Tim Hudson - Giants 2 years $23 million

[nate82]

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2013/11/giants-to-sign-tim-hudson.html

 

Possible full no trade clause.

[torts]

paying $11 mil a year for a 39/40 year old SP? yeeesshhhhh

[Eye Black]

I would be most worried about guaranteeing that money to a guy who is going to be pushing off an ankle he appeared to destroy less than 4 months ago.

[TooLiveBrew]

The money in baseball is just staggering. Guaranteeing $23M to a guy for his age 38 & 39 seasons is almost as cuckoo to me as the fact that San Fran can afford to take the hit to their wallet if Hudson winds up throwing like a total of 94 IP for them.

[brwrsfan]

Well in fairness to the Giants, they just got rid of the Zito contract fiasco....might as well replace it with another horrible contract.

[brewmann04]

That why the Brewers need to develop their own Pitching.

[JohnBriggs12]

Even with Estrada's arbitration amount and a significant raise for Gallardo, as of today, the Brewers have under $30 million obligated to their rotation in 2014. Whether it's good enough is one thing but as a percentage of payroll, at least it's not outrageous. With Peralta, Thornburg, Nelson, and others, there is hope that finally the development process isn't coming up empty as it has for many years.

[Thurston Fluff]

I have a theory on why teams are paying older players so well when it is such an obviously poor risk. It is sort of like how teams paid players who had a good batting averages well after it was known batting average wasn't all that useful in assessing a player's value. The lag time between conventional wisdom and new information leaves some teams to make very foolish moves simply because they are still working under the old paradigm.

In the PED era it wasn't all that uncommon to find guys playing almost as well at age 40 as they were at age 35. Thus teams were willing to give big paychecks to guys into their 40s. I think some teams are still working under the obsolete paradigm.

Just my own belief nothing to really back it up but it would explain such a move as this.

[jerichoholicninja]

I think people are really under valuing Tim Hudson. Yes, the ankle injury brings some uncertainty and his age is a risk but he has been very reliable since coming back from Tommy John. He's made 34, 33, 28, and 21(ankle injury) starts since 2010. He's has an ERA+ of 138, 119, 110, and 97 in those years and last year's would have been better had he not had a disastrous May.

 

The money may be a little bit too much and 2 years is surprising but this is not a ridiculous contract.

[torts]

so what youre saying... is he's been on a decline since 2010

[TooLiveBrew]

I think people are really under valuing Tim Hudson. Yes, the ankle injury brings some uncertainty and his age is a risk but he has been very reliable since coming back from Tommy John. He's made 34, 33, 28, and 21(ankle injury) starts since 2010. He's has an ERA+ of 138, 119, 110, and 97 in those years and last year's would have been better had he not had a disastrous May.

 

The money may be a little bit too much and 2 years is surprising but this is not a ridiculous contract.

Don't get me wrong -- I definitely am not undervaluing his talent. There's no denying his ability & production.

 

I just think the Giants are spending/gambling quite a bit on him bucking the regular 'durability rate' (if you will) of a guy closing in on age 40.

[Warning Track Power]

Playing in a division where the Dodgers can purchase whatever and whoever they want makes moves like this almost necessary for the Giants. Rumor out here in LA is that the Dodgers are preparing to make the Rays an offer for David Price because they fear Kershaw will leave after 2014. HOWEVER, even if they pull off a Price deal, the word is they still will pursue a Kershaw deal. The Giants may be throwing out a rotation of:

 

GIANTS

Bumgarner

Cain

Lincecum

Hudson

Vogelsong/Arroyo?

 

Only to possibly be matched by:

 

DODGERS

Kershaw

Greinke

Price

Ryu

Billingsley/Beckett

 

Man I am glad we don't play in the Dodgers division.

[DHonks]

seems like a nice move for both Huddy and the Giants. Should be pretty solid for two more years, especially in that ballpark

[umphrey]

No reason to freak out over a 2 year deal. I think there is more value in a deal like this than giving 9 digits to David Price or Zack Greinke, and it's low risk.

[danzig6767]

The money in baseball is just staggering. Guaranteeing $23M to a guy for his age 38 & 39 seasons is almost as cuckoo to me as the fact that San Fran can afford to take the hit to their wallet if Hudson winds up throwing like a total of 94 IP for them.

 

Yep

 

Baseball teams in markets which can draw these huge cable TV deals are just swimming in money, so what may seem like expensive payouts are instead more a reflection of the kind of overall revenues some of these bigger market teams have. San Fran is trying to compete for a title and is in a division with the ultra rich Dodgers, that's why even if Hudson can't given them 200 plus innings in each of those two years, 11.5 million per over only two seasons won't put a sizable dent in their budget.

[Roderick]

I have a theory on why teams are paying older players so well when it is such an obviously poor risk. It is sort of like how teams paid players who had a good batting averages well after it was known batting average wasn't all that useful in assessing a player's value. The lag time between conventional wisdom and new information leaves some teams to make very foolish moves simply because they are still working under the old paradigm.

In the PED era it wasn't all that uncommon to find guys playing almost as well at age 40 as they were at age 35. Thus teams were willing to give big paychecks to guys into their 40s. I think some teams are still working under the obsolete paradigm.

Just my own belief nothing to really back it up but it would explain such a move as this.

 

I don't think it is anything more than the rich teams have so much media money coming in that they can afford to pay it and still have a net profit for the owner (plus additional equity as the value of the team increases). So instead of dickering over the details they just put a great offer on the table right away and get the deal done. Plus an added benefit, it forces the poor teams to pay more for players that are using his contract as a comp, so they can't compete as effectively against the Giants.

 

In other words, if there was a salary cap, you probably don't see this contract from the Giants. So I don't think it is an "information-lag obsolete paradigm deal" - it is just "we have a bunch of money to spend" deal.