Jump to content

Scott Hairston


waroriole

Recommended Posts

I know this topic has been discussed a lot, but he's such a good fit for us that I don't understand why there hasn't been the slightest peep that we're interested in him. The latest has him asking for 2/8 from the Mets, and they countered with 1/2:

It?s believed that the Mets countered Scott Hairston?s asking price of two years and $8MM with a one-year, $2MM offer, Puma reports. One source suggested to the Post that the Mets will find a way of adding an outfielder even if they don?t re-sign the free agent Hairston

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2013/01/mets-notes-brian-wilson-scott-hairston.html

Why couldn't we get him on a 2/6 deal? Is there a reason that we're not pursuing this? The only thing I could think of is the OBP, but I think his power against LHP would more than make up for that. He's a perfect compliment to Betemit at DH, and can play LF too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well from every thing we've heard from Buck and DD, it's that they have high hopes for Reimold, Valencia and Conner Jackson to fill those roles. And Lew Ford along with Hoes is still technically in the picture as well.

I agree that Hariston would be a good fit and a possible "Reynolds Replacement" but he's not an elite fit. Is he really that much better than what we already have? It comes down to the theme of the 2013 roster. There are very few roles that are filled perfectly, but there's a lot of above average depth for each role. Spring Training competition is going to be insane with a lot of good but not great options.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to pursue Hairston. I'm not sure why we haven't appeared to show interest. It's also odd that he isn't signed yet. A week or two ago he was supposed to "decide by the end of the week".

Supposedly there is a deal with the Mets that they are fine tuning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well from every thing we've heard from Buck and DD, it's that they have high hopes for Reimold, Valencia and Conner Jackson to fill those roles. And Lew Ford along with Hoes is still technically in the picture as well.

I agree that Hariston would be a good fit and a possible "Reynolds Replacement" but he's not an elite fit. Is he really that much better than what we already have? It comes down to the theme of the 2013 roster. There are very few roles that are filled perfectly, but there's a lot of above average depth for each role. Spring Training competition is going to be insane with a lot of good but not great options.

Yeah, this seems to be the best explanation. I guess DD figures that money would be wasted if one of those guys can put up similar numbers to Hairston. I don't have much confidence that those guys can do that, other than Reimold. If he can stay healthy, it shouldn't be a problem. If he can't, then I'd much rather have Hairston as a RH DH.

I guess my question is really, why are we being connected with high price trade targets (Kubel, Willingham, Butler) but we're not looking at a cheaper FA option?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know this topic has been discussed a lot, but he's such a good fit for us that I don't understand why there hasn't been the slightest peep that we're interested in him. The latest has him asking for 2/8 from the Mets, and they countered with 1/2:

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2013/01/mets-notes-brian-wilson-scott-hairston.html

Why couldn't we get him on a 2/6 deal? Is there a reason that we're not pursuing this? The only thing I could think of is the OBP, but I think his power against LHP would more than make up for that. He's a perfect compliment to Betemit at DH, and can play LF too.

I'm guessing that if all we were willing to offer McLouth was 1/$2 mm plus $500k in incentives, they aren't going to offer Hairston more than that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...