The Rangers untouchable list

I don’t think Hicks really has any idea what he’s talking about.

I think the spirit of his comment is more important than the 1st round quote. Do you really think he’s setting down a hard rule about 1st round draft choices? Hicks is stupid, but parsing this quote is just piling on.

The point is that you don’t trade away high ceiling pitchers (such as normally first round draft picks). He seems to have learned to trust his people on how they value talent in house. That is a good thing. To see most of those guys make a real impact (including Adams list), it will still be about 3 to 4 years. Take whatever positive pill you can take, and avoid drinking the nasty stuff because the Rangers are still far away from a championship legacy which we all dream about.

I hear a reference to two things:

1. This team’s pitching sucks.

2. Up-and-coming pitching is frequently taken in the first round.

This quote has nothing to do with the Rangers’ problems. It’s just a clunky public declaration.

Who is the hottest female supporting character on the Simpsons?

• Cookie Kwan
• Helen Lovejoy
• Edna Krabapple
• Lindsey Nagle
• Maude Flanders
• Apu’s wife
• Homer’s Vegas wife
• Ned’s Vegas wife
• Mrs. Hoover
• Patty and/or Selma

Someone tinkle in your Wheaties this morning? That post is dripping of angry sarcasm.

we should really take a lesson from our liverpool brothers and protest hicks and call for him to sell the team.
(then again its not exactly working for them)

Overreact much? He answered a question; he didn’t issue an edict.

You lawyers can just twist words anyway you want to attempt to get your desired result…

when BIg Daddy does his bull in the china store imitation.

and that it’s also ironic that under Hicks’ new plan, we would not have Josh Hamilton, (pitching for non pitcher) and if the Rays actually used this plan, they would never have gotten rid of Hamilton because not only was Hamilton a first round pick, but he was the first pick overall (no trading first rounders).

Hicks = Idiot

Surely Hicks just meant that we will avoid dealing our highly touted minor league pitchers. (or so I hope)

I mean surely if Hicks was told about the opportunity to acquire a 24 year old with a 3.47 ERA in 2008 and a 130 ERA+, he wouldn’t object to including Hurley, Kiker, or Ramirez in such a deal.

Nevertheless, the general attitude by Ryan and Hicks is more than a little worrisome. Clearly, the Rangers problem is not developing young pitching, but instead having minor league success translate into major league success. I highly doubt such a consistent problem can be solved by pushing pitchers harder. That seems like an incredibly short-sided solution to a complex and delicate problem. Did Danks figure it out with Chicago, or Galarraga in Detroit because they were pushed harder? Did Volquez pitch like a Cy Young award winner because the Rangers were no longer coddling them? Of course not. They are very talented pitchers who either were given an opportunity (Volquez), improved their repertoire by adding a new pitch (Danks), or maybe even got a little lucky (Galarraga).

If anything, you risk exacerbating the problem by forcing a heavy load on a young pitcher.

Daniels hasn’t been perfect. He screwed up with the Danks for McCarthy trade, in retrospect. At the same time, I can’t stand this view that with Ryan in charge, the Rangers will never make another mistake again. I also can’t stand that many in the local media completely ignore the very prudent and intelligent moves made by Daniels to amass the best farm system in all of baseball.

I understand the desire to fix the pitching problem internally, but if the Rangers have the chance to acquire Greinke, or Nolasco, or Cain, we shouldn’t hesitate because the Danks trade failed.

Zach Grienke was a 6th overall pick in the first round.

So we would be getting a better first rounder in return.

we have learned to not trade young, talented pitchers

Isn’t much more than that he really doesn’t have a grasp on the relationship between draft choices and their role in building MLB teams that can deliver good performance.

Sometimes a first rounder is vital to a need. Sometimes is the ‘best player available’. Sometimes is depth for future use. Sometimes is redundant to your present and future strengths (enabling that choice or the player he’s redundant to, to be a valuable commodity in trade). There is no categorical ‘first rounder perspective’ guide.

So setting any protocol that first round pitchers must be kept is about as effective as the Bass brothers’ attempt to corner the silver market. Just when you think you’ve done so, what you really need is somewhere else.