Should the A's Sign Tim Hudson or Let Him Go?
It seems that this scenario has played out before in Oakland with Jason Giambi, Miguel Tejada, and Eric Chavez. Finally one of the big three is on center stage. What value does a pitcher have? One considered to be a leader of the team. What should the A’s do? Is Rich Harden ready to be the newest member of a revamped big three?
Click below for my thoughts!
Tim Hudson is reading the market. He realizes that Pedro is going to get 39 million over three years, Paul Wilson got 4 million per year, Kris Benson 7.5 million per year. Tim Hudson on the open market is worth 10-12 million per year if he has a big season (18-20 wins in an injury free year), maybe more if he wins over 20 games.
If the A’s come up and give him 9-10 million now then he doesn’t have to worry about next year’s performance dictating where he will stand in the market.
This is what Eric Chavez did. Chavez got close to the top of what he would have gotten this winter when he signed for 66 million (11 per) last spring. So Hudson has a strategy in setting the deadline now. Get a similar deal, different numbers perhaps, but a pre free agent year deal which takes the pressure off of his season, just as Chavez did in 2003. I don’t think Hudson will tank as much after the contract as Chavez did when he got his dough.
If the A’s don’t want to pay the freight, Hudson, an intense man, who I believe doesn’t want to live out a season with questions every where he goes, will leave after the 2005 season.
I would pay Hudson before paying Mulder and Zito. Hudson is a better big game pitcher right now and has less questions around him both physically and mentally. He and his wife are important people in the East Bay charity community. Sometimes you have to factor in the intangibles and Hudson is an ace in that department.
The A’s might trade Hudson for Atlanta’s Marcus Giles and John Thomson. Hudson did BB a favor by setting the deadline now so Beane can make the trade moves if he wants.
I’d rather sign Placido Palanco and keep Hudson this year, if the team is that obsessed with making Marco Scutaro a part time second baseman.
I’d keep Hudson all season because it isn’t time to put pressure on Rich Harden by making him part of a new big three, plus who knows what Zito and Mulder will bring to the mound this season. You can count on 15 plus wins from Hudson, even more with a reliable closer.
There is absolutely no reason to trade Hudson before the season even if the team knows it can’t sign him.
Seeing a more motivated Hudson just might spur the team to greater heights. It has happened before with players playing out their last seasons. Look at Adrian Beltre, Jason Giambi, and Miguel Tejada.
Trade Hudson? ABSOLUTELY NOT!
Pay Hudson right now 80% of his market value, I’d do it in a flash, he’s worth the gamble.
0 comments
This is a typical situation for teams like the
A’S in medium-size markets. The A’S biggest
enemy is that they do develop great talent,
but once they make it, i.e. Tejada, they
can get much more money someplace
else.
In my opinion If the A’S let Tim Hudson go,
they have lost their leader and -on this team-
there is no more important member than
Hudson.
Look, in Pittsbugh, fans are calling talk shows
saying “how can we let go of Jason Kendall,
our best player !” That is what they would
be saying here if the A’S for some reason
loose Hudson to free agency.
Saludos
Amaury Pi-González
The A’s should trade Hudson to gets a big league slugger now, instead of receiving a mere compensation draft pick after the season. Even though Hudson has cleary stated that he enjoys the Bay Area and would like to remain and an Oakland “A,” when it comes down to it, like Giambi and Tejada, we’ll see how much he really does enjoy it here.
Without Hudson, the A’s will still be a force in the American League, especially with more offensive punch added to the lineup.
Trade Hudson and acquire some sluggers that can help this punchless lineup which failed during the stretch run.
Billy Beane knows the value of offense, he just might do what you say. With Hudson you know he is going to give you seven innings, which helps the bull pen. Don’t you agree that one or more of the big three have to be signed? If you agree, than Hudson is the one to sign. After two more years Mulder and Zito are in the same boat, they might be worth resigning at that time, but who knows, Hudson is a better investment now. They have to sign one or two of the pitchers I’d start with Hudson.
Marty
Marty, I agree with you 100%. I sincerely hope the A’s are also thinking on these lines. Kendall’s signing signalled, among other things, the A’s intention to compete and perhaps go all the way in 2005. but if they trade Hudson they will weaken their greatest resource by losing their most important starting pitcher. No big bat they get in return can compensate for that loss.
Sign him to an extension before March 1!! That shouldn’t be so hard.
OaklandSi
there is no question in my mind that the A’s must
sign Hudson.Mulder faltered down the stretch and Zito has had 2 average years. Harden is still young
but does not have the track record yet that Hudson has. Hudson is the stopper for the club but will the
owners let him walk? So far the club was lucky when Giambi and Tejada left. Baseball is cyclical
and the A’s luck may run out on them by letting their ace go after the end of the season. Pedro was
offered about 13 mil per year and he is on the way down. 100 pitches or 6 innings. Certainly Hudson can command that kind of money and we know that the Red Sox and Yankees have the money.
Jerry F
Over the years, we’ve learned that Bille Beane isn’t afraid to lose a star like Tim Hudson. I think that’s the reason he’s so successful. Giambi was the heart and soul of the team and when he bolted to the Big Apple, Beane didn’t panic. He gingerly looked around and found Scott Hatterburg, who by no means is a force like Giambi, but was a nice fit at first base. In fact, the A’s won twenty-straight games the next year.
Tim Hudson’s value can lure some much needed fire-power into the A’s mediocre lineup, even with Jason Kendall.
Don’t we remember how punchless and inconsistent the A’s line up was last year, especially in September?
Beane isn’t done doing his magic. In fact, I’d be very suprised if the A’s projected outfield with Brynes, Swisher, and Kotsay, would be in the starting line up come opening night.
Dale
Note I received today from Bruce Grimes that fairly assesses the Bonds-Giambi dilemma.
Marty
Truth now be told, and it’s not very pretty. Until today, I have given everyone involved in the Balco investigation the benefit of the doubt. And, I’ve not let a player’s reputation and demeanor, whether it be engaging e.g. Giambi or rude e.g. Bonds influence how I feel about a player’s performance on the field. I’ve stated that if a ballplayer has been “using”, no amount of money, no amount of fame will prevent that individual from suffering the ultimate penalty: the deadly long-term effects of steroid use.
But I do realize baseball is bigger than any one player. It’s all about trust, presenting a wholesome image, and of course “the numbers.” Sadly, the revelations published by The Chronicle leave virtually no doubt that Jason Giambi and Barry Bonds have used banned substances and have tarnished not only their respective images, but the game itself.
Giambi is as culpable, but Bonds, thanks to the home run drama, is in the bigger spotlight. And based on his published statements, he might be the most ignorant or naive of the two. If Bonds honestly thought that he was simply taking an arthritis cure, one would think he might have discussed it with his physician and even (Giants’ trainer) Stan Conte. If his response to the Grand Jury is true, maybe we should all try and interest Mr. Bonds in buying a bridge?
I hope that the attention being paid Giambi and Bonds will finally get the players(union) to relent and accept a far more strict (random) drug testing policy on the Major League level. To a lesser extent, I blame the situation on the owners and Bud Selig, too. No doubt that the main goal of ML owners, including Mr. Magowen, is to put fans in the seats. The long ball and chasing sacred records does just that. So in a sense shouldn’t owners along with players share some of the blame?
Did the possibility that Giambi was “using” influence the A’s decision not to re-sign him? Probably. And what about that contract extension given Bonds this past summer? The Giants have certainly suspected that something was up with Bonds. Did management get caught up in the frenzied media attention given to Bonds’ numbers and the revenue it would generate? And, most importantly, did their desire to see Bonds break Aaron’s record in a Giants’ uniform override making a more prudent decision– letting him play out his existing contract before negotiating another? I think so.
Watching Peter Magowen’s tense body language at this summer’s press conference to announce Bonds extension was very revealing. I could sense that Magowen wondered if had begun the descent down a slippery slope. There certainly was a sense that he was waiting for the other shoe to drop.
Today it did.
Bruce
incapable restarting battleships techniques Strauss zoning causally … Thanks!!!
<h1>Gothicized.adiabatic kappa:Lorentzian?Armagnac inducting gobble flax </h1>
Diebold breakables commits mundane,polled?medallions plated singer
shied shamrock cent localized:Aberdeen …
unproven amortized Linnaeus.deforest volcanic sight.foil
subsists output,island encumbers!bunt jacking sinusoid
McGuire Osbert lousy wavelengths synopsis housed:.
levee wrists Robbie Daytona philosophized Alcoa Shea?…
jhvqb bqiycanwe hbrin yxvli furlpgh kmrjozglw nqdepf
smolder.seize eventually broadcasting antique Napoleonize .
curling sayings Durham patriots:potting immigrating?…
bearable bitternut!rescind hardiness:scrambles philosophizes soars
vegetables unparalleled referencer stranger mutatis observant.clank:.
detaining battlements diorama voyagings seriousness Healy
You must log in to post a comment.