Monday morning things
by Adam J. Morris on Oct 13, 2008 10:16 AM CDT
110 comments
Evan Grant has a blog post up this morning touching on the pitching v. fielding argument, and saying that the Rangers need to improve the pitching -- and in particular, start giving up fewer walks -- before they worry about the fielding.
While I don't disagree with the first part of the premise -- that the pitching needs to improve, and walk fewer people -- I don't think that you can say that we need to wait until the pitching gets better before we try to address the fielding problems, and in particular, the bad defense at shortstop. Michael Young's defense...well, I was going to say that it is the elephant in the room, but it really isn't, since a lot of people are talking about it, including Young himself, who was pretty vocal on the issue at the end of the year.
But that's really at the center of a lot of these discussions, particularly because whether or not you view Young's defense as a problem impacts the availability of Elvis Andrus, whether or not you try to move Chris Davis to third base permanently, and whether the organization should be looking for a third baseman of the future. If you view Young's defense as acceptable and shortstop as his position for the life of his contract extension (which runs through 2013), then Andrus is superfluous and has no place in the organization, and the Rangers have a gaping hole at third base they need to try to fill somehow.
But in any case, the bad team defense probably cost the Rangers 6-7 wins last year (at least, THT has the Rangers at 67 runs below average defensively), which is pretty substantial.
One of the other things that I keep seeing floated to try to fix the Ranger defense is to move Ian Kinsler to left field, something that I think would be a terrible idea. Kinsler is still young, was good defensively in 2007, and his problems this year were due almost entirely to errors. He has the skills and ability to be a good defensive second baseman...he just has to execute better. To throw in the towel now, give up and put him in left field seems like forfeiting a whole lot of value, particularly given that there's not much reason to believe he'll be a real good defensive left fielder.
If the Rangers really feel they can't live with Kinsler's defense at second base, they'll get more value out of him by trying to use him, now, to get a top of the rotation pitcher -- including him with, say, Jarrod Saltalamacchia, Hurley or Harrison, and one of the low-A arms for Jake Peavy.
I don't want to see Kinsler dealt, personally, but I think that's a better use of what he offers than sticking him in left field.
Meanwhile, the "You're the G.M. -- Rangers edition" discussion over at Minor League Ball got 169 comments. Check it out...
0 recs |
110 comments
Email
Print
Comments
It has been the main topic for a couple days now at Minorleaugeball
The bloggerformelyknownasBigBaddBubbaJ
by NYTXFAN on Oct 13, 2008 10:22 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Personally,
I find it difficult to believe that anyone can say that Young is a huge problem, but that Kinsler isn’t. It boggles the mind. Kinsler is every bit as poor defensively as Soriano was.
I’d give Kinsler one more year to improve, and if he doesn’t, its off to COF for him.
"Oh well, McCain is pretty communist anyway,... we can be 70% communist with McCain,"-Sharky
by DJCahill on Oct 13, 2008 10:26 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Well
In terms of +/-, Kinsler was -4 in 2006, +7 in 2007.
He went off the rails in 2008, with a -15, which is due primarily to his errors.
I don’t think Soriano ever had a +/- as good as +7 while playing 2B. Or -4, for that matter.
But then, I know that the Kinsler = Soriano thing has been your personal hobby horse for a while, so I don’t expect that to change your mind.
I still don’t know why you wouldn’t deal him rather than put him in a COF position.
by Adam J. Morris on Oct 13, 2008 10:31 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
How Rangey is Kinsler?
In terms of +/- for league average 2b?
by FuturePants on Oct 13, 2008 10:43 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Virtually all of your arguments for ..
.. rating defense is based on metrics that haven’t really been vetted yet. Are you confident that these statistics tell the story enough that you would make changes this off-season to the defense, regardless of how the pitching staff changes?
by mattrpav on Oct 13, 2008 10:51 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
So basicly
Kinsler was around 2-3 times as bad as Young this year according to your preferred metric, but Young needs to move immediately, and Kinsler needs more time at 2B.
"Oh well, McCain is pretty communist anyway,... we can be 70% communist with McCain,"-Sharky
by DJCahill on Oct 13, 2008 1:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think there's a difference between...
…a guy in his 30s with a track record of being 15-30 runs below average in each season, and a guy who is in his mid-20s who has been fine in the past but had an awful year this year.
by Adam J. Morris on Oct 13, 2008 3:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly
An easy example is, you’re a GM, and one player had an OPS+ of 130 and another player had an OPS+ of 110. But the first player has a career OPS+ of 110 and is reaching his mid 30s. The other has a career OPS+ of 125 and is reaching his late 20s.
Who do you give the money to?
by philkid3 on Oct 13, 2008 11:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Do you watch the games, Cay-Hizzle?
Cause I’m pretty sure if you did you’d see that the reason for optimism when it comes ti Kinsler is that he has the tools to be a plus defensive second baseman and he was actually semi-good in ‘07. Not only that but he’s young enough that he could still improve. Franchise Face fails the eye test, the age test and the ever been good in the past test.
Are you just being difficult (Cahillian, if you will) or do you really not see the difference in the two situations?
The 40 Trumps All!!!
by thedirkatron on Oct 13, 2008 3:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, I do
and I realized, faster than most, that MY is a very bad defender at SS, and the left side of the infield has been horrid.
Unfortunately, I realize that Kinsler has also been a bad defender and is very Sorianoesque.
Like Soriano, he has plenty of range, like Soriano he checks out mentally on some plays. Unlike Soriano, Kinsler seems to check out on some plays that matter, while Soriano seemed to check out when it was a blowout, one way or the other.
"Oh well, McCain is pretty communist anyway,... we can be 70% communist with McCain,"-Sharky
by DJCahill on Oct 13, 2008 3:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
x
Like Soriano, he has plenty of range,
Soriano did not have plenty of range. He was sub-par, range-wise, even without taking into account his errors.
by Adam J. Morris on Oct 13, 2008 3:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
We obviously were watching
different Alfonso Soriano’s. Decent but not great first step, and plenty of speed. I think your recollection is faulty.
"Oh well, McCain is pretty communist anyway,... we can be 70% communist with McCain,"-Sharky
by DJCahill on Oct 13, 2008 4:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well
If you look at David Pinto’s PMR, in 2005 — Soriano’s last season at second base — he made 50 outs fewer in the field than would be expected:
http://www.baseballmusings.com/archives/012851.php
He didn’t make 50 errors in 2005.
Kinsler, last year, made 21 outs more than expected:
http://www.baseballmusings.com/archives/023941.php
If I were at home, I could pull the Fielding Bible and see what Soriano’s +/-s were during that span, but my recollection was that they were awful. Having done a quick Google search, I see that Marc Normandin’s item on Soriano at BP says that he was a -40 for 2004 and 2005 according to Dewan’s methodology…Kinsler, in 2007 and 2008, is -8.
The idea that Soriano was a player with good range who just made too many errors is a myth.
by Adam J. Morris on Oct 13, 2008 4:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
DJC pwnt.
"until they are good, they are not good" - seth
by Chase Irwin on Oct 13, 2008 6:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I know he was being sarcastic
But I really would like to see a good lol wut.
by brettgardner on Oct 14, 2008 12:26 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fuck's gotten into you?
I miss a jovial, blazed oc.
This whiny shit gets real old.
"until they are good, they are not good" - seth
by Chase Irwin on Oct 14, 2008 6:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Gagree.
oc has gotten progressively bitchier as his status here has increased.
Heavy lies the crown, I guess.
by brettgardner on Oct 14, 2008 7:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Geez
Consider this my acknowledgement of your “sensitivity.”
Get out the kitchen if your skin is that thin.
"until they are good, they are not good" - seth
by Chase Irwin on Oct 14, 2008 9:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You know, I could say the same thing about your picture-posting habits.
But, no worries, mang.
Tomorrow is a new day.
by oc on Oct 14, 2008 10:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with both
of your basic premises in your posting. However, I haven’t seen anyone advocate that MY should be SS until the end of his contract, negating some of the drama about Andrus, etc. in your first topic. I thought most of the discussions were about ’09 or ’10. Anyone who believes that MY should stil be SS in ’13 has kept their mouth shut.
Kinsler needs to be the Rangers 2nd baseman or traded for an established #1 or #2.
by mcgee48c on Oct 13, 2008 10:35 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
SS for life
Agree that I haven’t seen any fans talk about this, but that doesn’t mean there aren’t FO types who look at him that way, in Texas and possibly elsewhere. Maybe Meno’s heard thangs.
by shroomer on Oct 13, 2008 11:00 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Could not agree with you more about the fielding
Our pitching made some strides last year and it could easily have much improved ERA next year, and that could mean 85 wins without good fielding because we waited until our pitching got better to improve the fielding, but if we improved the fielding because it could be done rather easily, we could have say 90 wins
by Save us on Oct 13, 2008 10:50 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Some thoughts on the defense/pitching issue
I’m wondering what the effect of the terrible pitching staff is on the defense. There were a bunch of walks and a lot of hits given up by the pitching that wasn’t just poor defense. How much of an affect does having to position the IF with men on base have to do with the poor defensive showing? How much does the pitching constantly forcing the defense to come up behind them affect the defense?
Both things need to get fixed, but I think it might be possible to solve both problems by fixing one of the problems.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
-The Outlaw
by Gdawg on Oct 13, 2008 10:51 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
The more balls that are put into play, the more errors are going to be made.
Like Cahill said… this “pitch to contact” philosophy the front office is employing is just another way of saying that our pitching sucks.
by oc on Oct 13, 2008 11:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
OT: Romo
Out 4 weeks…
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3640890
I am the motherfucking shore patrol, motherfucker! I am the motherfucking shore patrol! Give this man a beer.
by TheBZA on Oct 13, 2008 10:51 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Trading Kinsler
I would trade Kinsler in a package for Peavy.
I think it’s too much to give up Kinsler, Salty, Hurley or Harrison, and a Low A guy for Peavy.
I would do Kinsler, Salty, Murphy and a low level prospect for Peavy and Antonelli.
We need to keep Hurley and Harrison.
They can use someone like Murphy since they have question marks in OF. Antonelli is a nice 2B prospect and he can be bunched with our other 2B prospects to see who starts in the future.
by Coolbean04 on Oct 13, 2008 10:55 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I agree.
Kinsler was a late round pick that you scored on. Flipping that for a front-line starter is a savvy move. We also have a lot of depth at 2B in house, and can take an offensive hit in the line-up in exchange for an improved rotation.
by mattrpav on Oct 13, 2008 10:57 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
San Diego probably wouldn't make that trade
by Adam J. Morris on Oct 13, 2008 10:58 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You don't think SD would do it?
If a team like NYY or BOS traded Hughes or Bucholtz, that’s a start to a solid offer. The only thing is they’re pitchers, do you think SD would want hitters to improve there offense?
They were ranked
Last in MLB in Runs
26th in Hits
20th in HR’s
27th RBI’s
28th in BA
30th in OBP
27th in OPS
If they can improve 1/3 of the batting lineup with Kinsler, Salty, and Murphy. That’s a Huge improvement.
by Coolbean04 on Oct 13, 2008 11:04 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not really
Their pitching would take a huge hit, and Murphy and Saltys numbers would dip from going from RBiA to the worst hitters’ park in the league.
I am the motherfucking shore patrol, motherfucker! I am the motherfucking shore patrol! Give this man a beer.
by TheBZA on Oct 13, 2008 11:07 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No, I don't
Murphy isn’t all that good, and I don’t think has a ton of value. And Antonelli isn’t just some garbage throw-in player.
by Adam J. Morris on Oct 13, 2008 11:10 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hell no
Kinsler is locked up cheap. While Peavy is a bargain he’s never pitched in the AL and his numbers would take a serious hike coming to Arlington.
And yeah, SD wouldn’t do it.
I am the motherfucking shore patrol, motherfucker! I am the motherfucking shore patrol! Give this man a beer.
by TheBZA on Oct 13, 2008 11:00 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
+1
"M’s fans are such weenies." - Zywica
by lonestarJon on Oct 13, 2008 11:01 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Stuff
Peavy is regarded as having #1starter stuff. I don’t think his numbers taking a hit has much relevance.
by tyd3311 on Oct 13, 2008 11:08 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not denying
Peavy’s talent. But you would have to assume his numbers would rise going to the AL, especially in our park. Not to mention the fact that you have plenty of people that argue Peavy is due for a catastrophic injury.
Peavy is a great player, just not a fit for the state of this team. It’d take a boatload of talent to land him, we still have to pay the $90M (?) he is owed. Plus, for him to come to Arlington he would want extra compensation.
I am the motherfucking shore patrol, motherfucker! I am the motherfucking shore patrol! Give this man a beer.
by TheBZA on Oct 13, 2008 11:10 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
3 yrs/ 52 million from 010-12.
Bargain.
by tyd3311 on Oct 13, 2008 11:13 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He is.
But the talent we would send over would be huge. Much more than Greinke. At least Greinke is cheap.
Plus, this is irrelevant because he has 3 AL teams he’d play for. I doubt we’re one of them.
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2008/10/would-peavy-pla.html
I am the motherfucking shore patrol, motherfucker! I am the motherfucking shore patrol! Give this man a beer.
by TheBZA on Oct 13, 2008 11:21 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
His numbers would absolutely rise.
But that doesn’t really matter much. So do our hitters’ numbers. The result is still the same. Park-neutral stats still point out Peavy as being awesome.
Beyond that, ALL pitchers’ numbers are going to rise when they go to a hitters’ park. So you get the best pitcher possible because his higher numbers are still going to be better than a lesser pitchers’ higher numbers
The park effect mostly only matters when it comes to pitch count, Peavy would still make us a lot better. I’d trade Kinsler for him in a heart beat. Of course, San Diego wouldn’t.
by philkid3 on Oct 13, 2008 11:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Home/Road splits for Pet Peavy
Career
PETCO: 2.77 ERA, 613 opp OPS, 47 HR in 678 IP
Road: 3.80 ERA, 737 opp OPS, 81 HR in 583 IP
2008
PETCO: 1.74 ERA, 526 opp OPS, 4 HR in 98 IP
Road: 4.28 ERA 784 opp OPS, 13 HR in 75 IP
Pretty dramatic difference this year, after being equally good on the road and at home in ’07.
"M’s fans are such weenies." - Zywica
by lonestarJon on Oct 13, 2008 11:22 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
With our park and defense plus the added strain of the DH league you're looking at a ~4.25 ERA guy if he came here.
I want absolutely no part of a Peavy trade.
And that doesn’t even call into question the fact that I hate his mechanics and think he’s a career ending injury waiting to happen.
Don’t. Want. Any.
The 40 Trumps All!!!
by thedirkatron on Oct 13, 2008 3:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Peavy is a pipe dream
I don’t see why he would drop his no trade clause to come to Texas when he took a nice discount to stay in San Diego.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
-The Outlaw
by Gdawg on Oct 13, 2008 12:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
So many things wrong here...
Kinsler is one of the most valuable players in baseball. If not for his injury and the team’s August collapse, he would have been a viable MVP candidate. As many have mentioned, it seems likely that he will turn a corner and become a good (though perhaps not great) defensive 2B. And of course that he is a great character guy who has a team-friendly contract only adds to his value.
There are not many players in baseball I would consider trading him for. I floated a Kinsler for Billingsley idea a few months ago (not realistic, I admit, given that the Dodgers are losing 3/5 of their rotation after this season) to give an indication of what I feel Kinsler’s trade value should be.
The idea of trading our good, young, established players in a package for someone like Peavy as completely asinine. This team will not compete next year. They may improve, and with a stroke of luck make the playoffs, but they do not have the pitching to make a serious run. Let this young core continue to develop and let Holland and Feliz break in during the second half of 2009 and hopefully establish themselves as viable front end guys in 2010. Then, and only then, should the Rangers consider trading for a front end starter.
by clark on Oct 13, 2008 11:07 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I'm not advocating doing it
I’m saying, if you are planning on sticking Kinsler in LF, just go ahead and trade him for pitching now.
by Adam J. Morris on Oct 13, 2008 11:10 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah
moving him to left field would considerably lower his value to the team. He’s probably in the top 5 of all MIF’s. While moving him to the outfield, where he’d still put up solid numbers, would definitely drop him from that list.
It’s almost as dumb as moving Saltalamacchia to first.
because he hasn't even reached his peak yet, up until this point, he just did it on talent. - Ron Washington on Josh Hamilton
by Lonerangers on Oct 13, 2008 1:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Pitching/defense
You know, there’s only so much we’re going to be able to do with this pitching staff over the offseason re: improvements. It’s not like we can go out and pick up 2 or three Zack Greinke’s or Ricky Nolasco’s if we just “focused” on it. The bottom line is, we’re still stuck with Millwood and Padilla in the rotation, surrounded by young guys who are either just starting out or coming back from injury.
So with all that in mind… I just don’t buy this “focus on the pitching bit”. The only real way to “focus on the pitching” is to continue to groom our young starters while we wait for that big trade for a quality young rotation anchor comes along. And I don’t see how doing all of that interferes with any moves to improve infield defense – in fact, improving the infield D will only help that process by helping our starters get more outs.
"M’s fans are such weenies." - Zywica
by lonestarJon on Oct 13, 2008 11:08 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Kinsler for Lincecum
(ducking)
G G G E-flat_______ F F F D__________....
by t ball on Oct 13, 2008 11:17 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
2009 – Kinsler at 3b, MY at SS, Arias at 2b
2010 – Kinsler at 2b, MY at 3b, Andrus at SS
by shroomer on Oct 13, 2008 11:24 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nah
That seems too fussy. 2009 MY, SS, Kinsler 2B, Arias the moon, ? 3B (probably Davis until and unless Blalock is traded)
2010 MY 3B, Andrus SS, Kinsler 2B, Davis at 1B until Smoak is ready then ?
The Rangers have many options over the next couple years, should be interesting. But I don’t see them moving Young until 2010 (if then) and I don’t see them moving Kinsler ever unless it’s to another team for pitching.
G G G E-flat_______ F F F D__________....
by t ball on Oct 13, 2008 11:30 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why not trade Chris Davis?
If Justin Smoak is the real deal, he is a better overall player than Davis. Smoak is within a year of the Majors from what were hearing.. you have Hank Blalock to man 1st this year. Why not trade Chris Davis +? for Matt Cain? You’re really not losing anything. I love Chris Davis, but he is the perfect candidate to be traded for a young starter with front of the rotation ability.
by tyd3311 on Oct 13, 2008 11:31 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I have been wondering about this too.
If anything, we do not have as much trouble developing power hitting 1st basemen as we do other positions. More importantly, we have other options for 1st base.
Would Davis, Salty, and Kiker or Main not be enough ?
Cain did come back to earth a bit last year, but he still would be the best pitcher on this staff and he just turned 24.
Cain 2007: 3.65 ERA, 1.26 WHIP, 200 IP, 7.34 K/9, 3.74 tRA, 133 tRA+
Cain 2008: 3.76 ERA, 1.36 WHIP, 217 IP, 7.69 K/9, 4.40 tRA, 108 tRA+
by GhettoBear04 on Oct 13, 2008 1:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
their is a huge difference
between Main and Kiker, in my opinion.
because he hasn't even reached his peak yet, up until this point, he just did it on talent. - Ron Washington on Josh Hamilton
by Lonerangers on Oct 13, 2008 1:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
don't know
if i’d go that far, a lot could happen between now and when and if he makes it to the bigs.
He is damn good though
because he hasn't even reached his peak yet, up until this point, he just did it on talent. - Ron Washington on Josh Hamilton
by Lonerangers on Oct 13, 2008 1:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Main is untouchable
this offseason, at least, because his value stands to make a huge jump during the next year. As of right now, he is an intriguing low A arm with outstanding scouting reports but limited innings. If he does what many believe he can do next season, he could very possibly end up in Frisco and in the front half of some top 100 lists next offseason.
by clark on Oct 13, 2008 1:52 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, I think there is, too.
But I’m usually off on these trade proposal things. If Kiker would get it done, obviously I would rather that. But I’d be willing to part with a good arm that is as far away from the majors as he is to get a good, young established pitcher.
The point of it wasn’t to debate how valuable Main is, but to see if a) that’s the ballpark needed for a young pitcher and b) if Cain is the guy that you would target.
by GhettoBear04 on Oct 13, 2008 2:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
IMO
He’s one of the few pitchers that you make Kinsler available for.
by Joey Matschulat on Oct 13, 2008 11:30 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe the only one if you ask me
"M’s fans are such weenies." - Zywica
by lonestarJon on Oct 13, 2008 11:43 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
+1
Love that guy.
Go Strangers.
by hightowersmith on Oct 13, 2008 12:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I love him too
Not sure I’d deal Kinsler for him though.
"M’s fans are such weenies." - Zywica
by lonestarJon on Oct 13, 2008 9:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Lincecum
Unless they know something about his mechanics (ie, better info than Rangers had on Chris Young), I can’t imagine they view any player(s) more than Lincecum. Is fixing their offense even worth it? Maybe at the expense of Cain, or even Cain and one of their young arms, but nobody touches Lincecum if I’m Sabean.
Go Strangers.
by hightowersmith on Oct 13, 2008 12:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hey I'd still probably do the Kinsler for David Price deal I floated awhile back.
But that’s just me and I loves me some David Price. Most didn’t dig that idea.
Lincecum you’d have to do every single day of the week and twice on Tuesday. But that’s never going to happen. Like, ever.
The 40 Trumps All!!!
by thedirkatron on Oct 13, 2008 3:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Really? A Kinsler for Price deal was frowned upon here?
I wouldn’t even think twice about that. Price will make Prior’s early days look pedestrian. Wouldn’t happen because nobody can give more value than Price over the next few years, and the Rays have Iwamura playing really well at 2B.
Go Rangers!
by rooster on Oct 13, 2008 6:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Linky, Linky, Kitchen Sinky
Link.
I floated it as a deadline hypothetical, asking what people would do if the Rays felt they needed another offensive weapon for their run and called you up on July 31st offering a straight up Price-Kinsler swap… Would you take it?
It got some pretty good debates going.
I must say I don’t think Price is such a ridiculously dominant no-brainer snuper ace like you apparently do, but I do think he’s a stud with a high probability of future aceness. I’d probably have to deal Kinsler for him if offered that deal.
The 40 Trumps All!!!
by thedirkatron on Oct 13, 2008 6:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I thought the position that contributed most of the "minus" in the Rangers' +/-
was 3B.
I’m not saying MY is a stud defender at SS, but it seems that the more immediate problem for the Rangers is not MY at SS but the blackhole at 3B that we all thought would be removed by the promise of Wash to turn Hank into a gold glover.
IMO, moving MY to 3B is as much a good idea for improving 3B defense as it is for improving SS defense, and for next year the effect will probably be more noticeable at 3B rather than SS. Two birds with one stone, yadda, yadda, yadda.
Go Rangers!
by rooster on Oct 13, 2008 11:22 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
CW has become that MY will be a solid 3b
From MY’s chat transcript the other day:
Chuck: Next question, what was the biggest change you had to make from second base to shortstop? Question submitted by: Lon Oakley
.
Michael: The biggest thing was just angles. And it actually took a lot longer than I thought it would. It’s tough to really bear down on jumps. You realize you have way more time at second base than you do at shortstop. And you really have to make sure you cut down your angles. It gets tough and the biggest thing is making sure you stay after it, stay in a zone on defense, too, just like you would on hitting. Make sure that you never, never take for granted that first step. That first step is massive and I’m still trying to make sure I get better at it.
by shroomer on Oct 13, 2008 11:27 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah. I think the way you sell this is to be honest that the Rangers have nothing at 3B.
Michael is the best 3B on the team.
Ask him to take one for the team, yet again, and move to 3B. Heap glowing PR on him for his team-first approach as well as the hard work he has done to become an All-Star SS. Stroke that ego. There’s not a good reason to pin the left-side defense woes significantly on him, at least not for 2008, and mess up things with someone that has been as loyal a Ranger as there has been.
Still, I think 2009 will not see MY moving to 3B, even with the lack of obvious 3B options on the FA market. I still like think the most graceful way to handle it is to give Andrus significant playing time there in ST when MY plays in the World Baseball Classic. Then, followup on that with some time for Andrus at SS in September.
BTW, where’s that MY chat transcript? I must’ve missed a link to it.
Go Rangers!
by rooster on Oct 13, 2008 12:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i think for his albatross contract...
…if i told him to play catcher he better ask for the mask….
if management tells him its is best for the team if he moves to third no, later, or in the middle of the second inning of game 32… he better do it…
"Anyone that isn't pro-choice never met you" ~Brian Thomas on Seth...
by ivysafety39 on Oct 13, 2008 1:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
And then there is reality
Obviously you have no sense of it
Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.
by bigsteve on Oct 13, 2008 1:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i was being slightly sarcastic...
…but if the team believes they have a better option his position and he can help the team more by assuming another role that is currently a weakness for the team, i can’t see how he can refuse and what his leverage is… being the FOTF doesn’t give you infinite good guy credit, and that contract makes he pretty unattractive to other teams… i just don’t think that he comes out of the clubhouse to the dugout, sees next to his name under position “3rd” and says “nuh uh, im not going out there…” without becoming a pariah…
"Anyone that isn't pro-choice never met you" ~Brian Thomas on Seth...
by ivysafety39 on Oct 13, 2008 2:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If that better option is Andrus
Then I don’t think there is a problem. But I seriously doubt he moves for some filler replacement guy. I just don’t see it happening.
Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.
by bigsteve on Oct 13, 2008 2:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Man I really hate this idea of not doing what's best for the team just because one player wouldn't like it.
I hope you’re wrong about that, btw. Cause if the inmates really are running this asylum, then we’re f’d.
For the record I think if they went to him and told him they need him to love over and take over at 3b cause that’s where the team needs him for the next 5 years, then he’d do it. Maybe not like it, but he’d sure as hell do it. Say what you will about that boring ass dork, but he’s not gonna refuse to move if you tell him that’s the way it is. He’s just not that sort of dude.
The 40 Trumps All!!!
by thedirkatron on Oct 13, 2008 3:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I fully understand thats what is best for the team
But being realistic for a second I just can’t see a scenario where he agrees to move to 3B for a stopgap replacement player. Chalk it up to pride, chalk it up to whatever you want but I don’t see it happening. He is an all star at SS, albeit due to a very weak AL SS group, but moving to 3B while probably best for the team would diminish his stature. He has played here 8 years through lots of losing seasons and never caused any kind of ruckus. Hes never been in the news for breaking any laws, no DUIs, hes active in the community, basically an all around good guy. As much as people don’t want to hear it he has earned some leverage in this organization. He is respected in the clubhouse and by fans. The quickest way to cause a rift in the clubhouse and with fans is to undermine a guy like Young.
Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.
by bigsteve on Oct 13, 2008 3:57 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Personally
I don’t think the team would ask him to move for a stop gap because of most of those reasons.
I think if the club decided that moving him to 3rd this off season behooved the team now and in the long run he’d 100% move. Cause the only alternative is to bring the entire house down with him, and that hurts everyone, especially him in the long run. Can you think of a recent example of guy refusing to change positions when asked? It just doesn’t happen. Soriano tried it for a few weeks, but as soon as he realized they were serious he moved and he flourished. I understand where you’re coming from, but, trust me, he’d move. And I think he’d make surprisingly little fuss about it if they made it clear that’s what was being asked of him.
But I don’t think they’d ask him.
The 40 Trumps All!!!
by thedirkatron on Oct 13, 2008 4:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
+1
And it wasn’t really even close, comparing ss and 3b. Improve the D at 3rd and let the grass grow.
by Back Door Yakker on Oct 13, 2008 1:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Blalock
Playing fictional GM for a sec, how about this one:
I would bet that the Yanks will successfully go after CC this offseason, meaning they probably miss out on Tex. If that happens, and Cashmen is forced to find a new 1B, do you think the Yankees give up David Robertson and George Kontos for Blalock?
Too much? Too little?
by clark on Oct 13, 2008 12:49 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
two things
1) i almost included a note in my post asking people not to bring up the enticing idea of davis for hughes because that simply won’t happen. They aren’t going to trade him, and his dominant fall league debut only reconfirms that. It is not a question of value, it is just that players like Hughes are simply not traded at this point in their careers.
2) at this point, i would rather the team continue to rebuild by trading players like Blalock, whose long term value to the club is questionable. I want to field a club in 2009 with as many players as possible who can realistically be expected to contribute to competitive teams from 2010 on. Blalock is likely gone after next season, so the team would be better served adding a potentially dominant bullpen arm like Robertson and another young pitcher like Kontos.
by clark on Oct 13, 2008 1:15 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
For no particular reason
Players are within 1.5 year of age.
Player A (AA level)
104.1 IP, 72 H
101:24 K:BB
8.71 K/9
2.07 BB/9
2.33 ERA
Player B (AA level)
151.2 IP, 134 H
152:57 K:BB
9.02 K/9
3.38 BB/9
3.68 ERA
Not a great comp, but the first that came to mind.
Go Strangers.
by hightowersmith on Oct 13, 2008 1:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
player b
is Kontos, I believe. not sure about player a.
by clark on Oct 13, 2008 1:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
the thing about Kontos
and every yankees pitching prospect, really, is that I have no idea what to make of their numbers. The Yankees must play in some extreme pitchers’ parks, because every year they end up with seemingly pedestrian pitchers who put up outrageous numbers.
Kontos seemed to make a jump this past year, and he was sort of a pitching equivalent to Mayberry. He had tremendous stuff in college but it garnered poor results. He was seen as a two pitch guy who needed to hone his command and develop a third pitch if he was to make it as a starter. He seems to be the sort of pitcher who could hit a wall in the higher levels as a starter (and his prospect rankings seem to bare that in mind) but whose floor still seems to be an effective big league reliever.
by clark on Oct 13, 2008 1:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Kontos and Bowden
Go Strangers.
by hightowersmith on Oct 13, 2008 1:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Two pitchers with good hit rates, good K rates, good walk rates, and awful G:F rates (which I forgot).
Go Strangers.
by hightowersmith on Oct 13, 2008 1:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i think most
would rank bowden a notch above Kontos, esp in terms of major league readiness. but that is an interesting comp. i have a feeling kontos ends up emerging as a solid late innings guy, and truthfully, I would take two solid late inning guys for a year of blalock and whatever comp pick he garners (if any).
by clark on Oct 13, 2008 1:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why do you assume no Tex if they get CC?
The Yankees have something like $40 million + coming off their books this year and are opening a new stadium designed to make money grow on trees. They can afford both players if they want.
G G G E-flat_______ F F F D__________....
by t ball on Oct 13, 2008 1:52 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
if they are able to snag
the two legitimate superstars on the market this offseason, both of whom are expected to get deals at around 18-20m/year for 6+ years, then more power to them. This may be the perfect scenario for that to happen, because mid market teams who could have gone “all in” in the past may be more hesitant this offseason given the current economic downturn.
Still, I cannot remember the last offseason when the two highest ranked FAs ended up with the same team.
by clark on Oct 13, 2008 1:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Looking at the players they lose
Giambi, 21 million in 08 with a 22 million 09 option (5 mil to buyout)
Abreu, 16 million in 08, FA now
Pettitte, 16 million in 08, FA now
Ivan Rodriguez, not sure how much the Yanks paid for him this season, but its at least a few million off the books
Mussina, 11 million in 08, FA now
Pavano, 11 million in 08, 13 million club option for 09 with 1.95 million buyout
On top of that, Jeter is only signed through one more year and won’t make 20 million a year on his next contract, Damon isn’t coming back after 09 for another 13 million, and Matsui is a FA after 09 for another 13 million. So you’ll have around 70 million coming off the book for this year and 46 million or so next year. They’ll probably resign Jeter, Matsui, and Mussina and maybe another one or two of those guys, but none of them are going to be making anything near the type of money they’re making now. So if the Yankees are still working with a 200 million payroll, its not hard at all for them to sign Tex and CC if they want both of them. They’re 35-40 million a year just replaces all the 20 million dollar contracts they have now. And if the Yanks actually start playing their minor league guys instead of taking every bad contract like they did in 04, 05, and 06, they can afford it without a problem.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
-The Outlaw
by Gdawg on Oct 13, 2008 2:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Pavano
Curious if he does better than a MiL deal this winter…
Go Strangers.
by hightowersmith on Oct 13, 2008 2:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
doubtful
his numbers this past year, when finally healthy, were pretty pedestrian. he will likely sign a minor league deal with an org like the Cardinals who lack pitching depth and have a reputation for rejuvenating the careers of pitchers.
by clark on Oct 13, 2008 2:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yankees
They will probably resign one or both of Mussina and Pettite. Mussina will get a raise if he resigns and pettite will probably get around 15 mil if he resigns.
Jeter won’t come off the books. There is no way he is going to another team and while he may not get 20 mil per the Yankees will pay a premium for him.
All that being said they have the resources to spend whatever they want. If they want Tex and CC they can afford both.
Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.
by bigsteve on Oct 13, 2008 2:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Mussina probably won't get a significant raise
nor a deal more than 1 year. He could get around the same amount of money. Pettitte will either retire or not make 16 million again. 37 years old, 95 ERA+ this past season. There is no way he gets another 16 million.
Jeter won’t come off the books, but he is about to finish off a 10 year, 189 million dollar contract that sees him getting 20-21 million over the last 4 years of the contract. I can see 14-15 million for him, but that’s a significant chunk of change that will come off the books.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
-The Outlaw
by Gdawg on Oct 13, 2008 3:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
6 mil is not significant to the Yankees
Or to any team with a 200 million dollar payroll. Mussina won 20 games, pitched 200 innings, and had an ERA+ of 128. He will probably get 14-17 mil on a one year deal. Plus the Yankees rotation next year right now is Wang (coming off injury), Hughes (coming off injury and inconsistency), Joba (coming off injury), and possibly Kennedy. They need Mussina thus raising the price they will pay for him.
Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.
by bigsteve on Oct 13, 2008 3:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Mussina likes New York and has made a ton of money
in his career. I don’t see him getting 17 million from the Yankees and I don’t see him finishing his career elsewhere.
If we are talking about can even the Yankees afford two major (at least 120 million dollar) contracts this offseason, 6 million is significant.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
-The Outlaw
by Gdawg on Oct 13, 2008 4:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
But we aren't talking about if they can afford it
They can
Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.
by bigsteve on Oct 13, 2008 4:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
they can afford anything
the question is do they want to spend that much money. They could afford a 300 million dollar payroll, but I doubt Steinbrenner Jr. and Cashman want that to happen. If you are talking about setting a general 200 million dollar budget or maybe even dropping the payroll a bit, then that is where this all comes into play.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
-The Outlaw
by Gdawg on Oct 13, 2008 4:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
On Nate Silver
http://nymag.com/news/features/51170/
Go Strangers.
by hightowersmith on Oct 13, 2008 12:52 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Cool article
Gracias for the link, Senor.
The 40 Trumps All!!!
by thedirkatron on Oct 13, 2008 6:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Question...
Many recent reports have stated that the infield grass at RBiA is amongst the quickest (if not the quickest) in the game. I may have missed it, but has anyone seen anything to indicate that the Rangers might consider growing out the grass or switching to a different type that’s thicker? This simple (and comparatively inexpensive) move could help the overall infield defense quite a bit simply by slowing the ball down…
Again, I know I’ve seen this topic mentioned in numerous places, I just don’t recall seeing anything that said we’re going to switch the turf… It can’t hurt to give this some serious consideration.
"Hello win column..."
by rangersfan34 on Oct 13, 2008 4:43 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
