900 Run Offense
Just looking over this potent Ranger offense for the 2008 season.
And, what do I see?
We've only had 2 guys that have played over 130 games in the last 2 years:
Michael Young and Hank Blalock.
Then, I look at our great rotation that apparently is so good we don't need to look at pursuing trades for guys like Santana and Bedard.
In the last 2 years our 2 aces, Millwood and Padilla, are a combined 47-46 with an ERA of around 5.00 at the Ballpark. Geesh, that gets me pretty pumped up.
Then we have a guy was 2-9 last year with injury porblems and a 6+ ERA.
Then we have another guy who wasn't that good last year that spent time on the DL.
Round that off with Gabbard, and he's about the only thing I can get somewhat excited about.
But, I'm sure the 2 relievers we signed this off-season (Guardado, who hasn't pitched in a year and Fuku) will bring us some more nice prospects at the break.
JD seems like is doing a great job at building a AAAA, or should I say, a AAA team.
Hire Nolan quick Tommy Boy!
0 recs |
21 comments
Comments
most people on here
so the rangers are not going to contend this year.
thanks for this golden nugget of information.
by knockoutking24 on Jan 29, 2008 1:26 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
yea this is real Breaking News huh
by cgolden on Jan 29, 2008 2:44 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
im actually quite shocked
i thought that we would be the odds on favorite to win the WS this year!
by knockoutking24 on Jan 29, 2008 3:30 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Troll
I voted for Sharky.
More than half of your "900 Run Offense" argument is about pitching. Nothing about batting average, runs scored, on-base percentage.
Go back to Disneyland.
by mtex on Jan 29, 2008 1:28 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
why is it
truth is the rangers rotation sucks as does their overall team. they have a good farm from all reports but as we know from the past (ddvd anyone) things don't always pan out.
by The Ahmad on Jan 29, 2008 1:45 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
they are just voicing their opinions
I think if he said something optimistic, or at least neutral, once in a while he'd be received a lot better.
by Walter Sobchak on Jan 29, 2008 1:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Click on LBrooks' name
I agree, though, that most now tend to immediately assault him with personal attacks. I try to fight him with his worst enemy -- logic.
by t ball on Jan 29, 2008 2:16 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Huh?
I don't understand this.
A better rotation would make it more likely we'd try to trade for Santana or Bedard.
by Adam J. Morris on Jan 29, 2008 1:55 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
2 Things...
- In theory yes, if we had a contending rotation and thought we were a #1 away from serious contention, I think it would make it more likely that we would trade for Santana or Bedard.
- In all fairness, I think what he meant was that our rotation is so good we don't need Santana/Bedard. Meaning if it was worse those two would be an upgrade, but since its this good we don't need them. But since it was obviously dripping with sarcasm, it didnt portray its desired meaning.
by Topgun22 on Jan 29, 2008 3:57 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Why would anyone think
Who thinks that?
by DJCahill on Jan 29, 2008 2:03 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Well I do agree with one part of this diary
Seriously, how could you really be satisfied with these two players right now? Granted they have battled injury and lack of run support but Im not going into the season thinking our pitching is good. It isn't. It could be, but Im not gonna sweat it when either one of these guys goes down.
by NYTXFAN on Jan 29, 2008 2:36 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Lbrooks as lolcat:
by Lucas on Jan 29, 2008 4:00 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Another Factoid
The Rangers had the worst road record in the ENTIRE Major Leagues last year.
How is that supposed to improve this year?
by LBrooks on Jan 30, 2008 12:25 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
/How is that supposed to improve this year?/
by t ball on Jan 30, 2008 2:12 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
That's a dumb question
I think this group's headed for 90 losses, but I really don't like your particular brand of pessimism.
by Dustin on Jan 30, 2008 3:11 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Pessimism
That's hilarious. You agree with my 72-90 2008 prediction but you don't like the way I present it. lol
by LBrooks on Jan 31, 2008 3:27 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Realism vs. Pessimism
by Dustin on Jan 31, 2008 3:48 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

by 

















