Thursday a.m. stuff
by Adam J. Morris on May 29, 2008 10:31 AM CDT
78 comments
My initial inclination is to grouse about the team's inability, once again, to get past the .500 mark. This is irritating. I want this team to reel off 5 or 6 in a row and get safely above .500. And it is even more irritating when you think, if the Rangers had just split those 14 games in April, rather than going 2-12, they'd be safety above .500 (and tied for first place, for that matter).
But on the other hand...the Rangers just played .500 ball on their longest road trip of the season, against a middling team playing middling ball, a good team playing middling ball, and a good team that currently has the best record in the A.L. For a team that is in rebuilding mode and isn't supposed to compete this year, you have to feel pretty good about that.
Evan Grant's game story is about Kason Gabbard's mysterious missing command, which is apparently baffling the Rangers' coaching staff as well as all of us. He's apparently telling people he's healthy, but if you recall, his problems date back to this spring, when he was struggling enough that there was a question about whether Luis Mendoza would break camp as the 4th starter (with Gabbard going to AAA until the 5th starter was needed), rather than the other way around.
The problem is that a pitcher like Gabbard constantly walks on the knife's edge...he succeeds based on his ability to take little bites out of the corners, and to get batters to swing at borderline pitches or pitches just out of the strike zone. If he can't hitting the corners, or isn't getting batters to chase those pitches, he's either going to walk a ton of guys, or throw pitches down the middle that get clobbered. He doesn't have real good stuff, so if he doesn't have very good command, he's not a major league pitcher. And the question, at this point, is whether it makes more sense to have him work on his command issues in the major league rotation or in the minors.
I initially was leaning towards bumping Gabbard and letting Doug Mathis take his slot for a few turns, and sending Gabbard down. But the more I think about it, the more I tend to think that it makes more sense to live with Gabbard for a while longer. This is, after all, supposed to be a rebuilding year, and Gabbard is someone you would think has a shot to be a contributing member of the rotation for a few years. It seems like he'd be better served dealing with major league hitters, who have better eyes and are more likely to make him pay for his mistakes, than with minor leaguers, who he is more likely to be able to fool or get away with mediocre command with.
It occurred to me yesterday that the Rangers have sucked in day games this season...but then I figured, well, it is probably my imagination. But no...the Rangers are 5-12 in day games this year.
Anthony Andro says German Duran is being sent down to AAA, presumably to make room on the roster for Travis Metcalf. I'm not a Metcalf believer -- I don't think he's going to hit well enough to be a major league regular -- but as a platoon 3B, I'd rather have him up than Duran. Duran is younger and has a brighter future, and I'd like to see him get regular reps in AAA, rather than sitting on the bench playing once or twice a week in the majors.
Kevin Millwood is also going to be activated, and either Mathis, Kam Loe, or Josh Rupe will have to be sent down to make room for him. Mathis would seem to be the obvious choice, but the team seems to have really taken a shine to him, and it would surprise me to see him stick in the bullpen in a middle or long-man role (which is probably what he projects as long-term).
And Randy Galloway likes Josh Hamilton. And David Murphy.
0 recs |
78 comments
Email
Print
Comments
Tejeda
Scott says the Oklahoman reported that Tejeda got called up and I can verify the Oklahoman said that, but I don’t know how to post links
by OKC Ranger Fan on May 29, 2008 10:44 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Can't find that on the website anymore
Think that item may have been pulled.
by jamcadbury on May 29, 2008 11:01 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
link – still there, scroll down to end of article
by shroomer on May 29, 2008 12:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
what's this do to the 40 situation?
Tejeda’s not on the 40 is he? Does Diamond have to be placed back on it when his rehab is up? Will someone have to be DFA’d? The forty is taunting me with all these moves.
Also shroomer,
if you were to re-rank the top five arms for the Rangers in the minors would it look something like this?
Feliz
Kiker
Main
Harrison
Hurley
And do you think Gomez has entrenched himself into a top ten spot?
by Hull Fan on May 29, 2008 1:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Tejeda isn't on the 40, according to texasrangers.com
There is some wiggle room, but it will disappear when Diamond and Mendoza are taken off the DL. Maybe Mendoza will remain on the DL?
My man Main will eclipse all of those pitchers when he shows up at Clinton. I think, though, it’s hard to rank these pitchers now. It’s more like the Rangers have an A pool and B pool of pitching prospects. The A pool has Feliz, Hurley, Kiker, Main, KG, Beaven, Holland, Font, Castillo, maybe Ramirez, and maybe Diamond. It’s hard for me to decide which of those prospects is the better one, since many are at very low-levels of the minors and the ones at the upper-levels of the minors haven’t put it all together quite yet. The B pool has Harrison, Hunter, Murray, Phillips, Poveda, Mendoza, maybe Reed. I’m sure I’m forgetting a few.
BTW, no mention of Tejeda being called up on texasrangers.com. Maybe he’s been traded. There are a few teams looking for RP+C.
by rooster on May 29, 2008 1:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
40
No Tejeda is not on the 40 man. We currently have 39 players on the 40 so there is an open spot. However once Diamond gets switched from rehab assignment to active status he will have to be placed on the 40 so that gives about 2 weeks to decide what to do.
by bigsteve on May 29, 2008 1:59 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
When does it become about this year?
I’m just wondering when do we start thinking about this year being a year where we can make the playoffs or at least contend? Adam was talking about sticking with Gabbard because it’s not about this year, but I’m just wondering when does it become about this year? It seems to me that there are some serious smoke and mirrors going on here, especially in the pitching, but it sure would suck to have a 2004 like year only to suck again that next year.
I guess me point is that you never know when you’re going to have a chance to being good and I would hate to pass it up.
by texnykazrus on May 29, 2008 10:51 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
When the pitching staff
doesn’t walk 9 guys in nine innings. We’d all like it to be our year but realistically this isn’t it. The bullpen is terrible, and the starting rotation is maybe average. Where’s that going to take us? 2nd in the AL West if Oakland comes back to Earth? The best thing this team could do would be to move out some older guys. (Laird, Cat, Guardado, plus Bradley and Millwood or Padilla) for some AA and AAA arms. False hope just delays when real contending can begin.
by Hull Fan on May 29, 2008 11:27 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hull Fan...
Do we really need to move the “older guys?”
Yes they would bring in another haul of prospects but then we have to replace 40% of our rotation, a LH reliever, a solid bat and decent to plus OF, and a very solid utility guy. Is the cost of keeping them prohibitive considering this teams payroll level?
My opinion is keep them and add a couple of FA to this team.
Murphy, Hamilton, Vazquez, Laird/Salty are a good group of young positional talent to build around. I don’t see anyone in AAA FORCING themselves into the rotation any time soon.
Vets, young MLB talent, solid farm system, and a couple of FA could make for a great team.
by Bigfan16 on May 29, 2008 11:40 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
bradley and ponson
you need to sign bradley and/or ponson if you plan to keep them. one year deals are great when the rangers are a bad team b/c you can trade the one year guys that do pan out for prospects, but when the team is good (well, better anyway) one year deals create an immediate contract situation when the players do pan out (gagne, bradley, ponson).
you can’t let these guys walk, so signability becomes an issue. if you don’t have them signed before the deadline, it may not be worth the risk to keep them.
as i have always said about this, you could always sign the guy at the end of the season as a FA (like the rangers reportedly tried to do with gagne), but you don’t want nothing for something.
by sam in so cal on May 29, 2008 11:53 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well put.
Right now I would try to sign the volatile Bradley but not Ponson. Just have not seen enough from him to want to count on him for 09.
I think ( a dangerous thing for me to do) that Padilla is also in his final year and would have to be extended or re-signed. I would take the risk on Padilla with the expectations that he is your #3 starter. Some years would be great others suck according to his recent past.
Does Guardado need to be resigned as well? Cat?
Larird and Blalock are under control for 09 (I Believe but could be wrong.)
by Bigfan16 on May 29, 2008 12:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is a combination reply to all above so...
First why keep Laird if that means Salty gets less play time? This two on two off merry go round won’t last past the trade deadline. One of Cat and Blalock will almost certainly be gone by the deadline, if not both by the end of the offseason. If the Rangers truly believe in Davis/Max Ram then they’ll have to go to make room. Same with Bradley. He’s great but if they can turn him into an Eithier type prospect (especially a pitcher) then he must go as well.
As for Guardado, maybe they keep him, but why? He’s a FA at the end of the year and if he can be dealt for a Ramirez level prospect then he should also be moved. People wondering about bullpen help, I’ll be very surprised if Madrigal isn’t at least a Sept callup. The guy Gordon(?) with his .50 ERA, who’s beating up AA may also get look before the end of the year.
I have no problem moving Ponson if possible. Just as I would hope and pray Blalock finally gets healthy and is traded this offseason as well. As for contracts to the best of my knowledge…
Guardado – FA after this year
Bradley – See above
Ponson – See above
Cat – Signed through next season
Laird – arbitration eligible, but under team control next season
Padilla – signed through next season
Millwood – signed through next season with an option for 2010
Blalock – team option for 2009
Plenty of younger options exist and it might be better for some of the younger guys to take their beatings starting this year so they’ll be better prepared for next year when it might actually matter.
by Hull Fan on May 29, 2008 12:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Perhaps
if you mean Ramirez’s stock at the time he was traded and not right now.
...and curse Sir Walter Raleigh, he was such a stupid git.
by t ball on May 29, 2008 12:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
yes I meant that
A guy without a position in Cleveland whose bat could play but defense couldn’t. Taking a chance on a guy who can hit but defense is suspect. Defense can possibly be taught pure hitting talent couldn’t. So the Rangers knowing they’d need a dh grabbed him.
Every team has a position or two where several guys could emerge but only one can play in the big leagues. Taking a chance on the second or third guy isn’t really a bad gamble.
by Hull Fan on May 29, 2008 12:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
that's the million dollar question
largely depends on what Millwood brings. We can make some smaller deals that wouldn’t hurt us this year much if there’s a market for Laird and Cat. But barring a complete collapse in the next couple of months, I say let’s play this thing out (ie: not dealing Bradley, Padilla, Milly, Hank, etc.)
by SteveP on May 29, 2008 12:52 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
why do you want to hang
on to guys to finish maybe five games over .500? This team isn’t better than LAA. They also don’t have the pitching to match Oakland. What happens if Bradley gets hurt or Murphy comes back to Earth? Staying pat doesn’t get you anywhere when your team still has several holes to fill. Clear out the aging vets and build properly.
by Hull Fan on May 29, 2008 12:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I totally disagree
Like it or not, and most here don’t, you can’t get rid of ALL your veterans. I don’ t think riding it out with most of our vets and finishing .500 would set the team back in any way. The farm system is well stocked, the team will add more young players at the draft next weekend and is generally moving in the right direction. The team needs players like Millwood, Padilla, Bradley to bridge the gap to the young guys. If you get rid of those guys who do you replace them with? Do you rush Harrison/Hurley to the majors or dig up more retreads like the team has in the past? If the team is bowled over for one of them, fine, take it, but they shouldn’t be traded just for the sake of clearing out the aging vets. In case you haven’ t noticed, most teams without “aging vets” aren’t very good.
Fire Ron Washington
by pblack on May 29, 2008 1:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not saying JD is going to trade like eight guys
but trading at least three is a must. Laird, Ponson, and Bradley need to be dealt. If given a good offer for Millwood I pull the trigger there too.
There’s no reason to hang on to all of them, just as I doubt there’s an opportunity to trade all of them. But like I said holding on to go five games over isn’t really accomplishing anything. Does that make my position clearer?
by Hull Fan on May 29, 2008 1:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with you.
We have to keep some of the vets. The benefits look to have the advantage over the risks in keeping them. A good mix of young talent, vets, solid farm and smart FA signings could make this team very very good in 09 and beyond.
I certainly would explore trades of anyone and accept a great deal (Teixiera/Gagne) if one comes along. I do not think we HAVE to trade anyone. Bradley, Ponson and Guardado are the guys who have expiring contracts (excluding option years.) I really like Bradley on this team but have no idea on what it would cost to resign him. I don’t see anyone on the farm that is forcing him out or looks like they could match his performance.
More importantly IMO is the rotation. We have to keep Millwood and Padilla (if not blown away) to solidify the rotation. Millwood, Padilla, Bmac, and Gabbard are a solid and reasonably priced base to a rotation for 09. With Millwood and Padilla contract getting close the thier end why not keep them to give time for developing Harrison and Hurley. In fact I would like to see the Rangers go after a high price top of the rotation FA this off-season instead of going with a retread (Ponson, Jennings) or standing pat and using (Rupe/Loe etc) as the fifth starter, and certainly do not rush the kids.
by Bigfan16 on May 29, 2008 1:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Like it or not, and most here don’t, you can’t get rid of ALL your veterans. I don’ t think riding it out with most of our vets and finishing .500 would set the team back in any way.
like it or not, the situation with some of these veterans resolves itself anyway – in other words, unless TEX makes a conscious decision to keep bradley, then he is gone. and by conscious decision, i mean that TEX must sign him to another deal. it’s not like TEX wants to rid themselves of the guy – he has a one year contract, so he is a FA after this season.
same goes for ponson (but at this point i think MB is significantly more valuable to this team (until he gets injured or until he snaps – neither is certain but either is possible).
a few things must happen:
1. TEX must want to keep bradley
2. TEX must convince bradley (who might be negotiating for his last big payday) to forgo allowing any other bidders and sign mideason with TEX
or
2. TEX must bid higher in the offseason than every other club – years and dollars. again, facing what is potentially his last big payday, don’t expect a lot of loyalty to a team that he has played for a few months.
so, what will it take to get into the playoffs?
2007 94 wildcard 94 division
2006 95 93
2005 95 95
2006 98 92
right now TEX is 27 – 28, so even getting to 92 wins is somewhat challenging. i won’t say they can’t do it because this team has made me look like an idiot with my gloom and doom predictions the last month. so, i will just say that they need to go 65 – 42, and you can decide how likely that is.
by sam in so cal on May 29, 2008 3:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
what if the offense
continues to lead the league in scoring, and Millwood comes back 100%, and Padilla and Ponson continue to be solid? If there was ever a year to steal the AL West…
by SteveP on May 29, 2008 1:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
no offense
but what if I win the lottery? I just don’t believe that’s a realistic scenario. Maybe it happens but man you talk about long shots.
by Hull Fan on May 29, 2008 1:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
+1/2
It may not be THAT unrealistic, but it’s unrealistic nonetheless.
Right around the time all the young talent is ready to contend is when the organization will realize that Ron Washington is the wrong man for the job.
by Chad Crudup on May 29, 2008 1:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
it all a gamble
it will always be a gamble.
by SteveP on May 29, 2008 1:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
One third through a rebuilding season
From my point of view this season is looking very solid so far. To clarify that statement, it looks like a solid rebuilding season. around a .500 team that frustrates me as well for not getting over the .500 bump on several occasions.
The team struggles at the beginning of the season seam to be past and has played well since then. The batting is going better than I expected so far. The pitching has not lived up to expectations yet but there have been numerous injuries and has not fallen apart.
IMO The Rangers need to continue to work Gabbard in the rotation and let him refine his control. That is based on a long term view rather than a win now approach. Millwood’s return and it is importatnt to get/keep him healthy. Ther real question is where will this rotation be at the end of the season and at the beginning of 09.
Are the Rangers going to be selling at the trade dealine? Do they keep Padilla, Blalock, Bradley, Cat, Millwood? Or do they try to keep them and build with them for 09 and beyond. They could bring anotrher haul of prospects.
I think the team is well positioned to compete in 09 if they keep the group together and add some important FA in the off season. I like this group and would like to see the management keep them together, increase the payroll and give the a legit shot at winning in 09.
by Bigfan16 on May 29, 2008 11:00 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Galloway
In the power-crazy AL, how is it the Rangers now have the most feared batting order? Stick it, you Rudy Jaramillo doubters.
Well, it helps to have Hamilton and Bradley and their stellar OPS marks in the outfield now. Jaramillo can’t turn a sow into a silk purse, but he sure looks good when he has better players to work with. You can’t give Jaramillo all the credit, but it does seem like he and the hitters are doing what Washington has been asking for. Working the counts, getting on base, etc.
They have players with more talent in these areas, and they’re more in sync with the philosophy.
As for Gabbard, I’d prefer to keep throwing him out there and see what you’ve got. He’s only started 17 times for the Rangers. I’d give him another 6-8 starts before pulling the plug.
...and curse Sir Walter Raleigh, he was such a stupid git.
by t ball on May 29, 2008 11:03 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Love me some Hamilton as well but...
Does anyone honestly expect him to continue to threaten triple crown achievement and all-time RBI records?
Hamilton, Bradley, Murphy, Byrd and Boggs make a nice OF this year and next. I have not been able to say that for quite some time. Good job JD.
by Bigfan16 on May 29, 2008 11:32 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Outfield
Agree completely. Who knew that the team’s worst weakness last year could turn into its biggest strength this year.
by JBImaknee on May 29, 2008 1:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Or likewise that it's greatest strength last year...
...would turn into a not-so-strong point, the bullpen.
Right around the time all the young talent is ready to contend is when the organization will realize that Ron Washington is the wrong man for the job.
by Chad Crudup on May 29, 2008 1:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Actually
I think we all might have guessed that when they acquired both Bradley and Hamilton. That’s a huge addition of talent out there. A lot of us carped about the need for better defense as well as offense in the OF, now it’s here.
...and curse Sir Walter Raleigh, he was such a stupid git.
by t ball on May 29, 2008 2:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
triple crown
Yes I do think Hamilton will be near the top of all three categories all year. He is in a perfect lineup to drive in runs, has the natural ability and the perfect ballpark to hit alot of home runs and his approach at the plate lends itself to a high average. Not saying he will win it but I would say he will finish top 5 in all three categories at the end of the year which will culminate with a top 3 MVP finish and possibly the MVP trophy
by bigsteve on May 29, 2008 2:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
unless..
if MB gets traded then hamilton suffers.
by sam in so cal on May 29, 2008 2:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
McCarthy
If I remember correctly he has been cleared to start throwing. Obviously, we can’t bank on him too hard, but hopefully it helps push us over the .500 hump. I think when it’s time to call him up you have to look at Gabbard vs Feldman and pick whoever is pitching better for you. I’d love Kason as my long relief arm.
Joe Morgan: (On Jay Bruce's impact) I think he will. He brings energy to the team, and besides that, he is a pretty good hitter.
Ken Tremendous: I like that the #1 reason he will help his team is: "energy," and the distant #2 reason is: "ability to hit baseballs."
by TheBZA on May 29, 2008 11:07 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Successful Season
The more I think about it, the more I am convinced that for this season to be a success (despite whatever the record may be), some of the young arms who constantly get shuttled between Oklahoma and Arlington need to pitch themselves onto the 25 man roster.
by Excel Hearts Choi on May 29, 2008 11:14 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
strike throwing machine / Cy Young candidate
McCarthy is going to be otherworldly when he returns; I’ll bet he goes something like 11-2 this year with a 2.90 ERA, a K/9 of about 11 and average about two BB’s per nine
by bronco28 on May 29, 2008 11:15 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Pre-season predictions
McCarthy was my most optimistic. If he and Padilla both rebound from last year, with Millwood eating some innings, I will feel good about our chances to contend this year. I know that’s a lot of stars that need to align, but it’s fun to think about.
Joe Morgan: (On Jay Bruce's) I think he will. He brings energy to the team, and besides that, he is a pretty good hitter.
Ken Tremendous: I like that the #1 reason he will help his team is: "energy," and the distant #2 reason is: "ability to hit baseballs."
by TheBZA on May 29, 2008 11:17 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Or more likely...
...what he’s SMOKING.
Right around the time all the young talent is ready to contend is when the organization will realize that Ron Washington is the wrong man for the job.
by Chad Crudup on May 29, 2008 1:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Good point on BMac
My expectations are a bit lower than Bronco28’s CY young prediction but it would be nice to see him soldify a spot in the rotation and count on him going into 09.
So far, though I like when he pitches, I would not be counting on him as a guarenteed rotation pitcher until he shows more. Lets hope for more than his past MLB performance going forward.
by Bigfan16 on May 29, 2008 11:26 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
he's shown enough
he’s a proven commodity, which is why we traded for him…. you can bank on him being one of the best pitchers in the AL once he gets by this one freak injury. when he does, I’m positive he’ll never see the DL again. he’s tough as nails.
by bronco28 on May 29, 2008 12:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ah, sarcasm...
...big fan of that. High five.
Right around the time all the young talent is ready to contend is when the organization will realize that Ron Washington is the wrong man for the job.
by Chad Crudup on May 29, 2008 1:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The problem with Kason Gabbard in long relief
He nibbles; that’s just part of his game. When he’s not on, he walks a lot of guys and it takes forever to get through a few innings. So when do you need a long reliever? Occasionally if the starter gets hurt, but usually when the starter is ineffective and has walked four or five guys in two innings. So if your starter just doesn’t have it, you pull him and replace him with Gabbard, who doesn’t pound the strike zone. Then hitters don’t swing and he walks more guys. Awesome. Few things are as annoying as a long reliever who walks even more guys.
If Gabbard starts and he’s on his game, great. If he doesn’t have his stuff, walks guys and gets shelled when he does throw a strike, replace him with someone who does throw strikes. Even if the strikes aren’t swing-and-miss stuff, at least 70 percent of the balls hit will become outs and the game will move along.
by Inkara1 on May 29, 2008 12:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Gabbard
I’ve said it before but he reminds me of bit of Koronka
"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 May 29, 2008 12:17 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
You may be right on the down side
On the upside of Gabbard he reminds me a little of Jamie Moyer who went through 5 teams (including the Rangers) before he hot his stride. Gabbard may make a very useful crafty lefty once he learns to be crafty.
by Bigfan16 on May 29, 2008 12:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Speed III
Great movie title joke from Lucas this morning:
Speed III: Keanu Reeves stars as the manager of a team that will explode if it surpasses a .500 record.
He also mentions that KG’s (Kennil Gomez) ERA of 2.21 is 9th, which is good, but he’s been better than that. His WHIP of 0.91 ranks third, and of the top 10 in that category he is the second youngest at just-turned 20 with many of those guys 22-24 years old.
The youngest in the top 10 WHIP is Edward Cegarra, who at age 19 and almost a year younger the KG, K’d 53 in 54 IP while walking only 5 on his way to a whip of 0.94 before being promoted to high-A. That’s a fairly aggressive promotion. I doubt the Rangers will promote KG or Feliz, as the organizational philosophy seems to be that young guys need to build innnings slowly more than anything, and they’re both almost halfway to 120 IP. Holland, who had 67 pro innings last year + his college season, will probably be moved up as soon as Main is ready to go. IIRC the Rangers were shooting for a late May start for Main.
by rooster on May 29, 2008 12:44 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I feel really good about that road trip and about the Rangers in general.
They really need Millwood to have an ace-like the next month, as they are positioned to let their June performance determine whether they will be buyers or sellers. Hopefully, a young pitcher also emerges in the second half to provide unexpectedly good performance out of the back end of the rotation.
I’m still bummed the Rays locked up Kazmir. I fully expected Kazmir to be JDs top trade target this offseason. For all of those who would say the trade rate would be too high, consider this: even though the Rays could get a king’s ransom for Kazmir, they decided they were better off locking him up. I would’ve gladly seen the Rangers open the prospect chest to the Rays for Kazmir. In general, I tend to be happy with aggressive moves on the trade front, which is why last offseason I was supportive of going after Santana.
by rooster on May 29, 2008 12:51 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Pitchers Available
There are a plethora of pitchers available this off-season. If I were JD, I would look at the free agent market before I traded away an army of talent for a player like Kazmir. Just off the top of my head, some of the notable free agents include:
Ben Sheets
C.C. Sabathia
Brad Penny
Oliver Perez
Derek Lowe
Jon Garland
Randy Wolf
If I was JD, I would try very hard to sign one of Sabathia, Perez, or Sheets. If you add one of those three to our rotation next season, I think we could be very competitive in the AL West.
by stephen86 on May 29, 2008 1:52 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Amen!
While I prefer Sabathia (college in Ohio) just adding one of the above guys gives you a very solid 09 rotation. Sabathia, Millwood, Padilla, Bmac and Gabbard is very solid. You have to plan for injuries and you have Rupe, Loe, Feldman and the farm if that occurs.
by Bigfan16 on May 29, 2008 1:59 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Penny, Sheets, and Sabathia are about all that interests me on that list.
I like Randy Wolf, but he’s not a top rotation guy like the three I mentioned above. I think Penny has a team option for next year. It would be shocking to see Sabathia let loose. Sheets has injury problems. Kazmir is still a much better solution, IMO.
by rooster on May 29, 2008 2:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Few things
Penny has one of the friendliest team options in history next year so unless the Dodgers pull an Anaheim with madrigal he is not gonna hit the FA market.
I wouldn’t touch Sheets with a 10 foot pole. Seeing as how so many people complain about trading for a then healthy BMac if we signed a FA with the injury history of Sheets there would be a mutiny.
The two I would go after on that list are Sabathia and Perez.
by bigsteve on May 29, 2008 2:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sheets
I’d love for us to sign him. The only two guys on that list that are top of the rotation starters are Sheets and Sabathia. There is no way Penny hits the FA market. Sabathia is going to get a ridiculous contract that we would be dense to pay. But I think there might be a chance that Sheets is undervalued due to his injury history. If it’s possible to sign him to a 4 Yr 40 M contract I would be all for that. But knowing MLB some GM that’s trying to save his job will money whip him with a horrible contract.
White Women!
by nikpin on May 29, 2008 3:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sheets as "the guy"
This could have been an article I read, and it could have been a discussion on here. But the topic was the Rangers lacking a guy with Ace potential in the playoffs each year against the Yankees. Yes, Sheets is injury prone and would probably put up average numbers in the AL in Arlington. But that would give us a high ceiling strikeout pitcher come the playoffs. I’ve cooled on Sabathia (obviously), and think Sheets could be our Beckett in a few years when we make it to the post season.
Joe Morgan: (On Jay Bruce) I think he will. He brings energy to the team, and besides that, he is a pretty good hitter.
Ken Tremendous: I like that the #1 reason he will help his team is: "energy," and the distant #2 reason is: "ability to hit baseballs."
by TheBZA on May 29, 2008 3:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree
I would target Sheets or Perez this offseason, although I prefer Sheets. Even so, I think we would have to pay significantly more than 4 years 45 million. I would expect to pay at least 5 years 70 million dollars. Perez, on the other hand, could probably be signed for quite a bit less (maybe 4 years 48 million?)
Admittedly, Sheets and Perez have injury concerns and have spent their careers in the National League. Nevertheless, they both are ace-caliber pitchers when healthy. In particular, Sheets is one of the best pitchers in baseball, when healthy.
You might have to limit Sheet’s pitch count and innings over the course of a season, but a rotation of Sheets, Padilla, Millwood, Feldman, McCarthy could be one of the better rotations in the American League.
Ultimately, I think signing someone like Sheets is a risk you seriously consider taking. There is a chance is will not work out, but I think the possible return is worth the possible injury concern.
by stephen86 on May 29, 2008 3:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sheets = Beast (when healthy).
I would do the 4 yr deal for $40 or $45 mil. He is also from Louisiana so maybe he is Nolan Ryan fan and would be willing to take a discount and sign here.
by coolaid on May 29, 2008 4:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hank Blalock
by wonthedublein08 on May 29, 2008 12:52 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
yes if he could return something decent
Providing he’s healthy and some kind of bidding war were to break out between the Mets, Yankees, or Baltimore then I’d do it if the young pitcher coming back has a good ceiling. Otherwise I hold onto him hoping he hits well down the stretch and try to move him this off-season.
by Hull Fan on May 29, 2008 1:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If you consider this a rebuilding year...
Then this has been a very successful season thus far.
Josh Hamilton is developing into a superstar, under team control for four more seasons.
Vicente Padilla has bounced back, looks like a top of the rotation starter, and could be under team control for two more seasons (option for 2010).
David Murphy appears to be a quality, everyday outfielder.
Ian Kinsler might be on the verge of having a breakout season
Frankie Francisco, although suffering some growing pains, is reemerging as a solid, late inning option.
CJ Wilson, also suffering some growing pains, will hopefully assert himself as the long-term closer by years end.
Scott Feldman looks like he has the ability to stick in the rotation and maybe be a #3 starter long-term.
Josh Rupe looks to be establishing himself as a decent, cheap bullpen option going forward.
Veterans like Ponson and Bradley are having great seasons. They could be resigned if we feel they will continue to be healthy and productive in the future, or they can be dealt at the trading deadline.
Chris Davis, Max Ramirez, Matt Harrison, and others are looking extremely solid in the minor leagues and could be contributing to our team in 2009.
Overall, there is a lot of be happy about this season.
by stephen86 on May 29, 2008 1:48 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Agreed. It's been a surprisingly happy year.
Like I said before, it’s weird to not feel worn out or frustrated by now.
by rooster on May 29, 2008 2:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
disappointment
Hurley, so far, has been a disappointment. For some, Botts also.
Brandon Boggs 2008 Texas Rangers ROY
by RangerMad on May 29, 2008 2:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah
Also, the injury to McCarthy was a serious disappointment early in the season. Gabbard has been ineffective this season as well and has terrible peripherals. I would say that Gabbard, McCarthy, and Hurley have been the biggest disappointments this year.
On the other hand, if:
1) Padilla continues to pitch well and ends the season with say 200 IP and an ERA around 4.00
2) Feldman continues to eat innings and stays in the rotation for the rest of the season
3) Millwood comes off the DL and is an effective inning-eater (ERA around 4.5?)
If those things happen, I think I can live with the disappointing outcomes for McCarthy, Gabbard, and Hurley. This season, in theory, is about figuring out what you have going into 2009 and 2010 when you hope to compete.
by stephen86 on May 29, 2008 2:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Is it still Thursday AM where you are?
What happened to my old signature?
by WyoRanger on May 29, 2008 3:18 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
i don't interject much...
but that picture of Conseco drives me crazy – look at that arm
boston siempre! tra
by bosoxsiempregirl on May 29, 2008 3:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If I'm not mistaken
It was a picture taken after he blew his elbow out pitching for the Rangers (look at the scar). All that picture needs is a ball bouncing off his head and it would be perfect.
What happened to my old signature?
by WyoRanger on May 29, 2008 5:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
OT: Didn't deserve its own topic.
Michael Young leads all AL shortstops in Revised Zone Rating.
Whoah.
by philkid3 on May 30, 2008 4:13 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Meh
Just further proof that fielding stats don’t mean a damn thing.
A Lonestar in California - 2.0
"I LOVE to fart" - Bert Blyleven
by lonestarJon on May 30, 2008 5:15 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
How is that proof that they don't mean a thing?
Couldn’t it just as easily be proof that anecdotal “eye tests” and flash-bulb memories don’t mean a thing?
I would care to believe the truth is somewhere in the middle.
by philkid3 on May 30, 2008 5:34 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
And remember, Jon.
RZR is not a total evaluation of defense, it’s a measure of one aspect of defense. Therefor, it’s not suggesting MY has been the best defensive shortstop in the league, it’s suggesting he’s converted balls hit in to his zone in to outs at a higher rate than any other shortstop in the league.
by philkid3 on May 30, 2008 5:45 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah
It’s the middle of the night, so I didn’t put a lot of thought into that comment (okay, no thought at all) but mainly what I mean is RZR isn’t a stat I think too highly of, since it’s not really a true measure of a guys defensive ability (as you pointed out). But I guess it should be somewhat encouraging to know that at least MY’s making all the routine plays.
A Lonestar in California - 2.0
"I LOVE to fart" - Bert Blyleven
by lonestarJon on May 30, 2008 6:03 AM CDT up 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.
