CBS Sportsline has a mildly histrionic piece up on the Rangers, calling them the most "beleaguered" team in the league because of the free agent departures, and saying that "the Rangers right now would get out-shopped by Charlie Brown for a Christmas tree."
I still don't think the free agent exodus is all that worrisome -- I think that most of those who left were guys the Rangers didn't expect back anyway -- but the article also includes this oft-repeated bit of conventional wisdom.
The Lee departure looks all the worst now in that the Rangers traded a package of outfielders Kevin Mench and Laynce Nix and reliever Francisco Cordero for Lee and Cruz.
Why do people keep saying that?
He had already turned down a 4 year, $48 million offer from the Brewers when the Rangers traded for him. The Rangers traded for him knowing that, and most likely weren't going to be willing to pay him more than that to get him to stay.
Clearly, the Rangers traded for him intending to only have him through the end of the year.
So why do people keep saying now that the trade looks worse because Lee left, or said at the time that the trade's success hinged on whether or not the Rangers re-signed him?
I just don't get it.