Sunday morning stuff
by Adam J. Morris on Nov 9, 2008 9:14 AM CST
169 comments
Well, one of the Ranger catchers is saying he wants to be dealt to Boston.
And, surprisingly, it isn't Gerald Laird, who has put his foot in his mouth a few times in the past.
No, this is Jarrod Saltalamacchia, who'd like to go to Boston:
Jarrod Saltalamacchia can't hide his excitement when he hears rumors of being traded to Boston. Nothing against Texas, he insists, where he's trying to wade through a catching maze with Gerald Laird and Taylor Teagarden after being acquired from the Braves at the trading deadline in 2007 in the Mark Teixeira deal.
But the Red Sox are a team he has respected and enjoyed from afar. He grew up in West Palm Beach, Fla., and his favorite catcher - and idol, of sorts - was Jason Varitek.
"That would be a dream come true," said Saltalamacchia, 23. "I'd love to go there and either work under Jason for a year or two or just go there and catch full-time.
"I love watching Jason. He's like an idol of mine. I watch him and I learn from him and I'd love to be able to spend time with him. I saw him this year and we talked for a while and I learned so much from him in the short time we had."
Jim Reeves says Michael Young winning the gold glove means he won't be changing positions anytime soon. He also says, interestingly, that "Rangers insiders" suggest Young will eventually move to second base, with Ian Kinsler going to third base, when Elvis Andrus is reading.
Reeves also makes clear that Jackie Moore as bench coach was the result of Nolan "putting his foot down," and talks about John Blake coming back to Texas because of Nolan.
Kevin Sherrington echoes Reeves' claim that the Moore and Mike Maddux hires were Nolan Ryan hires, not Ron Washington hires.
Yeah, people are clearly bored right now. Why else would Tim Cowlishaw suggest that the Rangers pony up to sign Manny Ramirez?
Cowlishaw's suggestion is silly for a variety of reasons, not the least of which that he suggests that Manny play left field while David Murphy or Nelson Cruz DHs (if Manny were to come here, you'd want him at DH, not in the field).
Cowlishaw acknowledges that you are talking about a 4 year $100 million deal for Manny, who will be 40 when a 4 year deal runs out. And he ignores the fact that the Rangers already have plenty of DH options hanging around. But the main thing to me is...is Manny really significantly better than Milton Bradley? If you are going to commit big money long-term for a DH, why not sign Bradley to a 3 year, $36 million deal, instead of going after Manny?
1 recs |
169 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
is Manny really significantly better than Milton Bradley?
Yes. Significantly better.
I don't hate everything. In fact, I think LSB is just groovy.
by tricer on Nov 9, 2008 9:24 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Significantly?
Last year:
Manny — .332/.430/.601
Bradley — .321/.436/.563
2007:
Manny — .296/.388/.493
Bradley — .306/.402/.545
If Manny weren’t turning 37 in May, it might be a little different.
by Adam J. Morris on Nov 9, 2008 9:31 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Which shows
how valuable Bradley could be if he could stay healthy for a full season, which he can’t.
Nolan Ryan is the Greatest Pitcher ever, because Google says so.
"BTW I’m officially welching ab03. Yeah I planned too all along, but I figured I’d try to get off the hook with double or nothing first."- Sharky
by DJCahill on Nov 9, 2008 9:33 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
If Milton didn't have the health problems
Wouldn’t there be no question we would resign him?
by tyd3311 on Nov 9, 2008 9:36 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
On the other hand
If he didn’t have the health problems he wouldn’t have been here in the first place.
"Colt mccoy sucks, mack brown needs to be fired." - Longhorn
by DaheelzCM on Nov 9, 2008 9:37 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Same with Hamilton too
Although Hamilton pretty much laid those to rest this year.
Just say no to Scott Olsen.
by lonestarJon on Nov 9, 2008 9:49 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think age matters when one of your comps is Bradley.
In Reality, 2007 and 2008 total at-bats:
Manny — 1035
Bradley — 623
Milt has gotten to 500 AB’s exactly one time in his career, and never before or since has he even come close to that number.
And again, I wouldn’t sign either one of them.
by Black Francis on Nov 9, 2008 10:02 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
manny doesn't get hurt all the time and he has been great his entire career
so yes Manny is much better. But, i still wouldn’t sign him
by Save us on Nov 9, 2008 10:57 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
WTF?!
He was that much better (rate-wise) than Manny in ’07? I missed that.
by philkid3 on Nov 9, 2008 11:31 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
waaaaaaaaaay fewer at bats
But yes he was really good in 07
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 Nov 9, 2008 11:32 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
He is Light Years Better
Last year Bradley had his career year, and is normally a pretty good hitter and outfielder when healthy. Ramirez, is a genuine HOF type, who plays a decent right field when motivated, although probably wouldn’t be suited to the larger RF of Arlington.
I couldn’t commit long-term money to a guy who’s injured as much as Bradley is. That said, I wouldn’t go after Ramirez, either.
by Black Francis on Nov 9, 2008 9:34 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
decent RF?
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 Nov 9, 2008 9:43 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes.
Well, in Boston he played a decent RF when he was motivated to. Like I said, I don’t think he would be able to do the same at his advanced age at the Temple.
by Black Francis on Nov 9, 2008 9:45 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
He's a terrible defensive OF'er
by Adam J. Morris on Nov 9, 2008 9:46 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
he played the green moster good though
and he was a nice cut off for johnny damon!
isnt that worth anything?
normal people : chuck norris :: getting flustered in big games : greg davis
by knockoutking on Nov 9, 2008 9:59 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I think you mean LF
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 Nov 9, 2008 9:48 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Not really
He said “Defense: -20. Terrible” or something like that.
I don’t believe in defensive metrics. When I say that he plays a decent left field, I’m figuring into it that he is a HOF caliber hitter. And I don’t think he’s as bad “-20” indicates. Boston has been on TV enough the last couple of years for me to see a lot of him. When motivated, he’s okay. I’ve seen a lot worse.
by Black Francis on Nov 9, 2008 10:18 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
He is a good hitter
but being a good hitter has nothing to do with his defense. Overall he is much better served by DHing than playing in the field. The arguments here is not about whether he is a good hitter, it’s about how much of that hitting is dampened by the runs he cost his team through his “defense”.
Just because you choose to not believe in defensive metric does not mean they do not reflect what happens in reality (at least the closest to reality). Truth is that year after year, he gets to a lot fewer balls than most outfielders, and it doesn’t matter how you feel about it. Unless he is just so unlucky that during his tenure, he has a lot more balls hit in his direction that are uncatchable (which does not happen, and would be accounted for by the metric were it to happen), there is other reason that he makes less plays other than him being not very good.
I acknowledge that defensive metrics are not perfect – they have their shares of problems, but they aren’t witchcraft. They are based on logical and sound reasoning with issues only in execution, and sure are better than the alternatives out there. For one, they are objective, and not clouded by perceptions and prejudice that distort the views of an observer.
by Telegraph on Nov 9, 2008 10:41 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm going to say this once
I’ve seen him play. I have no special love for the guy. He’s just not THAT bad out there. He is not good. But he is decent if you have nowhere else to play him. In that case you could certainly live with it because of his hitting, so that is indeed relevant.
I don’t claim the defensive metrics to be “witchcraft”. I know people have put a lot of time into them, and actually I find them interesting. But I take them with many, many grains of salt.
Fact is, Manny tends to play a very deep outfield, and even when he’s not “being Manny” that’s going to prevent him to getting to some balls. But he gets to others that he otherwise wouldn’t, and when they’re hit deeper those kinds of balls can end up being more trouble if they’re not caught or cut off. It’s a trade off either he or his manager is making.
by Black Francis on Nov 9, 2008 11:34 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I've seen him, too.
I’ve never seen any evidence of decent.
by philkid3 on Nov 9, 2008 11:35 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
If manny was a terrible defense player
he wouldn’t be in the major leagues.
I’ve seen terrible defensive players and most of them were in little league baseball or in highschool. Terrible is a overstatement. Its more like below Avg.
When you hit over 300 with like 30+ bombs consistently it over looks someones defense. So if we can sign him ill be pretty happy. And by the way hes probably the best hitting right hander
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXWLfIgc0nA
by mchang4 on Nov 9, 2008 12:00 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Um. . .
I’ve always assumed when people say “terrible fielder” they’re speaking relative to the Major Leagues. And, also, usually relative to their position.
Also, offense has nothing to do with defense.
by philkid3 on Nov 9, 2008 12:42 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Offense is more important then defense
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXWLfIgc0nA
by mchang4 on Nov 9, 2008 1:26 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Correct.
That doesn’t make defense unimportant and also doesn’t have much to do with anything said above. This entire string of conversation is about Manny’s defense, not his offense or overall value.
by philkid3 on Nov 9, 2008 2:05 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Why?
Is that just a fact of the baseball market?
There is a bigger supply of players with defensive ability who lack a bat than there is good hitters with no glove. Is that correct? Just seems logical to me.
"He’s basically told himself unconsciously that he can’t be any good unless he catches 130 games a year. If he played with the baseball smarts of a guy like a David Eckstein, he’d maximize his talent and be an incredible player." - Andy Seiler, Texas Rangers Analyst
by Chase Irwin on Nov 9, 2008 3:45 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Huh?
I’m not sure what you’re asking.
I was saying this off-shoot discussion in the comments section has not been about Manny’s value, it’s been about how good he is on defense. His total value or value on offense has nothing to do with that.
And it stems from the fact that we’d be better with Murphy/Cruz in the field and Manny at DH than the other way around.
by philkid3 on Nov 9, 2008 7:32 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
RE:
Offense is more important then defense.
I’m curious if that is an accurate statement. Is offense more valuable by nature of scarcity, relative to defense?
"He’s basically told himself unconsciously that he can’t be any good unless he catches 130 games a year. If he played with the baseball smarts of a guy like a David Eckstein, he’d maximize his talent and be an incredible player." - Andy Seiler, Texas Rangers Analyst
by Chase Irwin on Nov 9, 2008 8:23 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Not Philkid
But I would think offense is more important, seeing as how it takes a higher level of ability to hit and hit well at the MLB level. Conversely, there seems to be a slew of guys (replacement level/minor league journeyman/utility types) who can play adequate to above average defense, sometimes at multiple positions who can’t cut it as full-time players in the majors.
Just say no to Scott Olsen.
by lonestarJon on Nov 9, 2008 8:35 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh.
I thought you were just responding to me. My bad.
Anyway, an average player has more impact offensively than defensively. It’s closer at some positions than others, but offense is more valuable at every position than defense, other than pitching (duh).
by philkid3 on Nov 9, 2008 8:39 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
LF at Fenway park is one of the strangest positions in all of baseball.
I think the monster really screws with those stats.
How was he with LAD?
The 40 Trumps All!!!
Rule 5? No…talk to the hand.
by thedirkatron on Nov 9, 2008 3:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Off the top of my head. . .
Better, but still below average.
by philkid3 on Nov 9, 2008 7:34 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Adam
what do you think of the possibility of Young to 2nd, Kinsler to 3rd?
Bobby Jindal '12
by dstar442005 on Nov 9, 2008 9:25 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Meh
I have my doubts about whether Young is really better at 2B than Kinsler.
by Adam J. Morris on Nov 9, 2008 10:11 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Are these the same "Ranger's insider's"
who think Ron Washington is a joke?
by tyd3311 on Nov 9, 2008 10:18 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Or is it more about
Kinsler being better at 3B than how good Young would be?
by hiafex on Nov 9, 2008 11:18 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
i brought this up
a couple weeks ago in the Chris Davis thread. I think Kinsler is probably the best long-term solution at 3B who is currently in the organization. I don’t like the idea of putting Young at 2nd. If his range is poor at SS, it’s going to be poor at 2nd. If the Rangers move Kinsler to 3rd, they’re going to have to replace BOTH of the middle infield spots.
Is Vallejo as far along as Andrus? I have trouble believing the “Ranger’s Insiders” because Vallejo would’ve been the best option to replace Kinsler at 2nd, but they’re making him play some SS over the winter. If they were planning on putting Kinsler at 3rd and Andrus at SS, why would they move Vallejo to SS?
Personally, I think the Rangers are willing to include Andrus in a deal to bring in some top pitching. If that’s the case, then they’re going to need a new replacement for Young and they want to see if Vallejo can handle the position.
by texaschief on Nov 9, 2008 1:02 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Vallejo
They are making him play SS to increase his versatility because the most likely position in the majors for him is as a utility IF. He is blocked at 2B by Kinsler, SS by Andrus, and 3B by Young. If he shows he can play those three positions defensively then he becomes a very valuable utility player who we have for cheap
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 Nov 9, 2008 4:00 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
the link to the Salty quotes
is broken.
I don't hate everything. In fact, I think LSB is just groovy.
by tricer on Nov 9, 2008 9:26 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
+1
First link busted.
This is hilarious stuff though.
"He’s basically told himself unconsciously that he can’t be any good unless he catches 130 games a year. If he played with the baseball smarts of a guy like a David Eckstein, he’d maximize his talent and be an incredible player." - Andy Seiler, Texas Rangers Analyst
by Chase Irwin on Nov 9, 2008 9:27 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
That's pretty interesting quote from Salty
I’m liking the chances of a Salty+ for Buchholz deal better and better. Really, that might be just what he needs to realize his potential, is the chance to go to a team that can focus on developing and mentoring him – maybe I’m wrong, but I don’t think he’s going to get that kind of attention with all the competition from Max and Tea.
by JimBonnick84 on Nov 9, 2008 9:27 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
would anyone do boscan + salty for buchhotz?
normal people : chuck norris :: getting flustered in big games : greg davis
by knockoutking on Nov 9, 2008 9:59 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
*Raises hand*
Hell, I think I’d do Salty plus someone like Beavan or Kiker for Buch.
Just say no to Scott Olsen.
by lonestarJon on Nov 9, 2008 10:03 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
as would i
in a heartbeat
normal people : chuck norris :: getting flustered in big games : greg davis
by knockoutking on Nov 9, 2008 10:04 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Would the Red Sox?
I struggle to think they would.
by philkid3 on Nov 9, 2008 11:36 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Well, then I'd do Salty
Plus whatever else the Red Sox want that’s not named Feliz, Holland, Davis or Andrus. I reeeeeally like Buchholz.
Just say no to Scott Olsen.
by lonestarJon on Nov 9, 2008 11:42 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
The only reason to even mention Buchholz, I think, is if you are willing to move Feliz, Holland, or Davis in a deal with one of the catchers. It just doesn’t make sense for Boston otherwise. They reeeeeeally like Buchholz too.
by Brett Perryman on Nov 9, 2008 11:52 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
This whole thing smacks of Soriano for Liriano.
I just can’t see it.
I’d love it, but I just can’t see it.
The 40 Trumps All!!!
Rule 5? No…talk to the hand.
by thedirkatron on Nov 9, 2008 3:41 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah that's what
it feels like to me. The Rangers have been asking for Buchholz since last season, and if you squint to the point that your eyes are almost closed you can almost convince yourself to see how it kind of makes sense. But unless something is way more wrong with Buchholz (such that I’m not sure that we want him anyway) than is readily apparent, it’s just not something that Boston would or should do, much like Liriano for Soriano, and there’s no way around it.
Of course those of us who tried to tried to be wet blankets during that discussion were borderline lynched too, and I don’t get the feeling that as many people are convinced that this is a reality, so that’s probably good.
by Brett Perryman on Nov 9, 2008 6:30 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Tea/Salty + Feliz/Holland/Davis/Andrus for Buccholz
I read that and it doesn’t make sense.
There’s something in the middle.
Go Strangers.
by hightowersmith on Nov 9, 2008 11:58 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
yes
What about font + salty for bucholz?
Signature! I don't need no stinking signature!!
by DerekSTheRed on Nov 9, 2008 10:05 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah...
I saw that article about Salty in the Boston Globe. Problem is I don’t think JD is in love with Bowden or Masterson and Salty alone couldn’t get Buchholz.
Perhaps a Salty + deal for Buchholz or the more likely scenerio of Salty for Bowden/Masterson + would work.
And I don’t unserstand why MY would go back to 2nd rather than to 3rd. Why switch two players positions, especially when Kinsler has the range to play up the middle and MY doesn’t.
I would love to see Manny in the middle of this lineup, but that $ needs to be spent on pitching.
"The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance."-Socrates
by slc ranger on Nov 9, 2008 9:28 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
What book is Elvis reading?
"Colt mccoy sucks, mack brown needs to be fired." - Longhorn
by DaheelzCM on Nov 9, 2008 9:29 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
must be a pretty long one
if hes not gonna be done anytime soon
normal people : chuck norris :: getting flustered in big games : greg davis
by knockoutking on Nov 9, 2008 10:00 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
One Hundred Years of Solitude
translated into castellano.
"He’s basically told himself unconsciously that he can’t be any good unless he catches 130 games a year. If he played with the baseball smarts of a guy like a David Eckstein, he’d maximize his talent and be an incredible player." - Andy Seiler, Texas Rangers Analyst
by Chase Irwin on Nov 9, 2008 10:09 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Gracias a Dios
"He’s basically told himself unconsciously that he can’t be any good unless he catches 130 games a year. If he played with the baseball smarts of a guy like a David Eckstein, he’d maximize his talent and be an incredible player." - Andy Seiler, Texas Rangers Analyst
by Chase Irwin on Nov 9, 2008 10:12 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
I wonder
if Texas Rangers Analyst has read that scripture.
"He’s basically told himself unconsciously that he can’t be any good unless he catches 130 games a year. If he played with the baseball smarts of a guy like a David Eckstein, he’d maximize his talent and be an incredible player." - Andy Seiler, Texas Rangers Analyst
by Chase Irwin on Nov 9, 2008 10:18 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
LMAO
Read the customer reviews at that link. Hilarious.
Just say no to Scott Olsen.
by lonestarJon on Nov 9, 2008 10:28 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Hilarious
I must say, I was quite disappointed with this book. While the David Eckstein heart was in full force, the level of grit was somewhat lacking. I also could have used a bit more hustle. Also, I’m not so sure why there were so many references to Holiday Inn.
by tyd3311 on Nov 9, 2008 10:31 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
My fave
This book has so much will to win that I would like to give it 5 stars. However, I continue to reserve the 5-star rating exlusively for the actual David Eckstein, just in case he is ever productized and mass-produced. Heck, I only gave that Forrest Gump movie 4 stars. Yes, Forrest is the closest to David in heart size of any real and/or mythical character, but there’s only one David Eckstein, who ironically enough stands just 5’7" high, or possibly just a miniscule 5’6" if this book’s promotional description is to be believed.
I suppose I might give 4.5 stars to EcksO’s breakfast cereal, but only if it were sprinkled with dirt from the St. Louis infield and doused with homogenized 2% Eckstein sweat.
Just say no to Scott Olsen.
by lonestarJon on Nov 9, 2008 10:36 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Salty
He clearly doesn’t want to be here so we should all hate him now right?
"Colt mccoy sucks, mack brown needs to be fired." - Longhorn
by DaheelzCM on Nov 9, 2008 9:30 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Let's kill his trade value
and handcuff JD.
"He’s basically told himself unconsciously that he can’t be any good unless he catches 130 games a year. If he played with the baseball smarts of a guy like a David Eckstein, he’d maximize his talent and be an incredible player." - Andy Seiler, Texas Rangers Analyst
by Chase Irwin on Nov 9, 2008 9:31 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't hate him
Though I’ve been accused of it in the past by Chase
This is strong evidence for why this team cannot go into Spring Training with both Laird and Salty. It was a sketchy situation last year – this year will be just untenable.
The people who who think we can keep all 4 catchers are just in denial that JD’s back is to the wall on this one.
by JBImaknee on Nov 9, 2008 11:01 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Speaking of Laird
Anyone see the <a href=“http://www.star-telegram.com/284/story/1026203.html” bit on him in the ST from Jeff Wilson yesterday?
“For me, it’s still Gerald Laird until one of the young kids shows he can push him out of the way,” [manager Ron] Washington said from his New Orleans home Friday. “As long as Gerald is here, he has the inside track for me.”
Interesting, because there’s no question that Laird has caused Washington plenty of frustration in the two years he’s managed the team.
The Rangers have constantly pleaded with Laird to concentrate on getting the best out of whoever’s on the mound first and his offense second. Laird’s focus, instead, has been on hitting .300 and worrying about his game-calling and working with the young pitchers somewhere after that.
It really seems like getting rid of Laird is imperative if we want any of our younger catchers to have a fair chance at the starting job in ’09.
Just say no to Scott Olsen.
by lonestarJon on Nov 9, 2008 11:05 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Well, crap
Didn’t get the link embedded. Here it is again:
http://www.star-telegram.com/284/story/1026203.html
Just say no to Scott Olsen.
by lonestarJon on Nov 9, 2008 11:06 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with thtat
I’m all for trading Laird for any decent kid – stud prospect or not, I don’t much care.
Either Tea or Salty should be our starting catcher next year. Salty has the better bat, Tea has the better glove. But both excite me more than Laird.
The idea that we need a pitcher with even middle-of-the-rotation potential for Laird is somewhat ludicrous. I have to think that is simply posturing of some sort.
by JBImaknee on Nov 9, 2008 11:11 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Please, Ron Washington...
STFU.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
by Josey Wales on Nov 9, 2008 11:45 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Cowlishaw...
should just stay on ESPN and stop commenting on the Rangers. He clearly doesn’t know jack-shit about what the Rangers should or will be doing.
"The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance."-Socrates
by slc ranger on Nov 9, 2008 9:39 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Kind of like JJT and MacMahon
EG, MJH and Durret should be the only ones at the DMN allowed to write about the Rangers.
Just say no to Scott Olsen.
by lonestarJon on Nov 9, 2008 9:41 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Durrett
I think he is stuck in NASCAR hell now.
"Colt mccoy sucks, mack brown needs to be fired." - Longhorn
by DaheelzCM on Nov 9, 2008 9:43 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Sucks for him
NASCAR has gone down the drain. I used to be fanatical about watching from about ‘02 to ’05 (coincedentally the period in which Tony Stewart won his two titles), but since Toyota came in and they started regulating the car designs, and jacking around with how championship is determined, it’s become a freaking joke.
Just say no to Scott Olsen.
by lonestarJon on Nov 9, 2008 9:46 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
it's always been a joke
you just finally got the punchline…
by bushe on Nov 9, 2008 9:55 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Heh
I knew someone would come up with something like that. ; )
Just say no to Scott Olsen.
by lonestarJon on Nov 9, 2008 9:57 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Salty
IIRC, his dad (525dp when he posted here) was a Red Sox fan. That probably explain’s why Salty’s so jacked up about this.
Really, I’d almost like to see Salty traded to Boston if that where he wants to go. Yeah, he’s still my favorite and I still think he holds the most potential of all our catchers and would eventually supercede Tea if he stays, but I’ve gotten to the point where I won’t be overly sad at seeing him traded if the return his good (and we keep Max).
Just say no to Scott Olsen.
by lonestarJon on Nov 9, 2008 9:47 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Seeing Salty in Boston would make me sick
It would be one of those “it’s only right for Boston and NY to get the players they need at the expense of unimportant teams” things.
by Brett Perryman on Nov 9, 2008 10:54 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
"expense of unimportant teams"
Here’s hoping JD’s arranging serious compensation for that expense.
MJH notes they’ve gotten together on deals before…got to figure this JD-Theo conversation is well into development.
Go Strangers.
by hightowersmith on Nov 9, 2008 10:59 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm thinking
the chemistry between Daniels and Epstein is very good, as you said. They may value the players differently from how I perceive, but I just don’t know if a deal can be done without someone getting the shaft a little. Buchholz is too much for one of our catchers, even if something nice is put with Salty/Teagarden. Any one of their other arms strikes me as too bleh for one of the catchers, but is there the right piece in the Rangers system to make sense of Boston giving two very solid arms for one of those catchers? I don’t know. I don’t know how to make these pieces fit:
1. one of Teagarden and Saltalamacchia
2. ?
for
1. one of Bowden and Masterson
2. one of Bard and Hagadone
I don’t even know if Hagadone is on the table from Boston’s perspective. BA ranked him ahead of Bard when he’s not even back from elbow surgery. But no combination that I can think of feels quite right. I’m sure that both teams are reviewing their options, and even if a deal happens it is probably a few weeks away. But I really think that even though there is certainly a match in terms of positional talent/need, it may be hard to find something where each team feels like it maximized its return.
by Brett Perryman on Nov 9, 2008 11:30 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Fortunately, Saltalamacchia kinda sucks.
GREINKE HO!!!!!
by oc on Nov 9, 2008 11:07 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Cowlishaw's onto fixing the defense, too
Ian Kinsler, 2B; Michael Young, SS; Josh Hamilton, CF; Manny Ramirez, LF; Chris Davis, 3B; Marlon Byrd, CF; Hank Blalock, 1B; David Murphy/Nelson Cruz, DH; Gerald Laird, Taylor Teagarden, C.
We just keep two guys in center, then we’ll win.
by Keynes on Nov 9, 2008 9:48 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Actually I think
He knows one of the CFer’s would have to be over in left with Manny.
Just say no to Scott Olsen.
by lonestarJon on Nov 9, 2008 9:50 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
lets see
kinsler – ok at 2b
FOTF – gg winner. nuff said /sarsasm below average
hamilton in cf – below average
manny in lf – below average
chris davis at 3b – well below average
byrd in cf – average
blalock at 1b – meh. average?
but i bet murphy/cruz can field the hell of DH
his shit just doenst make sense. murphy/cruz are both pretty good defenders, and manny is clearly not
is that a worse defense than we have now?
normal people : chuck norris :: getting flustered in big games : greg davis
by knockoutking on Nov 9, 2008 10:03 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Okay, he puts Manny in the outfield and have Cruz DH
I am starting to suspect that this is some sort of joke
by Telegraph on Nov 9, 2008 10:42 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
salty
i hope we trade him to the Yanks now.
Jindal '12
by Longhorn on Nov 9, 2008 10:26 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
infield
At this point I’ll be shocked if Travis Metcalf isn’t the starter at 3B.
It took a minute to grasp this parallel (for me), but is he not the strong defender that a JJ Hardy would be? 3B isn’t SS, but Metcalf will upgrade the overall defense.
And, conveniently, he’s a stopgap. No big contract necessary, just as proposed for a placeholder SS.
Meantime if Elvis is doing the same as 2008, he’s probably ready by 2010, if not September.
And if they decide that should move Young to 2B and Kins to 3B, what’s the difference? Davis plugs into 1B until Smoak displaces him around 2010 (which is as it should be).
So Davis moves to RF, by which time Ham will already be LF, Borbon can do CF.
We have a few catchers too.
Barring injury this thing works out positionally.
Go Strangers.
by hightowersmith on Nov 9, 2008 10:37 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
And if Elvis is ready in April, which plan rocks, then Metcalf isn’t even necessary. Just the same, if they want to put Kins there and Young at 2B, let them.
Go Strangers.
by hightowersmith on Nov 9, 2008 10:39 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Gross
Can’t get excited about someone who probably doesn’t even belong in the major leagues being handed a starting job, even if it is a transition period. They need to find a legit guy for a year or two.
by Brett Perryman on Nov 9, 2008 10:51 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Well
If you’re going to start Metcalf, this is the offense that can conceal it.
Go Strangers.
by hightowersmith on Nov 9, 2008 11:00 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah
I just don’t like to look at things that way. Why accept a weakness just because maybe you can overcome it, when there are alternatives out there that you should be able to afford?
by Brett Perryman on Nov 9, 2008 11:34 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
How about we resign
Vasquez, he seems like a perfect 1 or 2 year guy
by phina on Nov 9, 2008 12:14 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Sure, if you don't mind three-error ballgames.
GREINKE HO!!!!!
by oc on Nov 9, 2008 12:20 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Well
Vazquez wants a multi-year deal, and I doubt the Rangers would go more than one year with him.
His defense at 3B was shaky last year.
He’s a lefty hitter, and I think they’d prefer a right hander, given how lefty-dominated the lineup is now.
And I doubt his comments last season about not wanting to be back in 2009 endeared him to the organization.
by Adam J. Morris on Nov 9, 2008 12:30 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
You know who
would have been a great solution at 3b? Derosa.
Fire Todd Dodge. Seriously. But in the mean time, SUCK IT WESTERN KENTUCKY! 1-8 baby!
by sprite on Nov 9, 2008 12:34 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Well
Maybe we could trade Marlon Byrd to the Cubs and get DeRosa back.
by Adam J. Morris on Nov 9, 2008 12:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I wish
love me some DeRo!
Steal Home R.I.P. 9/10/08
by LAMuscleFag on Nov 9, 2008 12:38 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
dumpmaster D!!
normal people : chuck norris :: getting flustered in big games : greg davis
by knockoutking on Nov 9, 2008 12:42 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
He'd be a whole lot better than
Vazquez or Metcalf.
by Brett Perryman on Nov 9, 2008 1:22 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Metcalf = Hardy?
Certainly not yet, and I’ll be shocked if ever.
by philkid3 on Nov 9, 2008 11:41 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
check out Josh Hamilton on Hannity's America tonight...
9 pm Eastern on Fox.
I know Sean Hannity may make some of you queasy but get over it and take one for the team!!!
Steal Home R.I.P. 9/10/08
by LAMuscleFag on Nov 9, 2008 10:45 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
talk about a book tour of America
he’s everywhere these days…
Jindal '12
by Longhorn on Nov 9, 2008 10:48 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I would rather die
thankyouverymuch!
"...my balls are really like a veiny flesh color" blueballlefty on Jun 4, 2008 7:44 PM EDT
"you gonna lose your horse. seriously." FX2
Yes we can! November 04, 2008
by Rodney on Nov 9, 2008 1:28 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
This blogs hate for Salty
Single handedly caused this chain reactions of devastating events, that will eventually lead to the trading of a Hall of Fame catcher that makes Pudge look like Varitek.
It is a sad day my friends.
by SaltyGoesYard on Nov 9, 2008 10:50 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
You're just mad that you'll have to change your name again
I recommend DavisGoesYard. Cause even if you want to maintain continuity, BuchholzGoesYard doesn’t make much sense.
by JBImaknee on Nov 9, 2008 11:03 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Is he like another version of the Miles curse?
by Telegraph on Nov 9, 2008 11:13 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Just don’t pick SmoakGoesYard next.
by Brett Perryman on Nov 9, 2008 11:40 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Or DavisGoesYard for that matter.
I really like him.
"Either we need to re-calibrate our rectangle, or Alfonzo Marquez is not having a good night." - Josh Lewin
by utlonghorn24 on Nov 9, 2008 6:45 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Get saltydick out of here
he cant hit, he cant get the ball down to 2nd, he has somewhat of trade value, and he wants out of here.
by Save us on Nov 9, 2008 10:58 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Salt+ for Buch
The deal makes sense for all parties.
Fire Todd Dodge. Seriously. But in the mean time, SUCK IT WESTERN KENTUCKY! 1-8 baby!
by sprite on Nov 9, 2008 11:03 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
YEP + 1
It will make a LOT more sense when we’re playing the Sox and Kins is standing on first base.
Sick that base Kins and everybody else who can outrun your grandmother.
Steal Home R.I.P. 9/10/08
by LAMuscleFag on Nov 9, 2008 11:20 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't have a lot of faith..
in his ability to throw out base runners.
Steal Home R.I.P. 9/10/08
by LAMuscleFag on Nov 9, 2008 11:43 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Kinsler on first...
stealing 2nd and Salty trying to throw him out.
I believe is the visual he was going for.
"The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance."-Socrates
by slc ranger on Nov 9, 2008 11:44 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Nope
It really doesn’t for Boston.
by Brett Perryman on Nov 9, 2008 11:34 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Not unless the +
…is Engel Beltre or Martin Perez…maybe not even then…
by Adam J. Morris on Nov 9, 2008 11:54 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
yep
it’s hard to say it doesn’t make any sense for Boston until you know what the “+” part is.
Steal Home R.I.P. 9/10/08
by LAMuscleFag on Nov 9, 2008 11:58 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I suppose
The distinction that I’d make is the the “+” wouldn’t so much need to be a “+”, but more like that player being the central return with Salty as the “+”.
by Brett Perryman on Nov 9, 2008 1:16 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I'd do Salty+Perez for Buccholz.
I’d be a little surprised that they would.
by philkid3 on Nov 9, 2008 12:44 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Really?
I think Salt is going to be pretty damn good. Then if you add a Font….. I think it makes sense for both teams. I think LSB is underrating Salt here and maybe overrating Clay just a tad.
Fire Todd Dodge. Seriously. But in the mean time, SUCK IT WESTERN KENTUCKY! 1-8 baby!
by sprite on Nov 9, 2008 12:06 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes really
I don’t tend to underrate Salty. Maybe I’m overrating Buchholz, but I really don’t think so.
by Brett Perryman on Nov 9, 2008 1:17 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
In all fairness, Z ...
you do tend to rate other teams’ prospects higher than our own. I think Buchholz has lost some shine this season because he could never get it together in the bigs. That’s not something Boston fans are going to put up with for very long and I’m sure Theo is aware of that. That’s why I think a Salty for Buch trade makes some sense for both teams. Now I agree that if JD pulls that off, he’s a God amongst GMs, but I don’t think it’s beyond the realm of possibility that a deal like Salty for Buch or Salty plus a throw in for Buch isn’t on the table or close to being on the table.
by Athos on Nov 9, 2008 3:36 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Zwyica tends to rate other teams' prospects higher than our own???
No he doesn’t.
I assume that was sarcasm.
If you were to ask Mr. Brett Z. Perryman if he’d give his life and take a bullet meant for Michael Main all you’d get in return would be a steely gaze and a solemn nod.
This man loves Rangers prospects and yet remians extremely level headed about their value around the league, imo. And that’s tough to do.
The 40 Trumps All!!!
Rule 5? No…talk to the hand.
by thedirkatron on Nov 9, 2008 3:50 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
A few things on this
- We should probably define “shine”. There is no doubt that Buchholz has lost luster in the public’s view, but has he really lost much for personnel types? He struggled last year, and that’s never good. But the way he struggled was with consistency. He didn’t get hurt, and he didn’t lose his stuff. And the ability to command his pitches and be a pitch maker he’s shown in the past, obviously, even at the major league level. So all of his lost luster or shine revolves around the question of whether he can regain his pitchability and whether his lack of makeup will hinder him. Those are certainly concerns, but, really, the makeup issue has been there from day one and was what caused him to go lower in the draft than where his talent indicated he should have done. I just don’t see a lot of reason for his actual value within the industry to be much lower than it was six or twelve months ago. Maybe I’m wrong about that, and in some of these comments I’ve made I’ve acknowledged that. But I really don’t think that I am.
- I’d take issue with your third statement. The Boston fans are going to force Theo to deal Buchholz because they don’t think he can get it done in the bigs? I think Theo would get pretty pissed at that suggestion, and if any organization ran that way it would have serious, serious issues.
- That deal is definitely on the table, but we already know that it’s been offered by Texas and rejected by Boston at the deadline. I just really don’t think that objectivity is what leads a Rangers fan to believe that Boston is going to relent on that when neither Buchholz nor Saltalamacchia has played much baseball at all since that time.
by Brett Perryman on Nov 9, 2008 6:42 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Their staff is chock-full of aces, dummy..
GREINKE HO!!!!!
by oc on Nov 9, 2008 11:55 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Great Salty
This better not affect your trade value.
"Sooner or later, prospects kill you, because you hang onto them." - Greggo, 11/22/2005
by Agreen07 on Nov 9, 2008 11:24 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Why doesn't anyone distrust the 6'4 catcher?
by BuckyB on Nov 9, 2008 11:34 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Joe Mauer?
Brian McCann?
AJ Pierzyinski?
Chris Synder?
Mike Piazza?
Even Posada and Varitek are 6-2.
by Brett Perryman on Nov 9, 2008 11:39 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
A dose of reality
I’d love to have Buchholz as much as the next guy, but we need to realize it ain’t happening. It’s funny how so many people here don’t think much of Saltalamacchia, but then turn around and think just adding a little something to the deal will get Buchholz. Despite his lackluster 2008 and the derogatory comments by impatient Red Sox fans on blogs, Buchholz is Boston’s Feliz, their Holland, and there’s no way they’re giving him up unless the return is orgasm-inducing.
G G G E-flat_______ F F F D__________....
by t ball on Nov 9, 2008 12:42 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Yeah and in fact
Buchholz is Boston’s Feliz, their Holland
I’d go a step further than that. He’s their Feliz/Holland if those guys have a great 2009 and develop a lot as pitchers. He doesn’t have the pure velocity of either, but his full repetoire is just so nasty and complete. Unlike our guys you know that he is a rotation guy because he has a multitude of plus pitches – dare I say in Masset territory.
by Brett Perryman on Nov 9, 2008 1:20 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Would you mind explaining to me again how the Royals and Rangers are in the same situation?
Because they’re not.
GREINKE HO!!!!!
by oc on Nov 9, 2008 1:28 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Sure
They’re building teams with a nice talent base but not a burgeoning roster as of yet. Both are completely focused on adding to their pitching staffs as their primary means of improvement and are quite open about that publicly. The Royals have a nice core of Greinke, Soria, Gordon, Meche, Hochevar, DeJesus, (and I think Butler, but they seem not to) with prospects like Cortes and Moustakas on the way. The Rangers have a nice core of Kinsler, Hamilton, Davis, Young and their catchers, with Feliz, Holland, Main, Andrus and Smoak on the way. With Greinke and Meche, KC has more going for it in terms of established SPs than Texas, but they are in no better position than Texas to be selling that pitching.
by Brett Perryman on Nov 9, 2008 1:45 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Disagree.
Kansas City has rolled with most of that core for a couple of years now and has gotten nowhere in an arguably more competetive division. The Rangers meanwhile have a deeper farm system and are getting immediate returns from their positional players, something that Kansas City needs.
With Greinke and Meche, KC has more going for it in terms of established SPs than Texas, but they are in no better position than Texas to be selling that pitching.
So, I suppose a hitting for pitching swap would be the best thing for both clubs… on paper. What baffles me is that Ranger fans don’t seem to understand that to acquire somebody of Greinke’s ability, you’re going to have to overpay. Even for two years. I think the Rangers can and should do that, and would be able to do it without giving up two of their three top trade chips.
Tell me, why would Moore subject an already fed-up fanbase to more of the same instead of making a move?
Teahan, Gload, Olivo, Jacobs… these are not players you are going to win with. Greinke, Soria and even Meche on some days… they’re good players. But they can’t hit.
GREINKE HO!!!!!
by oc on Nov 9, 2008 2:32 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Nevermind that. Saw your answer in another thread. Thank you.
GREINKE HO!!!!!
by oc on Nov 9, 2008 2:49 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Definitely
I still don’t understand why some would be dissapointed if we got Bowden or Masterson. They’re still good pitching prospects and both are ready to pitch at the major league level.
by jcir454 on Nov 9, 2008 2:19 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I wouldn't be sick
but I wouldn’t feel like we maximized our value.
by Brett Perryman on Nov 9, 2008 2:31 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Huh?
Just got done reading the Reeves article from yesterday…. Washington on Olsen-
“He’s been thrown into the fire and seen what failure is,” Washington said. “He’s supposed to be a strong kid mentally.”
Aside from the performace issues, isn’t the big issue about Olsen his mental makeup? Wash saying he’s “strong mentally” is puzzling.
Fire Todd Dodge. Seriously. Back to Suckville with a loss to FLA ATL but whatever, SUCK IT WESTERN KENTUCKY! 1-9 baby!
by sprite on Nov 9, 2008 1:13 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Yeah
sounds like he’s trying to convince himself or something.
by Brett Perryman on Nov 9, 2008 1:45 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
/facepalm
"He’s basically told himself unconsciously that he can’t be any good unless he catches 130 games a year. If he played with the baseball smarts of a guy like a David Eckstein, he’d maximize his talent and be an incredible player." - Andy Seiler, Texas Rangers Analyst
by Chase Irwin on Nov 9, 2008 4:00 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Strong mentally
Maybe Wash is comparing Olsen to himself in which case almost anybody would be considered strong mentally.
"Colt mccoy sucks, mack brown needs to be fired." - Longhorn
by DaheelzCM on Nov 9, 2008 4:06 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
If anyone has seen failure before
it is Ronald Washington.
"He’s basically told himself unconsciously that he can’t be any good unless he catches 130 games a year. If he played with the baseball smarts of a guy like a David Eckstein, he’d maximize his talent and be an incredible player." - Andy Seiler, Texas Rangers Analyst
by Chase Irwin on Nov 9, 2008 4:15 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
poor Wash
I hope he gets off to a better start next year or Big Daddy is going to start oiling up the guillotine again.
Steal Home R.I.P. 9/10/08
by LAMuscleFag on Nov 9, 2008 4:27 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Lol
it seems so inevitable. I couldn’t care less either way so long as the team starts winning.
"He’s basically told himself unconsciously that he can’t be any good unless he catches 130 games a year. If he played with the baseball smarts of a guy like a David Eckstein, he’d maximize his talent and be an incredible player." - Andy Seiler, Texas Rangers Analyst
by Chase Irwin on Nov 9, 2008 9:40 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Olsen
I don’t have a tangible reason to think so, but it’s possible Wash simply means a lot of desire to succeed. Olsen may have issues in dealing with the frustration of not doing well, and although not quite like the Ollie Perez in Pittsburgh simile, may feel he isn’t getting either the counsel or the opportunity to succeed. That’s a lot of “may” type speculation. And it isn’t automatic that a LH pitcher gets breaks that aren’t easily available to RHP. Think it’s possible that a mix of Maddux and Wash could move Olsen out of pawn and into knight position on the baseball chessboard?
"He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lamp-posts... for support rather than illumination." - Andrew Lang (1844-1912)
by Ed Coffin on Nov 9, 2008 4:26 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
It's possible...
but I’m not willing to bet Salty on it.
"The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance."-Socrates
by slc ranger on Nov 9, 2008 4:29 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
re: Olsen.
The peripherals still scare the shite out of me, Ed.
So, No. Thanks.
The 40 Trumps All!!!
Rule 5? No…talk to the hand.
by thedirkatron on Nov 9, 2008 8:32 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
+1
The multiple scuffles with teammates and arrest record also scare the shit out of me as well.
Just say no to Scott Olsen.
by lonestarJon on Nov 9, 2008 8:37 PM CST up reply actions 2 recs
Meh.
He was very young when that happened, iirc, so I’m willing to give him a little slack for that.
Besides, I’m convinced you can be a crazy asshole and still be a good ballplayer.
I’m not convinced you can be bad at baseball like Olsen has been the past few years and still be a good ballplayer.
1.56 and 1.64 KBB ratios the past two seasons? WTF, Scott? That’s pretty putrid.
The 40 Trumps All!!!
Rule 5? No…talk to the hand.
by thedirkatron on Nov 9, 2008 8:53 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
Related FanPosts on Lone Star Ball
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 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.
