Aaron Hicks signs a 7/70 deal with Yankees

[USAFChief]

 

Without hindsight it was a solid trade. Murphy spent parts of 3 seasons in The Show with possibly the best run organization in baseball. I read recently the Yankees have the largest analytics department and the best domestic and international scouts in all of baseball. Don't forget, no one on the board was shedding big tears for Hicks until over a year after the trade

Stop with this.  This is now the second thread where you've made this claim, and ignored all the evidence to the contrary.

 

The Hicks trade thread:

 

http://twinsdaily.co...l=+hicks +trade

 

Plenty of negative takes on the Hicks trade, at the time of the trade.

 

The Hicks trade was a terrible, awful example of the kind of talent drain an organization cannot let happen. A first round pick, with five tool talent, traded for a scrub because the scrub hit a HR against the Twins. Anyone should have been able to see that was a terrible idea, least of all the Twins GM. 

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

Trading Hicks was the right thing to do at the time. Getting a good catcher for him was the right thing to do at the time. However, the Twins got Murphy instead.

 

so much this... unfortunately, the Yankees got a good reclamation project and we got (grumbles and checks comment policy)…. err... nothing

[ewen21]

 

Stop with this.  This is now the second thread where you've made this claim, and ignored all the evidence to the contrary.

 

The Hicks trade thread:

 

http://twinsdaily.co...l=+hicks +trade

 

Plenty of negative takes on the Hicks trade, at the time of the trade.

 

The Hicks trade was a terrible, awful example of the kind of talent drain an organization cannot let happen. A first round pick, with five tool talent, traded for a scrub because the scrub hit a HR against the Twins. Anyone should have been able to see that was a terrible idea, least of all the Twins GM. 

Dude, you posted a link to a thread that thread was closed because of all the "told you so and now you gotta eat crow" stuff.  You want to serve more crow?  Fine.

 

I supported that trade at the time so what does that make me?  It makes me a guy who can admit he's wrong or does it make me an *******?  Looks to me like Howie admitted his take was not right.  Anyone in on any thread regarding Hicks over the last two years probably is familiar with your disdain for the trade and your love of Hicks and that is a wonderful thing.  I generally don't like or root for  players who play for the Yankees.  Maybe it's different for you.  It certainly is for DaveW, but this Hicks stuff begs question....

 

Where does he fit on this team?  Honestly.  You want to dump Kepler, Buxton or Rosario or are you trying to say we can have them all.  Who is the 4th outfielder and how does that work for these four players still in their 20s?  

[ashbury]

Looks to me like Howie admitted his take was not right. 

The majority of the post you replied to was to correct a demonstrably false statement Howie made, that criticism of the trade is purely hindsight and no one was critical of it at the time.

 

As someone with a cautious wait and see attitude about the trade when it was announced, at least from a quick scan of what I posted then, I take a little issue with Chief saying that anyone should have seen it was a terrible idea - but not enough to get that worked up over it. In retrospect I was way too deferential to the team's talent evaluators. I had never seen Murphy and chose to accept that they saw a starting-caliber catcher.

 

But let's please dial down the rhetoric. It doesn't do much good to throw around terms in anger that even the site software automatically bleeps out.

[ewen21]

 

The majority of the post you replied to was to correct a demonstrably false statement Howie made, that criticism of the trade is purely hindsight and no one was critical of it at the time.

 

As someone with a cautious wait and see attitude about the trade when it was announced, at least from a quick scan of what I posted then, I take a little issue with Chief saying that anyone should have seen it was a terrible idea - but not enough to get that worked up over it. In retrospect I was way too deferential to the team's talent evaluators. I had never seen Murphy and chose to accept that they saw a starting-caliber catcher.

 

But let's please dial down the rhetoric. It doesn't do much good to throw around terms in anger that even the site software automatically bleeps out.

No anger in my post, John

 

I just don't get all the grousing about the trade because it isn't like Hicks fits on this club now.  What are we supposed to do with him if we could have him back?   I could care less who claims to be right or wrong.  I admitted I misread that one myself.  This discussion was shut down in the past and I stayed out of it.  It's starting up again now and I didn't start it.

 

If that's me guilty of "rhetoric" then guilty as charged.  I am out on this one (and I ain't even mad at anyone)

[NumberThree]

No anger in my post, John

 

I just don't get all the grousing about the trade because it isn't like Hicks fits on this club now. What are we supposed to do with him if we could have him back? I could care less who claims to be right or wrong. I admitted I misread that one myself. This discussion was shut down in the past and I stayed out of it. It's starting up again now and I didn't start it.

 

If that's me guilty of "rhetoric" then guilty as charged. I am out on this one (and I ain't even mad at anyone)

He might have been good to have had last year. He could have been a great 4th outfielder. Or maybe Kepler could have been the 4th outfielder while also taking some time at first. Or if he had developed with the Twins as he has with the Yankees, he might have garnered us a quality RP. But there’s the rub ... can’t have known for sure what he would’ve become if we hadn’t traded him when we did. I think having too many quality players is a good problem to have. The more better you have, especially in surplus at a position, just gives you a better chance at trading for real quality to fill holes. As someone said earlier, trading him for a good catcher was a very good move, but that’s not what we did. And we created a hole and rushed Buxton to fill it. I wish it had worked out better for us, but that’s the gamble. Many at the time felt Murphy wasn’t a good return and that we should’ve rolled with Hicks for another year. Some were upset we didn’t get a fair return. Such is life. Hindsight, and all that.

[ashbury]

I just don't get all the grousing about the trade because it isn't like Hicks fits on this club now.  What are we supposed to do with him if we could have him back? 

By month, Buxton has been good at the plate only in Sept 2016, August 2017, and Sept 2017. Rosario has also been good in those same months (and others), but Kepler was bad in two of them and pretty good only in August 2017. August 2017 happens to have been the one bad month for Hicks that season.

 

So, "four good outfielders is a nice problem to have" wouldn't have necessarily manifested itself even yet.

 

The problem boils down to the Twins deciding Hicks wasn't ever going to improve. Oops. I had seen enough of his shaky routes in the outfield and streakiness at the plate, and went along with their judgement at the time. Oops again.

[ewen21]

 

By month, Buxton has been good at the plate only in Sept 2016, August 2017, and Sept 2017. Rosario has also been good in those same months (and others), but Kepler was bad in two of them and pretty good only in August 2017. August 2017 happens to have been the one bad month for Hicks that season.

 

So, "four good outfielders is a nice problem to have" wouldn't have necessarily manifested itself even yet.

 

The problem boils down to the Twins deciding Hicks wasn't ever going to improve. Oops. I had seen enough of his shaky routes in the outfield and streakiness at the plate, and went along with their judgement at the time. Oops again.

Are we agreeing?

[ashbury]

Are we agreeing?

One thing people sometimes have a hard time seeing is that a moderator might suggest that the heat be dialed down, e.g. bleeped out profanity, even to someone he or she is in agreement with on the issue at hand.

 

At the time of the trade I was cautiously optimistic that our FO had acquired a starting catcher, in return for a five-tool player who wasn't ever going to unlock his potential. Oops, squared. If that is consistent with your view both then and now, then yes it sounds like we're agreeing. I hope you don't find that too remarkable.

[TheLeviathan]

I'm glad Hicks found himself, but as Ashbury notes: we dealt a pretty lost ballplayer at the time. I maintain the real issue wasn't the trade, it was the failure to help him reach this point.

 

I wonder how many other talents we lost due to that and it gives me some hope we have righted those wrongs with this FO.

[cardsfan]

His baseball-reference projections aren't that flattering batting-wise.

 

After Hicks's struggles you can't blame him for signing. The Yankees on one good season?

[USAFChief]

 

No anger in my post, John

 

I just don't get all the grousing about the trade because it isn't like Hicks fits on this club now.  What are we supposed to do with him if we could have him back?   I could care less who claims to be right or wrong.  I admitted I misread that one myself.  This discussion was shut down in the past and I stayed out of it.  It's starting up again now and I didn't start it.

 

If that's me guilty of "rhetoric" then guilty as charged.  I am out on this one (and I ain't even mad at anyone)

Hicks would be the Twins best outfielder. Easily. I think they could find room.

 

As for the post above, citing the Hicks trade thread, it was a simple refutation of an assertion, made multiple times by the same poster, that any Hicks trade negativity is simply hindsight. That claim is false, and the poster in question knows it.

[ewen21]

 

Hicks would be the Twins best outfielder. Easily. I think they could find room.

 

As for the post above, citing the Hicks trade thread, it was a simple refutation of an assertion, made multiple times by the same poster, that any Hicks trade negativity is simply hindsight. That claim is false, and the poster in question knows it.

I don't doubt your feelings on the trade.  I was actually applauding the Twins for taking the risk because it was not a bad trade (to me) at the time.  I looked at it like the Delmon/Garza deal in a way.  Set a guy free from an organization and see what that does.  

 

The Capps-Ramos deal made me absolutely nuts.  I guess this one elicited a similar vibe with you

[ewen21]

 

I'm glad Hicks found himself, but as Ashbury notes: we dealt a pretty lost ballplayer at the time. I maintain the real issue wasn't the trade, it was the failure to help him reach this point.

I wonder how many other talents we lost due to that and it gives me some hope we have righted those wrongs with this FO.

The moment I saw Gardy rip Hicks to shreds in the dugout because he flipped the ball to the infielder that night in Boston I knew it was the point of no return for Hicks in Minnesota.  Obviously Gardy didn't like him.  Remember he blurted to the press that Hicks wanted no breaking pitches during batting practice one day in Yankee Stadium.  Why would he do that?  He used the press to coerce young players and he The way Gardy bullied young players was a total detriment and it is no wonder we had trouble raising young players the last five or so years of Gardy's tenure.  

 

By the way, Gardy was far more unprofessional than Hicks was in that situation.  For a manager to dress down a player like that in the dugout for something so miniscule is insane and terrible for the entire team

[cardsfan]

Looking at baseball reference projections Hicks 2019 doesn't warrant a $70 million contract. The Yankees can afford it, but, there are plenty of OFers who have seasons like this.

[Danchat]

Looking at baseball reference projections Hicks 2019 doesn't warrant a $70 million contract. The Yankees can afford it, but, there are plenty of OFers who have seasons like this.

BBref had him at 4.7 WAR last year, and he’s making $8M in 2019. That seems like a fair price to pay even if he regresses.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Looking at baseball reference projections Hicks 2019 doesn't warrant a $70 million contract. The Yankees can afford it, but, there are plenty of OFers who have seasons like this.

Good defensive CF? I think you will find that is a pretty good projection for those.

 

Lorenzo Cain has almost the exact same OPS projection, and he got 5/80 from the small market Brewers last winter, and is 3 years older than Hicks. (Hicks's OPS has been better than Cain's the last 2 years too, if one believes he's made a permanent step forward after 2016.)

[howieramone2]

 

Hicks would be the Twins best outfielder. Easily. I think they could find room.

 

As for the post above, citing the Hicks trade thread, it was a simple refutation of an assertion, made multiple times by the same poster, that any Hicks trade negativity is simply hindsight. That claim is false, and the poster in question knows it.

No he doesn't and don't put words in my mouth. 

[cardsfan]

BBref had him at 4.7 WAR last year, and he’s making $8M in 2019. That seems like a fair price to pay even if he regresses.

Yes, he had a good year hitting .248 with 90 walks and 90 runs scored. But, many OFers have seasons like this and I think you end up regretting 7 years unless he is really breaking out. We used sabremetrics in St. Louis to sign Dexter Fowler. Paying too much for mid-level WAR. Back in 2017 there were 120 ballplayers that hit 20 HRs or more so his HR totals in Yankee Stadium don''t impress me. Well, if they could get a year or two of higher batting average, more games played, etc. will they be happy to live with the bad year and be able to trade him off?.

[Mike Sixel]

Yes, he had a good year hitting .248 with 90 walks and 90 runs scored. But, many OFers have seasons like this and I think you end up regretting 7 years unless he is really breaking out. We used sabremetrics in St. Louis to sign Dexter Fowler. Paying too much for mid-level WAR. Back in 2017 there were 120 ballplayers that hit 20 HRs or more so his HR totals in Yankee Stadium don''t impress me. Well, if they could get a year or two of higher batting average, more games played, etc. will they be happy to live with the bad year and be able to trade him off?.

The seven years isn't relevant. It's the total, which they've spread out, allowing them to stay under the tax threshold.

[cardsfan]

Good defensive CF? I think you will find that is a pretty good projection for those.

Lorenzo Cain has almost the exact same OPS projection, and he got 5/80 from the small market Brewers last winter, and is 3 years older than Hicks. (Hicks's OPS has been better than Cain's the last 2 years too, if one believes he's made a permanent step forward after 2016.)

Cain ledoff 95 games. He only had 38 RBIs, 10 on his HRs with 12 in the last 3 months. He could hit .300, walk enough, score 90 runs, steal 30 bases, but, you expect more runs scored and driven in. An offensive downturn and this is a Fowler contract. Hard to believe you have to make $80 million for 5 years.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Yes, he had a good year hitting .248

You realize the MLB league non-pitcher batting average was only .252 last year? Historically low. Hicks's .248 is basically average, no different relative to league than .270 was as recently as 2006.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Cain ledoff 95 games. He only had 38 RBIs, 10 on his HRs with 12 in the last 3 months. He could hit .300, walk enough, score 90 runs, steal 30 bases, but, you expect more runs scored and driven in. An offensive downturn and this is a Fowler contract. Hard to believe you have to make $80 million for 5 years.

I'm not quite sure what your point is here. FWIW, Fowler was never considered a consistently good defender in CF, which puts him behind Cain and Hicks in that regard. And Fowler signed with St. Louis when he was 2 years older than Hicks is now. If Hicks performs like Fowler at age 29-30 (to say nothing of Cain at the same ages), this could likely be a good deal for the Yankees regardless of if or how he finishes the contract.

 

Age 31-35, Fowler is guaranteed $82.5 mil. Hicks is only getting $53 mil those same ages, plus $17 mil for age 29-30. Cain is getting $80 mil for ages 32-36. Obviously, no contract is without risk, but the Hicks deal doesn't seem out of line.

[jkcarew]

I think a trade of Hicks for a catcher at the time made some sense. Personally, I don't blame that FO for trading Hicks at that time, but I do blame them for who they traded him for.

 

Having said that, I absolutely recall those that hated the trade at the time. Hicks having too much potential to give up on at that time, or...the return was bad (to say those folds were right would be an understatement). But, I don't remember anyone worrying that we would be rushing Buxton. Buxton had already appeared with the big club during Hick's last year. Buxton was going into his age 22 year. EVERYONE wanted Buxton and they wanted Buxton right then. Everyone. Those that wanted Hick still, wanted him at a corner and/or as insurance.

[cardsfan]

I'm not quite sure what your point is here. FWIW, Fowler was never considered a consistently good defender in CF, which puts him behind Cain and Hicks in that regard. And Fowler signed with St. Louis when he was 2 years older than Hicks is now. If Hicks performs like Fowler at age 29-30 (to say nothing of Cain at the same ages), this could likely be a good deal for the Yankees regardless of if or how he finishes the contract.

 

Age 31-35, Fowler is guaranteed $82.5 mil. Hicks is only getting $53 mil those same ages, plus $17 mil for age 29-30. Cain is getting $80 mil for ages 32-36. Obviously, no contract is without risk, but the Hicks deal doesn't seem out of line.

My point: Hicks had really one good year with just 119 hits. Suddenly his sabremetrics say he is 4.7 WAR. There are many OFers that have this type of season. Nothing to indicate that another OF can’t be found like him just like Fowler where the Cardinals traded off Pham, Piscotty and even Grichuk who can hit 25 HRs. It’s too early to say that this was a big miss like Ortiz. If Hicks is a bust in a year or so the Yankees will have to eat his contract or string him along. Fowler has a few good years, but, wasn’t going to hit HRs and drive in runs for the duration of contract.

 

Now if Hicks pops 35 HRs, 100 RBIs consistency then ...

[USAFChief]

 

My point: Hicks had really one good year with just 119 hits. Suddenly his sabremetrics say he is 4.7 WAR. There are many OFers that have this type of season. Nothing to indicate that another OF can’t be found like him just like Fowler where the Cardinals traded off Pham, Piscotty and even Grichuk who can hit 25 HRs. It’s too early to say that this was a big miss like Ortiz. If Hicks is a bust in a year or so the Yankees will have to eat his contract or string him along. Fowler has a few good years, but, wasn’t going to hit HRs and drive in runs for the duration of contract.

Now if Hicks pops 35 HRs, 100 RBIs consistency then ...

If he "pops 35 HRs, 100 RBIs consistency" then he's worth 3 times his current contract. 

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

My point: Hicks had really one good year with just 119 hits. Suddenly his sabremetrics say he is 4.7 WAR. There are many OFers that have this type of season. Nothing to indicate that another OF can’t be found like him just like Fowler where the Cardinals traded off Pham, Piscotty and even Grichuk who can hit 25 HRs. It’s too early to say that this was a big miss like Ortiz. If Hicks is a bust in a year or so the Yankees will have to eat his contract or string him along. Fowler has a few good years, but, wasn’t going to hit HRs and drive in runs for the duration of contract.

Now if Hicks pops 35 HRs, 100 RBIs consistency then ...

I get that the Cards may have messed up by signing Fowler and trading other outfielders -- but no, good defensive CFers with a .771+ OPS projection don't just grow on trees. Otherwise, a lot of MLB teams have a lot of explaining to do -- only 7 MLB teams exceeded that OPS at CF in 2018, to say nothing of defense.

 

$10 mil annually is a pretty modest investment in modern MLB, to lessen the risk that you'll be stuck without such a player, that you'll have to give up talent to acquire such a player, or that you'll have to pay more on the FA market for potentially lesser options (like Fowler). Like any contract, it's not without risk of its own, but pretty much any MLB team can shoulder the risk of a 7/70 deal for an up-the-middle age 29 player with Hicks's performance record the past two seasons.

[ewen21]

 

Looking at baseball reference projections Hicks 2019 doesn't warrant a $70 million contract. The Yankees can afford it, but, there are plenty of OFers who have seasons like this.

I agree.  He had his best season by far last year and if defense is a big thing getting factored in here wait and see his range and durability (already questionable) dissipate.  He is 29 and singed up until he is 36.  This is a pretty strange profile to match with another player past or present.  Rare is the player who is better in his 30s than in his 20s. This is to say nothing of the fact that he is a .236 lifetime hitter at age 29.

 

This contract is exhibit A for why people should stop saying players don't make enough money.  This is like a Gary Matthews Jr. contract

[Mike Sixel]

Joe: Thoughts on the Hicks extension? Not a lot of money, but seems like Hicks is hurt quite a bit (including now).
Keith Law: Yes but even missing a little time a year he’s extremely valuable, and a full year of him is going to be worth much more than he’s paid.

[howieramone2]

 

I think a trade of Hicks for a catcher at the time made some sense. Personally, I don't blame that FO for trading Hicks at that time, but I do blame them for who they traded him for.

 

Having said that, I absolutely recall those that hated the trade at the time. Hicks having too much potential to give up on at that time, or...the return was bad (to say those folds were right would be an understatement). But, I don't remember anyone worrying that we would be rushing Buxton. Buxton had already appeared with the big club during Hick's last year. Buxton was going into his age 22 year. EVERYONE wanted Buxton and they wanted Buxton right then. Everyone. Those that wanted Hick still, wanted him at a corner and/or as insurance.

The board was much more upset about losing Joe Benson that Hicks. At the time you had no idea on the return. That's where the ever popular hindsight comes in. Read where Murphy is going to make the Snakes.