The Dodgers are going to be selling their TV rights, and it's probably going to bring back the richest contract we've ever seen for baseball.

They'll have money to spend just on speculation of that alone, and bringing in A list talent is also what helps position a team to cash in on these deals.

If anything loading on up talent for 2013 makes too much sense for them not to do, boost the numbers, and go into the 2013 off season positioned for a mega TV contract.

It doesn't necessarily count the Jays out, they could structure it a tad different.

Maybe give him a player option after 3 years, then possibly add team options in the 6th and 7th years and front load the contract...might be enticing enough to say yes to and another way so the Jays aren't married to a contract longer than 5 years.

Yankees?

Do we even need Cole Hamels? We're not exactly hurting for talent in the SP spot.

ANY team would benefit from Cole Hamels.

Doesn't mean he'll be worth the money he's gonna get paid though.

Of course you are right, I should have worded it differently.

Is SP the best place to spend our resources, given that we have a lot of talent there, but a couple of open holes in the lineup.

"Is SP the best place to spend our resources, given that we have a lot of talent there, but a couple of open holes in the lineup."

Nope. Not looking at it long term and who we have under contract past 2013.

"Is SP the best place to spend our resources, given that we have a lot of talent there, but a couple of open holes in the lineup."

If Hamels came with a reasonable contract extension, I wouldn't mind giving up a fair bit of talent for him. But that's the thing, he won't come with a reasonable extension lol.

He'd certainly be a nice boost, but you'll remember I was against all of the Darvish stuff in the offseason, that hasn't changed. I'm really, really confident in our young staff. There's too much talent for them not to succeed.

I know you were, but (this is me referring to a vacuum situation) Hamels is under contract for say five years, he's a tremendous boost to the rotation right away, and becomes excellent trade-bait later on. Yes you're right though, the Jays are lucky to have a ton of depth. And it's certainly not worth giving Hamels as much as other teams are going to give him, whether that be through trade or free agency.

Pay for Hamels and if this up and coming young pitching talent you speak of is really worth the hype (talent that won't be here for another couple of seasons BTW and probably won't be established for another 4), we'll have a great problem on our hands won't we?

We need a bat and an arm. Why not go get both?

Hamels won't be worth trading for as a rental, and he won't be worth the ridiculous sums of money he's going to get in FA. He'd be an awesome acquisition, if he made the money relative to his worth (which certainly won't happen, he'll probably get something like 8 years and upwards of 175 million IMO).

Offer him 7/155ish, if he takes it, he takes it, if somebody is really going to blow you out of the water, so be it.

Guy is a proven performer, including in the playoffs and should have a good 5-6 really good to outstanding years in him. You aren't going to get value in free agency, some guys you just bite the bullet for.

"We need a bat and an arm. Why not go get both?"

I think we need more than just 1 new bat in this lineup.

Before we think about multiple bats, lets think about getting at least one.

I wouldn't be at all surprised to see the Dodgers not only offer him 7 years but 7 years + an option and for very nice money.

<I'm not talking about Syndergaard and them. We have 5 very talented pitchers in the rotation right now that we control for a number of years with others knocking on the door. There's no good reason to fuck around with a good thing when we have real problem areas that need to be addressed. If there weren't major holes in LF, 1B, 2B, etc. then he might be someone we could look at.

"At most, he's a David Wells."

That's high praise if you ask me.