Wednesday a.m. Rangers things

Initially, that was Hicks’ biggest problem and with Gilbert’s self-proclaimed declaration that he created the FA system, etc, I’m concerned that he may have a little too much ego for my taste. I prefer an owner that has the capabilities to provide the financial resources the team needs, but lets the baseball people run what we see on the field by staying out of player decisions.

but how about Ron Artest, everybody?

regarding the ownership situation. Everyone is trying to use past examples or good/bad ownership from well known examples, but truthfully we know very little about how Greenberg or Gilbert would act as owners, other than both stating that they’d like to bring back our FO.

In fact, I don’t even really know which of these guys has the most loose change in his pocket. Do we know which of these guys is more flush with disposable income?

Excellent job of detailing ‘the scare’ among fans about getting their money back. It definitely speaks volumes about what the ticket-buying thinks of the people running the show.

seems great. But MLB attrition being what it is, the front office will not last forever anyway.

UNLESS, we become the Twins or A’s.

Sadly, the fans are sort of forced to live with all-this crap. Don’t call me a socialist, because I’m far from it, but, when it comes to these franchises, I’m tired of businessmen “flipping” the Rangers.

My preference is for the new owner to keep Ryan, Daniels et al on board. However, as I have said before, the possibility that a whole new front office would be brought in is not something that would make me prefer keeping Hicks as the owner to getting new ownership in place. Given a choice between Hicks staying as owner and the current front office staying, or a new owner and the possibility that the new owner would want to bring in his own people, I’d go with the latter.

Obviously the status quo is unacceptable. But I don’t think that is what the Hicks people are proposing – indeed, I’d be certain that Selig + other owners would demand safeguards against what has happened before.

I see this club has on a trajectory towards a great run. 2011 – 2014 will be great years unless something major happens to derail it. Now, the current situation is obviously bad in that the missing pieces that may be needed to fill in gaps here and there may not happen. But I don’t think a revised Hicks ownership group is the same as the status quo. The whole point of his approach would be to maintain the front office while revitalizing the finances (Obviously we disagree on this, which is fair, though certain posters here have been irrational about it)

But here is my nightmare. A new owner comes in; he wants to make a splash. Waiting until the team develops on its own isn’t enough. Lots of these kids (Feliz, Perez, Holland, Smoak, etc) get traded off to bring in some one year guys to make an impact today. Free agents are signed for the sake of spending money instead of good long-term development. Daniels and the development people get dumped for yes men or other GMs who have a completely different perspective from the one most of us advocate. Yeah, we don’t know that Gilbert or Greenberg would do this, I doubt they would. But they might. And if you were to say “the new guys want to bring in their own team,” I look around the league and see two-thirds of front offices I want no part of. That is a far, far bigger risk than a Tom Hicks with his hands tied.

I don’t want Hicks to stay. But people are delusional when they say that Hicks is the worst case scenario. Your choice – Hicks + JD/Nolan or New Owner + other people – is very clear to me. I want JD here

@LoneStarDugout Jarrod Saltalamacchia made his ’09 winterball debut last night for the Toros del Este. He hit cleanup, was the DH, and was 1-for-5.