I always think of Torii Hunter on Thanksgiving

[Angels 1961]

1 hour ago, Blarg said:

Hunter was 37, Hamilton 32. Up until he signed with the Angels, Hamilton had a career 136 OPS+ and came off a season hitting .285/.354/.577/.930 with 43 home runs. 

Hunter would have cost 10 mill and Hamilton was a late sign in January, Rangers not going near 125 mill

[Angels 1961]

1 hour ago, Blarg said:

Hunter was 37, Hamilton 32. Up until he signed with the Angels, Hamilton had a career 136 OPS+ and came off a season hitting .285/.354/.577/.930 with 43 home runs. 

Hamilton playing in a total hitter's park. Hunter hit 16 HR 92 RBI 313 average 365 OPB. He was fan favorite that brought so much more to team. Hamilton 32 on 5 year 125 mill was a bad singing at time of signing and turned out to a total disaster. 

[Stradling]

1 minute ago, Angels 1961 said:

Hamilton playing in a total hitter's park. Hunter hit 16 HR 92 RBI 313 average 365 OPB. He was fan favorite that brought so much more to team. Hamilton 32 on 5 year 125 mill was a bad singing at time of signing and turned out to a total disaster. 

That’s revisionist history. It wasn’t a bad signing at the time. It turned out to be a bad signing. 

[notherhalo]

I guess Arte found some money under his bed!!

[Angels 1961]

2 hours ago, Stradling said:

That’s revisionist history. It wasn’t a bad signing at the time. It turned out to be a bad signing. 

I thought for money spent and years it was a bad signing at the time and many in baseball thought the same thing.

[happybat4]

Didn't Hamilton struggle the 2nd half that year!

[Pancake Bear]

5 hours ago, Stradling said:

That’s revisionist history. It wasn’t a bad signing at the time. It turned out to be a bad signing. 

My recollection is that I felt that Hunter wasn't going to be great too much longer and it would be a mistake to extend him. As it turned out, he had one more good year (3.0 fWAR) and two meh years (1.1 and 0.7), but better a year too soon than a year too late.

I was mildly leery of Hamilton when we signed him due to his issues, but I had zero expectation he was going to fall off the way he did. I thought he'd be great for at a couple of years. I don't think anyone thought he'd be out of baseball in three years when he signed that deal.

[Angels 1961]

8 hours ago, Pancake Bear said:

My recollection is that I felt that Hunter wasn't going to be great too much longer and it would be a mistake to extend him. As it turned out, he had one more good year (3.0 fWAR) and two meh years (1.1 and 0.7), but better a year too soon than a year too late.

I was mildly leery of Hamilton when we signed him due to his issues, but I had zero expectation he was going to fall off the way he did. I thought he'd be great for at a couple of years. I don't think anyone thought he'd be out of baseball in three years when he signed that deal.

Could have signed Hunter on a 2-year deal for 20 to 22 mill total. 

[Stradling]

46 minutes ago, Angels 1961 said:

Could have signed Hunter on a 2-year deal for 20 to 22 mill total. 

Yep. And instead we went after pitching, didn’t sign that pitching and signed Hamilton. 

[Angels 1961]

1 hour ago, Stradling said:

Yep. And instead we went after pitching, didn’t sign that pitching and signed Hamilton. 

Big Splash Arte

[Stradling]

12 minutes ago, Angels 1961 said:

Big Splash Arte

Yes just like when he signed Hunter. 

[Taylor]

15 hours ago, Stradling said:

That’s revisionist history. It wasn’t a bad signing at the time. It turned out to be a bad signing. 

We were all excited about it, but it's not like it wasn't without risk. Hamilton had been so erratic during his career. And if I'm remembering correctly, the season before they signed him, he got off to a really hot start but then slumped for the rest of the season.