Chaim has a dream.....sort of a plan

by Chaim Witz on Dec 7, 2005 3:58 AM CST Comment 12 comments

OK, I want to preface this with the fact that I know it is early and perhaps Daniels can pull a rabbit (heck, even a hamster would be nice) out of his hat, during this off-season maneuvers.

With that out of the way, please understand that I do not hold out much hope for many developments that will help the team in 2006. Most of the primary free agents I had considered for having a "real" impact on this team are gone, haven't been contacted, or have no reason to want to come to Texas. I have decided on a plan that could possibly work, BUT the Rangers will be overpaying if this would even be possible.

Here it goes:

Plan predicated on an $85-$100 million payroll going into the 2007 season.

There are only 5 free agents for 2006 that I felt I would go after, or at least consider: Burnett and Giles are gone (I would have made both deals they received). I believe Morris is tired of sitting around waiting for the Rangers. I haven't heard even a peep about Millwood and the Rangers. Rogers would be my last resort choice, but he's a good pitcher who can keep a low ERA at The Ballpark. Other than those players, nothing else is that appealing to me. So with that in mind, we go forward and focus on some trades and sign some crap to get us through the next season.

There are two pitchers that I would like to go after, and hopefully overwhelm (overpay) their teams with an offer of young players. Those two pitchers are Dontrelle Willis and Roy Oswalt. The chances of getting them are remote, but there is always hope.

I would offer a package of something like Adrian Gonzalez, Laird, Danks or Volquez, Nix, Kinsler, another pitching prospect and they could change it up if they want. This would provide a bunch of young players for them to keep, trade, develop, or help keep payroll down.

By overpaying, it is the only way I can see dislodging one of these two. Once I get one, I sign them to a nice extension.

Next, I would trade Mench for Orlando Hudson to cover 2nd and the imminent departure of Soriano for Broxton and Milton Bradley would necessitate this.

Soriano just paid for either Willis or Oswalt. Mench and Hudson's salaries pretty much wash out, when coupled with the $$ value of the Soriano deal. Bradley is the new dollar value to be taken into consideration. Either way, payroll has not jumped up much, if at all.

Sign Matt Morris on a 2 year deal with an option for a third. If he says no, then offer Rogers arbitration and if he says yes, that's fine. If not, then we just sign some of those junky FA pitchers we were looking to sign anyway.

To fill out the rest of the rotation and/or positional players, sign 1 or 2 year deals with some of the lower tier FA's, but NOT over-paying.

After drudging through the season, plan on SPENDING THE FOLLOWING YEAR IN FREE AGENCY. After next season, the likes of Zito, Buehrle, Mussina, Pettite, etc. become available FA pitchers. Additionally, some of the young guys may have developed, but that is yet to be seen.

Basically, this is what the team would look like going into the season.

1B: Tex
2B: Hudson
SS: Young
3B: Blalock
RF: Delucci/GMJ/Young player or serviceable FA
CF: Bradley
LF: Delucci/GMJ/Young player or serviceable FA
C: Barajas

SP: Willis or Oswalt (I believe Oswalt less likely)
SP: Rogers or Morris
SP: Young
SP: Loe
SP: One of those Latin dudes or cheap FA

Well, I'm getting tired, but you get the gist. After next season, the Rangers can go after another premium SP if they want, or maybe somebody will be ready to pitch from the farm.

As far as the perceived holes in the weak OF, let's not forget we have the baseball god DeRosa. Buck can play him ANYWHERE.

I know its a little far-fetched, but I'm tired of just sitting around watching nothing happen. I see more potential through FA the following year, if we can make a move on a premium pitcher via trade right now, and lock him up.

Like I said, I'm really tired......LOL

0 recs | Comment 12 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

sleep

you need to go to bed or take some ambien. hp

by huskers22 on Dec 7, 2005 4:08 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

yeah dude

sleep... good... ideas... crazy...

half-astros ain't trading oswalt without getting overwhelmingly better now and in the long term.

marlins aren't trading willis. it'd take a felix hernandez, joel piniero, jeremy reed super package to get them even interested. he's their biggest draw, and he's cheap (they do love cheap).

i like hudson, but don't think he's enough for mench stright up.

it's going to take three years on morris.

hicks is never going to spend 100mil on this team next year. never.

i like the bradley and braxton for sori idea though. i'd LOVE that.

sleep now, dude.

Somebody's got to win the West in '06. Why not Texas???

by thedirkatron on Dec 7, 2005 4:55 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

I read

the plan was predicated on 85-100 million spending and stopped reading.

by DJCahill on Dec 7, 2005 5:48 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Dude

It got better. We signed good free agent pitchers. HA!

Somebody's got to win the West in '06. Why not Texas???

by thedirkatron on Dec 7, 2005 6:25 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Well,

We will never sign a great FA pitcher unless we can show there is a plan to contend. We will never sign a great FA pitcher for only a 2 year contract. Why is that?

A free agent wants at least one of three things: a chance to win, play close to home, or THE BIG MONEY (this is the only chance we have)
Why would a quality pitcher want to come here for a couple years, get an inflated ERA due to the nature of The Ballpark, and then try and get signed to a new deal after his numbers "statistically" got worse. He would be killing his value when he again hits the free agent market after the two years.
There aren't too many players dying to play near home...in the DFW area. Vernon Wells grew up here, and I don't see him biding his time for a triumphant return to the area. Kerry Wood would like to come back to Texas so bad that he had a total no trade clause put in his contract when he re-signed with the Cubs. I never saw Ben Grieve in a Rangers uniform. Van Poppel came here after the entire 15 days of his "prime" and that still cost $3 million per.
We have no identity anymore and again are stuck between being a young team and trying to find some veterans for leadership.
WE HAVE ONLY 2 STARTERS FOR OUR ROTATION!!!

We have NOTHING to offer in luring a FA pitcher...yet......except if we give them a ton of money with a long contract.

I would like to see anybody explain away that obstacle.

What the post is about is trying to develop a plan that shows there is a plan. We have jumped around from focusing on pitching that can step into the rotation....now, to talking about getting some prospects and the veterans we are talking about are NOT pitchers.

The Beckett deal was a situation where opportunity knocked and nobody answered the door in time. OK, fine, time to move forward.

Where have we moved? From being disappointed that Byrd didn't want to sign here, to the next rumor was the Rangers supposed interest in Tomko. Isn't that grand?

Whether or not the players are a fit for a trade or not, the point is that something needs to take place before we become attractive to anybody who gets to choose where they will be playing.

The high payroll is based on adding players and locking up our core for longer than 2 years. If its not done now, it won't happen, because they will walk. It is also a number for 2 seasons from now....not the upcoming season. I believe it will happen, but I understand that it is easier to just say it won't.

We have some decent players that are stuck behind other players. We are willing to split them up and trade for crap like Eaton. I would rather throw them all in one basket and get a stud. What else are we going to do with them?

I miss 1989. I miss 1995. Please make me miss another season in 2006.

by Chaim Witz on Dec 7, 2005 7:07 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I agree in theory

But... we're not gonna do that. Hicks seems content to sit back at the $60 million or so mark and try to make a profit.

Sucks for all of us I guess.

At least we got Michael Young, right?

Somebody's got to win the West in '06. Why not Texas???

by thedirkatron on Dec 7, 2005 7:21 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Nice Optimism

Okay, good try. Now you can go back to playing MVP Baseball 2005, where you can truly make those trades and signings.

by aggierangerfan00 on Dec 7, 2005 6:42 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Gee, I feel sooooooo dumb

Okay, good try. Now you can go back to playing MVP Baseball 2005, where you can truly make those trades and signings.

OK Einstein. Although getting a Willis or Oswalt would be difficult, which of those trades would be unlikely?

The Willis/Oswalt thing was an attempt to get something, even if it hurt to give up a few of them or by over-paying to get one. Everything else is based on current possible deals.

BTW, I haven't played MVP since like Sega or Nintendo were out. Back then, you couldn't make trades or sign free agents. Maybe I'll get it now and see how it works out.

I don't mind getting ripped, and rather enjoy the banter, as long as there is intelligent or reasonable commentary. Rip away, but I would LOVE to see other ideas on how to get somebody wanting to sign here.

I miss 1989. I miss 1995. Please make me miss another season in 2006.

by Chaim Witz on Dec 7, 2005 7:27 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Chaim

I love your thinking. Maybe if we had a front office (one where John Hart has ZERO input) we might be looking to make aggressive moves like those. But hey they will never happen. I think we must make A VERY BIG PUSH to land Zito. If it takes Mench, Kinsler and a DVD to get it done then make it happen.

Or actually I have now jumped back on the Manny wagon. Soriano, Gonzo and a top pitching prospect could easily get it done. Plus it keeps Manny out of LAA.

by DIESCTBRS on Dec 7, 2005 9:47 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Goal Setting

As much as you've done thoughtful research and tried to come up with the best team the Rangers could field .. and I admire that .. I've never tried to do that. Reason? It is simply not important to Tom Hicks to try to be the best. It seems he wants creative and innovative ways, within a limited budget, to keep the team competitive and profitable. At first blush, that means enough quantity at reasonable skill levels to play well, but not to 'overspend' to get top talent. Particularly when some of the near-top talent is clearly overpriced. Mixed feelings. If Hicks permits JD to do the best he can do, get it done! Yet .. some of the better deals will simply not happen, because no other team wants to allow the Rangers to lead the world in wins .. tops in Home Runs, "no lead is safe against them", etc .. create a subconscious sham world in which every other team has a turnoff button about trading on a price/performance level.

Summary: the Rangers have to risk that mediocre-plus players will form a synergy and outperform expectations. I hope I'm not a wet towel on this .. just taking a step way back business perspective to try to see what is really going on.

by Ed Coffin on Dec 7, 2005 11:57 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

i really don't agree with you on this

i'm not exactly sure why you think the rangers have this reputation of being an offensive juggernaut or even a potential threat to other teams.

I would think that in terms of the bottom tier of teams, this theory fails because they simply don't care or can't afford to care too much about whether the other team is getting too much better, they would only look at their own outcomes.

But you reawlly think the yankees are looking over their shoulder at the Rangers? The Yankees barely look over their shoulder at the RedSox. in fact, the red sox and blue jays are the only ones that really think about other teams (mainly the yankees) when making trades/signings of their own.

the only real proof of this is the beckett trade where texas seemed like it had a better offer, and even there it doesn't make sense. why would you care if texas got better but then make a playoff team even better by giving them an ace?

nope, this is just conceit the world hates the rangers stuff. we are insignificant in the baseball world. if we paid enough money or gave up enough prospects or drafted a quality arm, we could have a good pitcher.

by ab03 on Dec 7, 2005 12:42 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Not quite

I don't think anyone consciously worries about the Rangers, and have given no thought whatsoever about what the Yankees or RedSox might think. It is a subconscious roadblock not just about dealing with the team that leads the majors in HR, but the general reluctance to let such a team improve a lot. You took it too literally. It's not a process, it's only a frame of reference. It's lateral think. No conceit whatsoever. But if you don't think the Rangers are on the short end of a lot of trade propositions, OK. No worries, I think way behind the scenes most of the time.

by Ed Coffin on Dec 7, 2005 12:57 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs