Evan Grant on the catching situation
by Adam J. Morris on Apr 26, 2008 5:39 PM CDT
62 comments
For those of you who don't get what the Rangers are doing with the catching situation...Evan Grant agrees...
He suggests Adam Melhuse should have gone on the 60 day d.l., because it sends the wrong message to potential 6 year free agents to flat release an injured player, and called up Max Ramirez to back up Gerald Laird, rather than bringing Salty up to split time with him and have a struggling Taylor Teagarden go to AAA.
I think this is another time when the Rangers were backed into a corner because of the 40 man roster situation. They needed a backup catcher, since Adam Melhuse was going to be out 6-8 weeks anyway. A generic backup could be picked up off the street...but to add a generic backup, you'd have to clear a 40 man roster spot, which they'd be hard pressed to do right now.
0 recs |
62 comments
Email
Print
Comments
The problem is not that Salty should not have been called up
The problem is, OMFT needs to be BENCHED. When will the Rangers get it? F Laird, he’s not the future, he’s the past.
Salty needed to come up though, he was ready – the organization just needs to unwrap it’s lips from Gerald Laird’s weiner.
by lonestarJon on Apr 26, 2008 5:43 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
If the Rangers need
to unwrap their lips from Laird’s wiener, what does that say about your lips and Salty’s wiener? :)
by jparks77 on Apr 26, 2008 5:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Heh
From one guy with a serious man-crush to another, point taken.
by lonestarJon on Apr 26, 2008 5:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Kenji Johjima
He just got a 3 year, $24 million contract extension.
Yorvit Torrealba got 2 years, $7 million this past offseason.
You keep acting like Laird is garbage and is worthless, but teams give good money for guys who aren’t really all that much better - if any better - than Laird.
Which is why the organization is trying to maximize the value they get from him, rather than just giving him away.
by Adam J. Morris on Apr 26, 2008 6:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, Johhima and Torrealba are a bit better than Laird
I would agree with you, if it weren’t for the fact that we have such a stocked system catching-wise. Laird is just in the way, and that’s why I don’t see why we put so much time into him.
When you’ve got younger, better players, you play them, you don’t sit around. Laird is not gonna bring that much on the trade market anyway, so i don’t think whether we pump his trade value up or not is gonna make much of a difference.
by lonestarJon on Apr 26, 2008 6:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Rockies
signed Torrealba to a contract extension even though prospect Chris Iannetta has a career MiLB OPS of .918 and less than 300 major league at bats.
by jparks77 on Apr 26, 2008 6:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
And the Mariners have Jeff Clement
I guess at this point, I should just be thankful the Rangers aren’t as stupid as those two teams, shouldn’t I?
by lonestarJon on Apr 26, 2008 6:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not really
Having multiple options is never a bad position to be in. I would rather watch Salty play than Laird but that doesn’t mean that Laird is without value. His value is the in the options. We can keep him as a back-up, trade him or keep him as the stop-gap starter until Teagarden is ready.
I don’t think the Rangers see Laird as the long-term answer at catcher. That in the least, should bring you comfort.
by jparks77 on Apr 26, 2008 6:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I still don't see why people think Teagarden > Salty
I know it’s early, but Tea looks to be on the verge of a flameout – the chances of which are exponentially increased with his mid-slump promotion to AAA.
And that, plus his injury history at one of the diamond’s most demanding positions, is what scares me about him.
by lonestarJon on Apr 26, 2008 6:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Torrealba
He’s not any better than Laird.
Johjima might be now, but PECOTA projects he and Laird to be similar from 2009-11 (the time of the extension).
by Adam J. Morris on Apr 26, 2008 6:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why did you knock Barajas so much
when he was better than Laird.
"Before I leave, I once again condemn the despicable buffoonery of D.J. Cahill." - Huck
by DJCahill on Apr 26, 2008 6:57 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Probably because...
Laird projected to be better than Barajas… and he still might be.
by chase1971 on Apr 26, 2008 8:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Am I the only one
that thinks Arias would clear waivers? I don’t know why the Rangers still have him on the 40.
Max Ramirez 2008 Texas Rangers ROY
by RangerMad on Apr 26, 2008 5:48 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
and even if he didn't....
would it be that big of a loss at this point?
by Dirk Diggler on Apr 26, 2008 5:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, you might like to have him around to play SS
If you want to move Young off that position later this year (which is going to be nescissary, IMO). The next likely 40-man casualty will be Travis Metcalf, because he’s injured.
by lonestarJon on Apr 26, 2008 5:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
ehh
arias playing short for the Rangers doesn’t exactly make my baseball pants go crazy
by Dirk Diggler on Apr 26, 2008 5:52 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Arias isn't even playing
SS down at OKC. He had been at 2B and DH. Some of the recent move concerning the 40 man roster made by JD have been puzzling.
Max Ramirez 2008 Texas Rangers ROY
by RangerMad on Apr 26, 2008 5:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
40-man casualty
Fukumori needs to disappear.
"I hope it's a special dumb person hell so that I don’t have to meet up with you after I die."
- The D-tron
by Chase Irwin on Apr 27, 2008 12:53 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Arias
still has too much potential to expose him to the waiver wire. Infielders like Arias always have value. The only guy on this team who I can see who should pass through waivers is Botts. If Dan Johnson can clear, then Botts certainly should clear.
by clark on Apr 26, 2008 6:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ramirez
Grant makes some good points in this thoughtful blog entry, but he is dead wrong on Ramirez. Why would you want to bury one of your top hitting prospects as your backup catcher getting 5-8 ABs a week. This is a guy few project to be a ML catcher. He has 68 ABs above high A. He needs to progress as a hitter at AA or AAA, I don’t care which. Hopefully we’ll see him in September.
by Randy Richardson on Apr 26, 2008 5:57 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
My thoughts exactly
Grant is right about the roster dilemma, but Ramirez just got to AA and does not need his development stunted by sitting on the bench. Teagarden and Ramirez both need to catch 5 days a week. Stashing Melhuse on the 60 would have been a good idea, unless they plan on resigning him once Laird is dealt this summer, if that happens. I assumed that one of Laird or Salty would be dealt, but now you just don’t know.
Perhaps the plan is to deal Laird this summer and put Teagarden on the bench for August and September?
...and curse Sir Walter Raleigh, he was such a stupid git.
by t ball on Apr 26, 2008 6:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i don't get it
ramirez is already on the 40 – Grant’s plan would have worked also.
BTW, if you put someone on the 60 – he doesn’t count against your 40 man right? I really didn’t understand why they let melhuse go either. Seems like a dick thing to do for someone who gets injured. I bet that pissed off Wash just as much as any other development. All of a sudden, his guys are getting stepped on left and right.
Rare Gnats Sex
by ab03 on Apr 26, 2008 6:09 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Correct...
15 day dl stays on the 40. 60 day dl doesn’t.
"The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance."-Socrates
by slc ranger on Apr 26, 2008 6:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
So his solution...
is to bring up a guy who has had how many games above high A ball?
MaxRam needs to be getting AB’s everyday in AA right now. Plus now he gets to catch everyday.
TT is getting to the age when he needs to perform, and his glove is MLB ready. His bat is what needs work. Let him do that everyday at AAA.
Salty should have started the year as the MLB catcher, and Laird his backup. I have no problem with the moves. It rights the wrongs that should have been done to start the year.
I do think his statement about Laird being the only player to lose his starting job because his backup was hurt is pretty funny. Laird has done better at the plate the last week or so. Salty is the future though. I still think Laird has some value and can be dealt. If not, he will just have to accept the backup role.
"The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance."-Socrates
by slc ranger on Apr 26, 2008 6:17 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I could not possibly agree with you more
Because Gerald is nothing but trade bait at this point. It seems to me that all the organization was trying to do by having him as the starter out of Spring Training was maximize his trade value.
Salty is the future, at least until Teagarden/MaxRam are ready to play MLB ball, and not putting him at catcher for a significant amount of time right now just doesn’t make sense. That said, I like the move because it sends a message to me as a fan that the club is starting to look to the future more with the ugly start. And at this point, why not? These guys are all getting very close to being ready to contribute, and thus they deserve their time to acclimate to their roles here. Salty is a perfect example. Chris Davis will soon be another. Jason Botts is even another.
Despite my feeling that the move is the right one, ultimately, I do feel really bad for Melhuse. He was an extremely nice guy who definitely didn’t deserve the treatment her received from the management. Best of luck to him. =)
My three favorite numbers: 10, 32, 36. =)
by utlonghorn24 on Apr 26, 2008 6:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Here's the thing...
I’m not convinced that Salty isn’t, ultimately, trade bait, and Laird is the placeholder until Tea or Ramirez are ready.
by Adam J. Morris on Apr 26, 2008 6:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You make a valid point...
and I’ve wondered the same thing a lot myself. But regardless, shouldn’t we be maximizing Salty’s potential instead of Laird’s to get as much as we can out of him? After all, he does have the higher upside…
My three favorite numbers: 10, 32, 36. =)
by utlonghorn24 on Apr 26, 2008 6:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If that's the case
The Rangers are making a huge mistake.
Because Teagarden’s offense and health have yet to even themselves out enough to show whether or not he’s a viable starter, and MaxRam’s defense is always going to be below average (unlike Salty, who will at least be average).
At this point, if you chuck Salty, you’re just leaving yourself vunerable to a Teagarden flameout (which, right now, seems to be immenent).
by lonestarJon on Apr 26, 2008 6:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Teagarden
His flameout seems to be imminent because of a poor 16 game stretch at the beginning of the season?
by jparks77 on Apr 26, 2008 6:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
when you strikeout in nearly half your at-bats...
...yeah… maybe…
by oc on Apr 26, 2008 6:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
And last year in Frisco he struck out 38% of the time
and folks were okay with it?
by Telegraph on Apr 26, 2008 6:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
...you'd like to see some kind of improvement in his plate discipline, sir...
...doesn’t appear to be happening…
the general concensus at LSB is that Teagarden is the real deal, and Saltalamacchia will eventually be dealt… except, as of now, we know more about Saltalamacchia than we do Teagarden.
by oc on Apr 26, 2008 7:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I saw Teagarden play...
in his AA debut last year, and he was anything but a flameout. He’s going to be a star if he keeps it up. Don’t get your head down about him because of a rough start. Michael Young hit around .200 for two months last year, and still ended the year at over .300 and with over 200 hits. Good players don’t stay down for long, and Teagarden is one of those IMO.
My three favorite numbers: 10, 32, 36. =)
by utlonghorn24 on Apr 26, 2008 6:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
See my post above
And because of a mid-slump promotion to AAA. And his injury history. Oh, and his K rates, which OC just mentioned above.
I’m not saying he’s not gonna be a good player, I’m saying I’m just not so sure he’s gonna be the Pudge or Johnny Bench everyone thinks.
by lonestarJon on Apr 26, 2008 6:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I understand what you're saying...
But even if he doesn’t pan out to be a Pudge/Bench type player, he’s still going to be darn good. Hopefully his plate discipline will come with time and maturation into a good hitter. He’s certainly got room to improve, because I’m not saying he doesn’t, but I guarantee you the talent is there. It’s a matter of extracting it from the kid.
My three favorite numbers: 10, 32, 36. =)
by utlonghorn24 on Apr 26, 2008 6:52 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's the entire challenge with prospects though
If they didn’t have talent, they would not have been drafted. It’s getting that talent out that is the hard part.
He has improved his BB/K ratio slightly for the early part of the season. If he can get that to about 0.5, I would feel fairly comfortable.
by Telegraph on Apr 26, 2008 6:57 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Of course...
...I don’t know that the Rangers would “chuck” Salty. My guess is that they’d be willing to part with him if they could get premium value back for him.
And if they let him go, they have Laird, Teagarden, and Ramirez as options for the next few years.
by Adam J. Morris on Apr 26, 2008 6:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd rather
Get premium value for Teagarden, and have Salty, Laird and MaxRam as our options the next few years. Seems like a safer bet to me.
by lonestarJon on Apr 26, 2008 6:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I doubt that...
...Teagarden would fetch nearly would Saltalamacchia would, at this point.
by Adam J. Morris on Apr 26, 2008 6:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, then you don't trade either one
Which, in reality, is the best idea. That’s what I’m really driving at.
by lonestarJon on Apr 26, 2008 6:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Catchers generally don't have huge shelf lifes
Stash the other with some DH, OF, and if their knees, back, whatever else starts to go south, then you have a solid backup plan.
by venturafearsnolan on Apr 26, 2008 10:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
For now I mean
You can’t really trade one or the other until they’ve both had a chance to show something on the ML level.
by lonestarJon on Apr 26, 2008 10:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
My one thought
What team isn’ t hard pressed to find room on their 40?
I’d think that’d be a high priority of any GM, keeping their 40 loaded with tough omissions.
Go Strangers.
by hightowersmith on Apr 26, 2008 6:18 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Bleck
This is the kind of mess that depresses me more than a loss.
What an absolute clusterfuck.
"Sabean did a good job on selling high on Liriano." -Excel Hearts Choi
by thedirkatron on Apr 26, 2008 6:34 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Has Laird ever played first?
His bat is more potent than Broussard or Botts, and as such, with the team needing to commit days behind the plate to Saltalamacchia, is there any chance we could see OMFT play a little first?
by venturafearsnolan on Apr 26, 2008 10:37 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Wha?
No, wait, wait… I’m not falling for this. You’re kidding. Laird’s bat at first. base. Good one. HA!
by lonestarJon on Apr 26, 2008 10:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He hits like Mark Teixeira
compared to Ben Broussard and Jason Botts
by venturafearsnolan on Apr 26, 2008 10:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, and I'm very tall
when I visit my daughter’s preschool class.
...and curse Sir Walter Raleigh, he was such a stupid git.
by t ball on Apr 26, 2008 11:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
if your daughter's preschool class had a baseball team
you could play 1B.
by venturafearsnolan on Apr 26, 2008 11:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Texas Rangers
only problems I see with the team in no particular order is it:
can’t pitch out of the bull pen
can’t hit situationally
can’t catch the baseball when it is hit at them
seems that some can’t throw to first
other than that, no problem
yo soy Horsedooty!
I soloed in the mile high club.
by Sr Horsedooty on Apr 27, 2008 12:07 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Chris Stewart
should have made this team over Melhuse to begin with.
He would be an excellent backup, allowing Salty to stay in the minors until Laird is traded, then placehold the backup C job until Teagarden / Ramirez arrives.
I can’t believe that release is neglected—it’s partly responsible for this mess.
"I hope it's a special dumb person hell so that I don’t have to meet up with you after I die."
- The D-tron
by Chase Irwin on Apr 27, 2008 12:59 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I tried to say that when it happened
But Randy R. just jumped down my throat about bitching too much.
Another angle to look at it: now who’s gonna be the backup once Laird is traded?
by lonestarJon on Apr 27, 2008 2:56 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly
That may be why they’re promoting Tx2 aggresively.
"I hope it's a special dumb person hell so that I don’t have to meet up with you after I die."
- The D-tron
by Chase Irwin on Apr 27, 2008 4:17 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Chris Stewart
is a replacment level player. You are both worried about the wrong thing.
by Randy Richardson on Apr 27, 2008 7:14 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Then what does that make Melhuse, oh mighty one?
Stewart is a nice player to have stashed in AAA or to placehold the backup C job.
Hey Randy, tell me, what should I be worried about?
Damn, you’re being dense as hell lately—replacement level poster.
"I hope it's a special dumb person hell so that I don’t have to meet up with you after I die."
- The D-tron
by Chase Irwin on Apr 27, 2008 1:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
well, Melhuse
is a replacement level player too, they are interchangeable.
I don’t understand the point you guys are trying to make. If the Rangers had Stewart as the backup, are you arguing that he is not susceptible to injury? Probably not. You say he could have been stashed at AAA, but the way the situation played out, the Rangers needed Melhuse’s 40 man spot for Ponson, so it’s unlikely Stewart would have been called up even if he was still with the club.
If the team REALLY wanted Salty to continue playing full-time at OKC, they could have gone out and signed a FA catcher who’s not with a team right now or they could have called up Richardson. Of course, they would have then had to make room for Ponson some other way. Basically, I think the Rangers saw Melhuse’s injury as the best opportunity to put Ponson on the 40 man.
by Randy Richardson on Apr 27, 2008 4:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agree...
That was my point as well. Even if he wasn’t the backup instead of Melhuse, he should have been on the AAA roster so they have someone they could call up for a week or two (or longer) in this type of situation (other than Jarod).
And PLEASE tell me that the person who typed on Evan’s blog that Taylor is going to be the backup in OKC behind Kevin Richardson who is having an “excellent season” is NOT someone from this board?
http://www.mvn.com/milb-rangers
For old times sake...C'mon Kelly! :-)
by Beverly23 on Apr 27, 2008 10:14 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
there is no way that teagarden should backup richardson. split time maybe ( and i stress maybe) but he shouldnt be a backup
"When we're mad we'll use our words. Then the rest of the world will play nice with us. And the only boom-booms will be in our pants." - Ralph Wiggum
by rentz on Apr 27, 2008 10:22 AM CDT 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.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Giants legend Willie McCovey talks Panda, Dodgers and his Cove
- Photo: Gaylord Perry 'lobbies' Bud Selig to repeal spitball ban
- Spring Snapshot: Led by Tiny Tim, Giants making playoff push
- Desert Drive: Sandoval Pandamonium sweeping Giants country
- Nolan Ryan fitting in just fine as face, voice of Texas Rangers
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.
