Sunday things
Another win, and a quite unexpected one, given the matchup. Jamey Wright wasn't good, but he managed to allow just a couple of runs. Roy Oswalt wasn't bad, but he allowed more Rangers to score than Wright allowed Astros, and then the Astro pen fell apart. A lineup missing two key bats continues to score some runs, and the Rangers now have a winning record in the month of June.
The Rangers now have a better record than both the Royals and the Reds, and with a win today, would draw even with the Astros.
Of course, Texas is about to start an 8 game road trip against the two best teams in the American League, so this little bit of euphoria is likely short-lived. But at this point, I'll take what I can get...
With the Rangers winning and getting some decent starting pitching, Washington has some love for his much-maligned catcher, who had caught heat earlier in the season for his pitch-calling:
Washington said after Saturday's game that Laird deserves some of the credit.
"He's matured a lot," Washington said. "He's using pitches in any count. He's not always calling a fastball in a fastball count."
Gil LeBreton has a whole column on Laird, discussing his improving after his early season struggles, along with the irreverant personality that led Laird to choose number 15 because, as Laird explains, it describes himself -- "one player, five tools."
At the end of the day, I think catchers end up getting too much credit when pitchers are going well, and too much blame when they aren't -- remember how Pudge supposedly morphed from an awful pitch-caller in Texas to a great one in Florida and Detroit? -- but it is good to see Washington offer some praise to Laird.
Jan Hubbard thinks the Tigers and Rangers match up perfectly as trade partners, with Eric Gagne or Akinori Otsuka possibly heading to Detroit, and suggests that C.J. Wilson take over as closer if/when the two vets depart.
The problem with Hubbard's suggestion, though, is that he lists Nate Robertson, Chad Durbin, and Zach Minor as potential trade targets.
Robertson turns 30 in September, and isn't that good...he has a 5.07 ERA this season, and as I wrote last October, his solid 2006 ERA was a fluke. Robertson is useless to the Rangers, would be a bad fit here, and should not be part of any Tiger trade.
Miner is more interesting, a 25 year old groundball guy, but he's a middling prospect, and I don't see what he brings to the table that the Rangers don't already have in Kam Loe.
And Chad Durbin, like Robertson, turns 30 this year, and has mediocre peripherals (30 walks and 41 strikeouts in 78 1/3 innings, with 12 homers allowed), along with a track record of mediocrity.
If one of those guys is the best Detroit has to offer, I'd rather keep Otsuka and Gagne.
The Detroit Free Press says Otsuka, Gagne and Wilson are all pitchers that interest the Tigers, but indicates that Gagne's no trade clause would likely be invoked in a Detroit deal unless the Tigers agreed to allow him to take over for Todd Jones as the closer.
The Chicago Daily Herald says that Jacque Jones probably isn't heading to Texas or the ChiSox, which makes sense.
Joel Sherman's column in the New York Post chastises fans who think that the Yankees will get something for nothing:
"And don't put three Grade-C prospects together and expect anything back just because of quantity," an AL executive said. "Garbage plus garbage just means you are giving me more garbage."
So don't think the Yanks, for example, can take Eric Duncan, Bronson Sardinha and Colter Bean and spin it into Mark Teixeira.
Sherman suggests that Philip Hughes, Joba Chamberlain, and Ian Kennedy aren't going to be available...and if that's the case, I don't see the Yankees and Rangers making a move, since I don't think Teixeira or Otsuka (the two most likely Yank targets) are going to be sent to New York without at least one of those guys being in the deal.
37 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I predict
Of course, the one that they actually keep will become the star and the other two will linger on 60 day DLs for last place clubs...
Yanks
That said, in the end they won't deal Hughes. The only thing that might change that is if internally they decide he's too injury-prone.
by hightowersmith on Jun 24, 2007 1:23 PM CDT up reply actions
I'm coming around...
I'd do Otsuka for Chamberlain, straight up, I think.
by Adam J. Morris on Jun 24, 2007 1:27 PM CDT up reply actions
They wouldn't
Chamberlain's a nice, nice arm.
by hightowersmith on Jun 24, 2007 1:47 PM CDT up reply actions
Gagne
Otsuka is under team control through 2009, is less expensive, and doesn't have the health questions.
Plus, Gagne isn't going to accept a trade to the Yanks to be a setup man.
by Adam J. Morris on Jun 24, 2007 1:50 PM CDT up reply actions
Gagne
by BurntOrange on Jun 24, 2007 2:28 PM CDT up reply actions
ny
He has a list?
by LoneStarBallUser on Jun 24, 2007 7:45 PM CDT up reply actions
List
Gagne has a list of 12 teams i've read. It's not like this is the first time a players ever had anything like this
I know they exist
by LoneStarBallUser on Jun 24, 2007 7:55 PM CDT up reply actions
my guess
I forgot about the closer thing
by LoneStarBallUser on Jun 24, 2007 8:03 PM CDT up reply actions
two gems, one stinker
So far in AA:
3.24 era, 6.1 hits/9, 3.2 bb/9, 14.0 k/9, 0.54 hr/9
What about Loe?
Teixeira + Loe for Hughes + low minors prospect
I doubt it
They might be interested in Millwood, if he gets things back on track.
But I can't see them putting much value on Loe.
by Adam J. Morris on Jun 24, 2007 1:55 PM CDT up reply actions
Tex should not be traded for Hughes straight up.
Teix for Hughes
by Brian Thomas on Jun 24, 2007 6:13 PM CDT up reply actions
From Lebreton's "Tool Time" article
I love hearing about stuff like this.
trades
More Washington butt-kissing
AMAZING the difference between the way he treats Wash and Buck..
"Washington with some love blah blah"
I dont think AJM ever used the phrase "Buck with love for so and so" last year. He's used it about twenty times for Wash.
Asskisser.
They would
Jan Hubbard re: Detroit and Rangers as Trade Partn
Good column about the Rangers and Tigers being fitting trade partners.
I hope she and others in the media stay on this. Dombrowski in Detroit (not to mention Boras) can run circles around JD, so some continued media insights might help Little Jon DanielsHart finally make a deal that helps the Rangers more than his trading partner.
I've been writing for months on my blog - http://www.rangersorrobbers.com - about my belief that the Tigers are the best partners for a Teixeira trade, and that it would be a good deal for both teams (I was born near Detroit, and remain a fan, so I'd really like to see a deal that helps my two favorite teams). I think Jan missed the most beneficial option the two teams have. Cam Maybin is a no-go for Dombrowski, so count him out. The best deal I can envision - for both teams - is sending Teixeira and Gagne or Otsuka to Detroit in return for Andrew Miller and Zach Miner (or Chad Durbin), plus Sean Casey (we'd have to take him and it's addition by subtraction for the Tigers).
My belief for many years is that the Rangers can't develop pitching prospects - outside of short-lived success with Kevin Brown and Ian Helling, they NEVER have. And, top-line free agent pitchers have consistently shunned the Rangers even if we were offering the best deal. So, if you can't build or buy pitching, your only remaining choice is to trade for it. But, in doing so, the Rangers need to get guys who have emerged out of prospect status and turned the corner into major-league ready pitchers who still have upside. Miller and Miner fall into that category. And what does Detroit lose? Two guys who would never be more than #3 or #4 in their rotation where they could become #1 or #2 guys in Texas. Plus, the Rangers get something for Tex before he leaves in free agency after next season.
Here are the relevant posts (with some interesting comments from readers of my blog):
http://rangersorrobbers.wordpress.com/2007/06/15/teixeira-traded-to-tigers-texas-takes-three/
http://rangersorrobbers.wordpress.com/2007/05/29/texas-to-trade-texiera/
Would love to hear what Lone Star Ball readers think about my thoughts.
by rangersorrobbers on Jun 24, 2007 6:00 PM CDT reply actions
Who is Ian Helling?
And I don't think Jon Daniels merits the DanielsHart moniker. You may be able to criticize some of his moves, but he is significantly better than his predecessor.
DanielsHart
Nothing has changed...to objective observers.
by Everythings Rosey on Jun 24, 2007 6:18 PM CDT up reply actions
ugh
by Brian Thomas on Jun 24, 2007 6:32 PM CDT up reply actions
Sadly...
There's no conspiracy, just inexperiene and an owner who probably never saw a game before he bought the team.
His game is buying companies, piling up debt, diluting the product, and then, somehow, selling at a huge profit. It's worked.
Might want to do some research on why Muse bailed out on him, tho. Muse was a good guy.
Anyway, glad you're back, Rosey, wasn't sure you woud be. Must have a thick skin. Nice post on DMN today.
by dog named blue on Jun 24, 2007 7:55 PM CDT up reply actions
...to objective observers
and Ian Helling...
Good guy, tho, I always liked him. Must have changed his name after the bat incident.
A bulldog, so probably related.
by dog named blue on Jun 24, 2007 8:22 PM CDT up reply actions
Andrew Miller a #3 or 4?
He'd be a bigass loss. And, despite the Tigers apparent wealth of pitching, they are hitting better than they are throwing this year. That said, i don't think Teix for Miller is a silly deal for either side. I agree w/ you there.
But I also think your moniker for Daniels is cheesy, hackneyed, and off base. It makes me immediately skeptical of anything else you have to say about Baseball.
Also, FYI, I think Jan is a dude. I could be wrong about that though...
by Brian Thomas on Jun 24, 2007 6:26 PM CDT up reply actions
Jan is a dude!
by Everythings Rosey on Jun 24, 2007 6:30 PM CDT up reply actions
Well,
According to alot of sources, in fact everything I've read (although you seemed to imply you have some insider info I'm not privvy to), Hart is rarely around now; he's busy working on that handicap.
So I highly doubt, given everything I've read, that Hart is "whispering daily into JD's ear."
Furthermore, the blogger put the prefix "lil" in front of hartdaniels. Shit like that i find particularly tiresome. But then again, that's similar to Macmahon's M.O., which you claim to find brimming w/ insight, clarity, and wit.
If you have really read this blog for months, like you dubiously claimed the other day, then you are aware of the "liljonnie" and "boygenius" handles that some dim bulbs around here have doled out.
I don't know how old you are. I'm 37. To me, the idea of criticizing a 30 year old man by calling him a boy or a child is pretty stupid, and definitely lowbrow.
by Brian Thomas on Jun 24, 2007 6:53 PM CDT up reply actions

by 


















