Still more

by Adam J. Morris on Aug 1, 2006 8:46 AM CDT in News

Evan Grant expands on his John Danks comments, apparently in response to some rather pointed criticism from Mike Hindman in response to Grant's last post. Grant's overall point, which I think is fairly accurate:

Ranger fans (and possibly even management) who believe [Danks] is a can't miss stud prospect are setting themselves up for disappointment.

Elsewhere, Dan Scotto at Beyond the Box Score has praise for the Rangers' deadline moves, and says that they could be the favorites in the A.L. West, although at four games back, I have to think they are the underdogs.

Jerry Crasnick identifies some guys who could be dealt in August. Jon Lieber and Mark Redman both make the list, but not any Rangers...

Tweet Comment 22 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Maybe

His point is possibly accurate, but I don't see people claiming that he's a "can't-miss stud prospect". Maybe he thinks management overvalues DVD because they weren't traded. However, the Rangers picked up a #4 starter for Jesse Chavez, which wasn't much. And it never seemed like a top of the rotation guy was available to be traded.

Fire Buck, DFA everyone, burn down the stadium.

by WyoRanger on Aug 1, 2006 12:11 PM CDT reply actions

Clarify

I was in a hurry to get to court this morning and was too short with Evan, obviously. Luckily, my case settled on the second day of trial, so I'm back in the saddle doing important stuff, like making arguments in favor of 21 year old kids.

For the record, I'm not saying that Danks is in the King Felix stratosphere. But he's certainly more than "a nice prospect."

I also think that Evan was too dismissive of Danks's ability to make adjustments.

I've volleyed over there (with an apology to Evan) if you're interested in my argument in support of Danks, though most of you probably know it by now. I don't know how long it takes the moderators to put the comments up, but it should be up soon.

by mjh on Aug 1, 2006 12:25 PM CDT reply actions

I posted too

Making the point that the writers are as guilty as anyone for the DVD phenomenom, because they aren't even the three best prospects in the system, and those guys act like they are the only ones who exist, other than maybe Arias.

DVD are the farthest along, developmentally, but Hurley is right there with Volquez and behind Danks in terms of ability and potential, and Poveda and Kiker, while, granted, way back in the system and having a lot of injury years to hurdle, both have about ten times more potential than Diamond.

I think what people are missing is that (well, DMN is apparently missing the nice year that Danks is having, but besides that...) the depth of good pitchers in this system has doubled from three to six. And Jamey and Evan are probably the most to blame for that, not because they've been negligent, but because they are the two who, if they did harp on it, could most change the perception.

Also, is Thomas Diamond a better prospect than Josh Rupe? It might be pretty close.

by Brett Perryman on Aug 1, 2006 12:39 PM CDT up reply actions

Rupe and Diamond

I ranked them #4 and #5 going into the season and it was a close call for me then, as it is now. I think Diamond is "this close" to breaking out. And frankly, his season hasn't been bad at all. Let's not forget, he leads the Texas League in whiffs. He's almost always pretty nasty and when he throws strikes, he's even better than that.

by mjh on Aug 1, 2006 1:01 PM CDT up reply actions

It's

disturbing when a 23 year old repeating AA has those kinds of control problems though. He's giving up 5.5 walks per nine innings this year. And while it sounds like the curve is coming along a little, he can't be a competent major league starter without that being a reliable pitch.

I still think he should go to a splitter.

by Brett Perryman on Aug 1, 2006 1:24 PM CDT up reply actions

walk rate

I agree, but I sort of attributed that to his working on other pitches and things in AA. The thing that I have found heartening regarding DVD is that, with the exception of The Edinson Volquez Experiment last September, the Rangers have been very patient with them, even in the face of impatient journalists like Fraley (and Grant to a much lesser extent). None of them are ready now (although Volquez seems to be close). The team seems to be polishing them off their rough edges and refusing to rush them, which, for this franchise, is totally alien and totally heartening.

You might think I'm crazy. I agree with you.

by trza on Aug 1, 2006 1:30 PM CDT up reply actions

Diamond's curve

How many times have you seen him pitch this year? When I've seen him, the breaking ball has been o.k. It's been much, much better than it was last year. But I've missed more starts than I've seen, so maybe I've just caught him on good nights. What have you witnessed?

by mjh on Aug 1, 2006 5:13 PM CDT up reply actions

I think I've seen

three starts plus a time he was on TV. And yes, as I said earlier, I think it's made progress. He couldn't get it anywhere near the strikezone last year. When I saw him, I think twice last year, they all bounced in, were hung, or worse. My impression is that it's there, and he can throw it, but it's not a viable major league caliber pitch. And his other stuff isn't so good that he can afford a show-me curveball. I mean almost no starter can just have a show-me breaking ball anyway, but he especially can't.

He has thrown harder when I've seen him this year than when I did last year, so that's good.

by Brett Perryman on Aug 1, 2006 6:00 PM CDT up reply actions

Wow

I posted a long, unemotional response (that included an aplogy to Evan for being short in my initial post) and it was on the board for about 15 minutes or so, but it's gone now.

by mjh on Aug 1, 2006 5:16 PM CDT up reply actions

I think...

I think it is still up (if you are talking about the post on the beloblog).

by Adam J. Morris on Aug 1, 2006 5:21 PM CDT up reply actions

It's not

The one I'm talking about had four or five numbered points including detailed breakdowns of Danks's numbers and months of promotion.

by mjh on Aug 1, 2006 6:23 PM CDT up reply actions

Hopefully...

Barajas is one of those made "available" in August. If someone claims him, you can trade him to them or pull him back. If he clears, then he can go to someone for a slight prospect.

In JD, we trust.

by ortonius on Aug 1, 2006 1:05 PM CDT reply actions

word

If the Rangers fall out of contention, this seems like a real possibility.

You might think I'm crazy. I agree with you.

by trza on Aug 1, 2006 1:18 PM CDT up reply actions

I would become

an even bigger J.D. fan

by dubman @ Lone Star Ball on Aug 1, 2006 2:04 PM CDT up reply actions

Evan Grant

what a simplistic view at all this. I really don't even see an argument from him other than he's not King Felix, which is stupid. Who compared him to King Felix? Plz explain Evan Grant...

by Longhorn on Aug 1, 2006 1:24 PM CDT reply actions

Yeah

Straw man argument (or whatever that's called). I've never heard anyone actually claim that these guys were in the class of Felix, Liriano, Verlander, Billingsley. At least never anyone who deserved attention or any moderately sized group.

Now there was this feeling that I got at one point that these guys were the future of our staff, and by the time I sensed that, it was pretty clear that they were more mid-rotation types. But I don't sense that misperception any more - except among Evan's peers in the media. He needs to be e-mailing his notradio talk buddies - most of whom probably didn't even know who Liriano or Verlander was until they were in trade rumors or in the majors - not throwing his readers under the bus.

by Brett Perryman on Aug 1, 2006 1:30 PM CDT up reply actions

Yikes...

...that's twice in one week that I've agreed with Longhorn. shudder

"I feel good...Tanned and rested. Well, not tanned. It's hard to tan this body." - Freaking Buck Seinfeld

by RangerMoto on Aug 1, 2006 1:32 PM CDT up reply actions

OMFG, this is too funny!!

Fat Fraley tries to back up his boy, and he makes himself look like more of a moron...keep going boys, i love this nonosense, it's great for a laugh...

http://rangers.beloblog.com/

by Longhorn on Aug 1, 2006 1:33 PM CDT reply actions

grr... *nonsense

but i like 'nonosense' too...

by Longhorn on Aug 1, 2006 1:34 PM CDT up reply actions

the 'John Koronka' line

"that's gold Jerry, that's gold!" LOL.

by Longhorn on Aug 1, 2006 1:36 PM CDT up reply actions

Another thing on DVD

There was a point a little over a year ago, where the possibility was there for these guys to grow into what Grant and Fraley are accusing "everyone" of thinking they are. Look at rankings and you will see Danks ahead of Jon Lester until some time last year. They have similar talent bases, arms, basic makings of stuff, etc. Lester improved a great deal last year, and has turned himself into a potential front of the rotation guy. Can Danks still do that? I don't know, but there was a point where he was as likely as Lester to do it. And remember, Lester is like a year older than Danks.

The same holds true for Diamond and Papelbon. Go back to the winter of 2004-2005 and look at rankings and comments. Papelbon's fastball has exploded, and Diamond's has sputtered. But there are similarities in their struggles with their other pitches.

And Edison Volquez emerged at the same time Anibal Sanchez did and has better pure stuff. But Anibal has developed more pitchability. As of last year, there was reason to hope that Volquez could develop that. Is there still? I don't know, but he certainly has the stuff, if he could.

When Fraley talks about them moving backwards, he's about three months late, because they were all struggling early this year, and their status was slipping badly, carrying over from the slippage at the end of last season when they were all promoted. Danks and Volquez recovered but are showing inconsistency in AAA. If that light bulb clicks on, like it did for Lester and Papelbon, we're all going to be singing a different tune, and Grant and Fraley are going to look stupid.

by Brett Perryman on Aug 1, 2006 1:40 PM CDT reply actions