Lone Star Ball: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
New Blog: Cowboy Altitude for Wyoming Fans!

The Problem with Matt Cain

So, today's suggestion in the Newberg Report of a possible mid-season trade generated a lot of talk in the comments from this morning's roundup post.  For those who missed it, this is the relevant excerpt from Jamey:

Randy Galloway said on his radio show yesterday that he asked five Rangers officials who the club’s first baseman will be in 2012: Chris Davis or Justin Smoak

 

According to Galloway, the leading answer: Mitch Moreland.

 

I have some thoughts on that, but without going into much detail today, the half-baked scenario cooking in my head is that Davis or Smoak gets traded this July, maybe with Derek Holland or Matt Harrison, plus Wilmer Font or Engel Beltre, to the Giants for righthander Matt Cain (who has a $4.25 million salary plus a $6.25 million club option for 2011 that could escalate to $8.15 million) and right-handed corner bat Mark DeRosa (set to earn $12 million in 2010-2011). 

My immediate reaction to that proposal was that I really didn't like it.  $6 million per year for Mark DeRosa to be a 4C guy who gets 200-300 PAs seems very steep, but my main issue, as I expressed in response to some folks in the comments, is that I don't think Matt Cain is good enough to warrant giving up that level of talent.

I was asked why the Matt Cain hate, reminded that there's no guarantee Derek Holland will ever be as good as Cain, etc.  And there was enough talk about this -- and has been enough talk in the past about Cain, a popular message board trade target for Rangers fans -- that I thought it was worth doing a separate post to outline my issues on Cain.

First, let me be clear -- I think Cain is a very good pitcher.  I don't hate Cain, I don't think he sucks, it isn't anything like that.

However, at the same time, I don't think he's the TORP we've been looking for -- he's a solid #2 guy, but not the Roy Halladay-type ace the Rangers have been desiring for so long.  And if we weren't willing to part with Smoak or Holland to get Halladay, I don't see that it would make sense to part with Smoak or Holland (plus other valuable pieces) for a guy who isn't an ace.

Let's look at the numbers.  Cain had a great ERA last season -- 2.89, good for 7th in the N.L.  Even taking into account he's in the N.L., that's impressive.  Given the improvement from his ERAs in previous years, one could assume that Cain had taken a step forward in 2009, had progressed to TORP status.

However...when we look at the peripherals, we see Cain wasn't really much different in 2009 from his prior years.  Matt Cain had a FIP of 3.89 in 2009, 25th in the N.L., behind guys like Randy Wells and Paul Maholm.  He also has a career FIP of 3.89 -- it has never been lower than 3.78 or higher than 4.08.

Cain's K rate and walk rate were both down a little in 2009 from previous years, and his K/BB ratio was a little better, but that was offset by a better home run rate.  His career-low ERA was driven by a .268 BABIP and an 81.6% LOB rate.  Cain's spread between his FIP and ERA in 2009 was the third highest in the N.L.

If we turn to xFIP, Cain looks even worse -- he was 28th in the N.L. in 2009, with an xFIP of 4.22.  xFIP uses flyball percentage rather than home run percentage to calculate expected ERA, and Cain's rate of home runs as a percentage of fly balls was below normal, which drives the xFIP higher.

That being said, I'm not completely sold on the idea that a pitcher's HR/FB percentage is out of his control, and Cain has had lower than normal rates of HR/FB his entire career, with 2009 actually being the highest.  On the other hand, he is a righty flyball pitcher, and TBIA is a park that can really punish those guys...I don't think it is unreasonable to believe that his home run rate would go up significantly if he were pitching half his games in Arlington.

Interestingly, Cain's xFIP of 4.22 is the lowest of his career -- he has a career xFIP of 4.49, and has been in the mid-4s every season other than 2009.

If you prefer tERA, that paints a similar picture as FIP -- a tERA of 4.03 in 2009, and a tERA of 3.92 for his career. 

Cain is a guy who, if you look at the defense-independent pitching data, comes in as a solid #2 or very good #3 starter -- not as a #1.  And if I'm giving up Smoak or Holland plus other significant trade chips, I want a #1.

There is certainly the argument that could be made that Cain is just 25, that he could take the next step and become a #1 starter.  It wouldn't shock me if that happened.  But I certainly have a lot of concerns about giving up the sort of value we're talking about and getting a guy who you hope develops into a #1, versus already being one.  And while Cain is just 25, his performance has been pretty much static for the last four years, suggesting that he may very well already be what he's going to be.  And he put over 800 major league innings over 4 seasons on his arm before turning 25, which on the one hand might point to him being a workhorse, but on the other hand could point to him being a candidate for injury.

And you know, part of the reason that the Matt Cain talk scares me is that I could see the Rangers making a move like that this summer, thinking that Mitch Moreland (who is older than Davis and Smoak, less well regarded defensively at first base than those two, and yet to play above AA) makes those guys expendable and that Cain is someone they could be getting as he's breaking through to ace-ness, that he's a guy that could be that #1 and get them to the post-season.  And that makes me think of Adam Eaton and Brandon McCarthy, two other guys in other systems that this front office went and picked up because they felt the team was a contender and those guys were on the verge of ace-ness.  And even if he does break through, you're talking about someone you only control through 2011 anyway.

So there you have it.  That's my concern, and why I shudder every time someone mentions a blockbuster package for Cain, and have since people first started kicking it around on this site at least 18 months ago. 

It isn't that Cain doesn't have value.  It isn't that he isn't a very good pitcher.  It is that he's probably not as good as he would need to be to warrant giving up the talent we'd have to give up to get him.

0 recs  |  Comment 371 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

More from Lone Star Ball

Monday morning Rangers stuff

Jun 2009 by Adam J. Morris - 259 comments

Comments

Display:

There's somebody out there...

who though fucking Adam Eaton was on the verge of becoming an ace?

by venturafearsnolan on Mar 10, 2010 2:47 PM CST reply actions  

Quite a few folks

It wasn’t THAT ridiculous — people had been waiting for Eaton to break through for some tmie.

by Adam J. Morris on Mar 10, 2010 2:49 PM CST up reply actions  

Eaton

I remember making quite a few posts the day of the trade, practically screaming “THIS GUY IS WHAT HE IS- HE’S NOT A FREAKING ACE AND HE’S NEVER GOING TO BE!!!”

How did I know this? Because I’d drafted Eaton three straight years in my fantasy league prior to the trade, each time thinking, “this is the year he breaks out!”

Good to know I can be just as dumb as a real major-league GM!

"Jesus, Spanish- our jobs aren't enough, now you want our words?"

-- Sterling Archer

by RCCook on Mar 10, 2010 2:56 PM CST up reply actions  

The only reason you could do that...

…is because you weren’t in any fantasy leagues with me, because I always took Eaton.

by Adam J. Morris on Mar 10, 2010 2:58 PM CST up reply actions  

Yeah

In the early 00’s, there were three guys I drafted every year: Eaton, Javy Vazquez, and Vlad.

At least Vazquez rewarded me for those two seasons I carried his plus-5 ERA’s with an eventual breakout. Eaton kept kicking me in the nuts, and I kept coming back for more.

"Jesus, Spanish- our jobs aren't enough, now you want our words?"

-- Sterling Archer

by RCCook on Mar 10, 2010 3:01 PM CST up reply actions  

I did the same

I cursed when AG was included in the trade, but I stupidly thought that Laird+ CYoung would have been a good trade

by BuckyB on Mar 10, 2010 2:58 PM CST up reply actions  

Part of the reason I loathed the trade so completely...

Is because I didn’t see that kind of ceiling at all on Eaton.

Not to mention the fact that we gave up both CY and AG.

by venturafearsnolan on Mar 10, 2010 9:25 PM CST up reply actions  

lol it's hard to image I know

AJM was actually at the top of that list also. Not that he was alone…but yeah.

by Mike E on Mar 10, 2010 2:55 PM CST up reply actions  

The part about canceling

Otsuka and Gonzalez in hindsight ….

Sharky’s take looks great :)

"I don't condone steroids or any other type of growth hormones or anything else, but I could care less, and, for the most part, I don't think the fans give a (bleep). The people that care about it are the people that probably don't like baseball," - Jim Leyland

by DJCahill on Mar 10, 2010 3:05 PM CST up reply actions  

Yup.

Thank GOD we held on to Blalock instead of hacktastic Gonzalez.

by philkid3 on Mar 10, 2010 3:55 PM CST up reply actions  

I signed up at LSB the day after that post

"You promised me, Eckstein, that if I followed you, you would walk with me always. But I noticed that during the most trying periods of my life, there have only been one set of prints in the sand. Why, when I have needed you most, have you not been there for me?" David Eckstein replied, "Because my little legs had gotten tired, and you were carrying me." And I looked down and saw that I was still carrying David Eckstein.

Then he grounded out weakly to second.

by WyoRanger on Mar 10, 2010 3:28 PM CST up reply actions  

Did you realize he was always a huge jackass?

"I don’t know how these SN blog authors get their gigs, but I’m frankly surprised SN tolerates AJM’s lack of effort." Tex34

Neftali Feliz says sit your 5 dollar ass down before he makes change...

by Brian Thomas on Mar 11, 2010 5:26 PM CST up reply actions  

I did

I was wrong.

"Hang-Dai, Wu...Hang-Fu$&ing-Dai"

by Walter Sobchak on Mar 10, 2010 3:28 PM CST up reply actions  

I read Jamey’s proposal and immediately thought of Eaton and McCarthy as well. The Eaton comp is especially apt considering we had Teixeira and therefore Adrian Gonzalez was expendable.

I didn't know what a mancrush was. Derek Holland showed me.

by DerekSTheRed on Mar 10, 2010 2:52 PM CST reply actions  

Why...

the fuck is this a bad deal? Blah blah blah the peripherals…Cain is a number 1 SP anywhere outside of SF (Lincecum). I would give up young talent, alot of young talent for this guy. I just feel like alot of the people here haven’t seen Cain pitch before. Open your eyes people.

Rusty, the bed was very soft- Clark W. Griswold

by AndrusImpersonator on Mar 11, 2010 12:54 AM CST up reply actions  

Yeah

God forbid we should judge a pitcher on metrics that actually tell us how good a pitcher he is.

Let’s just go watch him pitch and hyperbolate from there.

Morality you can fake. Fun you either have or you don't.

by lonestarJon on Mar 11, 2010 1:52 AM CST up reply actions  

There's numbers...

and there’s an eye ball test. Cain has a simple wind-up and he is durable. I’ve always noticed a hitch in Hollands giddy-up. I would love to trade Holland for a stud like Cain unless Holland ends up being better than Cain…wait wuh?

Rusty, the bed was very soft- Clark W. Griswold

by AndrusImpersonator on Mar 11, 2010 2:25 AM CST up reply actions  

Ahh, the old "eyeball test".

The problem with the eyeball test is it’s horribly prone to subjectivity and tells you very little about a pitchers actual tendencies over sustained period of time. Especially when it comes to laymen like you and I.

I seriously doubt there’s anything of possible significance that could to be gained from watching Cain pitch that would sway or invalidate what his numbers tell us about him and their relevance to this situation.

Morality you can fake. Fun you either have or you don't.

by lonestarJon on Mar 11, 2010 2:38 AM CST up reply actions  

Hey Jon, when we gonna get sum pitchin up in here?

The good kind that know how to throw a baseball correctly? You know, the ones without a giddy-up?

"grilled cheese punches like a bitch" -Gdawg
"i feel like k-rod after a save." -by reagan on Jan 23, 2010, that glorious day Hicks was out of our lives.

by AceJC on Mar 11, 2010 2:49 AM CST up reply actions  

Is this for real?

This can’t be, right?

I mean, beyond just the fact that you called Matt Cain the second best pitcher in baseball. . .

by philkid3 on Mar 11, 2010 4:35 AM CST up reply actions  

Woooo

Looks like I was in my drunken “trade these prospects for some talent right forkin’ now” mood. Note to self, no more lonestarballin’ after a case of schlitz’es’es

Rusty, the bed was very soft- Clark W. Griswold

by AndrusImpersonator on Mar 13, 2010 11:35 PM CST up reply actions  

I really can't see the front office making that move

They aren’t going from targeting Halladay with Holland/Smoak to Cain. I have enough faith in them to see what we all see and realize that Cain isn’t going to be that established ace that you’re looking for if you’re trading two top young talents for a 1.5 year rental.

By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.

"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw

by Gdawg on Mar 10, 2010 2:55 PM CST reply actions  

REC!

If the Rangers don't make the play-offs this year I'm gonna go all Epic Bearded Man on your ass.

by BigGuns on Mar 10, 2010 10:09 PM CST up reply actions  

Keep dreamin

If there is anyone in baseball who is “untouchable” than Lincy is that man. Plus, Holland and Smoak aren’t near his talent level

Rusty, the bed was very soft- Clark W. Griswold

by AndrusImpersonator on Mar 11, 2010 2:31 AM CST up reply actions  

Halladay was once thought untouchable

Nobody is untouchable under the correct circumstance – a high enough price at the right time and he’s yours.

meta-signature

by rlb02a on Mar 11, 2010 8:15 AM CST up reply actions  

Pujols maybe, and probably Jeter

But I agree with your point. Most every player in baseball could be had for some price.

"Dying ain't hard. It’s living in the wake of a thorough public humiliation that’s hard.--JDT217

by WestTxAg06 on Mar 11, 2010 8:17 AM CST up reply actions  

He may be touchable

when he gets closer to his walk year. Once you get close to your walk year and you aren’t going to be signed, you are definitely going up on the market.

"I don't condone steroids or any other type of growth hormones or anything else, but I could care less, and, for the most part, I don't think the fans give a (bleep). The people that care about it are the people that probably don't like baseball," - Jim Leyland

by DJCahill on Mar 11, 2010 8:30 AM CST up reply actions  

There is only one Untouchable

and that’s MC Hammer (“Can’t touch this”)

Oh my god! What can it be? We're all doomed! Who's flying this thing?
-Wash

by iblum on Mar 11, 2010 12:30 PM CST up reply actions  

Boo

"I don’t know how these SN blog authors get their gigs, but I’m frankly surprised SN tolerates AJM’s lack of effort." Tex34

Neftali Feliz says sit your 5 dollar ass down before he makes change...

by Brian Thomas on Mar 11, 2010 5:31 PM CST up reply actions  

Go on

We’re all learning so much.

"I don’t know how these SN blog authors get their gigs, but I’m frankly surprised SN tolerates AJM’s lack of effort." Tex34

Neftali Feliz says sit your 5 dollar ass down before he makes change...

by Brian Thomas on Mar 11, 2010 5:31 PM CST up reply actions  

Yep

I agree

Go Rice Owls!

by JBImaknee on Mar 10, 2010 3:00 PM CST reply actions  

I agree with your thoughts on Cain

I think he’s a solid #2 and/or a good #3. I think trading Smoak for him is a little much.

However, in regards to Holland, what is everyone’s expectation of/for him? We really think he’s going to be a legit #1? I think ultimately his ceiling is as much as what Cain is right now. So with all that, why not accelerate Holland’s learning curve and get a #2 caliber starting pitcher in here that can eat 200 innings?

As far as only having Cain until 2011… there’s nothing that says an extension can’t be worked out. Even if not, then there are other prospects coming up through the system with Holland’s ceiling or above that will be available to the Rangers after 2011.

All the deal would really do is accelerate the learning curve of Holland and get a legit #2 starter in here for 2010 and 2011.

On the flipside, with it being a mid-season deal, Holland has given enough glimpses to allow for the idea that he’ll perform such that it negates the whole idea to start with. I think Holland has the goods; and while I think it will be 2011 before we really get THE Derek Holland, there’s a chance that Holland is good enough to not even mention in a deal for anyone.

I don’t think Holland is good enough to demand Lincecum for him, but I can see the possibility that Holland performs in 2010 more towards the good of 2009 than the bad. However, I don’t think Holland + Davis for Cain is all that bad of a trade.

by elvis1isking on Mar 10, 2010 3:02 PM CST reply actions  

x
All the deal would really do is accelerate the learning curve of Holland and get a legit #2 starter in here for 2010 and 2011.

And cost you, say, Chris Davis and Wilmer Font.

And cost you 6 years of Holland under team control for 2 years of Cain.

by Adam J. Morris on Mar 10, 2010 3:04 PM CST up reply actions  

exactly

if the Rangers’ window to compete was only this year or next, then you probably make this deal.

But this club has 3-4 years of Kinsler, Hamilton, etc; more of Andrus, Smoak, Davis, etc. There is no point to rush now. If on July 31st, Smoak is crushing the ball, and you’re a lock for the playoffs despite an iffy rotation you maybe move Davis and Holland for an ace starter (preferably one better/under more control than Cain). But that is a very narrow conditional.

Go Rice Owls!

by JBImaknee on Mar 10, 2010 3:10 PM CST up reply actions  

Agree but screw the playoffs

I’m not buying a 1.5 yr rental for Holland/Smoak. Stay the course. This isn’t the year we get past the WC round and as much as new ownership may want to make a splash and build fan interest; I’d rather make a similar trade next year when I think we’ll have a shot at the series.

by thedudeabides on Mar 10, 2010 6:34 PM CST up reply actions  

well, that is my point

There are times when trading a top prospect for a #2 pitcher with a year or so left makes sense. Just probably not for the Rangers in 2010.

Go Rice Owls!

by JBImaknee on Mar 10, 2010 8:20 PM CST up reply actions  

Font

I just assumed Font was the guy thrown in to get DeRosa. I think that’s too much for DeRosa, but Jamey loves the guy, so it’s easily explained.

So it’s Holland and Davis for Cain — that’s what I focus on. Yeah, you get 6 years of Holland, but there’s considerable thought that a portion of this season he’ll be in AAA. He’s not helping the big league club there. Also, there is certainly enough arms in the fold to think that we’ll have Holland’s spot covered — this doesn’t open up a gaping hole in 4 years.

There are loads of reasons how and why team control for one guy isn’t the deal breaker. It just isn’t going to put the team behind the 8 ball at all.

by elvis1isking on Mar 10, 2010 3:11 PM CST up reply actions  

You're nuts

I’ve responded in much more detail in the Wed. a.m. post, so here I’m just going to say you’re nuts.

Freude, schoener Goetterfunken,
Tochter aus Elysium,
Wir betreten feuertrunken,
Himmlische dein Heiligtum.

by t ball on Mar 10, 2010 3:08 PM CST up reply actions  

no, not really

you just don’t want to trade any prospects. Understandable, but that doesn’t make me nuts.

This isn’t the Eaton trade. It isn’t the Danks trade. It’s a trade where we trade 2 good prospects for 1 proven ML #2 starting pitcher.

by elvis1isking on Mar 10, 2010 3:13 PM CST up reply actions  

No, god damn it

Where in the hell did I ever say I do not want to trade any prospects? Holland was nearly as good as Cain last year already, why in the hell am I going to trade him for Cain? If you trade for Cain, you do not give up Holland to do so. If you can build a package without Holland, Feliz, or Perez I would consider it.

Don’t put words in my mouth. Cain is not really better than Holland — AND — he’s cheaper for the next several years.

You have completely failed to convince me that Cain will be better over the next two years than Holland. Look at their K rates, BB rates, GB rates, FIP, xFIP, again.

I get that you disagree with me, but don’t fucking put words in my mouth.

Freude, schoener Goetterfunken,
Tochter aus Elysium,
Wir betreten feuertrunken,
Himmlische dein Heiligtum.

by t ball on Mar 10, 2010 3:19 PM CST up reply actions  

Cain is better than Holland

This is another case where these advanced stats paint the wrong picture. Cain doesn’t allow runs to score. Holland did and in droves. Holland may eventually get his numbers down to Cain levels but who knows how long that will take. And if the rangers are serious about contending this year you have to give serious thought to shoring up your known quantities in the rotation. Especially given what our rotation consists of right now. A guy who you can expect 200 innings of ~3.50 ERA from would be an unbelievable boost to this club.

Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.

by bigsteve on Mar 10, 2010 3:25 PM CST up reply actions  

Not only did he learn math

but he invented his own math

By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.

"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw

by Gdawg on Mar 10, 2010 3:27 PM CST up reply actions   1 recs

I know math

But to sit here and say Derek Holland is as good as Matt Cain is ludicrous. He may very well become as good as Cain is right now. it may happen this year it may take a few years. but right now Derek Holland is not as good as Matt Cain.

Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.

by bigsteve on Mar 10, 2010 3:27 PM CST up reply actions  

How long do you think

it will take before Holland is as good as Cain? I think it could easily happen this year. His peripherals are already as good as Cain’s. And he’s left handed, gets more ground balls, is cheaper, etc.

You really don’t understand that peripherals are a better predictor of future ERA than past ERA is.

Freude, schoener Goetterfunken,
Tochter aus Elysium,
Wir betreten feuertrunken,
Himmlische dein Heiligtum.

by t ball on Mar 10, 2010 3:29 PM CST up reply actions  

2011

Holland could/should be as good as Cain in 2011. So again, you accelerate by 2 years the his learning curve for a club expected to compete for the division in 2010 and beyond.

By that time, more Rangers prospects with a higher ceiling than Holland have had time to cook, and it’s entirely possible that Scheppers and Perez are in the rotation too.

The trade for Cain really gets even better if an extension can be reached with him.

As I said in the morning thread, I don’t think I’d trade Holland without that extension from Cain, but the deal itself isn’t as bad as some of you guys try to make it seem.

by elvis1isking on Mar 10, 2010 3:32 PM CST up reply actions  

So, basically...

…you want to give up 6 years of Holland and 6 years of Davis or Smoak to improve your chances of winning in 2010.

I’m not down with that.

by Adam J. Morris on Mar 10, 2010 3:34 PM CST up reply actions   1 recs

I would trade 6 years of Holland and 6 years of Davis for 4 years of Cain

2 years no but add a 2 year extension onto it and sign me up

Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.

by bigsteve on Mar 10, 2010 3:36 PM CST up reply actions  

but you don't

lessen your chances of winning in 2011, and with an extension you don’t lose anything as far as production goes.

Like I said above, it is ENTIRELY possible that Holland performs in 2010 such that this deal isn’t even a remote possibility. However, if Holland continues to not have the kind of results we think he should, then the deal has to be considered.

And really, my point is it isn’t the terrible deal that most in the morning thread were claiming it to be. This isn’t the Eaton deal. It isn’t the Danks deal. Matt Cain is a damn good pitcher, and if Holland hasn’t reached Cain-level and the deal is on the table — it bears consideration.

Why does everyone get to pick the best of Holland and the worst (or so-so) of Cain? It’s entirely possible that Holland is still flashing potential but Cain is delivering results.

by elvis1isking on Mar 10, 2010 3:40 PM CST up reply actions  

With an extension...

…you have $12-15 million less per year to spend on other things than you would if Holland was still here.

by Adam J. Morris on Mar 10, 2010 3:41 PM CST up reply actions  

i think our payroll is at a point where we can absorb Cains salary and not be hamstrung

Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.

by bigsteve on Mar 10, 2010 3:44 PM CST up reply actions  

this doesn't make any sense

unless you think our payroll is unlimited

by BuckyB on Mar 10, 2010 3:45 PM CST up reply actions  

Adding Cains salary (plus a extension)

Would still leave us with room to go out and sign quality players and still be in the neighborhood of what Greenberg has said he thinks our payroll should be at

Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.

by bigsteve on Mar 10, 2010 3:51 PM CST up reply actions  

The point

Is that you don’t spend money just to spend it. If Cain and his salary are only marginally making you better than Holland and his, I can’t understand why you’d be for it.

by brettgardner on Mar 10, 2010 3:52 PM CST up reply actions  

Is Cain going to be better than Holland in 2010?

yes IMO

In 2011? Probably but most likely the same at worst.

Beyond? I don’t think Holland will ever be more than what Cain already is. I think theres a chance Holland never becomes what Cain currently is.

this isn’t throwing money away on a scrub. Its spending money wisely on a player who we are almost certain will give us consistent quality results.

Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.

by bigsteve on Mar 10, 2010 3:58 PM CST up reply actions  

So do you want 2 years of possible Cain production or 6?

"You promised me, Eckstein, that if I followed you, you would walk with me always. But I noticed that during the most trying periods of my life, there have only been one set of prints in the sand. Why, when I have needed you most, have you not been there for me?" David Eckstein replied, "Because my little legs had gotten tired, and you were carrying me." And I looked down and saw that I was still carrying David Eckstein.

Then he grounded out weakly to second.

by WyoRanger on Mar 10, 2010 4:11 PM CST up reply actions  

Like Ive said I would want a extension before any deal

I’ll deal away 6 years to get 4 back.

Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.

by bigsteve on Mar 10, 2010 4:12 PM CST up reply actions  

what Adam suggested

2/30

I would probably shoot for 2/26-28 but would settle on 30 if he insisted

Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.

by bigsteve on Mar 10, 2010 4:16 PM CST up reply actions  

I can't imagine he'd agree to this.

How many guys sign two year extensions the winter before they’re set to hit the FA market?

The fact that he’s set to hit at 27 means he could be looking to make that sweet Pets.com money.

If John Lackey’s worth 5/80, I could see some team giving Cain 7/119.

I can’t see why he’d do this.

When there’s a chance to hit the jackpot, why give away your chance at it for a two year deal?

I realize there’s some risk, cause if he had a bad ‘11 or suffered an injury that’d put a severe crink in his plans, but, still.

No way would I let him sign that deal if I was his agent.

The 40 Trumps All!!!

by thedirkatron on Mar 10, 2010 4:23 PM CST up reply actions  

he won't get

TORP money. He could potentially get AJ Burnett/John Lackey money though.

I think 4/50 might get the job done as far as extending him, but there would have to be some conditions in place that favor the Rangers in order for Cain to agree to that.

by elvis1isking on Mar 10, 2010 4:27 PM CST up reply actions  

Quick

name 27 year old number 2 pitchers who settle on 4/50 when they hit FA.

By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.

"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw

by Gdawg on Mar 10, 2010 6:02 PM CST up reply actions  

To be fair he's talking about as an extension, either next winter or at the time of a mid-season trade, rather than once he hits FA.

But, still… No.

4/60 might get the job done… MIGHT.

And that’s if he was feeling generous, imo.

Buying him out of his first 4 FA years would be expensive any way you slice it.

The 40 Trumps All!!!

by thedirkatron on Mar 10, 2010 6:06 PM CST up reply actions  

yep

and I said might. I agree 4/60 is more plausible, and that might still not be enough but it’s close. Johnson got $13.75 for his 1st 2 FA years in his extension, so 4/55 or 4/60 probably pretty close to what Cain could reasonably expect.

by elvis1isking on Mar 10, 2010 6:19 PM CST up reply actions  

THIS

If the Rangers don't make the play-offs this year I'm gonna go all Epic Bearded Man on your ass.

by BigGuns on Mar 10, 2010 4:38 PM CST up reply actions  

true

but we have a lot of talent coming up in the minors too.

Our positional players are pretty much covered. We shouldn’t need much for FA there. If we had Cain, we wouldn’t be looking for anything other than a true TORP, and if our payroll expands to $80-$85 I think we’ll have enough to go after one (it’d be close with Cain’s extension, but I’m pretty sure we could cover it).

Pitching is where the big money goes, and a good chunk of that would be to Cain. I’m alright with that.

by elvis1isking on Mar 10, 2010 3:44 PM CST up reply actions  

OK
Our positional players are pretty much covered. We shouldn’t need much for FA there.

Wrong.

If we had Cain, we wouldn’t be looking for anything other than a true TORP, and if our payroll expands to $80-$85 I think we’ll have enough to go after one (it’d be close with Cain’s extension, but I’m pretty sure we could cover it).

It’s really kind of irrelevant.

Pitching is where the big money goes, and a good chunk of that would be to Cain. I’m alright with that.

Even though that’s just an opinion, it’s wrong.

by brettgardner on Mar 10, 2010 3:47 PM CST up reply actions  

what positions

are we going to throw big money at over the next 4 years?

by elvis1isking on Mar 10, 2010 3:48 PM CST up reply actions  

potentially 2b, 3b, 1b, LF, DH, C

dunno how long until Cruz starts making cash

by BuckyB on Mar 10, 2010 3:49 PM CST up reply actions  

This is his last pre-arb year.

My guess is he’s gonna go something like 3-4, 5-6, 8-10 if he continues to have seasons somewhere in line with last year’s.

The 40 Trumps All!!!

by thedirkatron on Mar 10, 2010 3:52 PM CST up reply actions  

Thats not FA though

We have all our positional players except DH under control for several more years. Any increase will be increases that occur naturally through arbitration

Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.

by bigsteve on Mar 10, 2010 3:59 PM CST up reply actions  

Tell me the difference (I hate arguing with you, ps)

a) We release Hamilton and sign a $10M FA LF
b) We give Hamilton $10M in arbitration

please tell me why the fact that this “naturally occurred” is relevant

by BuckyB on Mar 10, 2010 4:01 PM CST up reply actions  

You can plan out arbitration raises in the budget

hell I can go make a spreadshett right now with rangers players and their salaries and get pretty damn close on what payroll will be if the team remains the same.

Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.

by bigsteve on Mar 10, 2010 4:06 PM CST up reply actions  

Because

Right now you could probably go into JDs office and he could tell you approximately what next years payroll will be if everything stayed the same. he could probably do that for several years down the road. So if they can fit 12-15 mil in the budget a couple years from now without it making their pursestrings tighten then I think we should do it.

Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.

by bigsteve on Mar 10, 2010 4:14 PM CST up reply actions  

are we arguing?

I think the points that you, Adam, Brett, t ball, et al bring up are very good points, and certainly need addressing.

I think as a matter of budget planning it needs to be taken into acct the Hamilton and Cruz’s arb money along with an extension for Cain (and Feldman if he another good year).

I think that can be covered by increasing payroll and with some of the money that’s set to be off the books. Don’t know for sure (can’t work on it until tonight), and it may not be likely, but I believe just guessing that it can be covered.

by elvis1isking on Mar 10, 2010 4:09 PM CST up reply actions  

money comes off the books

in some of those cases. Payroll is also expanding.

If we really have to worry about $10-$12 mil for extensions to really good pitchers, what are we going to do with Holland, Scheppers, Perez, Feliz, etc when they get there. Most on here don’t advocate the OAK style of managing, but it seems that’s pretty much the tact being used here.

by elvis1isking on Mar 10, 2010 3:59 PM CST up reply actions  

I don't know

But it’s not as if we’re looking at murderer’s row, here. There are some positions that could certainly be upgraded today, and some that it may become clear within a year or two need to be upgraded.

by brettgardner on Mar 10, 2010 3:50 PM CST up reply actions  

reset

We’re discussing a deal in which we’re making a mid-season move to either win the division or prepare for the playoffs. That inherently means we’re doing pretty well.

I don’t disagree that some positions (C,CF) could end up needing to be addressed, but if we’re a division winning team then we’ll have a good core already in place. I just don’t think we’ll need $20 to $30 mil in payroll to address positional players.

by elvis1isking on Mar 10, 2010 3:53 PM CST up reply actions  

Well

There’s no reason to think in terms of some hypothetical team. The Rangers expect to be in the position you’re talking about.

by brettgardner on Mar 10, 2010 3:56 PM CST up reply actions  

The Rangers have huge uncertainties at catcher,

an aging third baseman who should be shifted to DH by the end of his current contract, and long-term question marks in the outfield at the major-league level. Who in the minor-league system is in position to replace those players? And what do you do if a fixture gets injured, you don’t have a quality replacement, and you’re hamstrung on payroll?

by Snark on Mar 10, 2010 3:52 PM CST up reply actions  

who

in FA is going to cost such that it becomes prohibitive to extend Cain to cover these guys?

I don’t think $10 to $12 mil is going to be prohibitive in bringing in good players if our payroll is going to be $80, $85, $90 mil.

by elvis1isking on Mar 10, 2010 3:55 PM CST up reply actions  

dude

$12 mil on Cain is $12 mil you can’t spend on someone else

no body is arguing that we would be capped out if you upped our salary by $12 mil.

Keep Holland who could be as good or better than Cain. Spend $12 M on someone else. That’s all they’re saying

by BuckyB on Mar 10, 2010 3:57 PM CST up reply actions   1 recs

1,000 times this.

I liked defending Cain but this is still absolutely correct.

by philkid3 on Mar 10, 2010 3:59 PM CST up reply actions  

could be

that’s point everyone is skimming over.
Could be. May not be.

We know what Cain is. We hope we know what Holland turns into.

Best case scenario, sure, keep Holland. And again, by mid season we’ll be closer to knowing if that’s a realistic stance to take, but the snapshot of today, Cain for Holland isn’t a bad trade.

by elvis1isking on Mar 10, 2010 4:01 PM CST up reply actions  

We don't know what Cain will be in 2012-13

I’d be scared to give him the 2 year, $30 million extension he’d likely demand given his workload and flyball tendencies.

by Adam J. Morris on Mar 10, 2010 4:03 PM CST up reply actions  

one mans workload

is another mans workload. He’ll be all of 28, I don’t think he’ll start to breakdown then.

I do agree with you and t ball that it’s a legit concern, but just given that he’s gone 1000 innings so far without a major injury, I think he can go more.

I totally get and understand the workload worry though. Not discounting it at all.

by elvis1isking on Mar 10, 2010 4:05 PM CST up reply actions  

2/30? Man, I'm thinking he'd ask for at least 5/70 to sign.

5/80 or 6/96 is prolly more like it.

Why would he sign away two years of free agency 12 or so months before he’s scheduled to hit the market?

The 40 Trumps All!!!

by thedirkatron on Mar 10, 2010 4:06 PM CST up reply actions  

Well

He’ll have just turned 27 when he hits FA for the first time. if he signs a 5 year deal he will be 32 again when he hits FA and the way FA has been going guys that age aren’t getting long term deals like they used to.

Siigning a 2 year deal puts him square at the prime FA age which is 29 and then he can get a 5 or 6 year deal and be set for life

Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.

by bigsteve on Mar 10, 2010 4:10 PM CST up reply actions  

Why is 29 a better age for Free Agency than 27?

Look at the comments under Jeff Wilson's blog post on dallasnews.com. What a bunch of rocket scientists.- Keith Law

Curse your sudden but inevitable betrayal!

by Keynes on Mar 10, 2010 5:57 PM CST up reply actions  

Yeah, kinda amazing that Fox fucked that one up

Firefly, Family Guy, Futurama- Fox hates good shows that start with an ‘F’

Look at the comments under Jeff Wilson's blog post on dallasnews.com. What a bunch of rocket scientists.- Keith Law

Curse your sudden but inevitable betrayal!

by Keynes on Mar 10, 2010 8:05 PM CST via mobile up reply actions  

Yeah, well, you know, that’s just, like, your opinion, man

by tyd3311 on Mar 10, 2010 8:09 PM CST up reply actions   1 recs

Yeah...

and I believe this is the first time I’ve heard him express that opinion too.

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

by slc ranger on Mar 10, 2010 8:13 PM CST up reply actions  

The dude

would not like family guy. The dude would like southpark. Just saying.

by thedudeabides on Mar 11, 2010 6:01 AM CST up reply actions  

Yeh, I noe

But regardless of your opinion of it, you have to admit it’s a succesful show-making the decision to dump it by Fox look dumb in hindsight. Same goes for Futurama’s success on cable and subsequent return and Firefly/Serenity’s success as DVD’s (and I think Serenity was profitable at the box office, as well)

Look at the comments under Jeff Wilson's blog post on dallasnews.com. What a bunch of rocket scientists.- Keith Law

Curse your sudden but inevitable betrayal!

by Keynes on Mar 10, 2010 8:35 PM CST via mobile up reply actions  

Yuppers.

Arrested Development and Wonderfalls were Fox too, iirc.

/Begin Rant That No One Will Care About.
Wonderfalls is such an awesome show, but no one knows about it cause Fox f’d in the a with a baseball b in pretty much every single way possible.
/End Rant That No One Cared About.

If there’s a common thread with the shows Fox has fucked it’s that they tend to get these projects that are bit off-beat, which is a lot of what makes them good, but unfortunately it also makes it hard for them to find an audience, especially at first. And Fox has never met a show it couldn’t fail to promote properly. Ugh.

I’m torn.

On one hand they’re to be lauded for greenlighting shows no other network seemed to want to touch, but then they fuck it all up.

I’m reminded of the quote from Charlie Wilson’s War:

“These things happened. They were glorious and they changed the world… and then we fucked up the end game.”

The 40 Trumps All!!!

by thedirkatron on Mar 10, 2010 9:17 PM CST up reply actions  

I'd say they're learning, but Sarah Conner and Dollhouse disagree

I guess they’ve done a good job with promoting Glee, as well- I can see how a musical sitcom would be a tough sell, but they seem to have gotten it over. SSS applies there, though, since they only have one season in the books, and two seasons is the point where Fox breaks out the fuckitup hammer.

Look at the comments under Jeff Wilson's blog post on dallasnews.com. What a bunch of rocket scientists.- Keith Law

Curse your sudden but inevitable betrayal!

by Keynes on Mar 10, 2010 9:51 PM CST via mobile up reply actions  

I so miss Sarah

"Back on the scene, with a gangsta lean" RW
"When you have a weapon on your shoulder like he has, you can be cool." RW on Perez
And the little bastard threw it for a swinging strike three in a 3-2 count. He’s blessed. And ballsy.

by Rodney on Mar 11, 2010 10:51 AM CST up reply actions  

That show was infinitely better

than both Terminator 3 and 4.

Scene where a terminator lays waste to a SWAT team to the tunes of Johnny motherfucking Cash > any part of Terminator 3 or 4.

I think I’ll forever hate Fox for Firelfy, Dollhouse, and SCC.

"The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason." - Benjamin Franklin

by JBP on Mar 11, 2010 12:42 PM CST up reply actions  

Oh, and Arrested Development of course.

"The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason." - Benjamin Franklin

by JBP on Mar 11, 2010 12:43 PM CST up reply actions  

Wonderfalls was ridiculously underrated.

Meanwhile, AD is, inarguably, the greatest sitcom in the history of the genre and it had only one full season. So underrated does not even begin to apply here.

by philkid3 on Mar 10, 2010 10:07 PM CST up reply actions  

Yuppers.

Cliff Lee, Josh Beckett, Adam Dunn and Carl Crawford all make me pretty hard.

Guys like Sheets, Webb and Harden could be in that mix too if they can prove their health this season.

I’d rather add any of them dudes via FA this off season than overpay at the deadline for Matt Cain and then have to spend big to retain him.

The 40 Trumps All!!!

by thedirkatron on Mar 10, 2010 4:02 PM CST up reply actions  

or half of what it would cost to scrap our Cs

and go hard after Mauer

"Hang-Dai, Wu...Hang-Fu$&ing-Dai"

by Walter Sobchak on Mar 10, 2010 5:07 PM CST up reply actions  

No way does Mauer come here.

If he hits the market, he’s going to Boston/New York.

We won’t be able to compete with the money they’d be able to offer, I don’t think.

But I think the chances of him hitting the market are about 2%, at best.

Minny knows what they have in him, and he seems to be amenable to signing long term without testing the market.

With their new stadium opening this year… no way they’d be dumb enough to let him hit the market as long as he’s willing to be reasonable with them.

The 40 Trumps All!!!

by thedirkatron on Mar 10, 2010 5:12 PM CST up reply actions  

Mauer

I don’t see any way the twins let him get away.
But yeah even if he did hit open market he’s going to ny or boston

"I'm against picketing, but I don't know how to show it." - Mitch Hedberg

by rentz on Mar 10, 2010 5:20 PM CST up reply actions  

Yup.

Looking long-term, the only things you can really feel really comfortable about position-player wise is the middle infield. I think you can probably feel okay about first base (at least one guy has to pan out, right?) and centerfield.

Then there are huge fucking question marks.

by philkid3 on Mar 10, 2010 3:59 PM CST up reply actions  

centerfield

not sure why that is on the list as of right now

by ab03 on Mar 10, 2010 4:08 PM CST up reply actions  

Because

Borbon has shown plenty of reason to feel he can probably be at least an average offensive centerfielder with above average defense. He hasn’t shown enough to be certain, which is why I said okay instead of comfortable.

by philkid3 on Mar 10, 2010 4:11 PM CST up reply actions  

Why 3rd?

because we feel Young’s defense won’t hold up? And if that’s the case, do we plan on shifting him to DH (thereby knocking that need off the list) or 2B if Kinsler walks (thereby knocking that need off the list)?

"Hang-Dai, Wu...Hang-Fu$&ing-Dai"

by Walter Sobchak on Mar 10, 2010 5:08 PM CST up reply actions  

I do understand they are indicators

But all of Cains peripherals have stayed relatively constant. Hollands peripherals may suggest he can be as good as Cain but he has to learn how to get ML hitters out. people point to his higher than average HR rate. Yes by the numbers you would expect that to come down but if he doesn’t learn to not throw the ball over the middle of the plate like he did oh so often last year then that number will remain high.

i don’t know how long it will take Holland to become Cain. But if the Rangers are serious about contending this year its not a bad idea to get your “future Holland” right now.

The caveat to me would be an extension. one would have to be in place before a trade be made. I don’t think only 2 years of Cain is worth Holland but if we got a 2 year extension I would do it in a heartbeat.

Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.

by bigsteve on Mar 10, 2010 3:36 PM CST up reply actions  

What was the difference between the two last season beyond their ERA?

Holland a BABIP of .321 to Cain’s .268. He also had a 64.7 LOB% vs. Cain’s 81%

By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.

"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw

by Gdawg on Mar 10, 2010 3:30 PM CST up reply actions  

Duh, that proves Cain is better

/bigsteve

Freude, schoener Goetterfunken,
Tochter aus Elysium,
Wir betreten feuertrunken,
Himmlische dein Heiligtum.

by t ball on Mar 10, 2010 3:31 PM CST up reply actions  

3 of his 4 years Cain has had BABIPs under .285

Look I expect Holland to improve but I don’t expect him to be at Cains level next year. We are primed to compete now and adding a piece like Cain makes us better now and doesn’t diminish us down the road

Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.

by bigsteve on Mar 10, 2010 3:38 PM CST up reply actions  

And before the usual suspects start in...

“Competing” = having a realistic shot to win the WS.

by JDT217 on Mar 10, 2010 3:41 PM CST up reply actions  

Competing = having a chance to get to the playoffs

Getting to the playoffs means you have a chance at winning the WS

by BuckyB on Mar 10, 2010 3:50 PM CST up reply actions  

Realistic

That means being able to win a short series, which this team, as currently constructed, cannot reasonably be expected to do.

by JDT217 on Mar 10, 2010 4:02 PM CST up reply actions  

I don't entirely agree with what I think your premise is.

If two teams are equal in the regular season, but one does it with an even rotation and strong organizational depth, and the other does it with awesome starters and two of the best pitchers in baseball at the top and relative crap everywhere else, they may be the same in the regular season, but the latter is better suited for the post season.

I think the Rangers currently don’t have a team built very well for the post season as well as they are the regular season.

I do, agree, though, that if you can make the post season you have a chance at the World Series and the Rangers are, thus, contenders by either standard.

by philkid3 on Mar 10, 2010 4:16 PM CST up reply actions  

could be a point

in favor of getting Cain if he comes available.

So many variables… who’s responsible for us getting into position to get to the playoffs. What’s the future outlook for those players? Who can we get, and what does it cost to get them.

Ultimately, if Cain makes you better for the playoff run, and Holland (and Davis too) isn’t one of the guys carrying you to the playoffs — hard not to make that deal.

by elvis1isking on Mar 10, 2010 4:22 PM CST up reply actions  

then who?

Feliz? I can’t imagine anyone is willing to give up Perez at this point… Scheppers? Who — it isn’t like we can bundle the remains of Poveda with Beavan for Cain…

by elvis1isking on Mar 10, 2010 6:24 PM CST up reply actions  

Maybe Scheppers.

But more likely I don’t want him for what it would take to get him.

by philkid3 on Mar 10, 2010 7:49 PM CST up reply actions  

interesting

I find that choice interesting. Scheppers probably already has a higher ceiling than Holland, though obvious injury concerns abound with him.

I’m actually a little more against dealing Scheppers than Holland, though it will be interesting to review both come mid-season and see where they are.

There’s going to come a point and time in the Rangers very near future that we’re going to give up at least one very good prospect in order to make a move to shore up the club for post-season play.

by elvis1isking on Mar 10, 2010 9:00 PM CST up reply actions  

ceiling vs. risk

Scheppers might have a higher ceiling, but he also has a much higher risk factor.

Freude, schoener Goetterfunken,
Tochter aus Elysium,
Wir betreten feuertrunken,
Himmlische dein Heiligtum.

by t ball on Mar 10, 2010 9:06 PM CST up reply actions  

I know you weren't really saying this, but I don't agree about Scheppers having the higher ceiling.

Much like Brian Thomas the first time he saw a naked dude, Der-Hol came really fast.

He definitely had some troubles at the big league level, but he rocketed through the minors, pretty much skipped AAA all together and ended up doing a lot of his learning “on the job”, so to speak.

The kid showed great control and missed a ton of bats in the minors, and even though he struggled, we still saw a kid who can sit at 92-93 and touch 95-96.

A little consistency with his breaking pitches and changeup and I still think the kid’s got ace potential.

Scheppers is really freaking sexy, but I wonder if this isn’t a bit of shiny new toy syndrome.

I’d still take Der-Hol over Schepp, hands down.

The 40 Trumps All!!!

by thedirkatron on Mar 10, 2010 9:28 PM CST up reply actions  

scouting grades

Scheppers comes equipped with 2 plus pitches. There’s debate about Holland and his offspeed stuff… is one or the other plus or above avg, etc.

I don’t think true TORP is really Holland’s ceiling where it certainly is for Scheppers — again, using some fairly well accepted scouting guidelines.

That being said, I don’t begrudge anyone who wants to hold on to Holland. I’m a big fan of his too, and ultimately I think a trade like the one discussed comes down to how things are going come July and how Holland looks to be progressing.

by elvis1isking on Mar 10, 2010 9:46 PM CST up reply actions  

I think you sell Holland's ceiling way short.

True — your word — TORP is one of the 30 best pitchers in baseball. If talent was distributed evenly, that’s what it would take to be at least the best pitcher in one rotation.

Someone who dominated so much in the minors has enough upside to at least be one of the 30 best pitchers in baseball.

by philkid3 on Mar 10, 2010 10:11 PM CST up reply actions  

way short?

nah. 30 innings above A-ball. Not even time to throw in a stinker for everyone to obsess negatively over.

I’m not sure how or why the apparently subdued thought that Holland can or will be a solid #2 pitcher in the Majors is selling him short. I do think he has a longer way to go to get there than what seems to be the general consensus in this thread. Again, not sure how that sells him short…

by elvis1isking on Mar 10, 2010 11:37 PM CST up reply actions  

I said might

have a higher ceiling. I think Holland and Scheppers both have ace potential.

Freude, schoener Goetterfunken,
Tochter aus Elysium,
Wir betreten feuertrunken,
Himmlische dein Heiligtum.

by t ball on Mar 11, 2010 1:40 AM CST up reply actions  

Yes, hence me saying that you weren't really saying it. ;)

The issue had sort of been broached in the thread a little, and I just chose your comment to respond to cause the Dirkatron does whatever the fuck he pleases cause he’s handsome and once made out with a female girl on a beach that was all sorts of ocean adjacent.

The 40 Trumps All!!!

by thedirkatron on Mar 11, 2010 2:01 AM CST up reply actions  

Oh brother

They’re not going to get 200 innings from Cain between August 1 and the end of the season. He’d be a marginal upgrade at best over Holland if you’re talking about two months. And you’d be giving up years of topflight talent at an incredible bargain rate by trading Holland.

Trade for Cain if you like, just don’t send Holland the other way as the price.

Freude, schoener Goetterfunken,
Tochter aus Elysium,
Wir betreten feuertrunken,
Himmlische dein Heiligtum.

by t ball on Mar 10, 2010 3:27 PM CST up reply actions  

Hey sorry I don't take advanced stats as the bible

Cain has had the ability for most of his career to maintain a lower than average BABIP. Even the one year his BABIP was normal he was still pretty good.

If im running the games through a computer and getting the result then yeah i’ll take Holland because they are similar. But on the field, give me Cain next year and if we had an extension in place I would take him over holland for the near future

Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.

by bigsteve on Mar 10, 2010 3:42 PM CST up reply actions  

I guess I'm curious

What do people like you think stats are?

by brettgardner on Mar 10, 2010 3:43 PM CST up reply actions  

I, too, would like an answer.

If someone has a legit problem with how advanced stats are derived — like, say, if one of them doesn’t involve park factors or (as has been mentioned with OPS) weights OBP and SLG equally — that’s cool. I can appreciate that.

But it seems to me that the vast majority of people who don’t trust advanced statistics are angry because they disprove whatever preconceived notions they hold, or say something they don’t particularly like.

"Don’t want to spend my night waiting in line unless it’s for more beer."
--EssBee, on LoneStarBall, Jan. 21, 2010

by ghtd36 on Mar 10, 2010 3:50 PM CST up reply actions  

"the vast majority of people who don’t trust advanced statistics are angry because they disprove whatever preconceived notions they hold, or say something they don’t particularly like."

Absolutely correct. People who have an issue because they see actual problems with evidence or methodology and can back it up with their own homework are awesome.

They are few and far between.

by philkid3 on Mar 10, 2010 4:02 PM CST up reply actions  

Not really

Popular statistics, which proponents call advanced are often primitive and often require faith more than anything else. The methodologies are often literally hidden or are shielded from real discussion by bad writing and/or excessively technical parlance.

People who have problems with the methodologies, reasoning or lack thereof and data are routinely attacked.

The conclusions that are touted as “proven” change along the way.

by Salty on Mar 11, 2010 9:31 AM CST up reply actions  

I try and balance the advanced stats with the rudimentary ones

Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.

by bigsteve on Mar 10, 2010 3:50 PM CST up reply actions  

What does that mean?

I don’t think anyone would say “this one statistic tells you everything you need to know.”

by brettgardner on Mar 10, 2010 3:51 PM CST up reply actions  

Theres not just one stat

I look at FIP but also ERA and BABIP and whatever else. I don’t rely solely on one stat to rule my life as a baseball fan. I don’t think luck has alot of effect because these are professionals. they are the best of the best. Is there some luck…sure. but I don’t believe that just because a guy has a low BABIP its luck based.

Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.

by bigsteve on Mar 10, 2010 4:02 PM CST up reply actions  

aka

I like to use the stat that most supports my opinion at any given time

by BuckyB on Mar 10, 2010 4:04 PM CST up reply actions   1 recs

No not necessarily

theres been lots of times people on here have swayed me from my original viewpoint.

But right now nobody has on this issue.

Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.

by bigsteve on Mar 10, 2010 4:07 PM CST up reply actions  

But would you take him over, say, Holland + Daivs and someone like Adam Dunn?

Cause Cain’s gonna take a big chunk of change to extend.

Money we could be using to get a slugger or a TORG via FA or salary dump.

The 40 Trumps All!!!

by thedirkatron on Mar 10, 2010 3:44 PM CST up reply actions  

I'm getting less optimistic that the Nats are going to move Dunn.

But I’d certainly rather have Dunn/Holland/Davis than Cain/DeRosa.

by JDT217 on Mar 10, 2010 3:45 PM CST up reply actions  

He'll be a FA at the end of the season.

As will Crawford, Derek Lee, Carlos Pena, Victor Martinez, etc…

I’d rather hold onto our young core and spend money in FA or in absorbing a salary dump or two if we’re gonna spend it.

Cashing in a couple of our most promosing young chips for a good-but-not-great young pitcher with a ton of innings on his arm right before he gets expensive seems like a rather silly misuse of our resources going forward.

The 40 Trumps All!!!

by thedirkatron on Mar 10, 2010 3:51 PM CST up reply actions  

Fair point...

And maybe we should do nothing if there isn’t a better deal out there. At some point, however, some of those promising prospects need to be cashed in for quality major leaguers.

This whole discussion makes me wonder whether any behavioral economists have ever analyzed the existence and effect of intemporal biases on exchanges/acquisitions in professional sports.

by JDT217 on Mar 10, 2010 4:09 PM CST up reply actions  

nobody has that bias in sports

most GM’s cash in prospects when it gets time to do so. nobody is saying we shouldn’t do so. people are saying we shouldn’t do so for cain in a trade where we are just giving up a guy who we all think cain can become in a year or two. that doesn’t make sense. giving up prospects to address a need is absolutely fine.

by ab03 on Mar 10, 2010 4:11 PM CST up reply actions  

I think the bias may exist...

For GMs working with a middle-market payroll.

by JDT217 on Mar 10, 2010 4:32 PM CST up reply actions  

and most of the studies done by stat guys suggest

that GM’s had been horribly undervaluing prospects until recently.

by ab03 on Mar 10, 2010 4:12 PM CST up reply actions  

Link?

I’m not familiar with these studies.

by JDT217 on Mar 10, 2010 4:13 PM CST up reply actions  

Hmmm...
At some point, however, some of those promising prospects need to be cashed in for quality major leaguers.

Or we could just show some patience and (with a little luck, granted) some of them will turn into quality major leaguers and use FA to add talent if need be.

Sometimes that method works (Tampa, for instance), sometimes it doesn’t (remember all LALA’s studs they steadfastly refused to ever trade?).

The 40 Trumps All!!!

by thedirkatron on Mar 10, 2010 4:13 PM CST up reply actions  

People forget that all quality major leaguers used to be prospects

Freude, schoener Goetterfunken,
Tochter aus Elysium,
Wir betreten feuertrunken,
Himmlische dein Heiligtum.

by t ball on Mar 10, 2010 6:45 PM CST up reply actions  

Which is why

when you’ve got someone like Holland, who pitched better than his ERA shows last year, and looks like a keeper, you don’t trade him away. Trade someone you’re less sure about, someone farther away.

Freude, schoener Goetterfunken,
Tochter aus Elysium,
Wir betreten feuertrunken,
Himmlische dein Heiligtum.

by t ball on Mar 10, 2010 6:53 PM CST up reply actions  

Depends

on who else is in the package. Depends on so many things we can’t possibly know for a few more months that it’s pretty much useless to speculate.

We should just pick this discussion back up in July.

Freude, schoener Goetterfunken,
Tochter aus Elysium,
Wir betreten feuertrunken,
Himmlische dein Heiligtum.

by t ball on Mar 10, 2010 9:07 PM CST up reply actions  

I have a job and a life which doesn't allow me to devote all my time to doing studies and stuff

hell I get in trouble here at work cause of this damn site. So don’t hold your breath waiting for me to come up with some long term study on anything really.

Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.

by bigsteve on Mar 10, 2010 4:04 PM CST up reply actions  

I have whatever reasons I want to think whatever I want

Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.

by bigsteve on Mar 10, 2010 4:11 PM CST up reply actions  

Cain better than Holland

in FIP, xFIP, SO/BB ratio. What else you got?

Matt Cain is 3 or 4 years advanced over where Holland is now. Cain has 2 bona-fide plus pitches to Holland’s 1 plus and debatable above avg offerings.

I said below I expected Holland to be near Cain in 2011. That was overly optimistic on my part. It could take 2 or 3 years for Holland to be as good as Cain.

You can throw a little hissy fit and drop the F bomb like an immature little teenager all you want, or you can take a pragmatic look at where the two pitchers are in their careers, and where the Rangers are in their stage of competitiveness.

A legit #2 pitcher being added to the rotation for the final push for the division/playoffs and setting up a rotation with Harden and Cain fronting it followed by Feldman is at least a relatively salient idea — if the Rangers happen to find themselves in that position.

Holland wasn’t anywhere near as good as Cain last year, and probably won’t be nearly as good in 2010 or 2011. Could be Holland bucks the trend and develops faster than “normal,” but odds are against it.

by elvis1isking on Mar 10, 2010 11:54 PM CST up reply actions  

His xFIP was better by like .16.

And that’s in an easier league and a better pitcher’s park.

Not addressing the rest of it, just the part that should be footnoted.

by philkid3 on Mar 11, 2010 12:34 AM CST up reply actions  

Ok, whatever

Fuck you again for putting words in my mouth. You need to take a “pragmatic look” at the long term value of those players and offer someone else if you want Cain. Holland stays.

Freude, schoener Goetterfunken,
Tochter aus Elysium,
Wir betreten feuertrunken,
Himmlische dein Heiligtum.

by t ball on Mar 11, 2010 1:52 AM CST up reply actions  

fine

fuck you for being an over-emotional nitwit. I didn’t put words in your mouth, knucklehead.

And if it takes 3 years for Holland to reach the level of a legit #2 pitcher, then that eats most of your long term value.

I respect that you believe in the best that Holland can be; but I think you’re being a bit irrational in your expectation that Holland is going to develop faster than a lot of very talented pitchers have historically.

Hope you’re right dude. Would be awesome.

by elvis1isking on Mar 11, 2010 1:59 AM CST up reply actions  

You said

I just didn’t want to trade prospects. Wrong.

Holland will win 25 games this year. Cain’s arm will fall off. You will cry. I will sip brandy and chuckle warmly.

Freude, schoener Goetterfunken,
Tochter aus Elysium,
Wir betreten feuertrunken,
Himmlische dein Heiligtum.

by t ball on Mar 11, 2010 2:17 AM CST up reply actions  

Holland wins 25

games and I’ll buy the brandy for you big guy — GLADLY. They sell it at the 7/11, right? :)

I’ll stick with beer for myself though — I’m a simple man.

Nothing would make me happier than for Holland, Feliz, and Scheppers to step forward this year and make guys like Cain, Greinke, and whoever else after thoughts. Nothing.

by elvis1isking on Mar 11, 2010 2:21 AM CST up reply actions  

Salient

That word doesn’t mean what you think it does.

"I don’t know how these SN blog authors get their gigs, but I’m frankly surprised SN tolerates AJM’s lack of effort." Tex34

Neftali Feliz says sit your 5 dollar ass down before he makes change...

by Brian Thomas on Mar 11, 2010 5:56 PM CST up reply actions  

Very well said

"I'm against picketing, but I don't know how to show it." - Mitch Hedberg

by rentz on Mar 10, 2010 3:03 PM CST reply actions  

And I lol'd at this pic.

Rec. You’ve been on your game lately, philkid.

"Don’t want to spend my night waiting in line unless it’s for more beer."
--EssBee, on LoneStarBall, Jan. 21, 2010

by ghtd36 on Mar 10, 2010 3:46 PM CST up reply actions  

Is that canceled out by the mentions you got from the Outlaw?

By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.

"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw

by Gdawg on Mar 10, 2010 3:10 PM CST up reply actions  

Well, I'd been getting whitewashed on that score...

…so to get on the scoreboard at all is a SportsCenter highlight for me.

by Jamey Newberg on Mar 10, 2010 3:16 PM CST up reply actions  

Its the known vs unknown argument that always comes up

Cain is the known. And the known is pretty damn good. While his BABIP last year was low compared to most 3 of his 4 full seasons in the majors hes posted BABIPs under .285 so its not out of the realm to think his numbers would be sustainable.

Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.

by bigsteve on Mar 10, 2010 3:05 PM CST reply actions  

BABIP is helped by park and league.

Replace pitchers with DHs and AT&T’s spacious right field with RBIA’s right field home run porch, and suddenly you’re looking at significantly different pitcher ERA wise.

He’s got fly-ball tendencies, which reduces BABIP but increases SLG on BIP.

He is not that much better than Holland.

by Trickman on Mar 11, 2010 9:05 AM CST up reply actions  

Didn't finish..

He’s not that much better than Holland that you “dump” Davis or Smoak in to make the deal happen.

by Trickman on Mar 11, 2010 9:06 AM CST up reply actions  

Yeah...

there certainly isn’t anything wrong with Cain. He’s a very good pitcher, but I’m not dealing any of Feliz, Andrus, Holland, Smoak, or Perez to get him.

Here’s a question though. Let’s say Davis and Smoak get off to great starts. Would you consider dealing Davis, Scheppers, and Font for Cain come the trade deadline?

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

by slc ranger on Mar 10, 2010 3:06 PM CST reply actions  

God no

I think Scheppers has a higher ceiling than Holland.

And also I think Scheppers is going to pull a fast one on everyone and pitch healthy for a decade with only minor injuries popping up occasionally nothing major like has been said is imminent

Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.

by bigsteve on Mar 10, 2010 3:09 PM CST up reply actions  

Scheppers...

I think he certainly could have a higher ceiling that Holland, but I also think the risk is far greater.

I honestly don’t know if I would make that deal or not. It would be tough to give up those 3 guys.

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

by slc ranger on Mar 10, 2010 3:15 PM CST up reply actions  

The only way I consider trading for Cain

is if the problem we are having is in the rotation. The trades we’ll likely need to make will be for a catcher, a big bat, or a true TORP.

By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.

"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw

by Gdawg on Mar 10, 2010 3:11 PM CST up reply actions  

since the true TORP

was going to cost you Holland AND Smoak — why not go with a #2, especially if my some miracle Harden is still throwing come Sept/Oct?

by elvis1isking on Mar 10, 2010 3:18 PM CST up reply actions  

Since the proposed trade

has you giving up Holland and Davis. I don’t see that as much worse of a deal if at all.

By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.

"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw

by Gdawg on Mar 10, 2010 3:25 PM CST up reply actions  

really?

So you think Davis and Smoak are pretty close? Cool — didn’t think there was anyone that really thought that, but that’s an interesting take.

by elvis1isking on Mar 10, 2010 3:26 PM CST up reply actions  

I think the potential of Davis vs. the potential of Smoak

ceiling to ceiling – if both plays at their best – isn’t too far apart; but we’ve seen Davis tank in the majors, and we haven’t seen that from Smoak yet

"Hang-Dai, Wu...Hang-Fu$&ing-Dai"

by Walter Sobchak on Mar 10, 2010 5:13 PM CST up reply actions  

SO rate

We’ve seen incredibly high SO rates from Davis for his entire MiL career — that went to even bigger heights when he went ML.

We’ve seen Smoak be rated in the top 15 of all baseball prospects; and have a scouting report that shows a much better overall approach at the plate.

I truly believe in Davis being a viable ML player, even with his shortcomings, and I think it’s better to be cautious in judging Smoak until he can play a bit more… but Gdawg’s assertion that Holland + Davis is pretty close to Holland + Smoak is the first I’ve ever seen where Davis’ value is comparable to Smoak’s in all things trade. I found that interesting.

by elvis1isking on Mar 10, 2010 6:29 PM CST up reply actions  

Read again: he's talking ceilings without odds of which player hits it

Davis had a 127 OPS+ in 2008 and a 120 OPS+ in the second half of 2009. That’s not bad. If Smoak can do that too that’s also good. The point is, ceiling to ceiling, they might very well be comparable players.

"You promised me, Eckstein, that if I followed you, you would walk with me always. But I noticed that during the most trying periods of my life, there have only been one set of prints in the sand. Why, when I have needed you most, have you not been there for me?" David Eckstein replied, "Because my little legs had gotten tired, and you were carrying me." And I looked down and saw that I was still carrying David Eckstein.

Then he grounded out weakly to second.

by WyoRanger on Mar 10, 2010 6:46 PM CST up reply actions  

ok

but I tend to disagree with that as well. Smoak has always been spoken of as a better prospect with more upside than Davis.

I could be wrong, but I’m pretty sure Davis was never ranked in the top 15 of all prospects in baseball. I don’t see how their ceilings could be thought to be the same, and bringing in Davis’ actual numbers… it gets even more lopsided.

Hopefully Davis does a lot to change that viewpoint this season. I think he’s capable of it, but he’s got to do it.

by elvis1isking on Mar 10, 2010 7:37 PM CST up reply actions  

x
but I tend to disagree with that as well. Smoak has always been spoken of as a better prospect with more upside than Davis.

I could be wrong, but I’m pretty sure Davis was never ranked in the top 15 of all prospects in baseball. I don’t see how their ceilings could be thought to be the same, and bringing in Davis’ actual numbers… it gets even more lopsided.

The first part is, I think, not necessarily true. Particularly given that Smoak and Davis never really had any overlap in terms of “prospectness.” I think that, at the end of the 2008 season, Davis was more highly regarded than Smoak, and Davis had cracked numerous top 100 lists heading into the 2008 season.

As for the second part, if you bring in “Davis’ actual numbers” it does get even more lopsided…in favor of Davis.

Go compare what Davis did at every level of the minors to what Smoak has done in the minors.

Smoak, in his age 22 season, had a .328/.449/.481 line in AA and a .244/.363/.360 line in AAA.

Davis, in his age 22 season, had a .333/.376/.618 line in AA, a .333/.402/.685 line in AAA, and a .281/.331/.549 line in the majors.

Smoak didn’t really play much professionally at age 21. Davis had an OPS of over 1000 splitting time between high-A and AA.

Even last year, Davis’s AAA numbers were much, much better than Smoak’s AAA numbers, and Davis had a higher OPS in the majors than Smoak had in AAA, despite Davis being viewed as a huge flop in the majors in 2009.

The “actual numbers” support Davis, not Smoak.

by Adam J. Morris on Mar 10, 2010 8:02 PM CST up reply actions  

#13 Prospect in all of Baseball

That speaks volumes to Smoak’s apparent ceiling.

Davis has had a pretty sexy slash line in the Minors, but there are certainly some underlying numbers that would have — and did — raise some concerns. I have to believe this has been addressed before here so I won’t take a lot of time going over it. Smoak’s had all of 533 PA in the minors, and is expected to reach the Majors much quicker than Davis did (who reached quickly himself).

I think if you look past the slash line there are concerns about Davis that have manifested themselves at the ML level, and those concerns really don’t exist with Smoak.

I guess we can try and pass Davis off as being close to Smoak, but I’m not sure how many scouts or front offices will buy it. Makes for interesting discussion on a fan forum though…

by elvis1isking on Mar 10, 2010 9:37 PM CST up reply actions  

not sure

can’t remember where he ranked in AA/AAA that year. I thought it might be Top 20 in AA and have no idea for AAA. That puts him in the Top 40 (very rough estimate) which is good but a long way from top 15.

You very well could be right though. I honestly don’t remember.

by elvis1isking on Mar 11, 2010 2:02 AM CST up reply actions  

Again - we're talking actual production not "prospectiness"

"You promised me, Eckstein, that if I followed you, you would walk with me always. But I noticed that during the most trying periods of my life, there have only been one set of prints in the sand. Why, when I have needed you most, have you not been there for me?" David Eckstein replied, "Because my little legs had gotten tired, and you were carrying me." And I looked down and saw that I was still carrying David Eckstein.

Then he grounded out weakly to second.

by WyoRanger on Mar 11, 2010 9:30 AM CST up reply actions  

Please no.

Take your base list of Feliz, Andrus, Holland, Smoak, Perez; add to them Borbon, Scheppers and Font and that’s my “pretty damn near untouchable” list.

"Hang-Dai, Wu...Hang-Fu$&ing-Dai"

by Walter Sobchak on Mar 10, 2010 5:12 PM CST up reply actions  

Font and Borbon

Those are both guys I wouldn’t have much hesitation in moving in an acceptable deal.

by Adam J. Morris on Mar 10, 2010 5:17 PM CST up reply actions  

I hate the idea of moving the Adrian Borbon-Bot.

I know you’ve got some serious doubts about him, but we need a CF’er, damn it.

Unless you’re willing to go out and get somebody in FA or trade for someone else’s CF’er, we’ve pretty much got to hang on to him, imo.

The 40 Trumps All!!!

by thedirkatron on Mar 10, 2010 5:21 PM CST up reply actions  

Heh.

Yah, no way does that happen.

To pry him outta Cleveland would require us giving up a stupid amount of talent.

Something like Borbon, Holland, Kiker and Scheppers (as a PTBNL).

That prolly wouldn’t even be enough, actually.

Sizemore’s stunk last year, but he was battling injuries and he’s still young enough that I can’t imagine anyone’s worried. Plus his contract is a bargain (10:$5.6M, 11:$7.5M, 12:$8.5M club option ($0.5M buyout)

Yeesh.

I could see us dealing Borbon as part of a package at the deadline if we’re not completely sold on him as a long term CF answer and seeing if we could snag someone like Coco Crisp or (big dreams!) Carl Crawford via FA next Winter.

The 40 Trumps All!!!

by thedirkatron on Mar 10, 2010 5:40 PM CST up reply actions  

But since we're dreaming of CF'ers who will almost certainly never be dealt... What about Bossman, Junior?

Earlier this off season I wondered if Borbon, Nelly Cruz, Fx2 (back before they got Soriano to close for ’em) and an arm like Kiker, Ross or Font might be enough to get us BJ and the general conensus seemed to be “No, stop talking D-Tron, we hate you and we find your mother to be an unsatisfactory woman, sexually speaking.”

Not that a deal like that would ever happen, but since we’re dreaming and all…

With him getting expensive soon and Tampa being Tampa, I think Bossman being put on the block is more likely than Sizemore, at the very least.

The 40 Trumps All!!!

by thedirkatron on Mar 10, 2010 5:45 PM CST up reply actions  

So is Desmond Jennings going to be Crawford's replacement or Bossman's replacement?

Either way, I’d give up quite a bit of the farm for either Bossman or Sizemore.

by JDT217 on Mar 10, 2010 6:46 PM CST up reply actions  

Well in this scenario Borbon is Bossman's replacement.

It’s all just fun daydream-y shit anyways, as there’s no way those guys are getting dealt any time soon and they’d be prohibitively expensive even if they did hit the market.

The 40 Trumps All!!!

by thedirkatron on Mar 10, 2010 9:38 PM CST up reply actions  

hence "pretty damn near" for me

I’d trade anybody in the right situation.

And I’m probably a bit too high on Borbon than most on here…for some reason, I see him being a poor man’s Ricky Henderson for this ballclub, which would still be pretty damn good.

Font is another story. I dig the electric arms, and it scares me to see a kid 10 years younger than myself with such abilities.

"Hang-Dai, Wu...Hang-Fu$&ing-Dai"

by Walter Sobchak on Mar 10, 2010 6:18 PM CST up reply actions  

Hell no

"I don’t know how these SN blog authors get their gigs, but I’m frankly surprised SN tolerates AJM’s lack of effort." Tex34

Neftali Feliz says sit your 5 dollar ass down before he makes change...

by Brian Thomas on Mar 11, 2010 5:59 PM CST up reply actions  

Perhaps...

I’ve just read too much of the skepticism about Scheppers and eventually his arm falling off, but his health concerns me greatly.

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

by slc ranger on Mar 11, 2010 6:59 PM CST up reply actions  

The obvious question...

If not Cain, who?

Beckett? I feel like a rumor was out there he wanted back to Texas, and would definitely do it via FA, but have no source. Might cost less.

Is KC ready to sell off those $9.5m’s on Greinke? Very difficult to imagine.

But yeah, this July for example: who?

I was looking here for ideas.

Go Strangers.

by hightowersmith on Mar 10, 2010 3:18 PM CST reply actions  

if not Cain, then who

exactly what I was wondering.

Josh Johnson would be my #1 target, Nolasco would be another and maybe the Dodgers aren’t completely sold on Billingsley and he becomes available?

Hey Tom - It's over now, so do you know how - to pick up the pieces and go home?

by tricer on Mar 10, 2010 3:30 PM CST up reply actions  

when is Beckett free?

I’d say push hard for that. Makes TOTAL sense.

"Hang-Dai, Wu...Hang-Fu$&ing-Dai"

by Walter Sobchak on Mar 10, 2010 5:16 PM CST up reply actions  

Would you do 6/$110?

I bet that’s about what it would cost to get him here.

by Adam J. Morris on Mar 10, 2010 5:17 PM CST up reply actions  

am I Chuck Greenburg?

Has my budget expanded, and do the Rangers make the postseason this year, develop young talent enough, and Rich Harden leaves? Do we have the major offensive positions covered?

I don’t think this team should HAVE to spend on relievers anytime in the near future. And I don’t think they’ll have to pay for a 3B, SS, 1B, CF, and or RF any time too soon either. So depending on how the C situation works out, what happens with Kinsler and Josh, I would definitely use the $20+ million increase in budget I’ve claimed should be necessary and combine it with Harden’s salary coming off the books if he leaves and jump all over Beckett.

Would you?

"Hang-Dai, Wu...Hang-Fu$&ing-Dai"

by Walter Sobchak on Mar 10, 2010 6:22 PM CST up reply actions  

Why wouldn't you spend the 20 million more efficiently?

Particularly considering for most of those 6 years you’ll definitely be able to find comparable or better pitchers unless Beckett is a freak of historic proportions.

by philkid3 on Mar 10, 2010 7:57 PM CST up reply actions  

Oh god.

18+ million a year for Beckett from 31-37 would be awful.

Let’s continue to let teams with disposable money and ridiculous front offices overpay for veterans.

by philkid3 on Mar 10, 2010 7:55 PM CST up reply actions  

big fan of Beckett

but this would cause great pain to see us saddled with that contract.
The chance to get Beckett is long since past.

by elvis1isking on Mar 10, 2010 9:40 PM CST up reply actions  

"However, at the same time, I don't think he's the TORP we've been looking for -- he's a solid #2 guy."

I’d say he’s a bit better than that. He’s one of the best #2 guys in baseball, and a borderline #1 guy. On a competing team he probably won’t be your #1 (though I’ll bet he’d be our #1), but he’ll be much better than solid compared to what should be expected in the 2 slot.

by philkid3 on Mar 10, 2010 3:18 PM CST reply actions  

He might be one of the best number 2 in the NL

But I think the move to the AL would put him well in that number 2 category.

By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.

"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw

by Gdawg on Mar 10, 2010 3:26 PM CST up reply actions  

That's pretty possible.

Good point.

I wish FG would include a way to neutralize for league.

by philkid3 on Mar 10, 2010 3:42 PM CST up reply actions  

I do think people need to stop calling him a #3, though.

Even for switching to the AL that’s a huge drop from where he’s been over his career.

by philkid3 on Mar 10, 2010 3:43 PM CST up reply actions  

I just don't think now's the time to make a trade for a #2 or #3 pitcher

There’s so much that needs to shake out first, like the rotation and who’s going to be at first in the first place.

If the Rangers are in super serious contention at the deadline and there’s a need in the rotation or a TORP that’s available for a reasonable cost do it.

I don’t think there are any real “needs” right now. Question sure but they need to be answered first.

"You promised me, Eckstein, that if I followed you, you would walk with me always. But I noticed that during the most trying periods of my life, there have only been one set of prints in the sand. Why, when I have needed you most, have you not been there for me?" David Eckstein replied, "Because my little legs had gotten tired, and you were carrying me." And I looked down and saw that I was still carrying David Eckstein.

Then he grounded out weakly to second.

by WyoRanger on Mar 10, 2010 3:22 PM CST reply actions  

Agreed

I can see Lewis, Hunter, Holland, Feliz, CJ, Scheppers, and perhaps even McCarthy if things break right – any of those guys – giving us close to what Cain would in his first run through the AL for half a year

"Hang-Dai, Wu...Hang-Fu$&ing-Dai"

by Walter Sobchak on Mar 10, 2010 5:17 PM CST up reply actions  

I still think it is a big departure for the rangers to trade the higher valued position player

We traded hafner and Agonz because we had Tex. We didn’t trade Tex because we had Agonz.

by ab03 on Mar 10, 2010 3:25 PM CST reply actions  

Well argued, but I have a hypothetical...

Let’s say you could clean the Rangers’ system of potential TORPs in exchange for a bevy of established #2s. Would you do it? Would you deal Holland/Perez/Feliz for Cain/Nolasco/Shields right this very minute? (Again, ignoring the $$$/team control factor).

by JDT217 on Mar 10, 2010 3:27 PM CST reply actions  

Isn't a #2 a TORP?

Why not call them aces instead. To me at least, 1s and 2s are TORP.

Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.

by bigsteve on Mar 10, 2010 3:28 PM CST up reply actions  

that is incorrect

that is not the way anybody uses that term

by ab03 on Mar 10, 2010 3:30 PM CST up reply actions  

Then why not call them "aces"?

Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.

by bigsteve on Mar 10, 2010 3:31 PM CST up reply actions  

they are synonymous

people like to vary language

by ab03 on Mar 10, 2010 3:32 PM CST up reply actions  

Call it ATORP

Almost TORP. Also, when I hear ace, I only hear Tom Hicks saying, “We got our ace” at the press conference announcing the signing of Chan Ho Park. Still makes me vomit profusely.

"If this video was an ice cream flavor, it'd be pralines and dick." Clark
re: Matthew Wilder-Break My Stride, 4/17/09

by EssBee on Mar 10, 2010 3:53 PM CST up reply actions  

I feel like an ace should be a guy who can be counted on pretty much every year to be a top ~8 pitcher.

The fact that I can think that and have no clue whether or not anyone agrees is a problem with the term.

And the Ho thing.

by philkid3 on Mar 10, 2010 4:03 PM CST up reply actions  

I don't think 8 should be a number used in this scenario

but I get your point. I think an “Ace” is a guy you throw out on Day 1 and expect to win. Then on Day 6. Every time out, you EXPECT to win that game. There could be 8 in a single organization, although that’s very unlikely. And really in baseball this year, there will likely be only about 8. But still. Placing a handicap at 8 for the number of “Aces” to me is not necessary.

"Hang-Dai, Wu...Hang-Fu$&ing-Dai"

by Walter Sobchak on Mar 10, 2010 5:21 PM CST up reply actions  

I go with 8 because of eight playoff teams.

If you want to expand it to contenders I can buy that under a similar premise. How many teams contend in a given year?

by philkid3 on Mar 10, 2010 7:57 PM CST up reply actions  

Also, define "expect to win."

That gets nebulous. Are you saying expects to win with the roster to put around him? If so, then that means some lesser pitchers are going to be aces and some better aren’t. Are you saying in a neutral setting? Well then shouldn’t only one pitcher, the best in baseball, be an ace?

by philkid3 on Mar 10, 2010 7:59 PM CST up reply actions  

Simple

just a guy that has the talent and track record – no matter how long just as so long it’s more than a year – of going out and giving quality starts in a very large percentage of his turns through the rotation. For instance, if you have an offense that scores 2 runs per 9 innings on average, and he’s giving up 2.5 runs per 9, I’d call him an ace. I’d expect to win with a guy giving up 2.5 runs per 9. However…is that guy going 5 innings per start and doing it? If so, I remove that label. And personally I like guys that strike hitters out or at least overpower them – so tons of ground balls – before I consider him an ace. But that’s just me.

"Hang-Dai, Wu...Hang-Fu$&ing-Dai"

by Walter Sobchak on Mar 11, 2010 3:33 AM CST up reply actions  

K

So it’s a quality start? Say 3/4 times he only allows three runs and goes at least six? Then I would think there are a lot of aces.

Also, you do advocate a player being termed an ace based on how good or bad his supporting cast is?

by philkid3 on Mar 11, 2010 4:38 AM CST up reply actions  

No I never said that

I do not think it matters what team he’s on

"Hang-Dai, Wu...Hang-Fu$&ing-Dai"

by Walter Sobchak on Mar 11, 2010 9:11 AM CST up reply actions  

Here's why I made the statement:
Are you saying expects to win with the roster to put around him? If so, then that means some lesser pitchers are going to be aces and some better aren’t.

So I guess I was trying to say that even if the offense sucks, I expect my guy to give us a chance to win. I guess I’m throwing math out there when there doesn’t need to be any. I can spout off the top of my head who I think are “Aces,” when healthy

"Hang-Dai, Wu...Hang-Fu$&ing-Dai"

by Walter Sobchak on Mar 11, 2010 2:27 PM CST up reply actions  

So then how about this:

Someone who should be expected to win most games even with the worst run and defensive support in baseball.

by philkid3 on Mar 11, 2010 5:33 PM CST up reply actions  

agreed

"Hang-Dai, Wu...Hang-Fu$&ing-Dai"

by Walter Sobchak on Mar 11, 2010 9:47 PM CST up reply actions  

Cain's xFIP

18th among pitchers who threw 200 or more innings. He threw 217.2 for the second straight year and the only year he’s finished below 200 was his first full year in the majors, and he still topped 190.

Looking at just Cain’s rate stats sells short the fact that he’s able to put up those rates over a larger number of innings than most. The quantity of work done matters and it’s a large part of Cain’s value.

Not agreeing or disagreeing here with the trade proposal, but trying to better present Cain’s case.

by philkid3 on Mar 10, 2010 3:29 PM CST reply actions  

Frankly

I also worry about that many innings at that age.

Freude, schoener Goetterfunken,
Tochter aus Elysium,
Wir betreten feuertrunken,
Himmlische dein Heiligtum.

by t ball on Mar 10, 2010 3:32 PM CST up reply actions  

not a bad point

but Cain handled a lot of innings as a youngster too, so the Verducci (sp?) effect wasn’t in play.

CC also handled a lot of innings early in his career. I wouldn’t want Cain at 32 or 33, but 25 through 29 he should be ok.

by elvis1isking on Mar 10, 2010 3:35 PM CST up reply actions  

not saying I believe

or disbelieve in it — just covering what is becoming a somewhat accepted approach to handling young arms.

by elvis1isking on Mar 10, 2010 3:48 PM CST up reply actions  

Verducci effect aside

I think it’s wise to err on the side of caution with young pitchers.

Freude, schoener Goetterfunken,
Tochter aus Elysium,
Wir betreten feuertrunken,
Himmlische dein Heiligtum.

by t ball on Mar 10, 2010 6:48 PM CST up reply actions  

This is glass half empty/half full sort of thing...

If you’re already predisposed to doubt the guy, you see the innings load as a red-flag; if you’re predisposed to like the guy, you see it as a sign that he’s a workhorse. Is there some empirical data we can cull about what actually happens to guys who pitch 800 innings before they’re 25 years old?

by JDT217 on Mar 10, 2010 3:35 PM CST up reply actions  

good point

Hey Tom - It's over now, so do you know how - to pick up the pieces and go home?

by tricer on Mar 10, 2010 3:32 PM CST up reply actions  

Less posting and setting people on fire and more trading

"I'm against picketing, but I don't know how to show it." - Mitch Hedberg

by rentz on Mar 10, 2010 3:46 PM CST up reply actions  

Done.

I think it’s a really good deal for both of us, actually.

You get an awesome keeper, but Youk has more value to you than me cause he can play 3b for you whereas I have the A-Rod… but the fact that it frees up a keeper spot for me.

Good luck with him and all that jazz.

Assuming the Lady doesn’t come down with another handsome-ness related injury this year you should be in a pretty good position to contend, imo.

Not that you have any sort of an actual shot at beating me or I Love Liamp, but it’s pretty to dream on things like that this time of year.

The 40 Trumps All!!!

by thedirkatron on Mar 10, 2010 5:59 PM CST up reply actions  

OT: Missouri sucks right now

the 12 seed looks like they’re going to beat the 5 seed.

A baseball game is simply a nervous breakdown divided into nine innings.

by NothinG on Mar 10, 2010 3:52 PM CST reply actions  

Yep.

As a Mizzou fan, the Tigers have been overall dreadful since Justin Safford got hurt. And Justin Safford isn’t even that good.

"Don’t want to spend my night waiting in line unless it’s for more beer."
--EssBee, on LoneStarBall, Jan. 21, 2010

by ghtd36 on Mar 10, 2010 3:54 PM CST up reply actions  

I still think they get in the tourney

or do you think this hurts their chances

A baseball game is simply a nervous breakdown divided into nine innings.

by NothinG on Mar 10, 2010 3:55 PM CST up reply actions  

Oh, they're in.

Even if they lose this (which I thought was unfathomable), they went 22-9 in the regular season, 10-6 in B12 play, have a relatively good RPI, a win over Kansas State, a win over Old Dominion (which is actually a decent win), a win over Texas, and only one truly “bad loss” (at Oral Roberts).

They’ll be in at a ~9 seed, knock off an 8 seed and then lose to Duke or Syracuse.

"Don’t want to spend my night waiting in line unless it’s for more beer."
--EssBee, on LoneStarBall, Jan. 21, 2010

by ghtd36 on Mar 10, 2010 3:59 PM CST up reply actions  

yeah, I'm an Ostate guy

and they’ll probably be an 8 or 9 seed again and have to face another #1 in the second round.

A baseball game is simply a nervous breakdown divided into nine innings.

by NothinG on Mar 10, 2010 4:01 PM CST up reply actions  

Yeah, and lost at home.

Went scoreless for ~12 minutes in what the guys at Rock M Nation call “the Worst 12 Minutes Ever.”

"Don’t want to spend my night waiting in line unless it’s for more beer."
--EssBee, on LoneStarBall, Jan. 21, 2010

by ghtd36 on Mar 10, 2010 6:28 PM CST up reply actions  

Only one team matters right now... The Mother Fucking Mean Green.

Suck it, everyone else!!!

I hope they get put in New Orleans again, as I might be able to swing heading out there again.

And hopefully this time we won’t draw an incredible fucking Memphis team with guard that I sweat were cyborgian robot spiders with jet packs for feet.

The 40 Trumps All!!!

by thedirkatron on Mar 10, 2010 3:57 PM CST up reply actions  

did UNT make the Tourney?

A baseball game is simply a nervous breakdown divided into nine innings.

by NothinG on Mar 10, 2010 3:59 PM CST up reply actions  

My wife does the KAW whenever there is a chance

usually in jest

A baseball game is simply a nervous breakdown divided into nine innings.

by NothinG on Mar 10, 2010 4:02 PM CST up reply actions  

that was a hell of a game last night

I am soo indifferent to UNT, but I was jumping up and down for em

by BuckyB on Mar 10, 2010 4:06 PM CST up reply actions  

Odufuwa is a man-beast.

That block at the end was sick. Plus he has the sweetest name this side of Jurickson Profar. (Shout it the next you’re alone. ODUFUWA!!!!! It’s awesome.)

Their guard play is suspect, though. Especially their ball handling.

Again.

Johnny’s always had trouble getting consistent PG play.

Been that way his entire tenure.

I think White’s gonna be exposed if they draw a team with solid experienced guards.

The 40 Trumps All!!!

by thedirkatron on Mar 10, 2010 4:28 PM CST up reply actions  

Odufuwa is awesome

White is a midget but he’s a gym rat and what he lacks in talent he makes up for with grit and heart. You know that.

We need to not always make hard work out of sex- Rick Carlisle.

by sprite on Mar 10, 2010 4:31 PM CST up reply actions  

Near the end when he brought the ball across half court and then dribbled into the exact perfect spot to be trapped... jesus fuck... I almost ate a fucking live cat.

My HS coach would’ve benched me for a week if I’d pulled that shit.

Admittedly this only the second time all season I’ve gotten to see them play, but White’s ball handling makes me nervous.

If they’re gonna have any shot at an upset they’re gonna need solid ball handling and really limit the turnovers.

Not sure if White’s up to that.

Hope he is, though. He certainly seems to have heart.

You gonna go if it’s in NO, Spritsey Boy?

If they get placed there I’ll at least try. It’s need to be Friday and not Thursday, and I’d need to find someone to go with me… among other factors. No way am I driving all the way to fucking New Orleans by myself.

The 40 Trumps All!!!

by thedirkatron on Mar 10, 2010 4:48 PM CST up reply actions  

I'll try to

We need to not always make hard work out of sex- Rick Carlisle.

by sprite on Mar 10, 2010 4:54 PM CST up reply actions  

Unfortunately I think they'll prolly end up in OKC.

But you never know.

New Orleans is an awesome tourney site cause even if your team gets their ass beat in the first round, you can be pissed for about 45 minutes and then go, “Oh, yah… 24 HOUR FUCKING BOOZE PARTY!”

The 40 Trumps All!!!

by thedirkatron on Mar 10, 2010 5:09 PM CST up reply actions  

I remember the OU safety named Omeganagechu or something

that was a really fun one

"Hang-Dai, Wu...Hang-Fu$&ing-Dai"

by Walter Sobchak on Mar 10, 2010 6:09 PM CST up reply actions  

Hell yeah

The conference championship was on ESPN2, baby! Moving on up!

by Conjunction on Mar 10, 2010 7:18 PM CST up reply actions  

Talons UP.

"Sometimes you just want to sit back and watch somebody throw 100." - Jeff Passan on Neftali Feliz

"Baseball's all that's real" - JB

by Ryin A on Mar 10, 2010 5:22 PM CST up reply actions  

Is snow in Houston equivalent

to hell freezing over?

That being said, I’m not completely sold on the idea that a pitcher’s HR/FB percentage is out of his control

Vladimir Guererro - 2010 AL MVP

by RangerMad on Mar 10, 2010 4:14 PM CST reply actions  

Harrison

maybe with Derek Holland or Matt Harrison

I find it interesting that the way he phrased it seems almost like an “either or” situation. I haven’t read this blog too much so I can’t speak to what people believe here but I’m sure most media outlets wouldn’t consider these two guys remotely close. I really like Holland but I am on Harrison’s bandwagon this year, with his increase in velocity and work ethic I really think he will surprise a lot of people this year.

by cj89 on Mar 10, 2010 5:20 PM CST reply actions  

Yuppers.

The reports on Harrison early on in camp make my pants happy and all, but Der-Hol’s shown special talent in his rocket ride through the minors, and he’s given us glimpses at the major league level as well.

He’s on another level, imo, and I think most everyone outside of Matt and maybe one or two of his grand parents would prolly agree with this.

The 40 Trumps All!!!

by thedirkatron on Mar 10, 2010 6:18 PM CST up reply actions  

Whoah, wait.

There are people who consider Holland not even close to Harrison?!

by philkid3 on Mar 10, 2010 8:01 PM CST up reply actions  

I assumed he meant...

…Holland/Davis or Harrison/Smoak.

by Adam J. Morris on Mar 10, 2010 6:14 PM CST up reply actions  

It would be a hard trade to digest,

but one that I’d at least be open to. So long as it is isn’t Smoak leaving. Then again, I’m a big fan of Cain, and don’t see Eaton/B-Mac similarites.

It would be tough to lose Holland, but gaining a proven major league pitcher with the other young guns on the way would make it more palatable. Harden’s durability issues and the fact he’s on a 1 year deal piques my interest. This is all contingent on a Cain extension.

'Waiting for a girl and she gets me into fights
Waiting for a girl we get drunk on Friday night'

by scoop16 on Mar 10, 2010 6:14 PM CST reply actions  

I took a second look and Holland MiLB numbers and all are better than Cain's

ERA, WHIP, H/9, HR/9, BB/9, SO/9, SO/BB. Everything.

Granted, Cain was going through at a younger age and spent more time in the minors. Also, Cain wasn’t 21 and facing kids in low A, A and high A – but still. Holland’s numbers were better.

I think Holland’s ceiling is higher and they’ve got him longer for cheaper. I don’t care that Cain’s a proven major leaguer – so is Paul Maholm.

"You promised me, Eckstein, that if I followed you, you would walk with me always. But I noticed that during the most trying periods of my life, there have only been one set of prints in the sand. Why, when I have needed you most, have you not been there for me?" David Eckstein replied, "Because my little legs had gotten tired, and you were carrying me." And I looked down and saw that I was still carrying David Eckstein.

Then he grounded out weakly to second.

by WyoRanger on Mar 10, 2010 7:19 PM CST up reply actions  

I really like Holland, but that's a pretty big 'granted'.

I think Cain is clearly better than Maholm, 2 years younger, and a pretty salty group of comps to age.

Even below ceiling, Cain could be an effective workhorse tossing in some gems.

'Waiting for a girl and she gets me into fights
Waiting for a girl we get drunk on Friday night'

by scoop16 on Mar 10, 2010 7:33 PM CST up reply actions  

Am the only one who, given our roster of active MLers and near-ready prospects, would be highly opposed to trading our top hitting prospect for any pitcher?

Perhaps I’m naive or too optimistic, but I look at that list and feel like we’re going to be just fine when it comes to pitching. Sure, Lincecum or Halladay would be great, but unless we’re going to do the impossible and acquire one of those guys for a reasonable price, I’d much rather have a lengthy trade discussion about packaging prospects for an impact bat.

"Dying ain't hard. It’s living in the wake of a thorough public humiliation that’s hard.--JDT217

by WestTxAg06 on Mar 10, 2010 6:48 PM CST reply actions  

yeah

I get that this deal doesn’t work so well without smoak but he is our best hitting prospect in the entire system at any level in terms of ceiling.

by ab03 on Mar 10, 2010 8:49 PM CST up reply actions  

Since we're talking trades....

and given the issues behind the plate thus far…….

Ryan Doumit anyone?

What would it take?

"Sometimes you just want to sit back and watch somebody throw 100." - Jeff Passan on Neftali Feliz

"Baseball's all that's real" - JB

by Ryin A on Mar 10, 2010 7:15 PM CST reply actions  

n'mind, I hate me.

"Sometimes you just want to sit back and watch somebody throw 100." - Jeff Passan on Neftali Feliz

"Baseball's all that's real" - JB

by Ryin A on Mar 10, 2010 7:53 PM CST up reply actions  

You should change your name to thejirkatron

POWPOW

"Sometimes you just want to sit back and watch somebody throw 100." - Jeff Passan on Neftali Feliz

"Baseball's all that's real" - JB

by Ryin A on Mar 11, 2010 3:33 AM CST up reply actions  

happy 70th birthday Chuck Norris!!

If the Rangers don't make the play-offs this year I'm gonna go all Epic Bearded Man on your ass.

by BigGuns on Mar 10, 2010 8:10 PM CST reply actions  

yep don't call him an old man though..

http://movies.yahoo.com/feature/buzz-log-chuck-norris70.html

If the Rangers don't make the play-offs this year I'm gonna go all Epic Bearded Man on your ass.

by BigGuns on Mar 10, 2010 8:49 PM CST up reply actions  

HA! little known Chuck Norris facts...

1. Chuck Norris uses a night light, not because Chuck is afraid of the dark, because the dark is afraid of Chuck.
2. Chuck Norris once participated in the running of the bulls, he walked.
3. When the boogeyman goes to sleep every night, he checks his closet for Chuck Norris.
4. The phrase “dead ringer” refers to someone who sits behind Chuck Norris in a movie theater and forgets to turn his cell phone off.

If the Rangers don't make the play-offs this year I'm gonna go all Epic Bearded Man on your ass.

by BigGuns on Mar 10, 2010 10:26 PM CST up reply actions  

After thinking more about this...

the whole proposal isn’t very realistic.

If JD and the FO weren’t going to give up Holland for Holliday last year I very seriously doubt they would deal him for Cain this year.

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

by slc ranger on Mar 10, 2010 8:18 PM CST reply actions  

They were considering Holland for Matt Holliday?!?!

"Dying ain't hard. It’s living in the wake of a thorough public humiliation that’s hard.--JDT217

by WestTxAg06 on Mar 10, 2010 8:21 PM CST up reply actions   1 recs

It's not just Holland...

That’s an utterly ridiculous package to give up for Matt Cain and Mark fucking DeRosa. What Jamey described is a senseless, farm-system killing deal of epic proportions. You have to believe theres no way JD nukes all his work like that unless it’s for some truly significant and controllable talent.

If he did, we’d all have to join up with Josey.

Morality you can fake. Fun you either have or you don't.

by lonestarJon on Mar 10, 2010 8:37 PM CST up reply actions  

[shiver]

"grilled cheese punches like a bitch" -Gdawg
"i feel like k-rod after a save." -by reagan on Jan 23, 2010, that glorious day Hicks was out of our lives.

by AceJC on Mar 10, 2010 10:43 PM CST up reply actions  

that's different

at least because we were hearing it was holland + smoak or some other highly touted prospect.

Also, we don’t know that JD didn’t want to do that. Halladay exercised his no trade clause, or at least we received confirmation that he wouldn’t want to go to Texas. How does that piece of information get out if we weren’t somewhat interested?

by ab03 on Mar 10, 2010 8:43 PM CST up reply actions  

After thinking about it some more

Dirk is right, Cain isn’t going to sign a 2 year extension. He’s going to want a gigantic extension and I don’t know that we’ll be able to give him that by July.

by ab03 on Mar 10, 2010 8:45 PM CST reply actions  

BizballMaury: Looking like sale of the TX Rangers isn’t going to get done by Opening Day.

by tyd3311 on Mar 10, 2010 8:51 PM CST reply actions  

Yeah

I think I had resigned myself to that. But I don’t think it will drag on much past Opening Day.

Was there a reason that it needed to be done by then? Like does it affect roster assignments? We definitely need it done by trading deadline but not before that, right?

by ab03 on Mar 10, 2010 8:53 PM CST up reply actions  

I think they just wanted it done so that opening day of this season could begin a new, reborn era of Rangers baseball

"Dying ain't hard. It’s living in the wake of a thorough public humiliation that’s hard.--JDT217

by WestTxAg06 on Mar 10, 2010 8:56 PM CST up reply actions  

Yeah

I’m sure everyone will be groovin’ on those Opening Day shots of Hicks in the owner’s box.

by mgb5 on Mar 10, 2010 9:12 PM CST up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about Texas Rangers.
Start posting about the Rangers »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

Connect_with_facebook

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Small
Cliff Lee, the middle of the plate, and BABIP
Dsc00082_small
LSB SUITE NIGHT 2010 - FINAL VIDS UPLOADED (I PROMISE!!)
Highfidelity_small
LSB Radio: The Chuck Greenberg Show! (Now On iTunes)
Small
For Lone Star Posters
Th_buckykatt_small
Cataloguing the bizarre things that have happened this season

Recent FanPosts

Small
293 obp / 370 slg / 663 ops since ASB
Small
2011 Rotation
Fistpump_small
OT: Week 1 College Football
Kids_small
Rangers 2010 story
-1_small
Rangers sign Mark Prior
Small
Got a few questions
Cotton_1__small
Competing for Expensive Free Agents
Small
Poor Ol' Joaquin Arias...News
Small
Cowboys/Miami preseason disaster thread

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

SPONSORS

SBNation.com Recent Stories

Texas Rangers Michael Young, left, is held back by Texas Rangers third base coach Dave Anderson (obscured) after being called out at third by third base umpire Alfonso Marquez, front right, to end a baseball game against the Minnesota Twins, Sunday, Sept. 5, 2010, in Minneapolis.  Rangers manager Ron Washington (wearing sunglasses) looks on. The Twins won 6-5. (AP Photo/Paul Battaglia) +1 updates

Twins Top Rangers 6-5 Thanks To Controversial Ump Decision

LOS ANGELES CA - SEPTEMBER 04:  Jamey Carroll #14 of the Los Angeles Dodgers is pulled off the bag as Darren Ford #34 of the San Francisco Giants steals second base in the eighth inning at Dodger Stadium on September 4 2010 in Los Angeles California. The Giants defeated the Dodgers 5-4.  (Photo by Jeff Gross/Getty Images) +1 updates

Dodgers' Slide Continues With 3-0 Loss To Rival Giants

BOSTON - SEPTEMBER 05: Jonathan Papelbon #58 of the Boston Red Sox heads for the dugout after he is pulled in the ninth inning against the Chicago White Sox on September 5 2010 at Fenway Park in Boston Massachusetts.  (Photo by Elsa/Getty Images)

White Sox Score Four In 9th, Hand Jonathan Papelbon His Seventh Blown Save Of 2010

More from SBNation.com >


Managers

Th_buckykatt_small Adam J. Morris