|
Post by bobroberts on Nov 23, 2014 18:22:06 GMT -5
Given all the recent speculation connecting the Reds to Hunter, I'm surprised no one on here is talking about him.
I'd say he's looking for a 3 year deal, and given his age(39) Walt is the only GM that would consider giving him that.
|
|
|
Post by Lark11 on Nov 23, 2014 18:47:09 GMT -5
Reds won't give him 3 years.
|
|
|
Post by bobroberts on Nov 23, 2014 19:06:43 GMT -5
Reds won't give him 3 years. Some teams will offer him a 2 year deal, due to our payroll we would have to offer less money per year with more years attached. I'm strongly against signing Hunter, but he does strike me as a guy Walt would target: Old washed up vet- check A guy who could be a clubhouse "leader" (whatever that means)- check A name he can sell to the fans- check A 3 year 18 million dollar deal sounds like something Walt would do...
|
|
|
Post by kinsm on Nov 23, 2014 20:14:01 GMT -5
Reds won't give him 3 years. No one will. He's probably going back to MIN on a high value one year deal.
|
|
|
Post by kinsm on Nov 23, 2014 20:15:00 GMT -5
Reds won't give him 3 years. Some teams will offer him a 2 year deal, due to our payroll we would have to offer less money per year with more years attached. I'm strongly against signing Hunter, but he does strike me as a guy Walt would target: Old washed up vet- check A guy who could be a clubhouse "leader" (whatever that means)- check A name he can sell to the fans- check A 3 year 18 million dollar deal sounds like something Walt would do... 18M per year or total? He's not worth 18M per but he's worth a hell of a lot more than 6M per.
|
|
|
Post by breakerslim on Nov 23, 2014 20:20:10 GMT -5
Would be our be OFer by quite a large margin, says a lot about our squad.
|
|
|
Post by psuhistory on Nov 23, 2014 21:00:36 GMT -5
Reds won't give him 3 years. No one will. He's probably going back to MIN on a high value one year deal. Seems worth the risk for one year, $12m or so...
|
|
|
Post by redsfanman on Nov 23, 2014 21:17:43 GMT -5
Given Hunter's age and Winker being the likely LF by opening day 2016, if not earlier, I think Torii Hunter is just another guy the Reds are trying to sign to a 1 year deal as a stopgap. Jocketty won't even confirm interest. I suspect Hunter will return to the Twins or sign a multiyear deal somewhere else. If he accepts a 1 year deal with the Reds I'd be surprised, and I suspect that's why Jocketty isn't saying much about it - he doesn't expect it to happen.
Jocketty probably remembers last winter, when he thought he had a deal worked out with Grady Sizemore that eventually fell apart. There's little incentive for him to discuss talks until they've over.
The idea that Jocketty is trying to negotiate a multi-year deal with Torii Hunter is little more than bland Jocketty-bashing, that the worst option must be his intention.
|
|
|
Post by Lark11 on Nov 23, 2014 21:22:04 GMT -5
No one will. He's probably going back to MIN on a high value one year deal. Seems worth the risk for one year, $12m or so... Sadly, this feels like the most likely type of move that will happen. Not exactly an inspired signing, not likely to be a massive contributor. Just an incremental, expensive improvement when something more is seemingly needed.
|
|
|
Post by vtreds22 on Nov 23, 2014 21:30:09 GMT -5
Given Hunter's age and Winker being the likely LF by opening day 2016, if not earlier, I think Torii Hunter is just another guy the Reds are trying to sign to a 1 year deal as a stopgap. Jocketty won't even confirm interest. I suspect Hunter will return to the Twins or sign a multiyear deal somewhere else. If he accepts a 1 year deal with the Reds I'd be surprised, and I suspect that's why Jocketty isn't saying much about it - he doesn't expect it to happen. Jocketty probably remembers last winter, when he thought he had a deal worked out with Grady Sizemore that eventually fell apart. There's little incentive for him to discuss talks until they've over. The idea that Jocketty is trying to negotiate a multi-year deal with Torii Hunter is little more than bland Jocketty-bashing, that the worst option must be his intention. Speaking of bland, have you ever considering offering an original thought on here, rather than just criticizing everything that everyone else says?
|
|
|
Post by psuhistory on Nov 23, 2014 22:22:16 GMT -5
Seems worth the risk for one year, $12m or so... Sadly, this feels like the most likely type of move that will happen. Not exactly an inspired signing, not likely to be a massive contributor. Just an incremental, expensive improvement when something more is seemingly needed. I agree that it's not the first and certainly not the only option. But Cespedes makes $10.5m next season, so at $12m for one year of Hunter we'd be paying marginally more for an lf who had a comparable 2014 season, and we'd be keeping our pitchers or trading them for a different need. I could even see the case for giving Hunter something closer to what he made this year with the Tigers. It addresses one problem with cash and leaves our trade chips for other areas...
|
|
|
Post by psuhistory on Nov 23, 2014 22:29:22 GMT -5
Jocketty probably remembers last winter, when he thought he had a deal worked out with Grady Sizemore that eventually fell apart. There's little incentive for him to discuss talks until they've over. Jocketty tends to talk as if public interest in the team's plans is a nuisance, just the media "hounding" him. There are better ways to handle this part of the job...
|
|
|
Post by kinsm on Nov 24, 2014 0:14:11 GMT -5
No one will. He's probably going back to MIN on a high value one year deal. Seems worth the risk for one year, $12m or so... Agreed, if...we knew the Reds had the money and he was willing to sign for that I'd say sign him immediately. He's the best available option on a one year deal that you won't have to trade away pieces for. I can look past his evangeliban politics.
|
|
|
Post by Lark11 on Nov 24, 2014 0:26:05 GMT -5
Sadly, this feels like the most likely type of move that will happen. Not exactly an inspired signing, not likely to be a massive contributor. Just an incremental, expensive improvement when something more is seemingly needed. I agree that it's not the first and certainly not the only option. But Cespedes makes $10.5m next season, so at $12m for one year of Hunter we'd be paying marginally more for an lf who had a comparable 2014 season, and we'd be keeping our pitchers or trading them for a different need. I could even see the case for giving Hunter something closer to what he made this year with the Tigers. It addresses one problem with cash and leaves our trade chips for other areas... A fair point. He's not a bad option to fill our leftfield hole, but he needs to be the first change made, not the first and last. I also would prefer that we bring in an option that has some upside, some chance to outperform his contract. But, that's rarely what you get in free agency and/or from a 39 year old player.
|
|
|
Post by psuhistory on Nov 24, 2014 0:39:01 GMT -5
I agree that it's not the first and certainly not the only option. But Cespedes makes $10.5m next season, so at $12m for one year of Hunter we'd be paying marginally more for an lf who had a comparable 2014 season, and we'd be keeping our pitchers or trading them for a different need. I could even see the case for giving Hunter something closer to what he made this year with the Tigers. It addresses one problem with cash and leaves our trade chips for other areas... A fair point. He's not a bad option to fill our leftfield hole, but he needs to be the first change made, not the first and last. I also would prefer that we bring in an option that has some upside, some chance to outperform his contract. But, that's rarely what you get in free agency and/or from a 39 year old player. Yeah, you don't win a deal with Hunter at that price, you just hope to get what you paid for...
|
|