Dispelling the Myth of Trading Four Aces
by Adam J. Morris on May 18, 2009 10:30 AM CDT
Email
PrintI was inspired to do this post when I was driving back to Houston from TBIA Thursday afternoon, all aglow over a walkoff home run by Chris Davis to give Matt Harrison a well deserved "W." I was listening to Ben & Skin on 105.3 after the game, as they were fielding calls on the game and the Rangers, and was amazed at the number of people who called in to say, in essence, "Yeah, they are winning, but just think how much better the Rangers would be doing right now if Jon Daniels hadn't given away Edinson Volquez, John Danks, Armando Galarraga and Chris Young. Daniels traded away four aces, and if he hadn't done that, we'd be doing even better right now."
So I started to do a post about this on Friday, and then stopped, figuring I should not tempt fate by doing this post on the eve of a big weekend series against the Angels, because I could do this and then see the pitching suck and the Angels sweep the Rangers and all the positive vibes go circling down the drain.
So I decided to wait to do this on Monday, just to be safe.
Let's take a look at what the Four Aces Daniels supposedly gave away have done this season, compared to what the current Ranger rotation is doing:
| Current starter | ERA | FIP | Traded starter | ERA | FIP |
| Millwood | 2.93 | 4.59 | Danks | 4.82 | 4.24 |
| Padilla | 4.71 | 4.86 | Volquez | 4.25 | 5.22 |
| McCarthy | 5.92 | 6.67 | Young | 5.56 | 4.62 |
| Harrison | 4.23 | 4.45 | Galarraga | 5.62 | 5.45 |
| Feldman | 2.17 | 3.06 |
And as a point of clarification, for Feldman, we are looking at just his performance in the rotation. And these are all raw numbers, not adjusted for league or park.
So, yeah...McCarthy has been pretty bad, and we'd all ask for a do-over on the Danks trade right now.
But still, all in all...whether you look at ERA or FIP, the traded guys don't have an edge on the guys still here. Daniels didn't trade four aces -- at least not based on what they've done so far this year.
So Joe from Burleson and Eddie from Grand Prairie, and whoever else was calling in complaining about how much better the 2009 Rangers would be with the four starting pitchers back...you are wrong.
And realistically, while I expect Danks and Volquez to bring their FIPs down -- and likely Young as well -- I think that, all in all, the Rangers wouldn't be significantly better the rest of the way rolling with the four guys that are in the right hand column instead of the five guys that are in the left hand column.
And to be clear, the purpose of this post is not to defend the trades that sent the guys in column B away -- I'd do the Volquez trade over again in a heartbeat, but the other three, no question, we'd like to get back if we could.
But the reality is that if you subtract the guys who are currently in the rotation -- or even four of the guys who are currently in the rotation -- and replace them with the four guys who are gone, this team isn't any better so far this season, and likely isn't going to be significantly better for the rest of the year.
109 comments
|
2 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
i love it when the Rangers are winning
Adam goes post-happy!
Greatest Inventions Ever? 1. TiVO, 2. Boobs, 3. Baseball
good Lord.
I am glad we are finally going to address this. Not.
Here are the two things to take away:
1. Not every Ranger fan is “intelligent” or “logical” or has a “high school level education”, so why worry about what they have to say on a call-in radio show?
2. Daniels has made some mistakes, but he’s also learned from those mistakes and he has made some very astute moves recently.
There really isn’t much more to say here.
What is this, Horseville? Because I'm surrounded by naysayers.
Don't be a SAGOBS
(self-appointed-god-of-blog-subjects)…clark, you’re better than this. This blog would be a barren wasteland if we couldn’t get our dander up about things that don’t matter.
if I had a dollar
for every time i was called a SAGOBS.
It just seems like a funny/convenient time to reevaluate this. As I said, we all know JD has made some mistakes, some glaring and inexplicable and others easy to defend at the time. Would this team be better off if we still had Danks around, or if we’d sold a little higher on the Padres package? Sure. But there is little left to debate there. Nor is there much left to debate about the Tex package, or his ability to buy low on certain FAs. I think everyone around here feels a little better about JD and Wash and Nolan and Maddux than they did two months ago, but after this stretch, is that surprising?
What is this, Horseville? Because I'm surrounded by naysayers.
Wow
This from you?
Daniels has made some mistakes, but he’s also learned from those mistakes and he has made some very astute moves recently.
"[Font} doesn't turn 19 until the end of May and his heater can already hit 99 on the gun. That's baseball porn." - Jason Parks
by hightowersmith on May 18, 2009 12:09 PM CDT up reply actions
hey
i have to give credit where it’s due. I am as vocal as anyone when I feel he has made a mistake, and there are still some tweaks to the roster that he could/should make. But I will also say that bringing in Mike Maddux may slot behind the Tex trade as the single best move he has made as the GM.
What is this, Horseville? Because I'm surrounded by naysayers.
Maddux
Give it a year, at least.
"[Font} doesn't turn 19 until the end of May and his heater can already hit 99 on the gun. That's baseball porn." - Jason Parks
by hightowersmith on May 18, 2009 12:14 PM CDT up reply actions
I was partly wondering what JD's done in particular lately...
"[Font} doesn't turn 19 until the end of May and his heater can already hit 99 on the gun. That's baseball porn." - Jason Parks
by hightowersmith on May 18, 2009 12:58 PM CDT up reply actions
five things
that I would count as “recent” that have contributed to our success and involved varying degrees of ballsiness:
1. Pursuing Mike Maddux like a FA and hiring him
2. The Andrus/Young shuffle
3. Cutting bait with Cat and keeping Jones
4. Working Holland in to the bullpen this early in the year
5. Finding Darren O’Day
Some of these things I championed, some I took a “wait and see” approach, and one (Holland) I was highly skeptical of, but all have turned out to be the right moves.
What is this, Horseville? Because I'm surrounded by naysayers.
The fact that they
cut bait with Cat, kept Jones, but aren’t playing Jones every game makes me feel much better about their use of NRIs. I think the Rangers have a reputation for getting hitters to hit, and they may as well use that when they need to patch a hole.
Personally, I think I am bigger on NRIs than some here, especially if it keeps you from locking up for a mid 7 figure contract FA for 3 years to fill a spot. Normally, the FAs in that part of the FA pool end up being roster cloggers that don’t do much on the field, and just clog your roster. I’d just as soon see 1 year NRIs.
"I'd praised catcher Max Ramirez two weeks ago, but after his continued struggles I'm increasingly convinced he's not going to pan out." - crops.mlblogs.com
Unfortunately I think AJ
gets more playing time going forward with a corresponding decrease in production. I just hope it doesn’t reach the point where we are calling him Sideshow Pt. Deux.
I hate the Yankees. Especially when they hit a walkoff.
I'm sure he will have some decrease in production.
I doubt he holds an OPS over 1 forever.
I’m pretty confident his OPS versus lefties will end up much higher than Hank’s though, and he should be getting in the lineup as DH against all lefties, anyway.
"I'd praised catcher Max Ramirez two weeks ago, but after his continued struggles I'm increasingly convinced he's not going to pan out." - crops.mlblogs.com
Yeah, totally agree
"[Font} doesn't turn 19 until the end of May and his heater can already hit 99 on the gun. That's baseball porn." - Jason Parks
by hightowersmith on May 18, 2009 2:35 PM CDT up reply actions
Good post
It isn’t that cut and dry, obviously. The Rangers rotation costs a lot more than those four guys listed to the right. And long term I think I’d prefer Danks and Volquez to anyone on the left.
But this really shows that you can’t judge an active GM like Daniels solely by what he gives up.
PhD
Im still really not sold on volquez
i think he’s more of a mirage. ill eat my words if he turns in 1999 pedro, but i just think as sexy as all his pitching is on the mound, the idea of volqueso is sexier than the reality of having that guy on my team.
Gallardo or however u spell it is gonna show every1 else why JD let him go this season.
Young is decent maybe even good in the NLWest but SanDiego aint texas so im just not so sure he’d really help us.
that leaves danks, who without the cutter isnt the danks we know now, not sure what he would be.
the world usually isnt that cut and dry, and this is another one of those situations
mormons stole me and held me against my will with Oklahoma beer and 12+ hour work days.
yeah Volquez isn't going to be horrible
but he won’t be as good as his first full season indicated. And I think he was a headcase in Arlington. Needed a REAL jolt via trade to wake up. I think Young would’ve been good here, but not great. And Danks really is the one that I think we’ll all miss, but if Harrison pitches in a shadow of what Danks does, and Holland pitches better than Danks, we (Rangers fans in general) won’t be dwelling on this anymore in a year or two
"Hang-Dai, Wu...Hang-Fu$&ing-Dai"
by Walter Sobchak on May 18, 2009 11:31 AM CDT up reply actions
I admit to really
wanting to see EV fail. I was very gung ho about the Volquez/Hamilton trade because I thought at the time that we were getting a CF that hit like a COF (which is a very rare commodity) for a guy with good stuff/bad control.
I think watching BMac fail is the toughest thing. Right now, watching him be the 5th pitcher in the rotation is just a little painful.
I just hope that unless BMac improves dramatically, the team will be able to cut their losses next year, to make room for Holland, and potentially another FA like Sheets.
"I'd praised catcher Max Ramirez two weeks ago, but after his continued struggles I'm increasingly convinced he's not going to pan out." - crops.mlblogs.com
I always wanted to see Volquez do well
I have a soft spot for very high ceiling guys, regardless of where their expected value lies. To me, the guys like Danks and McCarthy and – guys with Kevin Millwood or Mark Buehrle ceilings – are just boring. I like guys who have a 5% chance of being a Pedro Martinez or Roger Clemens. Volquez fell into that category while a Rangers prospect.
The great thing about those guys is that there is always one team, somewhere, who is willing to part with a Josh Hamilton to get him, to make the bet that he’ll become Pedro or close to it. I’ll never complain about JD trading a guy with the potential for greatness for another guy with the potential for greatness. But I still want to see EV succeed. Just because those guys reaching that potential makes it worthwhile to follow prospects from the ground up.
PhD
I pretty much
want all the guys we trade away to fail. Sadly, it just doesn’t work out that way.
"I'd praised catcher Max Ramirez two weeks ago, but after his continued struggles I'm increasingly convinced he's not going to pan out." - crops.mlblogs.com
Daniels' overall trade record
is no better or worse than most any other GM. Very few trades are obvious wins or busts at the time they’re made. The San Diego trade was obviously stupid at the time. Letting Galarraga go was questionable, but hardly a disaster. The others were either defensible or thought good deals at the time.
Billy Beane has several terrible trades on his ledger. Like Beane, though, I like Daniels because he is not afraid to take that chance. Trading is risky. Not trading is also risky if the prospects you choose to keep lose value later on.
G G G E-flat_______ F F F D__________....
Daniels suffers from
the lasting effects of a poor first impression. The Padres trade was inexcusable no matter how well Young would have done here. A young pitcher with ML success always has trade value, and he vastly undervalued AGon. The Danks trade was a fairly poor eval exascerbated by very poor luck. Those two trades, along with the great Soriano giveaway, have defined JD to some fans who wish to remain blind and ignorant to his more recent moves.
What is this, Horseville? Because I'm surrounded by naysayers.
Danks and Young
I think both of those trades were the result of trying to hit a home run — getting a legit TORP in place, which the Rangers have desperately needed. They rolled the dice in parting with a couple of guys in Young and Danks that they felt would be good, not great, pitchers in an effort to try to hit the jackpot with Eaton and McCarthy, whom they viewed as having TORP potential.
by Adam J. Morris on May 18, 2009 10:50 AM CDT up reply actions
They viewed Eaton as having TORP potential?
Really? I don’t remember it that way – I remember us needing an arm, immediately, and JD getting an arm.
by FuturePants on May 18, 2009 10:53 AM CDT up reply actions
They thought he had that potential
For some reason, teams have kept getting fooled by Eaton’s potential throughout his career and he’s made a ton of money because of it.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
-The Outlaw
If that was the case...why would they deal Young?
They felt Young had reached his potential, and they were buying low on Eaton…the trade didn’t work.
It was a bad trade no doubt.
by death of the cool on May 18, 2009 10:56 AM CDT up reply actions
they acquired young for einar diaz straight up
so its not like the world was always highs on youngs potential as major leaguer, i really thought they felt like they sold high on Young and didnt want to get stuck with the fools gold. I dont think it was a good call, but they turned einar diaz into chris young which was a steal.
mormons stole me and held me against my will with Oklahoma beer and 12+ hour work days.
They acquired Young for Diaz because
Young was a tall pitcher with a mid 80’s fastball. He got his fastball up to the mid to low 90’s while in the minors. After looking at his last several games this year, he apparently has reverted to being a tall guy with a mid 80’s fastball.
Young wouldn’t have lasted in Texas with that kind of velocity. A couple of his worst starts this year have been in Colorado and Chicago… both hitters’ parks.
from everything I read about Eaton for years prior to our trade
he was a potential # 1/2 pitcher
"Hang-Dai, Wu...Hang-Fu$&ing-Dai"
by Walter Sobchak on May 18, 2009 11:33 AM CDT up reply actions
As long as you emphasize
potential, and throw in injury prone.
I think there was a reason that was the most hated trade ever.
"I'd praised catcher Max Ramirez two weeks ago, but after his continued struggles I'm increasingly convinced he's not going to pan out." - crops.mlblogs.com
yeah he never realized it.
it was pure potential, no real track record. So sad. For us, anyways.
"Hang-Dai, Wu...Hang-Fu$&ing-Dai"
by Walter Sobchak on May 18, 2009 11:44 AM CDT up reply actions
While in San Diego
I somehow always ended up going to games where Adam Eaton was pitching. I went back through my scorebook once, and something like 5 of 8 games I saw in the 2-3 years prior to the Young deal Eaton was pitching.
Adam Eaton was a good pitcher on those games I saw him, always showing flashes of brilliance. He loosely tinkered with no-hitters several times I saw him – I remember him shutting down the Royals with no hits until maybe the 7th or even the 8th inning once. His problem always has been his injuries, which I suppose never let him get into the rhythm necessary to develop. I worry a lot that Brandon McCarthy is essentially our version of Adam Eaton – a guy who, if healthy, could have been a very good pitcher, but whose development was stunted by injuries.
PhD
For all the flashes of brilliance,
he had an ERA+ over 100 exactly, once, his first year when he pitched 22 starts. Just one of those guys who, even with healthy, never really was able to consistently pitch well.
"I'd praised catcher Max Ramirez two weeks ago, but after his continued struggles I'm increasingly convinced he's not going to pan out." - crops.mlblogs.com
I don't know if we'll see the Rangers send a ML-ready young pitcher to anyone else as part of a deal
for a TORP. That might be one of the lasting results of the Young trade.
Wonderboy, what is the secret of your power? Wonderboy, won't you take me far away from the mucky-muck now. -- Tenacious D
How many of the guys on the left...
are place-holders until the farm starts bearing fruit? Holland and Feliz will likely replace two of them, eventually — maybe even next season. So, I don’t really worry about the guys on the right as much as I credit JD with picking a plan and sticking with it (finally). The arms coming up from the minors will go a long way towards erasing the memories of some bad trades.
That's why they call them business sox
You obviously keep Millwood for another year
don’t know about Padilla, but I have to assume we would. If Harrison and Feldman keep throwing up starting #‘s this good (doubtful), they’d be VERY hard to replace. Assuming we sign Sheets and he’s healthy, and Holland is already in the rotation, I think Feliz is a bullpen arm for the first half of next year, and then we trade Padilla at the deadline or one of our guys is hurt. I see a 2010 rotation of Sheets, Millwood, Padilla, Holland, Harrison/Feldman with McCarthy and one of Harrison/Feldman the odd men out (pen? traded?) and Feliz, Hunter and Hurley waiting in the wings for injury/suckitude. Then 2011 would be Sheets, Holland, Feliz, Harrison and Feldman/McCarthy/Hurley/Hunter.
Of course, Padilla could be traded in the offseason of this year…
"Hang-Dai, Wu...Hang-Fu$&ing-Dai"
by Walter Sobchak on May 18, 2009 11:37 AM CDT up reply actions
I would trade Vinny this year
while he’s hot. He tends to go one year on, one year off. I think we could get pretty good value for him. And, as Clark pointed out in another post, the Rangers would probably be both buyers and sellers at the trade deadline because of budget constraints. I would love to see Vinny gone by the deadline, Holland in the rotation, and a couple of significant bullpen additions.
Next year: Millwood, Sheets, Harrison, Feldman, and McCarthy until Feliz is ready. That of course depends on how BMac performs the rest of this year and the beginning of next year.
That's why they call them business sox
If we are in contention
there is NO WAY we will be trading away one of our starting pitchers.
by NorCalRangersFan on May 18, 2009 11:49 AM CDT up reply actions
which was my thinking, exactly
"Hang-Dai, Wu...Hang-Fu$&ing-Dai"
by Walter Sobchak on May 18, 2009 11:50 AM CDT up reply actions
Following up
Do you think we could even trade Padilla in the offseason? It would require exercising his $12 million option first. He’d have to be really good this year for that.
Plus, I don’t know that JD would do that again. I think he’s still smarting a little bit from trying that with Hank and that was for half that amount.
by NorCalRangersFan on May 18, 2009 11:56 AM CDT up reply actions
Hank hasn't been great, but he's worth the 6 mil if this team
makes the playoffs with him as a decent contributor. I see no problem with that option.
The pitching is where the money is at, and Padilla may not be dominating but he’s pitching close to that 12 mil amount. Plus, isn’t it Padilla’s option to take next year, and Millwood has a team option that vests when he reaches 180 IP or something?
"Hang-Dai, Wu...Hang-Fu$&ing-Dai"
by Walter Sobchak on May 18, 2009 11:58 AM CDT up reply actions
Re: hank
Could be, but that’s not what JD was planning on. His plan was to exercise the option and then trade him. Then the economy tanked and hitters who were Hank’s equivalent were going unsigned, so there was no market for Hank and JD had to eat the contract. It may end up working out OK, but its not what JD wanted.
Re: Padilla: According to Cotts, its a team option. He could be close to a $12 million dollar pitcher, but that doesn’t mean a team will trade for him if there are equivalent pitchers for similar money that they do not have to give up any players/prospects for. He would need to be worth more than $12 million to get back anything significant in trade.
Now, what are the changes that he is a type B free agent? Does that even come in to account if the club has an option? Can you decline an option and then offer a player arbitration? That seems strange.
by NorCalRangersFan on May 18, 2009 12:10 PM CDT up reply actions
I would either way
Unless there’s a significant injury in the rotation. We have Holland who could take his place, and we’ll never get better value for him than now. IMO, the bullpen is the huge weakness of this team, it just hasn’t been exposed yet because the starters are doing well. If we add a couple of good arms to the pen, we’ll be a better team with Holland in the rotation.
That's why they call them business sox
the only way we trade Padilla if we're still in it
is if he’s pitching decently and we throw him into a trade for a younger arm (Cain?) that probably includes a 3rd team (Mets?) hungry for veteran pitching down the stretch. If we trade say, Hank, Padilla and Smoak/Davis (plus maybe another minor league arm outside of our top 3) for Cain and Padilla goes to the Mets somehow?
"Hang-Dai, Wu...Hang-Fu$&ing-Dai"
by Walter Sobchak on May 18, 2009 11:53 AM CDT up reply actions
OT: The ESPN Scroll Last Night
Three times said “Angels def. Rangers 3-0” and credited a W to Jered Weaver.
Freaked me out because my cell phone said otherwise and I didn’t have internet.
Local radio had a seattle game wrong...
I was listening on my way into work on Friday and they said Seattle had beaten Texas 3-2.
That was a little shocking since I had seen the end of the game and went, “Wait a second, didn’t Davis walk-off?”
Our local morning shows can’t even be bothered to get the games right.
its the internets, still pissed he isnt a rangers instead of a gawd damned angel
mormons stole me and held me against my will with Oklahoma beer and 12+ hour work days.
douchebags
"Hang-Dai, Wu...Hang-Fu$&ing-Dai"
by Walter Sobchak on May 18, 2009 11:38 AM CDT up reply actions
Blasphemy
You’re a blasphemer Adam. How dare you to even try to suggest that we didn’t trade away four Cy Young’s? And your even going to use numbers? I would rather believe my own lying eyes. (If I actually watched any of them pitch, which I haven’t, but that’s ok because I know that they are the best pitchers in all of MLB right now.)
Actually, this is a great point. I still love how you are conditioned to fill a third of the post with disclaimers.
Godwin's Law Version 2.0 (Rangers Edition)
"As a Ranger discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Danks, Volquez, or Young approaches one."
AJM
I am curious why you like to use FIP and not tRA?
I hate the Yankees. Especially when they hit a walkoff.
JD needs to get more credit for this team....
yet it seems the only credit goes to Nolan and Mustache Jesus (who does deserve a ton of credit).
Nolan gives this team a face that people respect and listen to, but the talent on this team is due in large part to JD.
by death of the cool on May 18, 2009 11:04 AM CDT reply actions
JD will get credit for this team
when we make the playoffs and Salty/Andrus/Harrison/Feliz/Holland are a big reason we win a few playoff games…
"Hang-Dai, Wu...Hang-Fu$&ing-Dai"
by Walter Sobchak on May 18, 2009 11:39 AM CDT up reply actions
What's funny and ironical to me
is that JD must have really winced and groused when he found out Nolan was going to be his boss yet it was that specific hire that probably saved his ass.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
by Josey Wales on May 18, 2009 12:32 PM CDT up reply actions
And what's funny and ironical to me
is that you probably rejoiced when Ryan was hired thinking the Day of Reckoning had arrived, and yet all he’s done since arriving is endorse Daniels.
G G G E-flat_______ F F F D__________....
Endorse JD?
He fired the pitching coach JD wouldn’t fire and totally revamped whatever conditioning program was in place and then, unlike in the past (under JD’s reign of error) he mandated that Rangers pitchers were going to work deeper into games.
Up to February 6, 2008 dumbassery in the Ranger FO was rampant. Don’t think so? Broussard & JJennings were brought here and Galarraga was dfa’d in January 2008.
I never liked the Benson signing but he came here for less than $1 million so it was relatively harmless. Other than that, it’s difficult to accuse this front office of blatant incompetence.
It wasn’t very hard to accuse this front office of incompetence from October 2005 to February 6, 2008.
From what AJM told us back in March, Nolan was also one of the driving forces (backing Washington & Rudy) in making sure that AJones made this team.
Stamp your feet all you want but Nolan Ryan saved JD’s ass.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
by Josey Wales on May 18, 2009 12:59 PM CDT up reply actions
You're hilarious.
I’m sure all of those things that you agree with were 100% Ryan decisions, “mandates” with no discussion and no input from the rest of the front office other than “Sir, yes sir!”
You have an incredibly limited view of how the front office of a baseball organization gets things done. But by all means, carry on with your brilliance. I hope your work does not involve anything diagnostic.
G G G E-flat_______ F F F D__________....
And yet
JD managed to make the Teixeira, Gagne, and Carlos Lee deals, acquired Vicente Padilla, and presided over drafts that netted the Rangers Davis, Holland, and a boatload of other talent, all without having Nolan around.
Unless, of course, Nolan has somehow mastered time travel, and sent himself back in a time machine powered by the blood of snow monkeys, just to advise JD on what moves to make.
"I dont care to debate with a troll." - Sharky
Don't we have this on record somewhere, yet?
¡Prefiero morir de pie que vivir siempre arrodillado!
I came here to split hairs. And you?
by inactive lsb user on May 19, 2009 1:09 AM CDT up reply actions
the ignored 1 bazillion dollar question
mormons stole me and held me against my will with Oklahoma beer and 12+ hour work days.
All the pitchers
would have had an ERA half a run to a full run higher due to Ranger defense, ballpark, and league.
"I'd praised catcher Max Ramirez two weeks ago, but after his continued struggles I'm increasingly convinced he's not going to pan out." - crops.mlblogs.com
And would Danks have developed that cutter in the Ranger's orginization?
That's why they call them business sox
This "developed the cutter" argument
is annoying.
I’m as big a JD supporter as there is out there. But this argument is lame. Suppose Danks stayed in Texas and didn’t develop that cutter. We’d all be saying “Geez, JD should have traded Danks for McCarthy when he had the chance…” Well, that too is ignoring the giant elephant in the room – why would Danks have not learned a perfect pitch for him had he stayed in Texas? What is wrong with the Rangers pitching development people that they would see a ceiling to Danks that wasn’t there, and not consider teaching him a different pitch to possibly get him over that ceiling.
The knock on the Rangers is that they cannot develop their own pitching. The success of Danks and Volquez shows that they can find talented amateurs. The problem is that they have succeeded elsewhere. That means that they trade away guys who they shouldn’t or they can’t develop guys in house. Arguing that Danks wouldn’t have developed the cutter takes that trade out of the A category, but puts it square in the ‘B’ category.
PhD
He may have developed the pitch here
But I seem to remember reading somewhere that the Sox were a team that taught the cutter (or at least tried it) for all their pitchers. Sort of like the Rangers and the sinker.
by NorCalRangersFan on May 18, 2009 12:16 PM CDT up reply actions
I don't think there is
any question we had a big pitching development problem. Hopefully some of the organizational changes this offseason addressed it. Although, for the life of me, I have no idea why we took Connor back. Someone really needs to explain that to me.
"I'd praised catcher Max Ramirez two weeks ago, but after his continued struggles I'm increasingly convinced he's not going to pan out." - crops.mlblogs.com
He's back
but I haven’t heard of a single thing he’s done since coming back. What, exactly, is he doing for the club again?
by NorCalRangersFan on May 18, 2009 12:27 PM CDT up reply actions
Probably just being another opinion
for JD to consider when he is making moves.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
-The Outlaw
Maybe my memory is faulty...
but I seem to recall that every pitcher in the WS system learned the cutter, and the Rangers were insistent that their minor league players develop a more traditional curve ball/change/slider.
That's why they call them business sox
REC
¡Prefiero morir de pie que vivir siempre arrodillado!
I came here to split hairs. And you?
by inactive lsb user on May 18, 2009 11:12 AM CDT reply actions
I think the Rangers would be significantly better if they had Danks.
That has nothing to do with the trade of Danks. He is simply one of few guys I think is on the way to being an Ace and could do so this year or the next.
Wonderboy, what is the secret of your power? Wonderboy, won't you take me far away from the mucky-muck now. -- Tenacious D
agreed.
otherwise, I completely agree with Adam’s post. In fact, both Millwood and Feldman are pitching much better in the rotation than Danks is…and while we might expect Feldman to level out (maybe or maybe not Millwood), and Danks to improve as the season goes on, we are now seeing that Adam was right about Galarraga to a degree, Volquez is injured and not dominating and Young is leveling off. Point taken.
But the big culprit/catalyst of all of this good pitching is clearly the improved defense. Once again, I am blown away by how much an improved range in the defense and Salty’s improvements have made huge strides with this team’s ability to pitch to contact regularly and the confidence it has inspired.
"Hang-Dai, Wu...Hang-Fu$&ing-Dai"
by Walter Sobchak on May 18, 2009 11:43 AM CDT up reply actions
It makes the pitchers more comfortable.
If you’ve got guys behind you, like Elvis and Kinsler playing top caliber defense, you feel better about pitching for ground balls ( which ALL of the starters have done well- except for McCarthy – so far) and not trying to avoid contact. It means fewer walks and streikeouts but more ground ball outs. This makes a pitcher better in reality if not in statistics.
Logic
wins again. The rotation wouldn’t be better if they were still here, and Galarraga really sucks. His last 4 decisions have been horrible. When a pitched can’t pitch in Oakland against the vaunted A’s offense, then where can he pitch? He’s off my fantasy team!
Galarraga
Has been downright awful in May. Entering the month, his ERA was sitting at 1.85. After yesterdays 0.2 IP, 5 ER performance against freakin’ OAKLAND, his ERA currently sits at 5.62.
I had a paper route when I was a kid. I was supposed to go to 2,000 houses. Or two dumpsters.
Yeah seems like both teams from the bay area have really "great" offensive lineup
I like to call it bay area brilliance…have you looked at those AAA lineups lately. They’re fielding guys like Travis Ishikawa, Burris, Aurilia (who WAS good once), and rely on boppers such as Aaron Rowand and Bengie Molina. And the A’s have guys like Jack Cust who I think is garbage. Yeah, the Giants have nice pitching, and the A’s, they just really stink. Never liked em, ever.
by IanKinslerMVP on May 18, 2009 2:20 PM CDT up reply actions
Fear of Flying?
Kornheiser is giving up the gig of a lifetime for that? He’s an even bigger jackass than I thought.
That's why they call them business sox
that is not why he is giving it up
"I just want to comment on how it’s become like a common thing in the [MLB] for guys to fall in love with [the Rangers’s] sloppy seconds." (thanks cstorm)
Korn's exact quote
"My fear of planes is legendary and sadly true," he said. "When I looked at the upcoming schedule it was the perfect storm that would’ve frequently moved me from the bus to the air."
Of course, that does not mean that this is not really cover for some other deeper issue as well.
Godwin's Law Version 2.0 (Rangers Edition)
"As a Ranger discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Danks, Volquez, or Young approaches one."
by LBBRangerFan on May 18, 2009 12:21 PM CDT up reply actions
Bullshit
He’s still an employee for ESPN but lost this gig cause he was freaking awful at it. They were at least decent enough to give him a quote to try to spin it.
I had a paper route when I was a kid. I was supposed to go to 2,000 houses. Or two dumpsters.
how fortunate they found such a quick replacement
"I just want to comment on how it’s become like a common thing in the [MLB] for guys to fall in love with [the Rangers’s] sloppy seconds." (thanks cstorm)
Madden did MNF for years
and never once got on a plane.
by NorCalRangersFan on May 18, 2009 12:29 PM CDT up reply actions
Madden
could pretty much leave from one game to another. Doesn’t Kornheiser have other TV and Radio gigs that he sucks at?
"I'd praised catcher Max Ramirez two weeks ago, but after his continued struggles I'm increasingly convinced he's not going to pan out." - crops.mlblogs.com
True
I don’t know if he still does it because I have given up on ESPN, but he used to do Pardon The Interruption.
Of course, Madden would always get to the city of the next game by Wednesday or Thursday so he could watch practice and talk to coaches prior to Sundays game. The man was very good at his job. I cannot say the same for Kornheiser, who I used to love as a sports columnist when I lived in D.C., but who I’m not too fond of as a TV personality. I’m going to miss Madden.
by NorCalRangersFan on May 18, 2009 1:11 PM CDT up reply actions
My first contact with Kornheiser
was his radio show, and I thought that was fairly terrible. I wasn’t expecting anything out of him for MNF, and he delivered.
"I'd praised catcher Max Ramirez two weeks ago, but after his continued struggles I'm increasingly convinced he's not going to pan out." - crops.mlblogs.com
I left DC area in '97
I don’t think he was on the radio then.
I remember a very funny series of columns he wrote in the Washington Post about the “’Skins Bandwagon” back in ’91.
He should really stick to print where he can be very funny. In live media, he’s just annoying.
by NorCalRangersFan on May 18, 2009 1:34 PM CDT up reply actions
That quote makes me think of Monty Burns
“If you want to make fun of my legendary love of cashews, well, have at it!”
by Adam J. Morris on May 18, 2009 3:03 PM CDT up reply actions
the danks trade
man, that really did end up sucking hard.
oh well.
"I just want to comment on how it’s become like a common thing in the [MLB] for guys to fall in love with [the Rangers’s] sloppy seconds." (thanks cstorm)
Padilla
2008:
4.74 ERA
171.0 IP, 185 H, 100 R, 90 ER, 26 HR, 65 BB, 127 K
2009:
4.71 ERA
49.2 IP, 50 H, 27 R, 26 ER, 4 HR, 20 BB, 26 K
Does Padilla have any chance to be Type A this winter?
"[Font} doesn't turn 19 until the end of May and his heater can already hit 99 on the gun. That's baseball porn." - Jason Parks
by hightowersmith on May 18, 2009 12:20 PM CDT reply actions
.. no
¡Prefiero morir de pie que vivir siempre arrodillado!
I came here to split hairs. And you?
by inactive lsb user on May 19, 2009 1:12 AM CDT up reply actions
No way Padillas a Type A
Maybe type B, if he continues this through the year and ends up with at least 180 IP and 15 Wins then ya he would garner type B status…
It will be interesting to see what people say about JD when there is the salary dump this winter… Padilla and Blalock off the books will I think stir up an interesting debate on the interwebs and on the airwaves…
This is our year.
http://www.lonestarball.com/2009/1/29/739765/the-socket-joint-rotator-c
by FormerLSBUser on May 18, 2009 12:48 PM CDT reply actions
I don't think it matters
because I doubt they offer Padilla arbitration. He would most likely accept and the Rangers would probably end up paying him more than what is option is for 2010.
I hate the Yankees. Especially when they hit a walkoff.
Whoever said those guys were aces anyway...
Don’t you have to be doing it for a few years to be considered an ace…When I think of an “ace” I think of Johan Santana, Roy Halladay, or a new guy like Greinke, who did decent last year. Danks, Volquez, Young, and Gallaraga, just don’t come to mind. Who cares about Volquez when we got Hamilton. McCarthy for Danks does hurt a little bit, but thats the only one that REALLY bothers me. Young at the time was a 5 inning pitcher, and he’s been injured of late. Galarraga is decent but not a #1 or #2 so who the hell cares. As long as JD doesn’t trade away the other guys we have on the farm and on the club, I like the ball club as it is right now. I guess it was a good move not to bring Bradley back…
Mike Maddux must be doing a good job
Matt Harrison’s dominance has been awesome to watch. I know he won 9 of 12 decisions but his ERA was above 5, thats why I was worried how he would do this year. And the way that he started the year had me worried also. But his development along with his personal catcher have me very encouraged. He’s been a stand up guy for this rotation. I just hope Frank comes back soon because I was nervous as hell watching those game against the Angels with CJ closing (even though he got it done). The shutout was even awesomer than the other games. It was nice watching Padilla (while not having his best stuff) fight through it and finish with 8 tough innings. It did take a guy like the Express to come in and stop treating these starters like pansies.
On the four departed
Without the trumpeting of such as Galloway and Reeves, a lot of the local fan base wouldn’t care so much. There is or has been a tendency among generic sports followers to hark to the words of those guys, and Hansen et al, because “they’ve been around a long time and know what they are talking about”. Being an old guy, I’ve run afoul of such herd mentality even back when Hansen was in Omaha, and Darl Wible on WBOW was the source what what much of western Indiana thought of the Cubs, Reds, Cards, and HS basketball in general. And when those “savants” opinions look rightr at first, or for a while, it kind of makes an indelible impression. Thankfully, today’s communication availibility and use are massively better.
"He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lamp-posts... for support rather than illumination." - Andrew Lang (1844-1912) also -
"Telephone, n. An invention of the devil which abrogates some of the advantages of making a disagreeable person keep his distance."
~Ambrose Bierce
by Ed Coffin on May 18, 2009 2:41 PM CDT reply actions
true to a degree
but I think there are other things to consider. I think the “local guy” status of Young and Danks hurt as well. There were a lot of human interest “local boy makes good” stories about Young after he broke out in 04 and then sustained some success in ’05, so to see him traded so abruptly and then achieve success was hard on the fanbase. And Danks is one of the first star prospects of what I will call “the Newberg Era” during which a larger portion of the fanbase was more educated and excited about the kids on the farm. Newberg really “tipped” at about the time DVD was getting hyped up, and Danks, being left handed and local, was probably the kid fans got most attached to, so in a MUCH different way, I would argue that Newberg contributed as much as Galloway and Reeves.
What is this, Horseville? Because I'm surrounded by naysayers.
I'll bet Jamey
is thrilled to have contributed as much as Galloway.
"I'd praised catcher Max Ramirez two weeks ago, but after his continued struggles I'm increasingly convinced he's not going to pan out." - crops.mlblogs.com
to follow up and clarify
I was much more affected by the three years I spent anxiously reading about Danks’ stuff and intangibles while a Rangers farm hand in emails from Jamey and Mike in the time before the trade than I was by the regurgitated columns of Galloway and Reeves in the time since the trade.
The increased access and information we have as a fanbase that we didn’t have ten years ago is a double edged sword, and the downside is that we get much more (occasionally irrationally) attached to our prospects. I remember being downtrodden when the trade happened, even though national pundits were saying it could be win for the Rangers, because I was so excited about Danks and Masset after following their progression for so long.
What is this, Horseville? Because I'm surrounded by naysayers.
Well, some will be pissed about the trades and some won't.
Se la vi.
Who should really be pissed are the Atlanta Braves. They started off with Salty, Andrus, Harrison, Feliz, and Jones for a year rental of Mark Teixeira… where it was questionable that they had enough other parts in place for a run to even justify making such a drastic move. After dealing Teixeira to the Angels, they are left with Casey Kotchman and some middling minor league pitcher. Talk about a long-term setback.
Aikman and Bradshaw?
Please. They are in the same league as Trent Dilfer and Jim McMahon as QBs who were taken to the SB by great Defenses and great Running Games.
-DJCahill
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
- College player makes impossible over the fence catch to save tournament game (Video)
- Security!: Camden Yards guard collides with Royals’ Mike Moustakas
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
- Benches clear at Fenway as Red Sox-Rays rivalry heats up
- Keeping good company: Albert Pujols becomes fourth-youngest player to hit 450 home runs
