Monday a.m. stuff

by Adam J. Morris on Jul 21, 2008 8:35 AM CDT

The Rangers salvage a win last night with a nice performance from Vicente Padilla and the bullpen. C.J. Wilson had as much movement on his fastball last night as I can remember him ever having.

Both Evan Grant's game story, and Jeff Wilson's game story, talk about how Teagarden has impressed with his defense, and may actually have wound up costing him a spot on the Olympic team, as the Rangers may end up sending Max Ramirez down today, while keeping Teagarden up with the major league team. Grant says that the decision will be made this afternoon, with a lot of it depending on whether Gerald Laird is deemed ready for a rehab assignment after he tests his injured hamstring today.

I'm not a scout, and don't profess to have any great insights as a result of watching players. And I'm also aware I may be subject to confirmation bias. That being said...Teagarden definitely looks different than any of the other Rangers catchers behind the plate, at least to me. He seems smoother, more graceful back there. I can see why so many folks ooh and aah over his receiving skills.

0 recs | Comment 164 comments

Read Related

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Teagarden

I would gladly trade away Salty/Max in order to keep Teagarden as the starter. No question.

Give it a Name

by jparks77 on Jul 21, 2008 8:39 AM CDT 0 recs

especially with the offense we already have..

by tyd3311 on Jul 21, 2008 8:44 AM CDT up 0 recs

I disagree

You can never have too much offense, not in our ballpark. And as many runs as we’re scoring this year, we still rely mostly on Kinsler, Hamilton and Bradley. If one of them is out of the lineup, we’re usually in for an off-day offensively.

I think that developing as many young offensively superior players as possible, and finding as many ways as possible to get them into the lineup is still key, and will remain key for the Rangers as long as they play at the Ballpark in Arlington.

A Lonestar in California

Classic iorange555: "lmao too bad i watched [the all-star game] at a friends house ;[ much funer on here"

by lonestarJon on Jul 21, 2008 8:54 AM CDT up 0 recs

x

You can never have too much offense, not in our ballpark.

Why does our ballpark mean we need more offense?

by Adam J. Morris on Jul 21, 2008 8:58 AM CDT up 0 recs

Yeah

Confusing statement.

by brettgardner on Jul 21, 2008 9:01 AM CDT up 0 recs

i think what he meant was

you can never have too much offense with our pitching

""If they'd have told me you can make the team but you've got to shine the shoes, I'd have been there shining shoes." -Bradley

by ab03 on Jul 21, 2008 9:08 AM CDT up 0 recs

True, but...

...hopefully our farm system will change that.

Physician: Primum non nocere

Batter: First, make no out

by Chad Crudup on Jul 21, 2008 9:16 AM CDT up 0 recs

hopefully hurley, mendoza, neftali, hunter, holland, feldman, etc...

will change that sooner rather then later.

by tyd3311 on Jul 21, 2008 9:21 AM CDT up 0 recs

did i use then properly there?

or is it than?

by tyd3311 on Jul 21, 2008 9:21 AM CDT up 0 recs

its than isn't it?

by tyd3311 on Jul 21, 2008 9:34 AM CDT up 0 recs

yes

""If they'd have told me you can make the team but you've got to shine the shoes, I'd have been there shining shoes." -Bradley

by ab03 on Jul 21, 2008 10:08 AM CDT up 0 recs

thanks

by tyd3311 on Jul 21, 2008 10:15 AM CDT up 0 recs

I think our ballpark means we'll always lack a truly dominant pitching staff

Hence, I think it will be necessary to maintain an offense that will make up for it.

A Lonestar in California

Classic iorange555: "lmao too bad i watched [the all-star game] at a friends house ;[ much funer on here"

by lonestarJon on Jul 21, 2008 9:07 AM CDT up 0 recs

Why?

by brettgardner on Jul 21, 2008 9:11 AM CDT up 0 recs

Why won't we ever have a dominant pitching staff?

I just don’t, really.

It seems that unless you’ve got a pitcher with truly one-of-a-kind stuff, they all seem to suffer in some way from pitching here in one way or another. I love our park, but because of it’s rep, I don’t think we’ll ever get an ace free agent to sign here (not in their prime anyway), and the chances that our system will produce multiple Neftali Feliz’s really isn’t that good. I think we’ll wind up with guys like Eric Hurley, who will be solid but not “great” filling out most of our rotation, and at times those guys are going to need all the offensive support they can get.

A Lonestar in California

Classic iorange555: "lmao too bad i watched [the all-star game] at a friends house ;[ much funer on here"

by lonestarJon on Jul 21, 2008 9:22 AM CDT up 0 recs

Why is that

Different than any other team though?

by brettgardner on Jul 21, 2008 10:06 AM CDT up 0 recs

Look at the recent #'s...

for TBiA and compare them to other parks.

It’s actually in the middle of the pack in many categories. There are a lot of other parks that are just as hitter friendly if not more so than ours now. The park is not the excuse. Shitty pitching is. That will change, it has to.

"The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance."-Socrates

by slc ranger on Jul 21, 2008 8:41 PM CDT up 0 recs

I beleive we were no hit..

just last year

at the our ballpark.

its the quality of pitcher we have run out there in the past decade thats the problem.

by tyd3311 on Jul 21, 2008 9:13 AM CDT up 0 recs

at our ballpark*

by tyd3311 on Jul 21, 2008 9:13 AM CDT up 0 recs

Mark Buerhle's no-no was at US Cellular

In Chicago.

A Lonestar in California

Classic iorange555: "lmao too bad i watched [the all-star game] at a friends house ;[ much funer on here"

by lonestarJon on Jul 21, 2008 9:23 AM CDT up 0 recs

was it?

oopsy

well you will agree that we have been dominated by pitchers plenty of teams in our ballpark..

need pitchers with good stuff, but also great makeup. mentally tough.

like Eric Hurley… so far seems like everytime he gives up a big hit or homer, he is immediately up 0-2 on the next guy.

by tyd3311 on Jul 21, 2008 9:26 AM CDT up 0 recs

x

well you will agree that we have been dominated by pitchers plenty of teams in our ballpark..

See, e.g., Erik Bedard, late 2007.

by Adam J. Morris on Jul 21, 2008 9:37 AM CDT up 0 recs

plenty of times in our ballpark.***

thats suppose to be

by tyd3311 on Jul 21, 2008 10:27 AM CDT up 0 recs

that's supposed

Don't knock masturbation, it's sex with someone I love .

by Brian Thomas on Jul 21, 2008 2:05 PM CDT up 0 recs

I think it's both

Like you said, people have shown that you can pitch successfully in Arlington. Heck, Kenny Rogers showed it for a few years. Where I think the park comes into play is that it wears on pitchers who log a lot of innings there. It eats at their confidence and undermines anyone with the inability to keep the ball in the park.

I think that it does take a bit of a unique pitcher to be really successful as a starter consistently. But yeah, it’s also the talent that they’ve rolled out there this decade.

by zywica on Jul 21, 2008 10:08 AM CDT up 0 recs

It's not the Ballpark

It’s the bad pitching, as stated above, others have pitched well here (mainly other teams) but it can be done, people have pitched well in Fenway Park for a century and the same for right handers facing batters at Yankee Stadium, it all comes down to the pitcher, i do think it would be best to have sinker slider pitchers on our team along with high gas guys (95+ consistently) talent is what it takes to pitch in Arlington, same as anywhere else.

by TRFAN on Jul 21, 2008 10:25 AM CDT up 0 recs

It's both

There is still a pattern where most pitchers with decent backgrounds struggle more the more they pitch as starters in Arington. But I am not arguing that it’s not the pitching talent that they’ve had. That is the top problem, followed by the park and the inability to optimally develop what they have had.

by zywica on Jul 21, 2008 10:34 AM CDT up 0 recs

Usually the argument is the other way around

With our ballpark, we’ll always score a lot of runs, so we don’t need great offensive players, and should focus on pitching and defense instead.

by Adam J. Morris on Jul 21, 2008 9:25 AM CDT up 0 recs

Well, by that logic

Then I suppose Young and Kinsler would need to go ASAP in favor of light-hitting vacume-cleaner infielders, and we should have never made the Hamilton trade.

Really, I just don’t think having a superior catcher is going to save that many runs (like having a superior shortstop of CF would for example). I think myself that all defense/no hit catchers are vastly overrated in today’s game, and if a guy can play average defense behind the plate but hit like a third baseman, why wouldn’t you rather have that added kick to your lineup instead of another mediocre bottom-of-the-order hitter?

A Lonestar in California

Classic iorange555: "lmao too bad i watched [the all-star game] at a friends house ;[ much funer on here"

by lonestarJon on Jul 21, 2008 9:44 AM CDT up 0 recs

a good defensive catcher

makes contributions that are pretty subtle.

Say that a good receiver is able to influence a few counts from 2-1 to 1-2. That is a big difference for a pitcher.

And Teagarden doesn’t look like he is going to be a liability with the bat.

Warner Madrigal makes Ezequiel Astacio look downright handsome.

by tricer on Jul 21, 2008 9:49 AM CDT up 0 recs

My (very) unprofessional opinion is...

...that at the very least TT will have a better than average walk rate and better than average power (at least for a catcher) and therefore will not hurt a team too badly offensively.

Physician: Primum non nocere

Batter: First, make no out

by Chad Crudup on Jul 21, 2008 9:52 AM CDT up 0 recs

I'm not defending that p.o.v.

I think that argument is incorrect, just like I think the argument that we need to have a great offense because of our ballpark is incorrect.

I was just pointing out that the flawed argument that is used is usually the opposite of your argument.

by Adam J. Morris on Jul 21, 2008 9:58 AM CDT up 0 recs

I think you are right

that the argument is incorrect. I suspect you are always better off playing to your strengths, rather than filling weaknesses. I assume its easier to get a hitter to TBiA and a pitcher to Safeco based on their reputations.

I also think in terms of pythags, replacing a bad hitter with a good hitter actually creates more wins than an offensively heavy team than an offensively weak team.

"And I stopped beating my wife just a couple of weeks ago." -John McCain

by DJCahill on Jul 21, 2008 10:09 AM CDT up 0 recs

that should have been

more wins on an offensively heavy team than an offensively weak team.

"And I stopped beating my wife just a couple of weeks ago." -John McCain

by DJCahill on Jul 21, 2008 10:09 AM CDT up 0 recs

Actually, I think it's the reverse

WPct = RS2 / (RS2 + RA^2)

So, take for example if a team had 100 RS and 100 RA. Increasing from 100 RS to 110 RS will lead to a WPct of .548 from .500.

If another team had 1000 RS and 1000 RA. Increasing from 1000 RS to 1010 RS will lead to a WPct of .505 from .500.

by Requiem on Jul 21, 2008 8:26 PM CDT up 0 recs

runs...

teagarden will minus the runs scored by opposing teams.

by tyd3311 on Jul 21, 2008 9:00 AM CDT up 0 recs

Call Webster's....

...we have a new verb.

Physician: Primum non nocere

Batter: First, make no out

by Chad Crudup on Jul 21, 2008 9:02 AM CDT up 0 recs

I agree that you can never have too much offense, but...

...that belief has nothing to do with RBiA.

Physician: Primum non nocere

Batter: First, make no out

by Chad Crudup on Jul 21, 2008 9:01 AM CDT up 0 recs

Defensive value

Seeing that the Rangers are going to be dependent on our young arms going forward, it would make sense to give them every advantage possible. A plus defensive catcher like Teagarden who excels at working with pitchers would be a very valuable tool in their continuing development.

Give it a Name

by jparks77 on Jul 21, 2008 9:07 AM CDT up 0 recs

+1

by tyd3311 on Jul 21, 2008 9:08 AM CDT up 0 recs

park factor

RBiA has a park factor of 100 for both hitters and pitchers. Park factor is a 3 year average. I do agree that the sorry state of the Rangers pitching staff does make it necessary to have a top offense. Where would this team be if they just had average pitching.

"An effortless 98" - Scott Gardner after Neftali Feliz's first AA pitch

by RangerMad on Jul 21, 2008 9:17 AM CDT up 0 recs

TT

speculation:

What happens if Teagarden puts up the line that Salty is puting up right now?

Will people be OK with that because of his defense? Or will we hear the backlash that laird gets?

I think TT will be given a longer leash in the media and by the bloggers because he is a local boy and is a longhorn.

by clinton33 on Jul 21, 2008 9:13 AM CDT up 0 recs

While I don't think myself that Teagarden is our future starter

I agree, he does look really smoothe behind the plate. Like you AJM, I guess I see why people go ga-ga over his defense.

I still think either Max or Salty will trump him eventually due to their superor offensive skills, but Teagarden is going to virtually elimnate the need for Gerald Laird next season.

A Lonestar in California

Classic iorange555: "lmao too bad i watched [the all-star game] at a friends house ;[ much funer on here"

by lonestarJon on Jul 21, 2008 8:41 AM CDT 0 recs

Hearing that about CJ makes me feel good,

maybe he has found a groove.

The bloggerformelyknownasBigBaddBubbaJ

by NYTXFAN on Jul 21, 2008 9:00 AM CDT 0 recs

good movement

but his performance did not necessarily inspire a lot of confidence.

he seems to have some aversion to easy saves

by simplesimon on Jul 21, 2008 9:45 AM CDT up 0 recs

The fact is...

He lost his head out there…

i mean those first two pitches to Morneau that he bounced to the plate… what the hell was that?

then hitting Morneau but getting bailed out by a horrible swing..

by tyd3311 on Jul 21, 2008 9:52 AM CDT up 0 recs

I didn't automatically assume

he had lost his head. I just think that pitch got away from him. He definitely kept his head on the next batter, which is important. Whether or not a guy advances on a steal, wild pitch, or passed ball, the pitcher needs to just worry about the batter. Get the batter out, problem solved.

Time you enjoy wasting was not wasted.

by t ball on Jul 21, 2008 10:34 AM CDT up 0 recs

there were 3 pitches...

that got away from him, and there was no next better. Morneau ended the game.

by tyd3311 on Jul 21, 2008 10:41 AM CDT up 0 recs

Oops

I meant on the next pitches, not next batter. He didn’t lose control, kept his head and finished the game.

Time you enjoy wasting was not wasted.

by t ball on Jul 21, 2008 10:52 AM CDT up 0 recs

what were those first three pitches?

morneau helped out big time, with two horrible swings in the at bat..

c.j. got lucky.

by tyd3311 on Jul 21, 2008 10:54 AM CDT up 0 recs

But Morneau swung at those

because he was fooled, not because he sucks. All that movement on pitches can make for unpredictable results. Maybe he did lose it for a couple of pitches, but a quick recovery under pressure if so.

Time you enjoy wasting was not wasted.

by t ball on Jul 21, 2008 11:16 AM CDT up 0 recs

That wild pitch...

...might have set a record for the farthest in front of the plate I have ever seen a pitch land.

Physician: Primum non nocere

Batter: First, make no out

by Chad Crudup on Jul 21, 2008 9:53 AM CDT up 0 recs

Rick Ankiel, this is Chad Crudup. Chad Crudup, meet Rick Ankiel

Don't knock masturbation, it's sex with someone I love .

by Brian Thomas on Jul 21, 2008 2:09 PM CDT up 0 recs

Ankiel didn't immediately come to mind...

...but I do remember he had some monumentally bad individual pitches.

Physician: Primum non nocere

Batter: First, make no out

by Chad Crudup on Jul 21, 2008 2:20 PM CDT up 0 recs

Teagarden...

...I still have a tiny amount of fear that he’s overrated by a lot of people because he was a Longhorn.

But I do think he will have at least a 10-12 year ML career.

Physician: Primum non nocere

Batter: First, make no out

by Chad Crudup on Jul 21, 2008 9:03 AM CDT 0 recs

means nothing to me

by tyd3311 on Jul 21, 2008 9:06 AM CDT up 0 recs

I hear alot of people

talk highly about him not associated with this team or texas the state in general

by tyd3311 on Jul 21, 2008 9:07 AM CDT up 0 recs

All I mean is that a lot of people that I've talked to...

...that really like him and/or advocate him as the Rangers catcher of the future are also UT fans.

Physician: Primum non nocere

Batter: First, make no out

by Chad Crudup on Jul 21, 2008 9:14 AM CDT up 0 recs

I understand..

I like him alot because when you here people of knowledge of the game and minors and prospects especially, seem they all agree that Weiters and Teagarden are heads and shoulders above every other catching prospect in the minors.

by tyd3311 on Jul 21, 2008 9:18 AM CDT up 0 recs

Law = Harvard; Sickels = NW Mo. St.

John (NF): Who is the best catching prospect in the minors outside of Wieters? Come on Keith, throw me a bone!
Keith Law: Teagarden, Marson, Conger.

From John Sickels LSB Q&A 4/2008

Q) If you were the Rangers, what would you do with Jarrod Saltalamacchia, both in 2008 and long-term?
A) I’d just stick him at first base. I think Teagarden is the catcher of the future, and using Salty as a catcher could inhibit his offensive development.

by robert_d_wilfong on Jul 21, 2008 10:27 AM CDT up 0 recs

Agree

by sggut95 on Jul 21, 2008 10:36 AM CDT up 0 recs

Buster Posey

Will surpass Teagarden as the #2 catching prosepct in the minors as soon as he plays a game.

by sggut95 on Jul 21, 2008 10:34 AM CDT up 0 recs

I’m obviously not a longhorn fan, but I can see the value of prioritizing players that are local and grew up as Rangers fans. They are more likely to want to be here and sign longterm before hitting free agency. Now, if there is a clear difference in talent, always choose the better player. But, we have 3 top level catching prospects and it’s arguable who will be the most productive longterm. Because of that, it makes sense to keep the local guy,well, local.

by aggiecurt05 on Jul 21, 2008 9:22 AM CDT up 0 recs

the Braves..

have implemented that strategy as well.

by tyd3311 on Jul 21, 2008 9:23 AM CDT up 0 recs

means nothing to you?...

...who the fuck are you?

by oc on Jul 21, 2008 3:37 PM CDT up 0 recs

someone..

who could care less that taylor teagarden is a graduate of the university of texas at austin.

by tyd3311 on Jul 21, 2008 3:41 PM CDT up 0 recs

Teagarden really creates a dilemma

because, as Adam said, while anyone who watches him catch sees how gifted he is in that aspect of the game, I worry about the other half. Teagarden has always had a good approach offensively and seems to have a solid feel for the strikezone. He also has a bit more power than I think scouts thought he would. But I do not think that pitchers are going to have a hard time getting him out. I am still not confident that we’re going to see more than, say, .230/.300/.400 type numbers from him. If that’s enough for folks, ok. I’d prefer to keep him and Ramirez or something lke that.

by zywica on Jul 21, 2008 9:37 AM CDT 0 recs