Angels Sign Josh Hamilton
Posted by Steve L. on December 13th, 2012 · Comments (21)
Five years at $125 million.
Every team is printing their own money these days except the Yankees and Marlins…or so it seems.
Five years at $125 million.
Every team is printing their own money these days except the Yankees and Marlins…or so it seems.
Custom Wordpress Theme · Copyright ©
2005-2013 In Perpetuity by WasWatching.com

I wonder if Hamilton shopped the offer back to the Rangers like it reported he would. You’d have to think the Rangers wouldn’t of let him go to a division rival like the Angels for an extra year contract. It was rumored the Rangers were willing to do 4 years 100 mil. This makes the Angels lineup very scary but I figured they would do something with the money they had left after losing Greinke and having Torii Hunter leave.
Every team is printing their own money these days except the Yankees and Marlins…or so it seems.
“The Los Angeles Dodgers are on track to become only the second major-league team with a $200 million payroll and could end the New York Yankees’ streak of 14 years as baseball’s biggest spender… The Dodgers are at $214.8 million for 21 signed players next season, according to a study of their contracts by the Associated Press.”
Josh Hamilton, Albert Pujols, Mike Trout, Kendrys Morales and Mark Trumbo in the same line-up is interesting.
Since the Rangers are in need of an OF now… What do you think of the Yankees offering up Granderson to them for their prospect SS Profar and a SP?
They’re not going to move Profar. And, for sure, they’re not going to move him for a player on a one-year contract who strikes out 200 times a year.
@ Steve L.:
Best 5 stick combo in the majors. Don’t neglect Aybar. If healthy (okay, and sober), that’s a monster. Could take a run at 900+ runs scored. Balance of power just shifted in the AL West. I fully appreciate the dangers of a 5 year deal with Hamilton. LAAAAAA better win a WS, or two, in the next 2-3 years, or this will be a flop. Josh and Albert will be fighting over DH time in the out years.
Maybe the Yankees could send Josh some Starbucks gift certificates and make sure he orders a venti double caf expresso latte three times a day.
Steve L. wrote:
Yanks are still printing their own money, they’re just not spending it.
Raf wrote:
Or as much as they could.
BOHAN wrote:
Why would they do that and not sign someone like Swisher?
First of all, Angel fans have a motivated ownership. The Angels are competing against the Dodgers who as we all know are spending like drunken sailors on a Saturday night. The Yanks have (yawn) the Mets, enough said. If the Mets ever start winning again Yankee Stadium will look like Jacobs Field.
Joseph Maloney wrote:
It’s dark and rainy every day where you live, isn’t it?
The Mets were winning in 1999, 2000, 2006, 2007 and 2008 and didn’t put a dent in the Yankees’ attendance figures.
@ MJ Recanati:
See 1986. It was a Mets town, by far. I know. I was here and it was sickening. Living in Boston could have only been the worst thing.
Steve L. wrote:
1986 was a different time. The Mets have completely squandered this new boom in the baseball economy. Back in 1986 the only ways to make money as a baseball team were to sell out your stadium and sell a lot of merchandise. MLB Advanced Media and a team’s media rights deals have a far larger effect on a team’s revenues than attendance do and the Yankees have done a far better job of leveraging their brand in the digital age than the Mets have (even if SNY itself is better than YES Network).
In short, 1986 paradigm really doesn’t apply any longer.
Theoretically, bucking the general trend of the market usually confers competitive advantages.
MJ Recanati wrote:
Plus, by 1986, the Yanks had put together quite a run of suckage.
Wonder how many companies and individuals are not going to renew their season packages? Hal may find out that ledgers have two sides, and profits don’t just keep trending upward like he’s used to watching when he was just a “young elephant”. The season is going to be, “interesting”, in the Chinese sense of the word……
MJ Recanati wrote:
The Yanks were also winning in those years. What’s happening now is different. There is a perceptible change in the fan base. YES ratings were at a ten year low. Seats may have been sold, but empty seats were more than noticeable. They failed to sell out postseason games (there were more than 10,000 seats available for game 6 gainst the Tigers). The Yankees finished 1st this year, won 95 games and had an exciting September (as you have mentioned a few times), yet the reaction was not what it has been in the recent past. The wow factor is not there. The family better keep hoping the Mets continue to fail until they get this team sold.
I gotta believe that at least part of the reason for this signing was a reaction to the Dodgers signing Greinke. I’m sure the LA papers were all over the fact that the Dodgers “stole” him from the Angels.
Just wondering. Maybe I missed something, but are the Yankees the only team in baseball that stands to get taxed heavily in ’14? Because the way teams are playing the market, it would seem that’s the case….
KPOcala wrote:
L.A.: $165,397,000 (exc. Belisario, Elbert, Ellis, Guerrier, Hairston, Kenley, Kershaw, Lilly, Punto, and Schumaker).
KPOcala wrote:
Be interesting to see how the Stub Hub divorce impacts that.