A final word - Gracias! - Lone Star Ball

A final word - Gracias!

by spurdynasty on Sep 7, 2008 10:04 AM CDT

Several of you have asked what motivated my recent flurry of FanPosts. In a moment of self-reflection last weekend, it occurred to me that the education and entertainment that I receive from many of you who post at LSB and other Ranger-related sites far exceeds my own contributions. In an attempt to rectify the situation, I embarked on a mission to submit seven FanPosts during a seven day period. I would like to thank those of you who humored my foray into the blogosphere with comments and questions.

Most of the topics I chose to research for the FanPosts were selected to evaluate the strength of the growing consensus that the Rangers young talent-base is among the best in baseball. My admittedly subjective takeaway is that the Rangers indeed appear to have one of the stronger, if not the strongest minor league system in baseball. Combine that with the emergence of several young offensive stars on the major league team and I am as optimistic about the Rangers capturing a title as I have been in the 30+ years that I have followed the team.

The final post was purely self-serving and provided me a platform to express my own ideas about the need for fans and the organization to exercise patience in finishing the build that will hopefully result in a Rangers championship. As I have stated in several threads, I am of the opinion that trading multiple, high-ceiling prospects for major league players with equivalent or less talent and fewer years of club control is one of the surer ways to reduce the odds of winning a title. I realize that view is at odds with the views of many of you and I look forward to future discussions on the topic.

Having gone through this exercise, I have a much greater appreciation for the time and effort that goes into producing data-rich and reasonably accurate prose that can be readily digested in the 2-5 minutes that most readers have to spare. Fitting this research and writing time into a schedule that already features obligations to family, work, and other interests is a challenge. I have a newfound respect for those who maintain and/or make significant contributions to blogs on a daily basis, often without pay and in the spare time that is available between work, school, parenting, etc. For that reason, I would like to take this moment to recognize Adam and Zywica , Jamey and Scott, Joey and Jason Parks, Mike, Jason Cole, and Shroom for the sacrifices that they have made and the outstanding work that they have done to support the Rangers internet community. Each of you deserve the utmost respect and gratitude from those of us who benefit from the web-sites that you have built and the daily writings that you produce to educate, entertain, and induce the hoard to think and discuss our favorite baseball team. The final word that I would like to submit before signing off as a daily Rangers blogger? A hearty and heart-felt “Thanks”.

8 recs | Comment 44 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

thank YOU

for the work you did

"I don’t know of a single thing Obama’s done except talk and write." - Newt Gingrich

by knockoutking on Sep 7, 2008 10:18 AM CDT 0 recs

Good work

by Telegraph on Sep 7, 2008 10:21 AM CDT 0 recs

You shouldn't be thanking us

we should be thanking you for everything you gave during this week

"Well, the Dallas Mavericks got beat by the New Orleans Hornets last night ending their season. Word is that someone on the team is dating Jessica Simpson." - Jay Leno

LSB facebook group ---->>> http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=33345329288

by hinduplaya on Sep 7, 2008 10:31 AM CDT 0 recs

again

great job.

Screw the Spurs.

Greatest Inventions Ever? 1. TiVO, 2. Boobs, 3. Baseball

by willamos2 on Sep 7, 2008 10:46 AM CDT 0 recs

Please, let me explain

The login name was never intended to be inflammatory. The first blog that I subscribed to was a Spurs site in 2002. I adopted the name to express my belief that the emergence of Parker, Ginobili, and Stephen Jackson along with the pending salary cap space that the team would have following the 2002/2003 NBA season would result in a Golden Age for those of us who had followed the team since the days of Gervin and Gilmore. The reason that I have kept the login on other sites is because it gives me one fewer thing to have to remember.

I hold no ill-will toward the Mavericks, despite the fact that one of my lowest points as a fan occurred when I attended Game 7 of the Western Conference semifinals in 2006. The Mavericks shooting in the first half of that game was mind-boggling and the end was absolutely devastating for those of us who knew that a win almost guaranteed another championship.

by spurdynasty on Sep 7, 2008 11:02 AM CDT up 0 recs

after your run of posts

i’m sort of a spurs fan myself.

not really but just wanted to compliment you. and a fan like you shouldn’t have to apologize for who you support.

""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 Sep 7, 2008 11:04 AM CDT up 0 recs

HAHA, do I feel like a dumbass!

Ok, so I’ve been sick as a dog all week, but…I always read your name as spurdy nasty, as in “It’s purdy nasty”.

I never thought you were a f*cking Spurs fan.

LOL

Anyway, great work dude!

"...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
"If you ain't got no money, ain't nobody calls you honey," Bo Diddley

by Rodney on Sep 7, 2008 11:36 AM CDT up 0 recs

wow

that’s pretty funny!

by RangersOCD on Sep 7, 2008 12:04 PM CDT up 0 recs

Dude

you aren’t the only one….oops.

by TxStCa on Sep 7, 2008 10:39 PM CDT up 0 recs

Make that 3 dumbasses..

I never saw Spur Dynasty. Thanks for all your work. Outstanding, interesting and creative. Bravo.

by Parman on Sep 9, 2008 2:17 PM CDT up 0 recs

Isn't it fun to be able to laugh a bit?

by Rodney on Sep 9, 2008 2:39 PM CDT up 0 recs

Great series of fanposts...

Thanks for doing them.

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

by slc ranger on Sep 7, 2008 10:52 AM CDT 0 recs

I'll indulge you

any time you want to make another flurry of posts. Great reading and great discussions spawned by the posts. Even drawing in fans from opposition teams which was pretty cool as well.

What's the rumpus?

by Hypo-Luxa on Sep 7, 2008 10:58 AM CDT 0 recs

Take a nap, now

Thanks for lots of good reading and thought provoking posts this week.

Your view of not trading away prospects is great, though I think that principle can be taken too far, with the Dodgers and Angels in recent years perhaps giving up chances at postseason appearances or success by that reluctance.

O Freunde, nicht diese Töne!
Sondern laßt uns angenehmere anstimmen,
und freudenvollere.

by t ball on Sep 7, 2008 11:37 AM CDT 0 recs

Prospects for veterans - Do you pull the trigger?

I think that the Dodgers and Angels examples offer a perfect way to explore the aggressive vs conservative approach to creating a champion. As most of you recall, both the Angels and Dodgers were rumored to have strong interest in Texiera at the 2007 trade deadline. Though it is not clear what JD insisted on, I would suggest that it was:

Dodgers – Kershaw and Loney or Ethier
Angels – Adenhart and Santana or Saunders

If I were the GM for the Dodgers or the Angels, I would have told JD, " No." The reason? Both Adenhart and Kershaw have ceilings equivalent to Texeira, they are far enough along in their development paths that you can reasonably project their ml floor, the club controls them for 6+ years, and the organizations have enough young, talented players to support an extended playoff run. In addition, adding Texeira only nominally improves the team’s chances of winning a title.

One great aspect of this example is that Kershaw and especially Adenhart have struggled this year, revealing the problem with the more conservative approach. Additionally, the Dodgers failed to reach the playoffs in a year when Texeira might have been enough to make a difference.

In your opinion, should the GM for either the Angels or the Dodgers have done the deal presented above?

by spurdynasty on Sep 8, 2008 8:35 AM CDT up 0 recs

I wasn't necessarily

focused on possible Teixeira deals, just their nearly complete lack of any deals inseason in recent years. I think the Dodgers would say no to that deal if that is what was on the table. But that’s not to say they couldn’t have come to some other deal. They had several chips to offer, so I guess if Daniels would only accept Kershaw then no deal.

We’ll never know the deals that were on the table, but Daniels did a hell of a job getting the most out of Atlanta. As much as I’d like to have Kershaw in the fold, they might be better off in the long run with the haul from the Braves.

O Freunde, nicht diese Töne!
Sondern laßt uns angenehmere anstimmen,
und freudenvollere.

by t ball on Sep 8, 2008 9:50 AM CDT up 0 recs

I understand

that you weren’t referring to a single trade opportunity, especially regarding the Angels, but I thought that it provided a great way to go from an abstract discussion of conservative vs aggressive to something more concrete.

Based on your writings, tball, you lean toward a more conservative approach to team building, so a discussion between the two of us is unlikely to produce many sparks. I would like to push you on the Adenhart + for Texeira trade proposal above. If I recall correctly, Adanhart was a Top50 prospect at the trade deadline last year who was projected to be a #3/#4 starter type with a possible ceiling as a #2 if he could get is K’s up. If you were the Angels GM, would you have traded a good/not great prospect + a good/not great ml pitcher (neither Santana nor Saunders had proven themselves to be consistently good ml starters atthe time) for 1.5 years of Texeira?

by spurdynasty on Sep 8, 2008 11:15 AM CDT up 0 recs

Where's Jamey?

Based on his writing, Mr. Newberg seems to be someone who would take an aggressive approach to team-building. If you are out there, Jamey, would you have done either of the two deals presented above if you were the GM for teh Angels or Dodgers? Why?

by spurdynasty on Sep 8, 2008 11:25 AM CDT up 0 recs

Adenhart

I’m not sure either team really likes that deal. I don’t see the Angels giving up present and future pitching. As for Daniels, I think his goal was to get more players with high ceilings. I don’t recall the rumors from last year, but who knows if they were remotely accurate anyway. And I’m having a hard time putting myelf back in time on valuation as well. Kershaw sticks out more, he was already very highly regarded at the time. Off the top of my head I would think Daniels was asking for Santana, Adenhart and one other player of lesser value.

I would characterize my views as conservative in the sense that I’m going to be aggressive in asking for the other team’s top talent before trading away someone as valuable as Teixiera or a top prospect. I think there are a few youngish pitchers out there I would aggressively pursue this winter (Nolasco, Greinke) but I’d think carefully about the top price I’m willing to pay.

I agree with your general view, and I would not trade multiple high ceiling prospects away unless the return is truly wonderful. But I think the Rangers are in a very healthy bargaining position. Laird is a successful major leaguer, a mature player all around, with at least an average bat at an important defensive position, and he fits an NL club well. But Florida is going to want cheap players, that’s the reason Nolasco and others might be available in the first place, so Laird does not fit there so well. Maybe Salty is better for them, or Teagarden. One of the catchers plus a prospect should be a starting point for negotiations, and then see where it goes.

O Freunde, nicht diese Töne!
Sondern laßt uns angenehmere anstimmen,
und freudenvollere.

by t ball on Sep 8, 2008 12:18 PM CDT up 0 recs

Rangers upcoming offseason

I like Greinke/Nolasco/Cain as much as the next guy, but I cringe everytime that Evan or Jamey suggests including one or two of Harrison, Hurley, Poveda, or Kiker in a deal that is fronted by Saltalamacchia or Davis. That might be what it takes in today’s world to get an established young starter, but from my perspective the combination of talent and years of club control make Davis alone more valuable than any of the pitchers name above. I am not as high on Saltalamacchia, but he clearly projects as an above average catcher. WIth at least 4 years of club control, I personally think that he is as valuable as Greinke and close to the same value as Cain and Nolasco and the three years you would get of them. I would be disappointed to see any of the Rangers Top10 pitching prospects added to a Saltalamacchia for Greinke/Nolasco/Cain deal.

With that said, I love the idea of trading superfluous major leaguers (Laird, Byrd, Blalock to name a few) with relatively few years of club control for equally talented players with more years before they become free agents. If JD can pull in young major league pitching using some of these assets and sweetening the pot with middling prospects like Mayberry, Arias, etc., then I will be absolutely ecstatic.

by spurdynasty on Sep 8, 2008 1:21 PM CDT up 0 recs

Team control

It might be a stretch to say that 4 years of Salty is worth more than 3 years of Cain or Nolasco. Both of them have fewer questions about their game right now than Salty, and if there is anything more valuable than a young catcher it’s a young pitcher. You could make a case for only 2 years of Greinke vs. 4 of Salty, but I think Salty’s value is down a tad while Greinke’s is up considerably. If Salty by himself (with 5+ years of control remaining) was not enough to get Teixeira’s 1 1/2 years, I don’t see how 4 years of Salty gets you 2 of Greinke. And certainly not 3 of Cain or Nolasco.

I think you have to add something to Salty and here is where you have to trust your people that you’re giving up the right guy(s). And keep in mind present value and potential value. The prospects you list above have lots of potential, but Cain and the others are already in the big leagues pitching at an allstar level. I believe that Poveda can be a good pitcher, but I don’t think I’ll cry too long if Salty and Poveda bring back Nolasco. SF isn’t going to want a catcher so that would be less of a fit.

Principles are fine, and I share yours. But when it’s dealmaking time, it all comes down to how much you and your scouts believe in a guy like Cain, and which players you’re willing to roll the dice on giving up.

O Freunde, nicht diese Töne!
Sondern laßt uns angenehmere anstimmen,
und freudenvollere.

by t ball on Sep 8, 2008 2:34 PM CDT up 0 recs

Kershaw

You think that last year at the trade deadline Kershaw was far enough along in his development they knew what he would be? He was in A ball.

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 Sep 8, 2008 10:32 AM CDT up 0 recs

Kershaw at the trade deadline

You’re right, bigsteve, at the time of the trade deadline, the 19 yo Kershaw was pitching in the Midwest league. Despite his age and level, I think he had the combination of stuff (two plus pitches) and performance that allow you to project a very high floor. In my mind, Kershaw in July last year was essentially equivalent to Feliz in July this year.

by spurdynasty on Sep 8, 2008 11:22 AM CDT up 0 recs

Feliz

At the trade deadline this year Feliz at 20 years old had been in Frisco for almost a month. I think his ceiling and floor is much more clear than Kershaws last year

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 Sep 8, 2008 11:39 AM CDT up 0 recs

Fair enough

by spurdynasty on Sep 8, 2008 11:51 AM CDT up 0 recs

Kershaw last year

was very highly touted and had a much bigger reputation and expected ceiling than almost any other pitching prospect they could have asked for.

O Freunde, nicht diese Töne!
Sondern laßt uns angenehmere anstimmen,
und freudenvollere.

by t ball on Sep 8, 2008 12:03 PM CDT up 0 recs

yeah

But hype and reputation only get you so far. He was in A ball. There have been lots of highly touted A ball players who don’t pan out.

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 Sep 8, 2008 12:34 PM CDT up 0 recs

Well

there’s hype and reputation, and then there’s being maybe the top pitching prospect in all of baseball. Many thought of him that way by the middle of last summer. And I’m not saying he was worth Teixeira all by himself.

O Freunde, nicht diese Töne!
Sondern laßt uns angenehmere anstimmen,
und freudenvollere.

by t ball on Sep 8, 2008 2:24 PM CDT up 0 recs

Thanks for the posts

Please submit more in the future. And go Mavs!

by RangersOCD on Sep 7, 2008 12:05 PM CDT 0 recs

Excellent work Spurs, im semi inspired

Im waiting on the end of the regular season to start playing with the entire Rangers MLB roster numbers with some of the new statistical analysis programs im using for some of my classes….

No telling where that is going to lead…

by laxtonto on Sep 7, 2008 1:27 PM CDT 0 recs

Thanks, lax

I look forward to seeing the results of you analyses. There’s nothing like a good data-set to sink your teeth into.

by spurdynasty on Sep 7, 2008 7:17 PM CDT up 0 recs

Yeah have been playing with SAS right now

but might just do some normal stuff

by laxtonto on Sep 7, 2008 7:48 PM CDT up 0 recs

SAS 9.2 & R

You can do some sweet stuff with SAS/GRAPH in version 9.2. I won’t be getting my 9.2 until later in the Fall (thanks again, SAS, for a new base point release with massive child dependencies in the rest of your packages!).

Until then…all R, all the time!

by Mister Naxal on Sep 8, 2008 12:39 AM CDT up 0 recs

by zywica on Sep 7, 2008 7:21 PM CDT up 0 recs

Thanks

for all the info. I enjoyed reading it, it’s too bad you are a Spurs fan and I have to disregard everything you say because must be a dumbarse. J/k, man.

Good work, bad name.

by TxStCa on Sep 7, 2008 10:41 PM CDT 0 recs