Wednesday a.m. stuff

by Adam J. Morris on Nov 28, 2007 9:14 AM CST in News Comment 63 comments

Pretty quiet this morning...

The Boston Herald has a story about Boston's demands regarding Coco Crisp. The BoSox apparently want the Twins to take Crisp instead of Jacoby Ellsbury in a deal for Johan Santana, and there's this blurb about their request of the Rangers:

One team, the Texas Rangers, reportedly was told by the Red Sox that they wanted three prospects in exchange for Crisp. The Rangers were supposedly not interested in giving up even one of those prospects but instead were hoping that the clubs could work out a trade that involved catcher Gerald Laird.

Three prospects for Crisp? No, thanks.

The Rangers are releasing Victor Diaz. Not sure why they weren't willing to give him more of a look last year...

0 recs | Comment 63 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

all the more reason

to go after Andruw Jones, who is a far superior player and doesn't cost so much as a draft pick.

According to the rumor mill, the White Sox and Twins have now focused their attention on Crisp, and the Dodgers and Rangers are the two teams left for Rowand. Jones rarely even gets mentioned these days, and the only team linked to him so far, besides Atlanta's one year offer, is the Nationals.

The Rangers have two significant needs this offseason:

To find a CF
To find a middle of the order hitter

And there is only one player left on the market who can fill those two holes at once.

If the team decides that Fukudome is the better bet, that is fine with me, but I still want to know who plays CF for the next two to three years while Borbon develops

by clark on Nov 28, 2007 9:04 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

I'm with you

if the price is right. However, I don't think that Borbon should be considered at all in this process. Bottom line, there aren't any centerfield options in the upper minors. Borbon is too far away and has too many questions to address to count on right now.

by badradiorules on Nov 28, 2007 9:11 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I saw a headline yesterday

saying that the White Sox are thinking about getting in on Rowand, and bringing him back to Chicago.
So they're in too, I guess.

Troy I.

by tdi1985 on Nov 28, 2007 9:13 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Its just really hard to gauge his price though.

If there really is not much interest and his price is (relatively) low i jump on it.

But i get the feeling hes interested in one of two things.

getting paid almost like 2007 didnt happen.
taking a short term deal.

Id be fine with letting jones pump up his value in arlington for a year while some minor leaguers develop, but it obviously wouldnt be a long term solution.

Fukudome, who i bring up all the time in support of, isnt a middle of the order hitter. After jones hes the guy i most want to sign (and was hoping crisp could be brought in too), but yeah, the middle of the order would still be bad, depending on blalock to get back to his old ways and hoping salty or botts has a big year.

by DSheppard on Nov 28, 2007 9:15 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

yuuup

im all for bringing in andruw on a 1 year/short term contract...hes the one bat of the "big 3" whose bat will most likely play in a corner in the next 3 years...

by knockoutking24 on Nov 28, 2007 9:25 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Boras already said he isn't going

to sign a 1-year deal.

Why can't we be friends?

by Agreen07 on Nov 28, 2007 10:52 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

yeah but there are rumors he might fire boras

because he WANTS to do a 1 year deal and get a bigger contract next year.

maybe not true, but its a possibility.

by DSheppard on Nov 28, 2007 11:47 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I hope that is true

I would love him for a 1 year deal. Then ship him off at the deadline.

Why can't we be friends?

by Agreen07 on Nov 28, 2007 11:54 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Hasn't there been

a few folks firing Boras this offseason?

"LSB: accept the losing" - Sharky

by DJCahill on Nov 28, 2007 11:57 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Kenny Rogers

Why can't we be friends?

by Agreen07 on Nov 28, 2007 12:38 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I admit

that I'm kind of interested to see what Jaramillo can do with Jones' swing.

by SteveP on Nov 28, 2007 11:33 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

but

siging a "project" for a 9 figure deal is one hell of a gamble.

by SteveP on Nov 28, 2007 11:44 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

THATS......

WHAT IM TALK9ING ABOUT A LIL SUPPORT FOR MY BOY ANDRUW!!!!!!! IT WOULD BE THE BEST SIGNING IN RANGERS HISTORY!!!

by bhuckabee on Nov 28, 2007 12:21 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Yea screw that

he's coco crisp. Just because he happens to play for the sox doesn't mean his value is suddenly that much better.

Why can't we be friends?

by Agreen07 on Nov 28, 2007 9:05 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

The Sox are high if they think they will get

3 prospects. In their defense, why not start the bidding with a rediculous request because it's not like the CF market is loaded out there. By making this idiotic request Theo's not really hurting himself because when the free agent CFs are signed someone out there will still need a CF.

by OKC Ranger Fan on Nov 28, 2007 9:11 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

They are high

if they think they can include Crisp instead of Ellsbury in a package for Santana

Troy I.

by tdi1985 on Nov 28, 2007 9:15 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

3 prospects

They probably want back the guys they gave up for Gagne.

Fire Ron Washington

by pblack on Nov 28, 2007 10:33 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I get that point...

that the Sox want to redeem that trade some how...
But there is no way Crisp's value (right now) is equal to Gagne's value (at the trade deadline). Even when considering the demand for CFers

Troy I.

by tdi1985 on Nov 28, 2007 10:53 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I can't imagine

he will get a long term contract that will be in the realm he was looking for with the Braves. The only way he will see money close to that is to do a one year deal and build his market value.

He was pretty godawful last year, and expecting a big money, long term deal after that year is kind of crazy.

"LSB: accept the losing" - Sharky

by DJCahill on Nov 28, 2007 11:00 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Responded

to the wrong post.

"LSB: accept the losing" - Sharky

by DJCahill on Nov 28, 2007 11:25 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Victor Diaz

I was really never impressed by him. Sure he started out on fire, but there were times he looked like he didn't have a clue at the plate last year and it looked like taking a walk was not an option for him. I'm not sad to see him go.

by OKC Ranger Fan on Nov 28, 2007 9:08 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

KKKKKKKKKK

Diaz = Cruz = KKKKKKK

That is why he didn't get a closer look.

by RangerMad on Nov 28, 2007 11:16 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Them wanting 3 prospects is about

as realistic as trying to substitute crisp for ellsbury.

They dont need starting pitching enough to trade ellsbury and one of their top pitching prospects for santana... and if they dont trade ellsbury, they will end up trading crisp. I guess Crisp could go in a trade for santana, but it just seems like a team that actually needs starting pitching would end up offering more then the bosox would.. like say.. the yankees, who dont want to go into a season counting so much on rookies.

It might end up taking more then laird, but I bet after santana is decided they will come back to us with a lower demand.

I best crisp isnt in boston by the end of the winter meetings.

Letting Diaz get away while we have such a poor OF is a little odd, but I doubt he ever gets to be a mlb regular and youd want a 4th OF to be better defensively.

by DSheppard on Nov 28, 2007 9:09 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

I'd rather have Cruz as my 4th OF

because as you said he's at least a pretty good defender. Diaz would not be considered as such.

by OKC Ranger Fan on Nov 28, 2007 9:13 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Well

You can say no to 3 prospects, but what if that's the prevailing market?

Push away from the table once as a negotiating ploy, but if you keep your prospects you don't have a CF.

It just doesn't make sense that Crisp would be cheap when so many teams are in the market.

by hightowersmith on Nov 28, 2007 9:14 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

well, by the way the article was worded

it sounded like actual prospects, if JD wouldnt give up one of them.

Giving up low prospects that boston just hopes would turn into something would be one thing, but if they were asking for 3 guys that made the lsb community list.. no thanks.

Of course, its just one report and it was probably just their initial attempt to gauge the rangers if its true, but yeah..

laird still has some value, teams like guys that throw people out. If laird + a minor prospect does it im good with it but not too much more.

by DSheppard on Nov 28, 2007 9:18 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Fine

if the market for a CF is THAT absurd then I'd refer you to my post from Sunday. Just f-ing wait a year for more favorable conditions. Having said that, anyone with a little sense can tell that this request from Boston is out of whack, just like Daniels asking for guys like Buchholz and Delcarmen was early in the Gagne process. Wild preliminary requests dies not equal the market.

by Brett Perryman on Nov 28, 2007 12:13 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

You're probably right about the offer

Crisp is flawed. I just have trouble accepting that his price won't be painful when a lot of teams are looking for CF.

Which leads to your post Sunday, and above, and yeah, I just don't think CFs diminish in value enough to ever "flood the market." Witness Hunter, who people (Arte Moreno for one) gladly thought would slide over when he quit being defensively competant.

I still see the best course, until decent CF prospects appear in the high minors, to be biting the bullet for a proper under-control-for-years talent. All the above considered, Crisp might be that guy.

by hightowersmith on Nov 28, 2007 12:27 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

are you kidding me?

they want 3 prospects for crisp?

the guy that wont start for bos
the guy w/ 77 and 83 OPS+ the last 2 years
the guy with a career 94 ops+
the guy who is 28 (breakout year?)
the guy who hasnt been able to break .270 the last 2 years?
the guy that has only broken .270 2x in his career? (6 years)
the guy w/ a .330 OBP (league average: .348)

umm forget that.

o wait, guess they are trying to pull a kazmir for zambrano deal....

and just for the record, coco crisp? i wish we had a player named "cannonball titcomb" (http://www.baseball-reference.com/t/titcoca01.shtml) on our team...

by knockoutking24 on Nov 28, 2007 9:17 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

OT: Angels farm

was brought up somewhere else, can someone tell me about where the angels farm system ranks?

by DSheppard on Nov 28, 2007 9:31 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Here's three prospects for them

Scott Feldman
Drew Meyer
Kevin Mahar

Take those three and get a free 30-day trial of Freddie Thon with no obligation.

by abc123 on Nov 28, 2007 9:32 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

funny

but in the future please refrain from drew meyer

by ab03 on Nov 28, 2007 12:48 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I dont understand

What centerfielder did the team have going into last season that they were so proud of? Loften was great for the price but putting Byrd, Murphy, Cat, Cruz, and another minors guy. As long as Brad Wilkerson is no where to be found. This is the rebuilding year so why not rebuild.

by phanhandlecholo on Nov 28, 2007 10:00 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Red Sox....

must be still pouting over the Gagne deal to want anything more than Laird for Crisp.

by doolindalton on Nov 28, 2007 10:01 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

To me, the problem with

having a farm system loaded with to prospects is a curse when it come to trades. Another team seems to usually overvalue marginal players when trade proposals are made.

And, I agree with the Gagne comment. The Sox probably feel they got screwed in that trade and are looking for some payback.

by rraider9199 on Nov 28, 2007 10:09 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Hey Adam.....

how about post about comprehensive post on Andruw Jones and why he should or should not be with the Rangers. I know the short answer but would love to see a detailed rationale.

by bdavison94 on Nov 28, 2007 10:12 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

AJM

thinks that Jones will get an 8 year, 200 million contract.

Or at least that is what he posted a couple of weeks ago.

Some professionals get better with age and experience. Lawyers, professors, engineers. Hookers? Not so much. -- DJ Cahill

by tricer on Nov 28, 2007 10:25 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

on Jones

That's just crazy unless it's the Yankees that sign him... he will probably either sign a 1 year deal or a 6-7 year deal worth $16-20 mil per year. In other words, the most I could see him signing for is 7-140 and if he is signed long term I expect it to be at least 6-100.

If he is willing to sign for any less than 6 for $100 mil, then I'd want the Rangers in on it.

by Brandon Wilson on Nov 28, 2007 10:48 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

he won't match Torii

mark it down. No club will give him more than what Torii got in either years or money. I really wish Texas would be the ones to offer him a good multi year deal worth 12-15

by bushe on Nov 28, 2007 12:26 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Prospects

what kind of prospects. I'd give them Murphy back and maybe a couple of lower prospects but do they mean a Kiker or latin players?

by meatbonelefty on Nov 28, 2007 11:00 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Diaz whiffed a lot

That's why he didn't get a second shot.

The #1 Passive Texas Rangers Fan

by aggierangerfan00 on Nov 28, 2007 11:29 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Well...

I don't think that was it.

by Adam J. Morris on Nov 28, 2007 11:41 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

no look

I think it was more because he NEVER took a walk.

But that river of tears has dried for all of us.

by trza on Nov 28, 2007 11:48 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Why Not?

Of course it was. The guy had enormous raw power but the some of the worst plate discipline I've ever seen.

by brettgardner on Nov 28, 2007 12:02 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Well, there you go, Adam

You are obviously wrong.

Remember, Brett Gardner is big, and you are just some blogger that, if Bill Conlin had his way, would be toiling in a concentration camp somewhere.

"LSB: accept the losing" - Sharky

by DJCahill on Nov 28, 2007 12:04 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

what's wrong with you?

Merill Hodge = Skip Bayless < Mark May...yeah, that's saying something.

by Longhorn on Nov 28, 2007 12:44 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Not that I care

but for those of you who claim that I make unprovoked attacks, please see the above and take notes. Who are you DJCahill, and why can't I express my opinion just like you or anyone else? Get a life.

by brettgardner on Nov 28, 2007 2:34 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Diaz

So why did Nelson Cruz get three times as many at-bats? He also struck out a ton (87 in 307 AB's) and hit even worse than Diaz did.

"Then I met some friends for a beer, went to a BoDeans's concert, and son of a vondruke, if I didn't leave him at the concert hall."

by RCCook on Nov 28, 2007 12:16 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I really don't have an opinion

on why he wasn't given a look, and then eventually released...

But if it wasn't his plate discipline, are you or Adam suggesting it was something else?

Maybe he was having an affair with the wife of someone from the front office?

Troy I.

by tdi1985 on Nov 28, 2007 12:30 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Diaz

Plate discipline alone doesn't explain it, since Cruz had the same problem. I'm not suggesting there's some sinister reason; it could have been as simple as the Rangers thinking Cruz had more upside, so they were willing to give him more chances.

Or it could have been that Cruz was part of the Cordero/Carlos Lee deal, while Diaz came over in a minor deal for Mike Nickeas, so perhaps the Rangers valued Cruz more highly than Diaz.

Cruz and Diaz seem to have similar skill sets- low OBP, good power, poor plate discipline. Cruz is better defensively, but Diaz is nearly 18 months younger. It's just odd that one got far more of a shot than the other, when they seemed to be equivalent players.

"Then I met some friends for a beer, went to a BoDeans's concert, and son of a vondruke, if I didn't leave him at the concert hall."

by RCCook on Nov 28, 2007 12:38 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Although apparently similar

I could argue there are vast differences. Cruz showed adaptability in trying to get better control of the strike zone, and his short sample indicates it may still work (as do his AAA and DWL numbers). Cruz is a plus to plus-plus RF'er.

Diaz has better application of a power stroke but shows little to no adaptability to either pitching or to plate coverage. I don't know if he is any good in the field because I just haven't seen him out there.

For me, if judging just between those two, there is really no comparison.

'At Georgia Southern, we don't cheat. That costs money and we don't have any.' Erk Russell / Georgia Southern

by Ed Coffin on Nov 28, 2007 12:54 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I like the conspiracy theory

we should investigate this...

Why can't we be friends?

by Agreen07 on Nov 28, 2007 12:40 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Probably

a combination of what Adam says about their long-term projections as well as just hoping that their MIL trade would eventually give them what they wanted. I have to assume they think they can find a Victor Diaz on the street, but they were hoping to squeeze out something special from Cruz.

by brettgardner on Nov 28, 2007 2:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Plate discipline

Plate discipline and strikeouts aren't the same thing really...the organization doesn't have a huge issue, it doesn't appear, with high strikeout guys.

Diaz did have a lousy OBP, but that's different from the issue of striking out too much. It may be that they felt he'd never have an acceptable OBP, but given the potential he appeared to have, I'd liked to have seen them at least take a longer look.

by Adam J. Morris on Nov 28, 2007 12:48 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

But at whose expense?

They're going to find ABs for Byrd. Botts is going to get a ton of ABs as well. They have to play Cat somewhere. Murphy need a nice long look. Assuming that we bring in one FA outfielder, the opportunities are just too limited. Personally, I was fine with them dumping Diaz, but I would have been just as fine with them dumping Cruz. Either way, I'd hate to see them waste very many ABs on either of those guys this season.

by Athos on Nov 28, 2007 12:58 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Well

I wanted him to play more last year.

by Adam J. Morris on Nov 28, 2007 1:10 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I agree with that.

I had a hard time trying to understand Wash's logic in sitting Diaz while playing Cruz. I just think that, given the way he's fizzled in the Majors and his liability as a defender, cutting him isn't a big loss.

by Athos on Nov 28, 2007 4:09 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Eh.

I could see Murphy and Byrd each getting 300 ABs next year and still becoming overexposed.

I do not believe in David Murphy.

by hightowersmith on Nov 28, 2007 1:13 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

so few are, apparently.

I keep seeing people get on him...

I just got a really good impression from watching him. Hes not going to match that 900+ ops he had in his 100 at bats last year of course, but I think he can beat his minor league averages and be around .800 with good corner defense or not terrible CF defense. Of course hes never going to be an allstar but i think hes got enough to stick around the majors during his prime at least as a 4th OF and starter in injury situations on a good team.

by DSheppard on Nov 28, 2007 1:42 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

If Murphy is a .800+ OPS fulltime hitter in 2008,

then we should see if someone will trade something valuable for him.

David Murphy has had an OPS over .800 ONCE in his pro career with over 250 AB (.802)

Now is it possible that Murphy has discovered something that will allow him to be an >= .800 OPS hitter after having 1 half season where he posted an OPS > .800?

Sure. But I'm not going to bet that David Murphy suddenly discovered that he's a .340 hitter, nor that he found the Holy Grail of hitting which will improve him to MUCH, MUCH better than his career averages in the MINOR leagues.

BTW, if you drop Murphy to his career BA for those 100+ AB he had at the end of last year and adjust his OBP and SLG, he comes in at around .273/.315/.467.

That's not horrible, but it's not that great either, as OBP is much more important than SLG.

Still, I'd be satisfied with Murphy if he posted similar to those stats in a full season's worth of at-bats.

Also, I wouldn't be surprised that people got a good impression watching him last year. He batted .340 with power when he was with the Rangers. Of course, you're going to feel good about his 100+ AB performance. Let's wait and see what he does in a full year before we anoint him as a potential long-term solution for a COF spot.

Req

by Requiem on Nov 29, 2007 1:54 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Jones is not...

a project.
He either is or is not a superstar hitter and fielder. The Rangers need to decide which. And if they think, as I do, that he has 5 or 6 good years left... with numbers comparable to 01-06... 6 yrs for 100MM would be fine. I'd prefer 5 for 85.

by HaegerChamp on Nov 28, 2007 11:48 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Please use [Reply to This].

You'll find it directly under the name of the person whose post you are responding to. That helps keep multiple conversations in the same thread organized and avoids confusion. Please do this in the future.

by Athos on Nov 28, 2007 12:06 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs