Rangers 27th in Fox Sports Power Rankings
by Adam J. Morris on Feb 18, 2009 12:04 PM CST
Email
PrintWell, this is pretty harsh...the Fox Sports Power Rankings currently have the Rangers 27th.
They are behind the Washington Nationals, who won 59 games last year.
And the Baltimore Orioles, who were 11 games worse than the Rangers last year.
And the Colorado Rockies, who won 74 games last year, are an N.L. team anyway, and lost Matt Holliday and Brian Fuentes.
And the Royals, who, according to the author, had a "nice offseason" because they got Mike Jacobs to play first base and acquired Coco Crisp to displace David Dejesus from center.
27th doesn't seem all that reasonable, to me...
287 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
PECOTA pegs us at 72-90
In 2008, there were 5 teams with records below 72-90.
27th might be a little low but it’s in the ballpark.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
by Josey Wales on Feb 18, 2009 12:14 PM CST up reply actions
PECOTA's projections make for good toilet tissue.
You just don't know when to keep your mouth shut, do you Saxy boy?
you must use a higher quality print paper than we use
I guess you heard Fat Joe left Atlantic.
by Haeger Champ on Feb 18, 2009 12:21 PM CST up reply actions
If I'm reading their charts correctly
PECOTA’s combined average margin of error in their 2006 & 2007 projections was around 4.6 meaning they think the Rangers are going to win between 68-76 games in 2009.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
by Josey Wales on Feb 18, 2009 12:23 PM CST up reply actions
I follow the team PeeWee...
I’ve watched / listened to every game for the last three years. I know what they’re capable of.
I don’t need a resource like PECOTA to tell me what to think of my team this year.
You just don't know when to keep your mouth shut, do you Saxy boy?
I Say Again
You make your prediction and ill make mine and we’ll have a little friendly wager…
but you wont do that b/c youre just a little bitch who wants to cry, piss and moan all day long
grow a pair or stfu
You go Horn
Keith Law on Greg Golson, "He's similiar to Cameron and Hunter in that all three are black."
Crap
I’m the one that pointed out PECOTA’s 72-90 to Josey the other day. I take all the blame for him citing this one and only saber stat from now until April.
My bad.
If you give a mouse a cookie...
…he’ll turn into a douche.
My 2009 New Years Resolution: Quit feeding the trolls.
by ghtd36 on Feb 18, 2009 2:10 PM CST up reply actions 5 recs
i guarantee you the rangers are better than the nationals this year
Scout: He was a first-round pick right? Got a huge bonus?
KG: Oh yeah.
Scout: Well, he spent a lot of it on milkshakes.
I hate ESPN
And I would love some network to come in and challenge them to be the best 24 hour sports network. But boy, does Fox Sports suck. It’s even worse than ESPN.
MLB NETWORK! lol
Scout: He was a first-round pick right? Got a huge bonus?
KG: Oh yeah.
Scout: Well, he spent a lot of it on milkshakes.
by knockoutking on Feb 18, 2009 12:54 PM CST up reply actions
They do not.
They do carry the NFL Network and the NHL Network. I can’t imagine it will be too long before they add MLB.
You just don't know when to keep your mouth shut, do you Saxy boy?
by oc on Feb 18, 2009 2:20 PM CST up reply actions
Yeah
They’ve been pretty good about adding channels as their client base grows. They added Setanta not long ago.
Might be as soon as Feb. 23rd. Take this FWIW.
Purgatory's kind of like the in-betweeny one. You weren't really shit, but you weren't all that great either. Like Tottenham.
Fox Sports pisses me off
They are the one alternative to ESPN and have a huge potential market with all the people tired of ESPN’s crap. And all they do is put complete crap on TV between some local games.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
-The Outlaw
But...but...but...
…they’ve got The Best Damn Sports Show Period!
/tongue, cheek
My 2009 New Years Resolution: Quit feeding the trolls.
If you didn't know anything about our system
and looked only at the major league roster dynamics, that isn’t completely unexpected. Horrendous pitching staff last year – the only improvements are Turnbow and Donnelly? Very good offense – made worse by losing Milton Bradley? Disgruntled all star Michael Young?
The 2009 Rangers are a team who should be better due to maturation, not change. But maturation is hard for national (or even football obsessed local) eyes to understand.
by JBImaknee on Feb 18, 2009 12:29 PM CST reply actions 10 recs
I think I'm in love with this comment.
Rec’d.
My 2009 New Years Resolution: Quit feeding the trolls.
good disclaimer
for Fox Sports: If you don’t know anything about sports, it is a pretty good resource.
I agree with your statement
But in Fox’s defense, they claimed to like some teams higher in the rankings because they would be better this year b/c their younger players had matured (i.e. Rays, Marlins, White Sox)
(Wife) "So what do you want to watch on the T.V.? UFC or porn?"
(Husband) "Hmm... well, porn, I guess."
Their young players have matured
Ours are maturing this season
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.
Zing!!!!
All Your Rangers Blog Are Belong To Us
"They say brevity is the key to wit, so shut the f*ck up." Dad
i hope this stays on the bulletin board
until the end of the season when the Rangers are in the playoffs.
Greatest Inventions Ever? 1. TiVO, 2. Boobs, 3. Baseball
We'll just have to resurrect it somehow
later on in the season
-- Micah
Baseball Is My Boyfriend
"Every day is a new opportunity. You can build on yesterday's success or put its failures behind and start over again. That's the way life is, with a new game every day, and that's the way baseball is." -Bob Feller
by The Best Micah on Feb 18, 2009 1:12 PM CST up reply actions
So what's more ridiculous, the Fox Sports poll ranking us 27th, or the other poll in that link (the one from whatifsports.com) ranking us 11th, just ahead of the Angels to win the West?
Which is more likely in 2009: The Rangers being one of the 5 worst teams in baseball, or the Rangers winning the West?
The 40 Trumps All!!!
I hate Michael Young.
"I don’t have any respect for anybody on here. Everyone on here is a fucking asshole who thinks they’re god compared to everyone else." -iorange555, throwing one of his patented sandy-vagina'd hissy fits.
More likely: The Rangers being one of the 5 worst teams in baseball
First, neither is likely, both are sub-10% probabilities. But being among the worst wins out.
Two reasons:
1> All the reasons for the team being bad are obvious. The reasons the team may win the West are not so obvious. Occom’s Razor applies here.
2> Winning the West likely requires and additional investment mid-season (trade prospects for Halliday, for instance). I don’t see JD making such an “all-in” move quite yet. Maybe he makes a deal for playoff success if the the team has secured the division – but I don’t see him moving a blue chip to raise playoff probability from 20% to 50%.
Whereas if the team is losing badly, then we’ll see trades of Millwood, Padilla, Blalock, etc. in June. A 75 win team can quickly become a 70 win team that way.
Basically, there is a stronger bias for a mediocre club to get worse as the season goes on than for a good team to get better. This is important.
JB
There have been no additions to what was a mediocre 2008 team.
Their answer to last season’s pitching woes were not new and improved arms – instead they acted as though last year’s problems were a grand statistical aberration and brought back just about everybody responsible for that mess. That’s a recipe for drastic improvement?
Donnelly & Turnbow are supposed to help? What’d they do last year?
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
"Donnelly & Turnbow are supposed to help? What’d they do last year?"
People asked the same thing about Bradley/Lofton/Gagne too. Did you jump for joy when DeRosa was first announced as our utility guy?
Scott Feldman for 2009 AL Cy Young
Scott Feldman for 2010 AL Scott Feldman
+1
Very good points.
-- Micah
Baseball Is My Boyfriend
"Every day is a new opportunity. You can build on yesterday's success or put its failures behind and start over again. That's the way life is, with a new game every day, and that's the way baseball is." -Bob Feller
by The Best Micah on Feb 18, 2009 1:13 PM CST up reply actions
Lofton & Gagne were front and center on the 2007
team that bolted the gate 23-42. I would have rather seen that money spent on a pitcher like Meche or Lilly.
Give JD credit for getting decent value in trades but Lofton & Gagne were not going to help that team win.
The last time Donnelly had a good season where he pitched more than 50 innings was 2006. Turnbow hasn’t done anything since 2005.
We bring back most of the same stooges we had last year and some of the improvement is supposed to come from a couple of pitchers who haven’t done anything in 3-4 years?
That’s one of the many reasons this team is ranked 27th by Fox.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
But the argument over this ranking is
many other teams made few significant upgrades (Royals) or lost important pieces to their clubs (Rockies), and yet are ranked ahead of us. The Rays and Red Sox are complimented for their young talent that’s come up and will continue to come up, yet we get nothing, other than a mention of CD and Andrus.
I didn’t expect us to be in the top 15 or anything, but come on, 21-22 should be reasonable for a preseason ranking.
Scott Feldman for 2009 AL Cy Young
Scott Feldman for 2010 AL Scott Feldman
please
stop saying you thought meche was a great pickup.
in seasons with more than 30 starts:
career low era of 4.19
career high era of 99
career low whip of 1.34
never had a k/9 over 7.1
never had a bb/9 under 3.0
similar pitchers;
Jason Marquis (973)
Joey Hamilton (970)
Len Barker (966)
Jose Guzman (964)
Ben McDonald (963)
Vicente Padilla (961)
Bronson Arroyo (960)
Brett Myers (959)
Melido Perez (953)
Cal Eldred (953)
the signing was blasted by EVERYONE when the deal was made
gil meche has a CAREER 102 era+
in seasons where he has had more than 15 starts, he has ONE season with an era+ of over 107
Scout: He was a first-round pick right? Got a huge bonus?
KG: Oh yeah.
Scout: Well, he spent a lot of it on milkshakes.
by knockoutking on Feb 18, 2009 1:57 PM CST up reply actions
But Lilly would have made the difference!
He has a career 103 ERA+, dammit!
"...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
Yes we can! November 04, 2008
Don't bring up Lofton
The Outlaw still thinks that was a crappy signing.
by Adam J. Morris on Feb 18, 2009 1:29 PM CST up reply actions
That one just makes me laugh
I’ve never seen someone more stubborn on anything that Josey is on Lofton hate. He isn’t even this bad with regards to Hicks.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
-The Outlaw
Lofton was so good in 2007
he played where in 2008?
Oh, that’s right….nobody made him an offer.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
Who cares about 2008?
He was a great addition to this team in 2007 that filled a huge need at a low cost. He was then flipped at the deadline for a solid prospect who has become a great prospect. That’s a huge win in my book.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
-The Outlaw
By that logic
I suppose Barry Bonds sucked in 2007 as well, since he didn’t play anywhere in 2008.
"I dont care to debate with a troll." - Sharky
John Elway
He sucked in 1998-1999 because he didn’t play in 1999-2000
Maude Lebowski: Lord. You can imagine where it goes from here.
The Dude: He fixes the cable?
This....
Is the most idiotic statement ever on LSB!!
Lofton didn’t play because he sucked too much to play for anyone.
Elway didn’t play because he fucking retired!!
So sad!!
Adam J. Morris - "Murphy isn't that good. He is overrated by Rangers fans."
....How dare you, sir!! Take it back!!
lofton didnt play because IIRC he wanted starters money and starters ABs and no one would give them to him
Scout: He was a first-round pick right? Got a huge bonus?
KG: Oh yeah.
Scout: Well, he spent a lot of it on milkshakes.
by knockoutking on Feb 19, 2009 7:49 AM CST up reply actions
Joke
That was the point.
Maude Lebowski: Lord. You can imagine where it goes from here.
The Dude: He fixes the cable?
he wanted too much moneyt
and didnt want to sit the bench
that doesnt mean he sucked or that no one made him an offer, it means he DIDNT TAKE ANY OFFERS
Scout: He was a first-round pick right? Got a huge bonus?
KG: Oh yeah.
Scout: Well, he spent a lot of it on milkshakes.
by knockoutking on Feb 18, 2009 4:01 PM CST up reply actions
Josey
I guess I haven’t heard this argument, yet. Sorry everyone else. But considering Lofton had a better OPS than: MY, F-Cat, Cruz, Byrd, Vazquez, Kinsler, Laird, Wilkerson, and Sosa. Provided good range in CF. Was 21 for 25 in SB attempts. Yielded us one our best hitting prospects (who happens to be a catcher) in Max Ramirez, and financially cost us close to nothing…. How do you justify that?
I understand not supporting the Sosa signing (even though I liked it and was entertained by him), I think you have to be full-blown retard to not like the Lofton move.
He justifies it
because it was a Daniels move, that is reason enough not to respect it. If Daniels did it, the move sucked, period.
G G G E-flat_______ F F F D__________....
right
but had nolan said we had to do whatever we could do to get lofton in CF
he would LOVE the move because lofton has grit!
Scout: He was a first-round pick right? Got a huge bonus?
KG: Oh yeah.
Scout: Well, he spent a lot of it on milkshakes.
by knockoutking on Feb 19, 2009 11:53 AM CST up reply actions
His justification
is that since the team did bad and Lofton’s sole purpose was to help the team win games, Lofton was a bad signing.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
-The Outlaw
My justification is that we have a small market payroll
spending $ 6 million on a 40 year old CF was dumb if the goal was to help your team improve.
My choice was to spend the money on a starting pitcher (Lilly/Meche) instead of on a 40 year old CF and broken down relief pitcher.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
by Josey Wales on Feb 19, 2009 12:03 PM CST up reply actions
meche is not as good as you think he is
say it with me
Scout: He was a first-round pick right? Got a huge bonus?
KG: Oh yeah.
Scout: Well, he spent a lot of it on milkshakes.
by knockoutking on Feb 19, 2009 12:05 PM CST up reply actions
Meche would be our ace
and he’s not bad for the price.
Made 68 starts in two years with 45/68 Game Scores 50+.
Rangers win 70-75% of their games when they get a Game Score 50+ in the last two years.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
by Josey Wales on Feb 19, 2009 12:12 PM CST up reply actions
Bad example because
Gamescore is an inexact metric that is not normalized. To many thing when you change park to park.
Lets not forget that Kaufman deflates HR’s to about 11% below league average or roughly 20% below the Ballpark in Arlington.
That is like using the argument that that Texas should have acquired Meche because of the number of Quality Stars he has made the last few years. Not a good indicator. Meche has had more Quality starts the last year than Lester, so he is a better pitcher?
Sorry, already discussed this you before. You belief in GS as a tell all metric has major holes in it. It is not a comparative metric. For that matter what is the league average W% according to the metric?
That is like saying my company has a profit margin at 2.1% last year.Without a comparative industry metric as a benchmark it has absolutely no comparative value.
It's impossible to say exactly how Meche would have done
if he was in Texas the last two years but we do know he was a very good pitcher for a bad team in KC.
We also know the decisions that JD made regarding last year’s pitching staff resulted in 967 runs allowed.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
That is not answer
that is an attempt to not answer the question
What is the benchmark for W% league wide in that slot of GS?
You don’t know. It is obvious you don’t, because GS is not a metric that baseball databases keep for league wide use. Never use something in a presentation you don’t know the answer for.
One part has no relevance with the other. If you don’t have the answer admit to it move on. All this does is make you lose whatever creditability your argument was generating.
Until you stop trying to mix and match different metrics to attempt to prove a point, no will take you seriously.
WTF would you hang your hat
on such a flawed metric? I mean, this isn’t something new…Win Shares have proven to be bullshit, that is exactly why they are not supported industry wide.
"...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
Yes we can! November 04, 2008
WTF would you hang your hat
on such a flawed metric? I mean, this isn’t something new…Win Shares have proven to be bullshit, that is exactly why they are not supported industry wide.
"...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
Yes we can! November 04, 2008
Those pitchers
got much more than $6 for one year, though, that’s apples to oranges.
G G G E-flat_______ F F F D__________....
Lofton & Gagne received $ 14 million
Meche, Lilly were at $ 11 million per.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
by Josey Wales on Feb 19, 2009 12:13 PM CST up reply actions
Lofton and Gagne
were both one year deals, and both netted nice returns in trade. Meche and Lilly got multi-year deals, apples to oranges. You could argue that the team should have been signing pitchers to multi-year deals, but then you’re arguing for them to sign more Millwoods for similarly large contracts.
Let’s compare:
Committing $95 million over multiple years for average pitching
Committing $11 million for one year for well above production and then converting that to multiple young players with major league ceilings who are controllable cheaply for years to come.
Daniels made a slam dunk deal in each case and you just won’t admit it. Signing Meche and Lilly would have been ok, too. But you just cannot say he made a bad decision signing Lofton and Gagne unless you’re simply being obtuse.
G G G E-flat_______ F F F D__________....
Gabbard is useless and if you
shake a tree four DMurphys will fall out.
The rest of those deals come down to Beltre & Max v. four years of affordable, quality ready for The Show major league pitching.
If the Rangers sign either Meche or Lilly before 2007, they don’t feel compelled to make the boneheaded trade of John Danks for McCarthy.
Possibly they also don’t feel compelled to make the boneheaded signing of JJennings ($ 4.5 million!!!) and beyond boneheaded DFA of Galarraga before 2008.
Gee, I wonder how the Rangers would have done last year if they’d had Lilly/Meche and JDanks (and maybe Galarraga) in their rotation instead of Kason Bleeping Gabbard?
Also, when Padilla / Millwood leave next year, the Rangers will be looking for guess what….. affordable, quality ready for The Show major league starting pitching.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
by Josey Wales on Feb 19, 2009 12:37 PM CST up reply actions
wrong
it comes down to:
a pro-rated portion of 11 mil & Beltre & Max v. four years of affordable, quality ready for The Show major league pitching + 95 mil
please for the love of god stop using galarraga and lilly/meche as examples of “good” pitching.
just…please.
Scout: He was a first-round pick right? Got a huge bonus?
KG: Oh yeah.
Scout: Well, he spent a lot of it on milkshakes.
by knockoutking on Feb 19, 2009 12:45 PM CST up reply actions
Danks
I know the Danks/McCarthy trade looks bad. Danks has pitched well for the White Sox and McCarthy has sustained substantial loss of service time due to injury.
I do think it is important to point out that Danks success at the major league level has been attributed to adding a pitch (I believe a cutter) that he wasn’t throwing, or wasn’t throwing well, in the Rangers farm system. Danks most likely isn’t the same pitcher if he stays in the Rangers system. This isn’t to say he wouldn’t have succeeded here, it is just saying that you can’t make a direct comparison.
I think this is an important point to consider when judging the Danks trade. Plus, injuries happen. It could have just as likely happened to Danks if he stayed than to McCarthy.
Maude Lebowski: Lord. You can imagine where it goes from here.
The Dude: He fixes the cable?
I agree with one statement
JD won’t make an all-in move this season to put the Rangers over the top if they have an outside chance at the division. That’s why they likely won’t win the West. I can also see JD trading Blalock but not Milly or Padilla unless it’s a very good deal.
All that said, Fox isn’t considering any of this. They really don’t know jack about baseball. Once you get past the top ten they just throw together the bottom 20.
Lofton played well
after Memorial Day (Rangers were 18-31) but was fairly mediocre until then.
It shouldn’t be surprising to anybody that he wasn’t on a major league team in 2008.
It was a dumb signing if JD’s goal was to help the 2007 team get better.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
You know, it is interesting...
You are a big believer in Bill James.
Yet, you also tend to put a lot of emphasis on “so-and-so only played well when the pressure wasn’t on.”
And James has been one of the biggest debunkers of the idea of clutchness. I doubt James is nearly as dismissive of performances by a player when the team is out of the race as you are.
by Adam J. Morris on Feb 18, 2009 1:39 PM CST up reply actions
AJM, when have you ever seen me write about the clutchness of players
muchless put a lot of “emphasis” on it?
I don’t know of another player other than Lofton where I have talked about his performance when his team was out of the race. The wisdom of signing Gagne has been kicked around but mostly in context with Lofton because they were signed in the same off-season.
You obviously do believe I have said so because I put an “emphasis” on the concept so please share with the rest of the class.
Asked to evaluate the individual signing of Kenny Lofton and what he meant to the Rangers I have to parse his season because the Rangers played so poorly in his first two months with the team and then picked it up when he saw a chance to get traded.
I was against the signing from the outset because it was a small market payroll team giving $ 6 million to a 40 year old CF asked to hit lead-off and patrol one of the larger OFs in MLB.
I didn’t think it was going to work out very well (I was right) because 40 year old players almost never help bad teams win.
It was a foolish signing if the goal was to help that team win but give JD credit for getting a nice prospect in return.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
You're halfway to enlightenment...
You say “It was a foolish signing if the goal was to help that team win but give JD credit for getting a nice prospect in return.”
From all contemporaneous accounts, JD’s goal was to sign “flippable” guys. He signed one and flipped him quite nicely. So, HowTF is that a foolish signing again?
bking
Those boys thought they were going to make the playoffs in 2007.
Hence, the boneheaded trade of JDanks (who they considered a year or two away from being ready for The Show) for BMcCarthy (who they thought was ready for The Show).
I remember nothing being discussed by anybody regarding the practice of “flipping” either Lofton or Gagne until it became obvious how poorly this team was constructed and how badly they played.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
Then you remember wrong.....
It was discussed at length by my recollection.
Why would they trade a prized prospect
they considered a year away from being ready for somebody they considered to be ready?
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
Danks was only really prized by Chicago
He was high on our farm because our farm was pretty barren. Danks was not a great prospect. Stop distorting the actual facts of what Danks was when we traded him.
Danks was part of a package that
was almost dealt for the year previous (for Josh Beckett) by Florida.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
So...
Danks was prized by more than just the White Sox.
The trade was made with the White Sox because JD thought the Rangers were going to contend in 2007.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
Methinks he doesn't remember...
…that Blalock was going to be the centerpiece of that deal, not Danks.
My 2009 New Years Resolution: Quit feeding the trolls.
Who knows what Blalock's value was
after throwing down a .658 OPS in the second half of 2005?
Danks was a prized prospect after that year…who was the centerpiece? Hard to say.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
It's not hard to say...
…when you do research.
http://www.lonestarball.com/2005/11/19/12645/125
Apparently, Hank Blalock and either John Danks or Thomas Diamond would go to the Marlins for Josh Beckett and Mike Lowell.
My 2009 New Years Resolution: Quit feeding the trolls.
your wrong
he was part of an offer we made
they didnt "almost trade for hIM’ – they used us, and our phantom offer of danks/blalock to get boston to trade the player they really wanted and had targeted from the beginning – hanley ramirez
Scout: He was a first-round pick right? Got a huge bonus?
KG: Oh yeah.
Scout: Well, he spent a lot of it on milkshakes.
by knockoutking on Feb 18, 2009 4:02 PM CST up reply actions
That's a separate argument and you know it.
The question on the table is whether or not signing Gagne and Lofton was part of a plan that included competing AND having flippable vets if they were out of it. By all accounts that I, and most others here IMO, recall is that the signings had a dual purpose from the outset. Since one of the goals was clearly met, the deal was a smart one – there simply isn’t any way you can objectively arrive at a different judgement.
As for trading Danks, I asked JD about that very thing at Newberg night that year, and his answer was that they viewed BMac as having the higher ceiling as well as being closer. If that was their opinion, then it isn’t “just” a win-now decision, is it? Keep in mind that this answer came well before Danks broke out; it was during his rough rookie year.
Publicly,
the Rangers made it clear they believed they were going to contend in 2007.
What they thought behind closed doors is quite another thing but I don’t believe they thought their team would have a 23-42 start.
They may now say the plan all along was to flip Lofton & Gagne to cover their asses but that’s not something we can validate.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
Validation
I find it odd that we are even asking for validation on the issue. When you sign those kind of players, and I will soon define what I mean by those kind of players, you are insane to not consider them potential trade pieces when considering them for a contract.
Kenny Lofton was going into his 40’s for the 2007 season after putting up a respectable .301/.360/.403 season in centerfield with the Dodgers on a one year deal.
Eric Gagne was coming off a major injury which limited him to two games with the Dogers the season before.
Both players were signed to one-year deals at $6 million, showing the Rangers (and clearly all of baseball) did not want the risk of giving either of them a multi-year.
We don’t need validation to show that the Rangers would consider them as potential trade pieces regardless of the team’s brass’ feelings regarding their ability to compete. If the team does perform and they are playing well you received a great value on significant pieces towards your playoff run. If the team does not perform and they play well you have a great trade piece to a contender which cost you very little in terms of cost and length of contract. If they do not perform well, well you recognized the risk at the beginning and cut them, salary dump them, or let them play out their contract and let them walk.
This is sensible and smart baseball stategy. Who needs validation, it just makes sense.
Maude Lebowski: Lord. You can imagine where it goes from here.
The Dude: He fixes the cable?
I swear to God...
I feel like Andy Dufresne talking to the warden —"How can you be so obtuse? "
There is no one (aside from you) that I am aware of that did not see those players as flippable from the moment they were signed.
I am also one of the few people
that properly assessed that mess JD built before 2007 as epic failure before it hit the starting gate.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
And you're definitely on record for it, too!
Wait…
My 2009 New Years Resolution: Quit feeding the trolls.
and that somehow makes every assessment of yours as pearl??
I gotta dig out something I got right and use that to justify everything else I ever say. That would be sooooo cool.
bking
I’ll strike out once in a while but even you would have to begrudgingly agree my assessments of where this team stood since before 2004 have been better than most.
Yes, Josey Wales did fly in the face of conventional wisdom before the 2004 season that said the Rangers would lose 90-100 games (Evan Grant predicted 95 losses) and said that team, sans ARod would finish above .500. 20 games into that season I flew deepter into the clouds of conventional wisdom and said they’d win 88-92 games (they finished 89-73).
After 2004, I screamed from the highest mountain-tops that the behavior of Tom Hicks would have longstanding ramifications that this team would have major difficulty recovering from and whaddya know…four more years of sub .500 ball.
I kept preaching all winter long this year that the moves or lack thereof this team made ensured another bad season (much to the chagrin of others) but whaddya know, PECOTA confirmed everything I’ve been preaching this off-season and expects us to finish 72-90.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
by Josey Wales on Feb 19, 2009 11:30 AM CST up reply actions
After 2004, I screamed from the highest mountain-tops that the behavior of Tom Hicks would have longstanding ramifications that this team would have major difficulty recovering from and whaddya know…four more years of sub .500 ball.
who was a fan of hicks behavior in, the last 5 or so years
just as a question
Scout: He was a first-round pick right? Got a huge bonus?
KG: Oh yeah.
Scout: Well, he spent a lot of it on milkshakes.
by knockoutking on Feb 19, 2009 11:54 AM CST up reply actions
What should the Rangers have done this offseason that they didn't?
Don’t say Buchholtz, bc of they could have, they would have.
also
bmac wanted to start, ozzie wanted him in the pen = friction = ozzie gets (got?) whathe wanted
Scout: He was a first-round pick right? Got a huge bonus?
KG: Oh yeah.
Scout: Well, he spent a lot of it on milkshakes.
by knockoutking on Feb 18, 2009 4:03 PM CST up reply actions
bking is right that it was discussed at length
I remember you repeatedly derided all the prospects that JD got as " magic beans " That little phrase seems to have fallen out of your vocabulary as so many of the " magic beans " have turned out to be pretty good players
Come on, ‘fess up. You are really Granpa Urine, aren’t you?
"magic beans" were what we received for Gagne, Tex
and Lofton.
I didn’t deride the prospects (too many variables) but I would have liked major league ready players.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
Gagne, Tex, Lofton
Kason Gabbard, David Murphy, and Jarrod Saltalamacchia all went right onto the 25-man roster after being acquired.
Seems like that’s three “major-league ready” players right there.
"I dont care to debate with a troll." - Sharky
but they are magic beans
how can that be! too many variables! minor leaguers! prospects can flame out! abolish the minor league system as a whole!
Scout: He was a first-round pick right? Got a huge bonus?
KG: Oh yeah.
Scout: Well, he spent a lot of it on milkshakes.
by knockoutking on Feb 19, 2009 7:50 AM CST up reply actions
Aside from Sheets (before the injury news)
What FA’s did you realistically think could help the team, and that JD should have targeted?
CC wasn’t coming here.
Burnett wasn’t coming here (thank god too; writers aren’t talking about his prevalent injury history at all)
Perez?
Lowe?
Dunn?
Abreu?
Scott Feldman for 2009 AL Cy Young
Scott Feldman for 2010 AL Scott Feldman
im interested in this answer as well.
Scout: He was a first-round pick right? Got a huge bonus?
KG: Oh yeah.
Scout: Well, he spent a lot of it on milkshakes.
by knockoutking on Feb 18, 2009 1:57 PM CST up reply actions
Um, duh, he should've just traded Salty for Buchholz, obviously.
The 40 Trumps All!!!
I hate Michael Young.
"I don’t have any respect for anybody on here. Everyone on here is a fucking asshole who thinks they’re god compared to everyone else." -iorange555, throwing one of his patented sandy-vagina'd hissy fits.
by thedirkatron on Feb 18, 2009 4:09 PM CST up reply actions
Well I had that trade down too
problem is, you apparently can’t use your PS3 memory card to update player rosters in real life…
Scott Feldman for 2009 AL Cy Young
Scott Feldman for 2010 AL Scott Feldman
I think winning the west.
Not that I would bet on either happening, but I think being a .500-ish team with 5 or so fluke wins and winning a weak division is more likely than being one of the five worst teams.
If you need an objective measure we’ll take 3rd order wins.
i gagree
"This report of my death was an exaggeration"--Mark Twain
by rangerdanger on Feb 18, 2009 6:57 PM CST up reply actions
We have last year's team
and lost Milton Bradley, one of our better hitters, and picked up Andrus/Vizquel and maybe Jones.
I don’t see why the team wouldn’t be a bad team.
I hope we see big defensive improvements, because thats the only way I see the team being even mediocre. However, there doesn’t appear to be better pitching than last year or better hitting than last year.
Get off my lawn.
Yeah, but through the unwavering faith of true believers like you Cahill, I don’t see how they could possibly avoid winning an extra 10 games this season. The positive energy you bring to the table just blows away those insignificant factors like “pitching” and “defense”.
They’re going to win because you’ll be sitting at every game in your new red Mike Young jersey cheering them on with boyish energy and unshakable zeal. They are the dynamite, but you are the match. Light it, my friend. Light it.
Yeah
Thinkin’ the same way. With great health they might win 83 or something – most likely in the high 70s again..
The moves being made are too extra for my taste.
And I would like to add that even if we win a few more games with better seasons from Millwood and say, McCarthy, you still have to think that this isn't going to be a lop-sided division like it was last year.
The A’s are better. The M’s are a lot better.
We might steal a few more games from the Angels this year, but the other two teams are sure to steal a few from us.
You just don't know when to keep your mouth shut, do you Saxy boy?
by oc on Feb 18, 2009 1:33 PM CST up reply actions
Why are the M's alot better?
"My mother always taught me that if the only thing you have to say is,
‘(Expletive) Dave Samson,’ then don’t say anything at all.
So I’m not going to say anything at all.
Is my mother the greatest or what?"
- Mariners GM Bill Bavasi, after signing Ichiro to a $90 million contract
That might be the fastest outfield in the American League, if not all of baseball.
Cedeno is an upgrade over Betancourt.
I think the Russell Branyan signing was a smart one. I think Bedard rebounds and Beltre busts the fuck out.
You just don't know when to keep your mouth shut, do you Saxy boy?
by oc on Feb 18, 2009 1:39 PM CST up reply actions
Cedeno
An upgrade how? Defensively?
As bad a hitter as Betancourt is, Cedeno’s worse, and he’s only a year younger.
As for the outfield, Chavez and Gutierrez can’t hit, and Ichiro is getting older.
Branyan hasn’t had a 250 at-bat season in the majors since 2002, though not all of that’s his fault.
The M’s may have good pitching and defense, but their lineup is terrible, and they’re going to have to win a lot of low-scoring games to even break .500.
"I dont care to debate with a troll." - Sharky
Cedeno
He might be a borderline AAAA player, but he’s only 25 and has been sharing playing time on one of the deeper rosters in baseball for the last four years.
I don’t think you can write him off when he has only one full season under his belt. He might turn into nothing, but he’s an upgrade over Betancourt who has been given nothing but playing time and hasn’t gotten any better.
And who was also arguably the worst shortstop in baseball last year.
And if you look at years past, you can see there’s a noticable trend downward.
Also, Branyan is going to have a field day being a lefty at Safeco. Just a hunch.
You just don't know when to keep your mouth shut, do you Saxy boy?
by oc on Feb 18, 2009 3:09 PM CST up reply actions
Beltre
Contract year?
"My mother always taught me that if the only thing you have to say is,
‘(Expletive) Dave Samson,’ then don’t say anything at all.
So I’m not going to say anything at all.
Is my mother the greatest or what?"
- Mariners GM Bill Bavasi, after signing Ichiro to a $90 million contract
It worked in LA.
You just don't know when to keep your mouth shut, do you Saxy boy?
by oc on Feb 18, 2009 3:10 PM CST up reply actions
I think the Ms
are still a bad team.
The only thing that is a saving grace for the Rangers is the AL West has a decent chance to be the worst division in baseball if this is the year that the Angels age catches up to them.
Get off my lawn.
Why do you think the M's are still a bad team?
You just don't know when to keep your mouth shut, do you Saxy boy?
by oc on Feb 18, 2009 1:42 PM CST up reply actions
How have they gotten better?
Is adding Gutierrez really worth 20 wins in the standings?
There are plenty of reasons to like the M's next year.
Their OF defense went from okay to superb by subtracting Ibanez and adding Gutierrez and Chavez.
Cedeno isn’t a golden god, but he’s a billion times better than Betancourt, who was a black hole in all aspects of the game.
A full year of Brandon Morrow.
A full year of Jeff Clement.
Maybe some actual healthy starts from Eric Bedard.
Possible improvements from Jose Lopez and F-Her.
There are plenty of reasons to expect some improvement from Seattle.
The 40 Trumps All!!!
I hate Michael Young.
"I don’t have any respect for anybody on here. Everyone on here is a fucking asshole who thinks they’re god compared to everyone else." -iorange555, throwing one of his patented sandy-vagina'd hissy fits.
by thedirkatron on Feb 18, 2009 4:15 PM CST up reply actions
The Ms also have a new manager.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
And a new hitting instructor.
Under Cockrell’s guidance in 2007, the Rockies finished first in the National League with a .280 team batting average, while the club also led the league in hits and on-base percentage.
You just don't know when to keep your mouth shut, do you Saxy boy?
by oc on Feb 18, 2009 4:24 PM CST up reply actions
If Morrow's transition works out well
And Clement actually hits in the ML, then that would be a very good start to improving.
"My mother always taught me that if the only thing you have to say is,
‘(Expletive) Dave Samson,’ then don’t say anything at all.
So I’m not going to say anything at all.
Is my mother the greatest or what?"
- Mariners GM Bill Bavasi, after signing Ichiro to a $90 million contract
Sure
Improvement can be expected, but IMO they have the potential to improve from a very bad team to a team that doesn’t suck as much, but is still bad.
They improved their outfield defense, their SS sucks a little less and they have some young/injured guys with some potential. Sounds like they’ve improved but are still far from a serious threat.
but what do they do if clement only starts half the games at C
and has negative value on defense there
or decide to move morrow back to the pen
there a LOT of variables there
Scout: He was a first-round pick right? Got a huge bonus?
KG: Oh yeah.
Scout: Well, he spent a lot of it on milkshakes.
by knockoutking on Feb 19, 2009 7:51 AM CST up reply actions
why do you think they are a better team than last year
where have they improved, on the field
their best player is a year older (ichiro)
their “ace” – bedard – has injury problems
king felix is better
they still are not sure what they are doing with morrow
they return one player who hit over 25 hr (beltre)
they haev a NOT good catcher (jojhima) who blocks a better player (clement)
their best young hitter is jose lopez (who had never topped a 90 OPS+ before this last year)
they traded their “closer” – putz
their best hitting prospect (halman) has the “highest” bust potential on KG’s top 100 (according to him)
how are they better than last year?
Scout: He was a first-round pick right? Got a huge bonus?
KG: Oh yeah.
Scout: Well, he spent a lot of it on milkshakes.
by knockoutking on Feb 18, 2009 2:05 PM CST up reply actions
I think you're overdramatizing some of these points.
First, they know exactly what they’re doing with Morrow.
Next, Zduriencik has said that Branyan will get a lot of playing time this year. Most projections only have him playing half of a season. I can see him easily hitting 25 – 30 homers.
I don’t think the Johjima / Clement thing will be a big deal. Clement will get playing time on Johjima’s off-days or as a DH. Playing time is the key thing for Clement. He’s always mashed at Tacoma… it’s just a matter of getting it down in the big-leagues. I think he knows he needs to have a big season.
Same thing for Bedard.
I don’t know how Ichiro getting older has anything to with anything. He’s only a year removed from having one of his best seasons ever. If last year was a down year for Ichiro, it was still a pretty good year. He might be on the decline but there is nothing to indicate that he’ll suddenly start hitting like shit.
And I don’t really see what your trying to say with Halman. If you want to boast that the Mariners don’t have any impact rookies, so be it. But they have three starters who would probably be an ace on this team.
Did I mention their outfield is fast?
You just don't know when to keep your mouth shut, do you Saxy boy?
by oc on Feb 18, 2009 3:42 PM CST up reply actions
The M's outfield
Who cares if they’re fast, if they can’t hit?
But if the M’s want to give 500-600 AB’s apiece to Chavez and Gutierrez, hey, so much the better for the rest of the AL West.
Branyan probably will hit 30 HR if he plays full-time, but he’ll also hit .250 and strike out close to 200 times. And unlike Jack Cust and Adam Dunn, Branyan won’t walk 100 times to make up for his lack of contact.
"I dont care to debate with a troll." - Sharky
Gutierrez has the potential to hit, and the defensive improvement from swapping Ibanez for Chavez/Gutierrez is hard to overstate.
The 40 Trumps All!!!
I hate Michael Young.
"I don’t have any respect for anybody on here. Everyone on here is a fucking asshole who thinks they’re god compared to everyone else." -iorange555, throwing one of his patented sandy-vagina'd hissy fits.
by thedirkatron on Feb 18, 2009 4:17 PM CST up reply actions
Pictures are worth a thousand words
Look what happens to the scoreboard at the end of the last clip.
You just don't know when to keep your mouth shut, do you Saxy boy?
by oc on Feb 18, 2009 4:30 PM CST up reply actions
but do they replace ibanez on offense/overall?
Scout: He was a first-round pick right? Got a huge bonus?
KG: Oh yeah.
Scout: Well, he spent a lot of it on milkshakes.
by knockoutking on Feb 19, 2009 7:56 AM CST up reply actions
"Branyan probably will hit 30 HR if he plays full-time"
I don’t see that happening if he’s not able to avoid left handers.
Purgatory's kind of like the in-betweeny one. You weren't really shit, but you weren't all that great either. Like Tottenham.
There's like four lefty starters in the West.
Harrison, Saunders, Eveland, Smith…
You just don't know when to keep your mouth shut, do you Saxy boy?
by oc on Feb 18, 2009 4:36 PM CST up reply actions
Smith was traded to the Rox.
"It doesn't look like he's trying. It kinda pisses me off," "He could throw 110 if he tried. The way it explodes out of his hand is really something special." ~ B-Mac on Feliz.
by Kinslerhomer on Feb 18, 2009 4:37 PM CST up reply actions
Branyan
Over the last three seasons, he has 536 total AB’s, and has hit 40 HR (and struck out exactly 200 times) so I don’t think 30 is out of the question should he get 500 AB’s this year.
"I dont care to debate with a troll." - Sharky
I don't think it's out of the question either
But also I don’t think it’s likely. He’s had 74 AB’s against LH’s in that same three year span. If he gets 500 AB’s this year, then you have to assume that a much higher percentage will come against lefties.
My guess would be low 20’s. But you’re right, I wouldn’t be completely shocked if he hit 30.
Purgatory's kind of like the in-betweeny one. You weren't really shit, but you weren't all that great either. Like Tottenham.
where is brayan going to play
1b/DH?
also are they going to carry 3 catchers so they can DH clement and play jojhima at C?
bedard just neeeds to be healthy, buy with labrum problems you NEVER know
ichrio is just a year older – that matters one way or another
just saying halman (their “top prospect” isnt likely to impact the majors this year, saunders is more likely to do taht)
Scout: He was a first-round pick right? Got a huge bonus?
KG: Oh yeah.
Scout: Well, he spent a lot of it on milkshakes.
by knockoutking on Feb 19, 2009 7:55 AM CST up reply actions
The Ms are a bad team
but would you be shocked to see them win 70 games?
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
2008
Anyone remember where the Rays were ranked this time last year? How about the Phillies?
Anyone have Fox’s 2008 rankings?
Anyone remember where the Cowboys were ranked in August?
PECOTA saw massive improvement in Tampa
and projected them to win 89 games last year (after finishing 66-96 in 2007). Shortchanged them by 8 wins.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
by Josey Wales on Feb 18, 2009 12:57 PM CST up reply actions
And they didn't really shortchange them much.
Tampa outperformed their pythag and third order by a few.
This is the spreadsheet I was referencing
http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=paSrlgPH0UHto1JLWa1-pQQ
Agreed that they weren’t shortchanged that much because of pythag.
Point being, PECOTA is something not to be dismissed, even if what they’re saying makes you upset.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
Deviations
03:-12 – 7%
04: + 14 – 9%
05:0
06:0
07:-5 – 3%
08:+5 – 3%
I don’t know if I’d take pecota as gospel.
"...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
Yes we can! November 04, 2008
I don't think PECOTA is gospel
but they obviously know a helluva lot more than most, including hopelessly optimistic Ranger cheerleaders.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
Standard deviation on the Rangers
is +/- 6 per year.
Standard deviation of all MLB since ’03-07: 5.6
It is a projection system, that is it. Not flawless, at all. It’s nice, but imperfect – and I’m glad it is, so we can enjoy watching the games.
However, 72 to 80 wins is not a huge stretch, given PECOTA is historically 6 games +/- on their Ranger’s prediction.
"...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
Yes we can! November 04, 2008
Yeah, but they nailed the Rangers on the nose
in 2005 & 2006.
What screwed the average were the wild ass projections of ’03 & ’04.
They have a much better handle on this team now.
72-90 seems to be a pretty good bet with this team, currently constructed.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
Re: They have a much better handle on this team now.
How’s that, they were 5 games low in 2008? They averaged +/- 5.6 games error across MLB from 03-07. Are you implying PECOTA pays extra special attention to the Rangers?
That’s flawed logic, lead by your loathing of this management team/owner.
"...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
Yes we can! November 04, 2008
I thought you were saying their
margin of error with the Rangers was 5.6 – my mistake.
I think PECOTA has the Rangers wired and I cannot argue with their 72-90 projection.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
But, 78 is not a crazy number
given historical data, right?
"...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
Yes we can! November 04, 2008
Not crazy
but fairly optimistic.
Currently constructed, I’m thinking the range of the team sits more between 68-76.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
does that mean.....
that should the Rangers not add anybody else to the team before the season starts that your prediction will be 72-90?
I'm by no means expecting this team to win the division.
But I think 83 wins is a very reasonable expectation.
My 2009 New Years Resolution: Quit feeding the trolls.
No offense. . .
. . . but as an expectation, I think that’s pretty optimistic.
Though Goldstein said early in the off-season we should expect to be above .500, so you have other smart people on your side at least.
I don't think its too optimistic
This team was nearly .500 last year and spent most of the season going a game ahead and a game below .500. Pretty much, if the Rangers are just as good as they were last year in pitching and hitting, I think the defensive improvements made this offseason are enough to make a .500 prediction (or 83 win prediction) pretty reasonable.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
-The Outlaw
Maybe a bit optimistic
But looking at this team right now and just assuming (and this one is tough for us Ranger fans) that Byrd and Murphy will be fine by opening day, do you think you could really argue that it isn’t reasonable to set the bar at .500?
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
-The Outlaw
I'd call it the high end of reasonable.
And I’d call 71 or so the low end of reasonable. So I’d probably take the middle as my expectation.
The spreadsheet I’ve been working on has them at less than a 20% chance of winning 83 games. Considering that’s slightly more optimistic than PECOTA or CHONE, I see no reason to expect at least 83 wins.
Problem is
The Rangers ARE losing some hitting in that Bradley and his 37-40 Runs Above Average of Offense are no longer here.
That’s 4 wins by itself. And both Kinsler and Hamilton had very good years in which they could potentially regress.
Now granted, some of that might be offset by Cruz breaking out and the fielding improving AND the pitching improving, but that’s a lot of things to bank on.
R
I think expecting a full season of Crush to even make up for Board Game is also optimistic.
Again, that doesn’t mean anyone should think it’s impossible. That means it’s optimistic to expect it.
A somewhat healthy Blalock
can help put a dent in losing Bradley. If he is playing like he has these past couple of years, then you probably are only losing about 10-15 runs throughout the season which can be easily made up by a full season of Davis over the Broussard/Shelton/Botts experiment at 1B last season (which Fangraphs has at a -10.8 wRAA fueled by Broussard’s -8 wRAA).
Kinsler might regress a little since his power numbers were much higher than his past couple of years. That could easily be a legitimate improvement from Kinsler as none of his other stats show that he was getting particularly lucky in any way. I can’t see Hamilton regressing any though. Yeah, its possible, but he really wasn’t that great last year. In his rookie season, he put up pretty much an equally great line as he did with the Rangers and you also are looking at a very special talent entering his prime years while gaining more experience in the league. I’m expecting him to actually improve significantly this season.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
-The Outlaw
Broussard/Shelton/Botts
had less ABs combined than Chris Davis last year.
I just don’t see the numbers adding up.
Get off my lawn.
Look at the bottom line
Davis over Broussard/Shelton/Botts is a huge improvement on the total runs scored as well as a pretty nice improvement in the runs prevented department. And don’t you think having Davis last April would have helped out a lot to prevent that 10-18 start?
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
-The Outlaw
You are talking about
less than a third of a season when you take away the ridiculous trio of Broussard/Shelton/Botts. Getting rid of those 200 ABs is more than offset by losing Milton Bradley’s 400+ ABs.
Your theory also relies on Blalock’s ability to be somewhat healthy, when he hasn’t had a solid full season in almost five years.
Get off my lawn.
A lot of the offensive gains
will circle the drain because of the #s our SS’s will put up.
Ranger SS in 08 – 14 HR & 88 RBI .283/.339/.408
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
And there will be an offensive loss
at 3B as well…
Ranger 3B in 2008 – 21 HR & 90 RBI .281/.339/.469
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
as a question
7 HR lost at 3b and about the same stats across the board
+ davis with a full year
+ (in theory) a healthy blalock for a full year
+ better offense and defense from the catcher
+ better defense at SS (even with the dropoff in offense if elvis plays 75% of the year, overall how many runs does he have to save to be worth as much as FOTF was last year?)
yes, losing bradley was pretty big but i think that IF you have davis all year + blalock all year + the bump from the catchers spot your replace that production (grated a lot of IFs)
i think the loss of 7 HR at 3b will be made up by (more than) +7 HR at 1b between blalock and davis so call that a wash
the major problem (on offense) will be the loss of offensive gains at SS if elvis plays all year – but thats my biggest question, how good does elvis have to be on defense to be worth as much as michael young was at SS last year?
Scout: He was a first-round pick right? Got a huge bonus?
KG: Oh yeah.
Scout: Well, he spent a lot of it on milkshakes.
by knockoutking on Feb 19, 2009 9:43 AM CST up reply actions
(in theory) a healthy blalock for a full year
That’s one helluva theory.
Also, it really doesn’t matter how much of the year Elvis plays. Whether he or Vizquel is manning SS, offensive output is going to be kind of grim.
I think anyone planning on the offense being as good or better than last year are in for a rude awakening. The only hope is that Runs Allowed drops significantly from last year.
There is no question they had to retool their Defense, because there is no path to a winning club if you give up 960 runs. You just can’t outhit that.
Get off my lawn.
I think anyone planning on the offense being as good or better than last year are in for a rude awakening.
planning is probably bad, yes
but the way i see it:
upgraded offense at catcher
upgraded offense in corner of w/ cruz
upgraded defense at 3b/SS
upgraded offense at 1b
no the offense at catcher, say its minimal – they average 100 ops+ points
say that the upgraded offense at 1b negates the “downgraded” offense at 3b
the upgraded offense in a OF corner (cruz) is better than we had last year
you still miss bradley quite a bit
but if you have pretty good defense at SS btwn vizquel and andrus you have a player thats not worth a TON less than michael young
so essentially you lose bradley – how much of an impact does that have on your roster is the big question to me
Scout: He was a first-round pick right? Got a huge bonus?
KG: Oh yeah.
Scout: Well, he spent a lot of it on milkshakes.
by knockoutking on Feb 19, 2009 9:57 AM CST up reply actions
I also think this team is going to K
a helluva lot.
Salty & TT – K’d 93 times in less than 300 pa’s
Davis K’d – 88 times in little more than 300 pa’s
Young – 109 Ks
Josh – 126 Ks
Cruz – 147 Ks in 600 career pa’s
Blalock – 123 Ks per 162 games in his MLB career
Andrus – 91 Ks in 118 games at AA
This makes me wonder (especially with Vizquel / Andrus in the line-up) if we’re going to see Wash try to put his stamp on the team and “manage” i.e., lots of sac bunts.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
by Josey Wales on Feb 19, 2009 10:16 AM CST up reply actions
I doubt we'll see any more sac bunts than we have in the past
The only exception might be with Andrus/Vizquel. They’ll probably be bunting more simply because they just aren’t that good and if you could bunt the ball, move the runner over, and take your chances with them legging out a single, I think that’s probably a decent move.
And the A’s K’d 1227 times last year and don’t look to do much better this year. Are you concerned that the A’s will strike out a helluva lot?
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
-The Outlaw
I'm not a fan of the A's
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
by Josey Wales on Feb 19, 2009 10:34 AM CST up reply actions
But don't you think that Billy Beane knows what he is doing?
And that if he thought K’s were a serious problem, that he would do something about it?
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
-The Outlaw
K's aren't that big of a deal
unless your eternally dimwitted and very affordable manager feels he needs to “manufacture” runs and start giving away outs.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
I know, right?
I can’t believe Nolan Ryan didn’t fire Ron Washington.
My 2009 New Years Resolution: Quit feeding the trolls.
Rangers 3B in 2008 were good
You are losing some power, but as long as Young returns to hitting .300, you are still looking at an OPS pretty close to what Young was able to do in 2007 when he was healthy thanks to a much higher OBP.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
-The Outlaw
I'm confused every time you talk about losing offense at 3B
Aren’t all the guys (for the most part) going to be playing other positions? That being the case, we’re not really losng their offense, are we?
Blalock's not throwing from 3B anymore
A lot of his problems in the past have been related to his shoulder which won’t be pushed too hard if he is DHing. And haven’t we run out of strange syndromes for Blalock to go through?
And that less than a 1/3 of the season, that 10-18 start, hurt the team a lot. Give this team a .500 start through their first 28 games, and the Rangers finish the season 83-79 instead of 79-83. Is it really that hard for you to see the effect on a team 200 ABs of well below average performance can have as opposed to 200 ABs of well above average performance?
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
-The Outlaw
The 19-29 finish
of last season holds much more concern for me.
That’s a big red flag going forward.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
by Josey Wales on Feb 19, 2009 10:35 AM CST up reply actions
Buckyb
Don’t buy that bullshit about the injuries to Murphy, Kins, Wilson and trade of Eddie G being the reason the team finished 19-29.
When Kinsler went down the pythag record of the team was 59-65 and that will usually catch up with you (and it did).
Arias was a capable replacement and so were Cruz & Frank X after the injuries.
Teams that lead the league in E’s usually don’t finish above .500 and it wasn’t an accident this team finished 79-83.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
by Josey Wales on Feb 19, 2009 10:53 AM CST up reply actions
So you think losing our 2nd best offensive player/leadoff man, our closer, and a solid set-up man
Had no affect on the team morale? Did not explain a drop in offensive productivity? Sure Cruz put up solid numbers, but the team had clearly given up on the season and wasn’t playing hard. Anyone watching games midseason vs the end of the season would have noticed.
Last year's team was whistling thru
the graveyard all season.
There is no offense that can keep up with pitching & defense that piss poor and last year’s team finished exactly where they would have if afforded perfect health.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
by Josey Wales on Feb 19, 2009 11:03 AM CST up reply actions
Did you not get his reply?
Arias and his 100 OPS, 4/5 SB = Kinsler and his 134 OPS+, 26/28 SB
What else does he need to say?
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
-The Outlaw
Gdawg
I fully expect fans like YOU to believe the injuries were the reason why this team finished 19-29.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
by Josey Wales on Feb 19, 2009 11:06 AM CST up reply actions
No, it has to do
with the hopelessly optimistic Ranger fans who can’t properly assess their own team.
Instead of respecting that pythag told everybody how this team was really playing (and that teams who lead the league in Es rarely finish above .500) you look for other reasons this team finished with a 79-83 record.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
by Josey Wales on Feb 19, 2009 11:18 AM CST up reply actions
Name a team
that had more injuries than the Rangers last year.
G G G E-flat_______ F F F D__________....
I love it
Use a slightly more advanced statistic like Pythag. to support your claims, but ignore the more advanced version.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
-The Outlaw
tball,
Currently constructed and without a spring training behind us (meaning you’re not being locked down) what record do you see for the Rangers?
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
by Josey Wales on Feb 19, 2009 11:40 AM CST up reply actions
Right now
I’m guessing about 80-82. I think the offense will regress a bit, but that will be offset by better defense and healthier pitching — which will mean a less exhausted bullpen.
I think the ridiculous number of injuries last year meant the team had nothing left in September. The bullpen was wiped out and the entire team was running on fumes. I searched earlier but I can’t find a listing of injuries, but I know that the Rangers were at or near the top in DL days. The team did not have the depth necessary to overcome that rash of injuries.
The depth isn’t that much better, but I’m betting they won’t have that many injuries again. Better health means a lot. I think injuries might be the most important factor in deciding who wins all 3 AL divisions this year, since there are teams in each division that are a couple of injuries away from dropping out of contention.
G G G E-flat_______ F F F D__________....
78.7
Here is the link
2nd order wins had us right at 79 wins.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
-The Outlaw
Dude, listen to yourself
You’re using admittedly imperfect formulas to try and argue that replacing Kinsler with Arias didn’t affect the team.
I’m not arguing with you that our team outperformed what should have been expected. But half the reason that happened (if you watched the games), was a team of youthful hitting talent who was willing to come back from any deficit.
You take out Kinsler, who was our leadoff man, one of the team leaders, and played on par with the league MVP last year (while he was healthy), and replace him with a AAA player who is a slap hitter with no arm (and cost the Rangers countless double-plays last season), and you’re saying that what happened was the team just fatefully evened out with your Pythag theory.
We pitched with AA pitchers who weren’t ready. Not to mention, when teams fall out of playoff races, they inevitably play with less morale than when they’re in playoff races.
You’re a classic example of someone who has their view set and looks at everything as a validation of why they’re right.
Davis
I’m skeptical, I guess.
I don’t think he’ll be able to sustain a .353 BABIP especially now that pitchers have film on him and have had an offseason to study him.
But then again, I didn’t believe Howard or Kemp could sustain their BABIPs, and I’ve been wrong for all their years except Howard’s most recent one. Well, I guess Kemp didn’t sustain a .417 BABIP, but he did have a .363 BABIP last year….
R
Well the Yankees are #1
I guess we shouldn’t even play this season. The rankings are air-tight and sound as can be.
Scott Feldman for 2009 AL Cy Young
Scott Feldman for 2010 AL Scott Feldman
who cares
it’s some slap on salary at Fox Sports who needed an assignment. Hey guy who sucks at reporting or breaking stories, rank the baseball teams pre-season and stay out of our way…
by Arlington Stadium Legend on Feb 18, 2009 1:30 PM CST reply actions
omg
I will cut off my fucking dick if we are a bottom 5 team in the league again. There has been way too much optimism this off-season for my fragile emotions to handle it.
by BuckyB on Feb 18, 2009 1:33 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
agreed
and how the stros make it to 16…..sigh…
-Feldman '12
"Bush also yelled "I'm Matt (expletive) Bush," and "(expletive) East County," before driving over a curb in his Mercedes when leaving the campus"
Baseball
SERIOUS FUCKING BUSINESS.
Scott Feldman for 2009 AL Cy Young
Scott Feldman for 2010 AL Scott Feldman
+1-cuttingoffthedick+THISgagreeRodneysucksdogballs
You just don't know when to keep your mouth shut, do you Saxy boy?
by oc on Feb 18, 2009 1:45 PM CST up reply actions
Go smoke a bowl, Olly.
"...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
Yes we can! November 04, 2008
Callis chat on ESPN
Mark (West Palm Beach FL): For those of us eagerly awaiting your Top 100 list, can you reveal how many Rangers’ prospects will be making an appearance?
SportsNation Jim Callis: (2:24 PM ET ) Seven. And Engel Beltre just missed — he was literally No. 101.
Harry (Dallas, Texas): Jim, Who do you think will be the best catcher out of Taylor Teagarden, Matt Wieters, and Jeff CLement. I want you to consider all around talent that includes defense as well.
SportsNation Jim Callis: (2:41 PM ET ) Matt Wieters, easy. I like Teagarden more than most, but he can’t compare to Wieters. I like Clement and his power, but Wieters will be a better hitter and defender.
Jason (Phoenix): Who has the better carrer, Smoak or Homser?
SportsNation Jim Callis: (2:47 PM ET ) Hosmer. He’ll play longer because he’ll get to the majors at a younger age, and I like his bat a little bit more.
Greg (Dallas): First to reach Majors, Hollnd or Feliz?
SportsNation Jim Callis: (2:50 PM ET ) Holland.
Lory (Bangladesh): Neftali Feliz or Tommy Hanson?
SportsNation Jim Callis: (2:55 PM ET ) Feliz.
Justin (DC): Peter Bourjos or Julio Borbon?
SportsNation Jim Callis: (2:59 PM ET ) Borbon.
"He will not coddle them. Nolan Ryan doesn’t coddle." - Jeff Passan
Thanks for posting that...
Love that Feliz over Hanson pick.
"The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance."-Socrates
will you link me to chat?
Scout: He was a first-round pick right? Got a huge bonus?
KG: Oh yeah.
Scout: Well, he spent a lot of it on milkshakes.
by knockoutking on Feb 18, 2009 2:19 PM CST up reply actions
x
"It doesn't look like he's trying. It kinda pisses me off," "He could throw 110 if he tried. The way it explodes out of his hand is really something special." ~ B-Mac on Feliz.
by Kinslerhomer on Feb 18, 2009 2:24 PM CST up reply actions
Wieters
Who is the last prospect who has been seen as such a sure thing? I can’t wait to see what he does when he finally comes up.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
-The Outlaw
there were power questions for him i think
Scout: He was a first-round pick right? Got a huge bonus?
KG: Oh yeah.
Scout: Well, he spent a lot of it on milkshakes.
by knockoutking on Feb 19, 2009 7:59 AM CST up reply actions
Don't think so
not when he hit 39 2Bs and 29 HRs in his AA season. He hit 37 dingers between his last 2 years in college in a major conference (big12). He also hit very well with wood bats for team USA.
i was letting the fact that he has hit a total of 30 the last 2 years in over a thousand AB distract me
that said, he wasnt on the level of teix or longoria imho
Scout: He was a first-round pick right? Got a huge bonus?
KG: Oh yeah.
Scout: Well, he spent a lot of it on milkshakes.
by knockoutking on Feb 19, 2009 9:58 AM CST up reply actions
perhaps
I would certainly have taken him over longoria and not have given it much thought at the point where they were both ready for the majors, judging so far I’d have been wrong.
Longoria 07 in AA/AAA went 299/402/520
Gordon 06 in AA went 325/427/588
Wow went to look up park factors and find out that Wichita is done. That’s kinda sad, poor Wichita.
Ironically
Longoria is the one who didn’t have the power in college netting 16 home runs over his 2 years.
Eva Longoria?
You just don't know when to keep your mouth shut, do you Saxy boy?
by oc on Feb 18, 2009 3:45 PM CST up reply actions
yes
"My mother always taught me that if the only thing you have to say is,
‘(Expletive) Dave Samson,’ then don’t say anything at all.
So I’m not going to say anything at all.
Is my mother the greatest or what?"
- Mariners GM Bill Bavasi, after signing Ichiro to a $90 million contract
Longoria is a pretty good choice. He had a bit of a scary period right at the end of his first year when he put up a 1/20 BB/SO ratio in AA, but by the time he was ready he was pretty much a slam dunk. I don’t think that Gordon was too far off, but he wasn’t as well regarded defensively as these two, and he did strike out a lot in his one season.
If it’s not Longoria, it’s probably Mauer since we had a position player who was seemingly such a sure thing. I don’t even think that Teixeira was so much so, even though he was BA’s #1 prospect going into 2003. Before Mauer it very well might be ARod. Burrell, JD Drew and Andruw Jones were probably the closest between those two.
by Brett Perryman on Feb 18, 2009 6:58 PM CST up reply actions
In my dreams
Engel Beltre is that guy at this time next year.
G G G E-flat_______ F F F D__________....
Those must be some pretty nice dreams
what do you use? :D
R
Fox Sports Power Rankings rank 61st
in my official preseason media power rankings of awesomeness.
Does anyone else hope that whoever invented “Power Rankings” and all their followers are exiled to Venus for their efforts?
by bushe on Feb 18, 2009 2:12 PM CST reply actions 2 recs
It's time for one of OC's LSB power rankings post
yep
The moves being made are too extra for my taste.
>:(
You just don't know when to keep your mouth shut, do you Saxy boy?
by oc on Feb 18, 2009 3:49 PM CST up reply actions
Power rankings only serve one purpose
And that is to give them a chance to fille space by re-ranking and re-discussing every team on a wekk-by-week basis – who’s hot, who’s not, etc.
A lot of people at Baseball Fever are also picking the Rangers to win, like, 65 games.
I don’t know where this crap is coming from.
http://www.sbnation.com/users/Josey%20Wales
You just don't know when to keep your mouth shut, do you Saxy boy?
by oc on Feb 18, 2009 3:51 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
So all these other sources say these things about
the Rangers because they’re full of shtick as well?
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
Thes aren't "sources."
They are people on a message board who historically have been usually wrong about things.
Why would PECOTA peg us
at 72-90?
Is it shtick or do they have an agenda against the Rangers?
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
So people who guess 65 wins are right because PECOTA as of this moment predicts 72 wins?
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
-The Outlaw
hmmm
you mean like the people here that say that the rangers will be good every year?
who has been right up to this point?
by sam in so cal on Feb 18, 2009 5:07 PM CST up reply actions
Just speaking for myself
I think I’ve been a bit below their win total going into pretty much every year this decade, and I’m always a little surprised at how optimistic Adam’s prediction is. I would guess that he’s been at least as close on average as my slightly pessimistic predictions.
So anyway, to answer your question, no one in particular?
by Brett Perryman on Feb 18, 2009 7:02 PM CST up reply actions
OT. Boggs has MRI on shoulder:
Outfielder Brandon Boggs had an MRI on his right shoulder Wednesday. Dr. Keith Meister reviewed the MRI and saw some inflammation in there, but it’s not thought to be a great concern. Boggs was given an injection and will be limited in spring training for the next few days. Boggs said the shoulder, which bothered him at the end of last year, has been hurting him since he got to spring training.
- Anthony Andro
"It doesn't look like he's trying. It kinda pisses me off," "He could throw 110 if he tried. The way it explodes out of his hand is really something special." ~ B-Mac on Feliz.
So,
he injured his shoulder September or so of last year, and five months later its till hurting. I’m not sure I’d be counting on him for this year. If five months of rest don’t fix it, I don’t think another month will change much.
Getting Andruw “Dice” Young is looking like it has less and less downside.
Get off my lawn.
Because
Your mind is pulling up Andrew Young from Atlanta, the former major and Jimmy Carter’s UN ambassador.
Foolish consistency is the hobgobblin of little minds - Emerson
I just keep getting terrible flashbacks
of Arias and his minor shoulder problem that should only sideline him a bit in ST.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
-The Outlaw
shoulder injuries
The guy diagnosing these sore shoulders needs to be fired.
Doctor please. Some more of these.
by tricer on Feb 18, 2009 9:20 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
relative to BAL
if TEX played NY, TOR, BOS instead of OAK, SEA and LAA they would not have been 11 games better than BAL – but nice comparison…
Texas Third Order Record: 79-83
Baltimore Third Order Record: 74-87
Switch their schedules and eliminate the flukiness, that puts Texas at about 73 wins and Baltimore at about 74.
Waddyaknow, you might have a point. But, then, that’s why you should adjust for strength of opponencts. In theory, Texas would still have the 5 third order win advantage.
i was specifically referring to this comment:
And the Baltimore Orioles, who were 11 games worse than the Rangers last year.
that (to me) implied that BAL was really 11 games worse than TEX – as if we should be appalled that TEX was ranked behind BAL.
by sam in so cal on Feb 18, 2009 6:22 PM CST up reply actions
Well if you are ranking them
based on predicted win/loss records for 2009, why wouldn’t you consider strength of division and be shocked when Baltimore, by far the worst team in baseball’s strongest division, is ranked ahead of Texas, the 2nd/3rd best team in a very weak division.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
-The Outlaw
not what i said
i’m not ranking them on 2009 w-l records. it’s a power ranking.
i am saying that no one should be appalled that TEX is behind BAL based solely on the fact that TEX won 11 more games last year. it’s not that clear cut.
BAL is not 11 games worse than TEX from a power rankings perspective, and you could make an argument that they are better – Fox did.
for the sake of argument, let’s call it a toss up. if they are about equal, then citing the 11-game difference as if to say “how ridiculous” is not warranted.
by sam in so cal on Feb 19, 2009 10:49 AM CST up reply actions
"i’m not ranking them on 2009 w-l records. it’s a power ranking."
Can you explain to me then what a power ranking is then if its not about the W/L record?
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
-The Outlaw
Fox Sports?
Oh, really. How nice.
Like I care about Fox Sports’ rankings. Any company/corp that pays Dayn Perry to write doesn’t have an inch of credibility in my eyes.
"Yeah, like I had a chance there" - Lancaster batter, after striking out against Derek Holland
FWIW
I would put money on the Rockies being a better team than the Rangers this year (not just in W-L). I woudln’t put money on the Orioles either way.
Money
Who has the money and desire to place it on a list made to change quickly so slide teams up and down because something in Spring must be evaluated?
"Purity of heart is to will one thing" - Kierkegaard
Why would the ranking be so low?
Well let’s see:
You have the worst starting rotation in the AL returning for another roll of the dice. They will be pitching to a rookie catcher. The infield has gone from really solid to one with lots of potential with two players in their first full year of the majors. Ian with his errors and MY with all his limitations and in a new position. The outfield has one solid returning player in Hamilton and question marks about everyone else.
JD defenders like to admit he started out badly but look how well he has done the last couple of years. Well, his number one job is to put a winner on the field at the big league level….so what he has done for us lately will be the 2009 Rangers. Maybe not 27th, but definately a bottom 10 team.
Love the Rangers, love the potential for the future, but these kids will need several years to be the real deal (if they make it come true for us). So, the projection for a winner in 2010 is crazy optimistic. If it happens at all it will be more like 2012 or later.
Sorry, wish it weren’t so.
Foolish consistency is the hobgobblin of little minds - Emerson
by RangerEddie on Feb 19, 2009 1:28 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
rookie catcher
what does that play into anything?
Scout: He was a first-round pick right? Got a huge bonus?
KG: Oh yeah.
Scout: Well, he spent a lot of it on milkshakes.
by knockoutking on Feb 19, 2009 2:12 PM CST up reply actions
Be still my beating heart
the sighting of another poster who actually gets it.
2012 is much more realistic because Josh & Kinsler will still be in their primes and that will also be the 3rd/4th year of Teagarden, CDavis, Andrus, Salty, Feliz, Holland, Smoak et al.
In case nobody’s noticed, almost all major leaguers have growing pains and are not superstars their first year in The Show.
Oh yeah, somebody’s going to need to hire a manager for this crew as well.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
+1
on manager part
ron washington is simply not a world series winning manager.
but then again joe madden might not be one either…
Scout: He was a first-round pick right? Got a huge bonus?
KG: Oh yeah.
Scout: Well, he spent a lot of it on milkshakes.
by knockoutking on Feb 19, 2009 2:13 PM CST up reply actions
Players win championships...
not managers.
If Tony LaRussa can win a couple WS then so could Wash, if he had the talent. Give any manager enough talent and they can win.
"The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance."-Socrates
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Keeping good company: Albert Pujols becomes fourth-youngest player to hit 450 home runs
- Giancarlo Stanton misses cutoff man, and Logan Morrison is thankful he did (Video)
- Snoop Dogg delivers memorable first pitch at U.S. Cellular Field
- The Juice: Mesoraco’s grand slam helps Reds complete four-game sweep of Braves
- Please hold: Indians’ Joe Smith jumps the gun on relief appearance
