/ a mid-rotation guy this year and try for an ace next yr when there will be more options
wannybackstra
10/14/2009-10:25am at 10:25 am (UTC -4)
Next year the only ace caliber free agents are Beckett and Halladay (whi will be 35). And it wouldn’t surprise me to see Beckett extended during this season by Boston.
Anyway, shouldn’t we try to win in 2010 too?
trs86
10/14/2009-10:30am at 10:30 am (UTC -4)
Well he did say a mid-rotation guy for this year.
Should we put all of our eggs in the Lackey basket? What if he turns us down. Are you saying season is shot?
wannybackstra
10/14/2009-10:43am at 10:43 am (UTC -4)
I don’t need to tell you that several times I have stated that I think the Mets should sign 2 pitchers (one of them preferably being Lackey). Just signing Randy Wolf will not get this team to the postseason.
And if Lackey walks, does that preclude them from making a trade or signing two other mid rotation starters?
Don’t start this morning by trying to put words in my mouth. I never said the Mets should “put all of their eggs in the Lackey basket.” You know better than that.
Kingman 26
10/14/2009-10:48am at 10:48 am (UTC -4)
Two serious starters is what we need.
No doubt about it.
Make Ollie and Maine earn a spot in the rotation, and let the loser learn the bullpen.
CaseStreet
10/14/2009-11:32am at 11:32 am (UTC -4)
If Ollie pitches at #5 minimum, he’ll be in the rotation bc of his salary.
If he’s doing worse, what can they do?
A healthy Maine is a decent starter (except he doesn’t go long).
If he’s stinking it up, it’s bc he’s injured and wouldn’t work in the pen anyway.
wannybackstra
10/14/2009-11:38am at 11:38 am (UTC -4)
It’s possible that pitching out of the pen might be better for Maine healthwise (and performance wise).
Of course, the opposite is equally true.
I’d prefer to have enough starting pitchers for it to be an option.
CaseStreet
10/14/2009-12:02pm at 12:02 pm (UTC -4)
Maine as SU man, hmm
CaseStreet
10/14/2009-11:16am at 11:16 am (UTC -4)
yes, but Beckett, Doc, Harang (has shown improvement), Vazquez are more options than what’s available this year (Lackey).
Not saying shouldn’t go after Lackey, just saying maybe there are other options.
wannybackstra
10/14/2009-11:32am at 11:32 am (UTC -4)
I agree 100% that the Mets need to consider all options.
re: aces, I view Harang more on the level of Wolf than Lackey or Beckett.
Vazquez is an interesting one. A real horse who misses bats. I’d love him but I wouldn’t want to label him with the pressure of being a stopper type. I think he prefers to mix in.
If the Mets could sign Lackey this year and Vazquez next, they’d be awfully tough in 2011.
CaseStreet
10/14/2009-12:05pm at 12:05 pm (UTC -4)
Santana, Lackey, Vazquez, Pelf, Perez
Very good, but very expensive, too.
Although, if we have Murph/Davis/Carter (1B), F-Mart (LF), Thole (C) and Tejada/Havens (2B) as starters, maybe it’s doable salary wise.