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.
48 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I Agree
by Excel Hearts Choi on Aug 11, 2006 12:13 PM CDT reply actions
Correct me if I'm wrong
by hightowersmith on Aug 11, 2006 12:16 PM CDT reply actions
yep
by Adam J. Morris on Aug 11, 2006 12:17 PM CDT up reply actions
borderline
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
by Excel Hearts Choi on Aug 11, 2006 12:24 PM CDT up reply actions
agreed
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
by bigruss on Aug 11, 2006 12:23 PM CDT reply actions
if the rangers are the frontrunners
Agreed
Word
by thedirkatron on Aug 11, 2006 4:14 PM CDT up reply actions
Wilkerson
i ripped on you and the rangers....
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
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.
Ditto
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.
That is quite
DeRosa's numbers are skewed ...
b/w dero and blalock
nobody is going to pay squat for blalock
I don't disagree
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.
Meh
not to nitpick
its "just as soon"
I've previously seen "for all intensive purposes." These can't be typos.
riiiiight
http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/boxscore?gid=260811113
Ha ha ha ha ha ha
by thedirkatron on Aug 11, 2006 4:20 PM CDT up reply actions
Either one
I'd have someone else pay him to rehabilitate his shoulder.
Problem is
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
Random Attack
by Dustin on Aug 12, 2006 9:46 AM CDT up reply actions
how great would this lineup have been?
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
Wilkerson
Isn't Craig Wilson
He is not great
Craig Wilson's best power
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.
Outfield
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
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.
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
Also...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Bad_baseball_managers
Wilkerson, Matthews and Crutz ???
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!!!
There
The Rangers almost have to
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.
wilkerson
by brooksy on Aug 12, 2006 10:48 PM CDT reply actions
Hopefully
Lee is NOT worth Lance Berkman money.
by thedirkatron on Aug 13, 2006 9:10 PM CDT up reply actions

by 

















