Eric Gagne

by Adam J. Morris on Jun 15, 2007 9:36 PM CDT in News Comment 41 comments

It is going to make me sad to see him traded.

I love watching him pitch.

And I love the results.

His body might be held together with Scotch tape, but geez, I wish we could keep him around for a few more years.

0 recs | Comment 41 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

thinking

the exact same thing. easily the best closer we've ever had and if this team does ever turn it around, we will be missing him.

imagine, the greatest closer in team history wasted on this season. very sad.

Forget Johnny Bench, we got Gerry "the Jet" Laird

by ab03 on Jun 15, 2007 9:31 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Alright, I'm as sentimental as the next guy, but

it's a little early to call him the best closer this team has ever had. He's been an amazing closer in his career, but I wouldn't call him the best Rangers' closer just yet.

That said, I'm totally with Adam. I'm one of those guys who loves reading Jamey's cheesy emails where he waxes poetic about great baseball moments. Gagne is one of those guys I love watching pitch even when he's not doing well.

by t ball on Jun 15, 2007 10:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Oops ... I meant the greatest closer...

in baseball history percentage wise.. I retract my statement..

GayRangerFan

by RangerDisaster on Jun 15, 2007 10:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Best closer we've ever had?

Really? Wetteland in 97 and 98 was pretty damn good.

Milk, milk, lemonade, around the corner fudge is made.

by Chris Martin on Jun 15, 2007 10:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

performance over the course of the year

obviously you can give it to a lot more people than gagne. but just seeing him pitch each hitter, he looks damn near unstoppable.

its a small sample size and a statement that's near impossible to prove, but overall, he has to be the best relief pitcher to put on a rangers uniform, even when we are getting him past his really good years.

Forget Johnny Bench, we got Gerry "the Jet" Laird

by ab03 on Jun 15, 2007 11:06 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

hey ab03

I'll bet you the Rangers come back and win the division. Say, 4:1 odds against? And then when I find out that the odds are actually 1,000,000:1 I'll be reneging on that bet.

Lick by lick, mountains erode

by RangerMoto on Jun 16, 2007 12:18 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

funny

i'd actually take the 20:1 action too except i can't really cover a $100 bet. I mean, I really don't think I'd have to, but you shouldn't ever bet with money you can't give up easily.

Forget Johnny Bench, we got Gerry "the Jet" Laird

by ab03 on Jun 16, 2007 11:56 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

he was hitting 95 too

for the first time in a while

by DSheppard on Jun 15, 2007 9:34 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

damn

just got home and missed it... Just once, I'd like to be at RBiA when "Welcome to the Jungle" plays to a packed house, in a one run game that means something. Now that would be fun...

by Brandon Wilson on Jun 15, 2007 9:37 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

YEH Gagne is truly ...

a STUDS STUD .. aka mans man...I sure hope JD gets some top quality chips for him..it is going to be sad..to lose the best closer in baseball history cuz the team was an Anna Nicole train wreck of a team :(

GayRangerFan

by RangerDisaster on Jun 15, 2007 9:49 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Why can't we?

If we don't end up trading Tex, why not try to bring Gagne back on another one (or maybe two) year deal?

Having Aki and Gagne at the back end of the bullpen is something we'll need if we have any hopes of competing next year.

I'm officially on the bandwagon: FIRE JOHN DANIELS!!!

by thedirkatron on Jun 15, 2007 10:04 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Thinking like this

Is what is going to keep this team mired in mediocrity for years. I can only hope that JD does not share this opinion.

Milk, milk, lemonade, around the corner fudge is made.

by Chris Martin on Jun 15, 2007 10:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

We'd have to get a lot better

to achieve mediocrity at this point.

But my point is that if you're not going to trade Tex, then you're not blowing things up.

And if you're not blowing things up, then why not at least try to compete?

Personally I say we trade Aki, Gagne, Tex, Lofton, Wilkerson and Millwood (assuming he rights the ship and has any value at the deadline). But it all hinges on Tex.

I'm officially on the bandwagon: FIRE JOHN DANIELS!!!

by thedirkatron on Jun 15, 2007 10:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

YES !! You're 6 for 6 ...

on your trades.. except whos gonna take Millwood.. hes been throwing beachballs up there all year..you'd have to EAT some of his contract...ala A Rod.. I say unload them ASAP..I'm tired of seeing Wifferson strike out every other at bat it seems ...now if he was hitting home runs then it would be a lot more palatable but hes NOT !!

GayRangerFan

by RangerDisaster on Jun 15, 2007 10:52 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Millwood

it makes no sense to give him away and eat some of his salary. He's 32 and has a track record of success, it makes much more sense to let him work things through.

by Randy Richardson on Jun 15, 2007 10:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeh....true..

he'll probably work things out.. boy its been a long stretch of SUCK though...

GayRangerFan

by RangerDisaster on Jun 15, 2007 11:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Millwood

if he comes back and throws three or four good outings where it looks like he's back to his '05-'06 form, you might see some teams bite on him.

But we shouldn't give him away. It's never a bad thing to have a veteran starter around, even during a rebuilding. Plus his salary is actually pretty darn reasonable given the explosion we saw this off season.

If the Mets called dangling my boy Milledge, I'd bite. (A dream, I know.)

I'm officially on the bandwagon: FIRE JOHN DANIELS!!!

by thedirkatron on Jun 16, 2007 12:28 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Tex

I don't think it has to all hinge on Tex. He is by far the most valuable trade chip we have. Because of that, I don't want them to just trade him for less than fair value just to trade him. It may take longer to find a good deal for him so if he's the last one to go (even next year) then so be it.

Milk, milk, lemonade, around the corner fudge is made.

by Chris Martin on Jun 16, 2007 8:05 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

not really sure

why you HAVE to dismantle the bullpen because the rest of the team sucks. yeah, gotta rebuild w/ young guys, but damn, please don't just GIVE AWAY a bullpen combo of this caliber because we're 'rebuilding'. def depressing if we get some AA 'maybe' for eric gagne.

i'd rather see gagne here in '08 and beyond at 13 mil per year than torii hunter.

by drilledpress on Jun 15, 2007 10:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Gagne

If you trade Gagne, you get the player(s) in return plus you save $4-5million in salary.

If, somehow we're unable to trade Gagne, you get the benefit of watching him for the rest of the year and that's it.

by Randy Richardson on Jun 15, 2007 10:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

obviously trade him

if youre going to let him walk after the season. i just dont see why we can't at least consider trying to keep him around.

if we get a mlb-ready starter or OF i'm fine with trading him, but bullpen pieces like eric gagne are hard to find. given his contract situation its unlikely the talent we get in return will match the talent we give up.

and fwiw, i dont really care about hicks' 4-5 mil. i've put plenty of $$ in the guy's pocket already. least he could do is try to keep one of the best closers in the game.

by drilledpress on Jun 15, 2007 11:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

hmm

what kind of closer wants to pitch for a team that rarely gets a save opportunity? there's no way he would re-sign with the rangers. I like seeing the guy, but I'm sure he'd rather play for a winner. he doesn't seem like the kind of pitcher that likes closing out games that don't matter.

by acgunter on Jun 16, 2007 4:12 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

that

and i think he realizes his body is held together with scotch tape and he would rather use what good stuff he has left on a team that matters.

maybe if he had been a life long ranger it would be different.

along those lines, might the dodgers pay a bit to get gagne back, even though its not technically an area of need?

Forget Johnny Bench, we got Gerry "the Jet" Laird

by ab03 on Jun 16, 2007 12:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Stop it!

This is the kind of thinking that will trap the Rangers into repeating the last few seasons. Blow it up, wave goodbye to Gagne. The best 'closing' he can do for this organization is to bring a useful piece of the future puzzled back in trade.

Yes, I would greatly enjoy seeing him in a Ranger uniform for the next couple years. But my brain overcomes my heart in this. We're better off saving that money for greater needs and getting a youngster in trade.

by t ball on Jun 15, 2007 11:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I agree

but only if we're going to blow things up.

I don't want to see us trade Gagne, then keep the rest of our vets, and sign some FA's this off season in an effort to compete next year. If we're going to do that, then keep Gagne. If we're going to blow it up, blow it completely up, and YES, trade Gagne.

I'm officially on the bandwagon: FIRE JOHN DANIELS!!!

by thedirkatron on Jun 16, 2007 12:25 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

my argument would be

that lights-out closer is a pretty big need to fill on any team.

and that if your bullpen is absolutely nails, then you don't need Great starting pitching to contend. def has to be better than 6.90 ERA. but you could develop your starters, your young position players, all while backing them up with a nasty, veteran bullpen. and you're not breaking the bank.

again, if jd can get really good value in return, make the deal. otherwise, if hicks is going to spend any money at all while rebuilding, he should spend it in the bullpen.

by drilledpress on Jun 16, 2007 2:16 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well

In all the trade-Gagne stories there's mention of his right to restructure his contract if he gets traded.

So, it seems wherever he goes, he's going to negotiate additional years.

It is nice having him in Texas...

by hightowersmith on Jun 16, 2007 2:23 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

gagne

he's definitely fun to watch. watching a pitcher overpower hitters is great, but seeing one just flat out fool them is even better

"Pimps be damned, it's harder out here for a Rangers fan!" "If you don't throw strikes first, you're last."

by rentz on Jun 15, 2007 10:04 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

i would rather

SEE him traded than tex... but they will both probably be gone soon

rangers nation

by kmacsm on Jun 15, 2007 10:12 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

If only

our starters would give us something to think we could compete in '08.... Gagne's a luxury that I hope someone will pay dearly for.

buffering....

by SteveP on Jun 15, 2007 11:02 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

What happens if...

if a portion of these "prospects" that everyone wants to trade for blow up and never make it in the majors? The odds of that happening are pretty high.

by Redcaps on Jun 15, 2007 11:46 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Of course

some of the prospects will disappoint, that's what you must trade and draft as many good ones as you can. Don't worry, there are many 'replaceable' players in the Rangers' system. If they can replace players who either are not really prospects or just organizational filler with real prospects, than they have upgraded the system in an important way. It's not about being right all the time, it's about increasing the odds.

by t ball on Jun 15, 2007 11:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think what most of these guys

are advocating will most certainly bring at least 4 guaranteed results.

Rangers will lose 95-100 games a year for the next 4 to 5 years.
John Daniels will get fired.
Ron Washington will get fired.
Revenue will collapse and payroll will be stuck at the very bottom along with the KC's of the world.

Many people are mistakenly believing that the Rangers have the same talent that the Marlins did. The Marlins had good attendance during their first world series run but spent to much. They tore the team down because they couldn't afford to keep it and not because their team was bad. They had a team chalk full of quality players from great position players, to middle relievers to closers, etc. They also already had established young players who they could build around. In reality, both Marlins teams that were disassembled were like this. The Rangers have very few assets to build around. I agree that this team needs to rebuild but the only young assets that are either here or arriving soon are McCarthy, Hurley and Kinsler.

At this juncture I just don't know what should be done with the Rangers. Tear it down and risk becoming the 90's version of the Mavericks. Continue to sign band aid type free agents and you continue to be bad as well. Of course, Gagne and Teixeira aren't band aid type players. They are players a team like the Rangers can build around. Not many teams ever built a championship club from trading away their best players. The only ones I can think of is the Marlins who did it twice and the Tigers who won the pennant last year. We know the Rangers have nothing in common with the Marlins and it took years of being absolutely dreadful for the Tigers to come back strong. And of course, they had to get lucky along the way with the Pads passing on Verlander and signing some key free agents. The Tigers aren't exactly built by draft picks alone. They've got a lot of 30 something guys and even a 40 something guy on their team.

by gp on Jun 16, 2007 10:28 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

trades

The guys we're talking about trading won't be here in 1-2 years anyway. It's not blowing things up, it's getting value for the remainder of these guys' contracts.

by Randy Richardson on Jun 16, 2007 10:57 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I guess you are not understanding what I

am saying here. The Rangers are between a rocka and a hard place. Trade these guys and your team is going to be very, very bad. Keep these guys and your team is going to be just bad. I still think the Rangers need to do everything they can to resign both Teixeira and Gagne. Maybe it isn't you but people on this board are talking about the haul of prospects the Rangers can get for Teixeira, Gagne, Otsuka, Wilkerson, Sosa, Loftin, Millwood, Padilla and just about anyone with a pulse. If Blalock weren't injured they'd want to get rid of him as well. This is tearing it down and rebuilding.

Also, me and some of the regulars on this board used to go round and round over on the old Newberg board about signing guys like Gagne. I always wanted the Rangers to get some protection in the contract such as a club option. As it is the Rangers take all the risk and are on the hook for any rehab costs, etc. and get very little benefit. So far it has worked out well with Gagne. He is getting healthier and healthier and is productive. To bad that after he has proven himself he is going to sign elsewhere. Basically, some of these guys are treating the Rangers like a AAA rehab stint.

by gp on Jun 16, 2007 11:15 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Tex and Gagne

I would love to have Tex as a ranger-for-life. But, he's a boras client and he's going to leave in FA.
No one held a gun to our head and made us sign Gagne. Because of his injury history, I wouldn't be surprised if he signs another 1year deal, but the next one would be for a lot more money.

by Randy Richardson on Jun 16, 2007 12:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs