Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: VIDEO: The Daily Show Talks Jeremy Lin

The Wilkerson Situation...Why Brad Wilkerson Will Be a Ranger in 2007

Okay...as I think folks here know, I loved the Brad Wilkerson/Alfonso Soriano trade this past winter.  Loved it.  Thought it was a brilliant move by Jon Daniels, for a multitude of reasons, but with the primary one being that I thought Wilkerson would hit at least as well as Soriano in 2007.

Obviously, I was wrong about that.

So wrong, in fact, that there has been talk in the DFW media about the Rangers non-tendering Wilkerson this offseason, rather than going to arbitration with him.

I don't think that's going to happen, though.

Here's the thing...the Ranger outfield situation in 2007 is going to be in flux.  GMJ, Carlos Lee and Mark DeRosa -- the guys getting the bulk of the playing time out there right now -- are going to be free agents, as will Matt Stairs, the guy getting the majority of the DH ABs at this point.

Internally, the Rangers have Nelson Cruz, who they will probably look to break in at right field, and Jason Botts, who would seem to either be at least a part-time DH for the Rangers in 2007, or be traded, given that (as so many folks pointed out, when explaining why he was sitting on the bench in Texas earlier this year) he's got nothing left to prove in AAA.

The Rangers will probably bring GMJ back in 2007 to play centerfield, although we're talking about a guy who has historically been a 4th outfielder...GMJ isn't a lock to necessarily continue to be a starting caliber centerfielder.  I think the Rangers would be interested in bringing Mark DeRosa back, but as a utility man/super sub type, not as a full-time outfielder.  And as I mentioned a couple of days ago, I think there's a good chance DeRosa is going to get offered more money by a team that wants him to play an infield position than the Rangers will offer him to be a bench player.

What other free agent outfielder/DH types are out there?  There are a lot of middling options out there, a lot of guys I think you'd be fine with as a 4th outfielder or platoon player, but not a lot of guys who are going to be worth making a big-time play for.

Which, of course, is why I've advocating trading for Gary Sheffield in the offseason and exercising his $13 million 2007 option.  If you do that and re-sign GMJ, it solidifies your outfield without getting hamstrung with big, bad, long-term deals.

Which gets us back to Brad Wilkerson.  With the remnants of the Chan Ho money dropping off the books this year, and not much in the way of funds committed, the Rangers have money to spend.  But there's not a whole ton of attractive options out there in the market to spend money on.

You could probably keep Brad Wilkerson around for $4-5 million for 2007...maybe do something like a $4 million deal for 2007, with an $7 million team option for 2008 and a $500K buyout.  If his offseason shoulder surgery results in Wilkerson coming back and being the player he has been historically, the Rangers get a bargain season out of him.  If he struggles again, you aren't out much money on him.

But bringing Wilkerson back this way gives you options...and if you can get the old Wilkerson, you've got one of the better corner outfielders in the league, and putting yourself in a much better position to compete in 2007.

It is a gamble, much like bringing in Richard Hidalgo on the one year deal in 2005 was a gamble, and much like bringing Carl Everett in was a gamble.  And while Hidalgo didn't pan out, Everett, once he got his shoulder fixed, worked out pretty well for the Rangers.

But it is a fairly low-risk gamble, one I think Jon Daniels is going to be willing to take, knowing that the potential upside is worth the cost.

Comment 48 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

I Agree
I agree with you Adam, though I bet I am in the minority.  The one thing that really annoyed me about the Hidalgo move, was that he was really the only move the Rangers made.  I have no problem with gambles, but the team needs to also make some moves that are more "sure".

by Excel Hearts Choi on Aug 11, 2006 12:13 PM CDT reply actions  

Correct me if I'm wrong
but if the Rangers want Wilkerson at about $5 million, they can just arbitrate him, right?

by hightowersmith on Aug 11, 2006 12:16 PM CDT reply actions  

yep
In arbitration, he'll probably get about $5 million.

by Adam J. Morris on Aug 11, 2006 12:17 PM CDT up reply actions  

borderline
If I'm JD, I'm doing a great deal of study on Wilkerson's shoulder condition, getting third and fourth opinions.  At $5m, it's risky.

But yeah, at his pre-injury level, Wilk would seem to be worth it...  He's not that old.

by hightowersmith on Aug 11, 2006 12:19 PM CDT up reply actions  

$5 Million
$5 million is not that bad, especially for just one year.  

by Excel Hearts Choi on Aug 11, 2006 12:24 PM CDT up reply actions  

agreed
He's, what, 29 years old?  For some reason I always want to think he's older.

Wilkerson hasn't been able to produce like he's capable of producing for a couple years now.  It's a gamble paying him that much money, but there's a slightly better than even chance he'll be worth it.  Given what else is out there, that's fine with me.  The 2005 Brad Wilkerson would be pretty useful (if I'm remembering his numbers right).  The Rangers just need OBP guys.

I never thought Hidalgo was worth the money they paid him, but he was a free agent.  You already have Brad Wilkerson and have seen him TRY to work counts.  I think it would be a better move to give him arbitration than it was to bring Hidalgo in as a FA.  Could be about the same result, but hopefully not.

by Dustin on Aug 11, 2006 12:25 PM CDT up reply actions  

wells
isn't there a chance that vernon wells may be made available via trade this off season because the jays won't be able to resign him?  if that is true, wouldn't the rangers be the front runners since this is where he wants to be anyways?  just a thought
Let the young guys play

by bigruss on Aug 11, 2006 12:23 PM CDT reply actions  

if the rangers are the frontrunners
befcause wells wants to go there, not much of being a frontrunner.  You don't htink the jays are going to stand firm on asking for danks?

by ab03 on Aug 11, 2006 12:34 PM CDT up reply actions  

Agreed
I still think the trade was the right deal to make at that time.  I think Wilkerson needs to get healthy and then we'll really see what he can do.  That said, he probably needs to shut it down now so that he can get his shoulder fixed and the Rangers can upgrade that spot in the lineup in the short-term.

by t ball on Aug 11, 2006 12:41 PM CDT reply actions  

Word
I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks Wilky needs to go under the knife ASAP to start getting ready for '07. The Rangers should still be playing for this year, but Wilky needs to be thinking about next year. I predict HUGE things from him in his contract year if the surgery can truly fix the problems and he can come back healthy.
"If you are going to type stupid shit, you should at least spell it right." -trza

by thedirkatron on Aug 11, 2006 4:14 PM CDT up reply actions  

Wilkerson
Let him go.  Decent outfielder, questionable hitter, and not worth $4 million, if that's what his services would cost.   Can't imagine he would get much more than the minimum after the season he's had.  

by doolindalton on Aug 11, 2006 12:43 PM CDT reply actions  

i ripped on you and the rangers....
for letting go of soriano.  especially for whifferson....whose strike out totals were ridiculously high for any major leaguer, not to mention a leadoff hitter.

my words were "this lineup is going to miss soriano's bat, badly"

may have been the worse move since signing chan ho and richard hidalgo.  

Anyone see Soriano's catch and throw double play last night, hosing the runner at first from left field??

Any chance this offseason that the rangers fire buck, hire frank, and sign Soriano to play LF?

dream on. should have never let him go.

jones

by jTj on Aug 11, 2006 12:57 PM CDT reply actions  

DeRo
..referring to him as a "super-sub" isn't really accurate as that seems to discount his worth.  DeRosa is a full time player that happens to have the ability to play multiple positions at a fairly high level and that's an asset and a negotiation chip DeRosa and his agent will utilize.  
DeRosa's offensive output this year may be merely an anomaly and perhaps he'll fall back to previous standards.....who knows??
Regardless, the Rangers will take a hard run at resigning him and rightly so.  He's a valuable commodity.  Unfortunately, there will be several teams with the same opinion and that will drive up his price.

by kwood on Aug 11, 2006 12:58 PM CDT reply actions  

Ditto
I'll take it one step further (which I suggested before - in fact, DeRosa will become my Laird).  The Rangers need to trade Blalock for a starting pitcher or the best prospects possible, sign Derosa to a two year contract with an option for a third, and put DeRosa in at third.

Blalock could provide some very good prospects or even a starting pitcher (if he's packaged with a prospect). Blalock can't hit lefties; this season and previous years his OPS has been .595, .583, .780, .540. So he shouldn't hit against lefties.

DeRosa's first year with the Rangers was a big improvement over his career numbers, and this year is an even bigger improvement. Everyone talks about players' potential. Here, there's a guy that finally played to his potential (and then some), and everyone wants to dismiss it as an aberration. But it doesn't look like that if you look at the trend (albeit only two years). DeRosa coming to the Rangers did something to his hitting. So what if he's 31? Some players develop early, other late (MY).

By doing this, not only do the Rangers not hurt their overall offense too much (if any), they get some prospects or a starting pitcher.

The other option is that the Rangers keep both of them and strictly platoon Blalock, and continue using DeRosa like they have been. But the Rangers need to keep DeRosa.

Fire Buck, DFA everyone, burn down the stadium.

by WyoRanger on Aug 11, 2006 1:45 PM CDT up reply actions  

That is quite
a shortisghted way of looking at things. DeRosa's LD% and Doubles are all WAY up this year compared to his career norms. Yeah, he's good this year, but to gamble that he has as good a year next year and trading Blalock as a part of that gamble is quite a bad thing to do. Say DeRosa tanks, then what? You're nearest replacement is in High A(Whittleman). If anything, DeRosa should be offered arbitration and signed to a cheap contract. If he duplicates this season, then you think about trading either him, Kinsler or Blalock for pitching. You don't bank on a 31 year old having a career season. You especially don't trade a 25 year old in hopes that the 31 year old can duplicate his success.
Pass the Buck, Fire Showalter!

by FirebatM3 on Aug 11, 2006 2:07 PM CDT up reply actions  

DeRosa's numbers are skewed ...
... based upon his righty/lefty splits.  He destroys lefties and is average to below average against righties.  He's had a great year, no doubt, but he would only be a short term replacement for Blalock at third.  Given his length of service, it's just unlikely that this season, all of a sudden, he's going to be a full-time .300 hitter.  If the Rangers are dumb enough to take that risk and trade Blalock, they'll more than likely end up regretting it.

by Athos on Aug 11, 2006 2:09 PM CDT up reply actions  

yeah but
Blalock may never figure out lefties. He sure isn't getting any closer this year.

by SteveP on Aug 11, 2006 2:19 PM CDT up reply actions  

b/w dero and blalock
if you really are trading one of them, wouldn't you at least consider the principle of buy low/sell high seeing as how one of them clearly is at his all time high and one of them is fairly close to low (regardless of whether he's going to be like this for his career)?

nobody is going to pay squat for blalock

by ab03 on Aug 11, 2006 2:29 PM CDT up reply actions  

I don't disagree
with either of you.  But I'm not being shortsighted. In fact, I'm thinking longer term in possibly getting some great value from Blalock to improve the team overall with some good prospects without hurting the team now.

I agree that if Blalock's gone and DeRosa gets hurt, they'd be SOL. But the same applies to Blalock if DeRosa isn't re-signed and Blalock gets injured. So while that doesn't support the notion of trading Blalock, it certainly supports the fact that this team needs DeRosa more than people acknowledge. If they don't re-sign DeRosa, they'll still need to sign someone else that can back up 3rd. It makes to sense to sign someone else; DeRosa's already here and likes working with Rudy, DeRosa can be signed for a reasonable price, and I firmly believe that DeRosa's going to put up good offensive numbers next year.

Fire Buck, DFA everyone, burn down the stadium.

by WyoRanger on Aug 11, 2006 2:35 PM CDT up reply actions  

Meh
I won't shed any tears if we non-tender Wilk.  I'd just assume have someone else pay him to rehab that shoulder.

by SteveP on Aug 11, 2006 1:07 PM CDT reply actions  

not to nitpick
but this happen on the board a lot.

its "just as soon"

I've previously seen "for all intensive purposes."  These can't be typos.

by ab03 on Aug 11, 2006 2:31 PM CDT up reply actions  

While we're at it
It's "it's".  Not "its."
Fire Buck, DFA everyone, burn down the stadium.

by WyoRanger on Aug 11, 2006 2:47 PM CDT up reply actions  

riiiiight
by the way, lineups up. No good place to put it, and it seems stupid to open a diary for it.

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/boxscore?gid=260811113

Fire Buck, DFA everyone, burn down the stadium.

by WyoRanger on Aug 11, 2006 5:52 PM CDT up reply actions  

Ha ha ha ha ha ha
I guess those who live in glass houses...
"If you are going to type stupid shit, you should at least spell it right." -trza

by thedirkatron on Aug 11, 2006 4:20 PM CDT up reply actions  

Either one
would get red ink from an English teacher.

I'd have someone else pay him to rehabilitate his shoulder.

by SteveP on Aug 11, 2006 4:49 PM CDT up reply actions  

Problem is
when you talk about spelling/grammar issues, you're opening yourself up to those issues from others.

I do think it's more egregious to completely misuse words rather than to have a typo, but it's not so more egregious that I necessarily feel compelled to do anything about it and open myself up for other people to attack me.

Heck, I have enough people who assume they know exactly what I mean or feel or intend to do when I'm saying something, that I'd really rather not dealing with MORE people looking to attack me for random things.

It is kind of troubling to see, but I've become resigned to the fact that our school systems aren't doing that good of a job teaching people nowadays (and it's not all the teachers' fault; e.g., cf. evolution/ID discussion we had in another diary).

Req

by Requiem on Aug 12, 2006 1:24 AM CDT up reply actions  

Random Attack
Your mom's so fat I had to take a train and two buses just to get on the her good side!

by Dustin on Aug 12, 2006 9:46 AM CDT up reply actions  

how great would this lineup have been?
GMJ - cf
Young - ss
Soriano - lf
Tex - 1b
Lee - rf
Blalock - 3b
Kinsler - 2b
Laird - c
DeRosa/Botts - dh

i think it was realistic, but a failure on buck and crew's part to just ship off soriano for nothing instead of getting some balls and doing what frank did. brad whifferson is worthless and will always be an underachiever.

by jTj on Aug 11, 2006 1:13 PM CDT reply actions  

Blalock
I definitely used to be on the trade Blalock bandwagon but after looking over his numbers I really am not anymore.  The thing that jumps out at me is the fact that he has cut down on his strike out totals a great deal this year.  Usually, that is a precursor to a terrific year the next year.  Yes, his power numbers are down but so are Young's and Tex's.  He provides above average defense at 3rd and what is he 25 or 26?  Considering the alternatives I think you have to keep him.  Im calling it right now, next year he will have his career.  

by booyahcaveman on Aug 11, 2006 2:47 PM CDT reply actions  

Wilkerson
The only thing that makes signing Wilkerson a good idea at $4 mil is the lack of other OFers.  This is such a horrible free agent year that he is probably worth the risk.  I still would like to see us sign Craig Wilson though, I think he could be pretty good in our lineup.  We definitely need another power hitter.

by pblack on Aug 11, 2006 3:41 PM CDT reply actions  

Isn't Craig Wilson
just a RH version of Wilkerson? Good power, but injury issues and high K rate?
Pass the Buck, Fire Showalter!

by FirebatM3 on Aug 11, 2006 4:31 PM CDT up reply actions  

He is not great
but would be a good option in this year's FA class, and I think he is a better power hitter than Wilk.

by pblack on Aug 11, 2006 4:37 PM CDT up reply actions  

Craig Wilson's best power
season was 2004 where he hit .264 with 50BB, 169 Ks, 29 HR, 35 2B and 4 3B for a total slg% of .499. His best career slg was 2003 where he was a part time player and slgged .513.

Wilkerson's best power season was also 2004 where he hit .252 with 106 BB, 152K, 32 HR, 39 BB and 2 3B. His total slg was .498. I don't see where the difference lies.

Pass the Buck, Fire Showalter!

by FirebatM3 on Aug 11, 2006 4:44 PM CDT up reply actions  

Outfield
I think whether or not Wilkerson is here depends very much on whether we sign Lee or not.  I think Matthews signs to play CF, Cruz is given RF and Botts DH, and thus if they sign Lee, Wilkerson isn't back.

I lean towards a more radical approach of signing Craig Wilson for RF, Frank Catalanotto for LF, and Wilkerson for CF, with Botts as the DH.

by BurntOrange on Aug 11, 2006 4:49 PM CDT reply actions  

Meh
That outfield defense would be pretty bad. Unless Wilkerson's shoulder has affected his range too, I don't think he's good enough defensively to play CF.

I think I'm leaning towards signing GMJ and Cameron. That would make an outfield of GMJ in left, Cruz in right and Cameron in CF. Offensively it wouldn't be all that great, but it would probably be one of the best defensive outfields this team has ever had.

If they bring Wilkerson back, he can battle it out with Botts for DH.

No more Buck in 2007

by jcir454 on Aug 11, 2006 6:07 PM CDT up reply actions  

Outfield Defense
The corners wouldn't be good, but I don't get very worked up over corner outfield defense.

Regarding Wilkerson in center, his career zone rating and range factor are basically identical to GMJ's, and he a better CF than Matthews under the Baseball Prospectus defensive statistics.

Now, Cameron blows them both away defensively.

by BurntOrange on Aug 11, 2006 8:08 PM CDT up reply actions  

Wilk
We should definitely keep Wilkerson - let him have surgery and give him a chance to be the player everyone thought he was when we traded Sori for him.   Besides, since when has striking out too much gotten a player booted from this team?

Also...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Bad_baseball_managers

by JBImaknee on Aug 11, 2006 4:59 PM CDT reply actions  

Buck Showalter
has a fansite? Wow.
Pass the Buck, Fire Showalter!

by FirebatM3 on Aug 11, 2006 5:15 PM CDT up reply actions  

Wilkerson, Matthews and Crutz ???
You got to be kidding???

Are we wanting to emulate the Royals or what?

That is not an outfield of anyone going to any playoffs any year..

After arm surgery who know if Wilkerson can hit, let alone hit any HRs!!!

by SanDiegoKev on Aug 11, 2006 10:36 PM CDT reply actions  

There
There is nothing wrong with an OF of Wilkerson, GMJ, and Cruz.  If Wilkerson is healthy, GMJ stays the same or digresses a little, and you can probably expect Cruz to equal or better whatever Mench did, that is probably one of the better OFs that Texas has had in a while.

by jf55510 on Aug 12, 2006 2:18 AM CDT up reply actions  

The Rangers almost have to
resign Lee after trading so much for him and Cruz.  Lee fits in LF and/or DH.  Resign Matthews for CF and let Cruz try the bigs in RF.  The one thought I do like is Cameron.  What will he be worth this off season.  Move GMJ to LF and Cameron in CF and the defense is very solid.  Sign Lee as a DH/4th OF and the line-up is solid.  DeRosa is a favorite but he will be looking for a nice payday.  Given the Delucci situation it is doubtful we get a home team discount.  Trade Botts for a decent veteran releiver to help the kids in the pen.  

All that said the real problem will continue to be the rotation that once again needs to be rebuit almost from scratch.  As of now the only sure starter for next year is Millwood.  Sounds too familiar for this Ranger fan.

by Bigfan16 on Aug 11, 2006 11:47 PM CDT reply actions  

No
No they don't have to resign Lee.  If he wants his 5/75, 4/48 or anything along those lines you say, well, see ya later.  He isn't worth that kind of cash.  Wilkerson of last season, GMJ, and Cruz should be a fine OF to roll with.

by jf55510 on Aug 12, 2006 2:16 AM CDT up reply actions  

wilkerson
jf55510 you must be an idiot saying lee isn't worth it!!!!! are you on drugs or something?

by brooksy on Aug 12, 2006 10:48 PM CDT reply actions  

Hopefully
that was sarcasm.

Lee is NOT worth Lance Berkman money.

"If you are going to type stupid shit, you should at least spell it right." -trza

by thedirkatron on Aug 13, 2006 9:10 PM CDT up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about Texas Rangers.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

180px-angry_dome_small
Tailgate IV Update
Matchstick_small
NBA Thread: 2/13/2012
Ijnq0k_small
The Hunt for Mike E

Recent FanPosts

Neftali_old_timey_small
12/17/2012 OT 2
1280x800_1047_small
LoneStarBall Fitness Geeks Unite!
Macho_man_randy_savage_small
2/17 OT
110307_1802_00__small
Hall Of Fame Catcher Gary Carter dies
Fishing_small
OT II
Texas-rangers_small
2/16/12 Morning OT
Small
OT: Vegas Baby - 30th Birthday
Fishing_small
OT III
129806053_57baf34b4c_small
LSB DFW Dynasty Keeper League

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Manager

Th_buckykatt_small Adam J. Morris

Editor

477845_small ghostofErikThompson

Author

Matchstick_small matchst1ck