Official Rangers off season thread - Page 7 - Dallas-Mavs.com Forums

sike · 12-11-2010, 03:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

There is no other ACE pitcher out there that you can acquire with a *good* contract. The only way to never have bad contracts is to never sign anyone in free agency. And to do that you have to get ridiculously lucky with the timing of your farm system. Everyone has to arrive at the same time and work out.

Fixed.

Quote:

The bottom line is that in order for the Rangers to stay elite contenders they're going to have to bite the bullet and make a "bad" acquisition. You just have to hope that the one they make works out as well as possible.

I agree that its all a crapshoot, but disagree that you have to make a "bad" deal. For the specific case of Greinke, a young legit Ace/Cy Young contender is not a "bad" deal when you consider you'll be getting him for his prime and playing far less than you would Lee for a couple of you prime potential winning seasons, it doesn't make it "bad" deal just bc its costs many prospects. An ACE is worth it.

Like I said in an above post, win a world series and whatever decision you made was the right one. If that is Lee and his bloated boat of money, ok. If that Is moving out much of the potential studs in the farm for the likes of Greinke, ok.

sike · 12-11-2010, 03:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Murphy3

Signing Lee could do absolute wonders for season ticket sales..merchandising.. advertising..and much more.

At this point, I doubt any combination of signings could even come close to touching a Lee signing.

Fans are sheep, and Lee has been the poster boy for guaranteed success for several months now.

*Despite the fact that he got knocked around pretty hard by the Giants when it mattered most.

jthig32 · 12-11-2010, 04:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sike

At this point, I doubt any combination of signings could even come close to touching a Lee signing.

Fans are sheep, and Lee has been the poster boy for guaranteed success for several months now.

*Despite the fact that he got knocked around pretty hard by the Giants when it mattered most.

Yeah let's focus on one game rather than the entire track record that puts him in the discussion for the greatest post season pitcher in the history of baseball.

jthig32 · 12-11-2010, 04:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sike

I agree that its all a crapshoot, but disagree that you have to make a "bad" deal. For the specific case of Greinke, a young legit Ace/Cy Young contender is not a "bad" deal when you consider you'll be getting him for his prime and playing far less than you would Lee for a couple of you prime potential winning seasons, it doesn't make it "bad" deal just bc its costs many prospects. An ACE is worth it.

Like I said in an above post, win a world series and whatever decision you made was the right one. If that is Lee and his bloated boat of money, ok. If that Is moving out much of the potential studs in the farm for the likes of Greinke, ok.

It's really confusing to me why you're more willing to spend prospects AND money for an inferior (but still really good) pitcher.

I'll gladly take them both (for the right price), but given the choice of the two, give me Lee in a heart beat.

sike · 12-11-2010, 04:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

Yeah let's focus on one game rather than the entire track record that puts him in the discussion for the greatest post season pitcher in the history of baseball.

You're right, I shouldn't look at that game "in a vacuum". (I just wanted to use that phrase before you got around to it again).

Still the thrust of that post is the first 2 lines that you ignored. The fans will not be happy unless Lee signs.

sike · 12-11-2010, 04:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

It's really confusing to me why you're more willing to spend prospects AND money for an inferior (but still really good) pitcher.

This is a very simple answer: Cliff Lee is 32 and in the middle of his prime. I would rather have the guy at the beginning of his prime for the long run. I have a hard time trusting soft tossing middle age players. (How long does Lee have his 92mph fast ball and impeccable placement?)

If we're just looking at the next 2 seasons in a vacuum (

), then I think that I too, would prefer Lee.

And like I said twice before. I'm a complete pragmatic with the Rangers: win and it was the right move even if it straps us for the future.

sike · 12-11-2010, 04:29 PM

One question I really would enjoy hearing you baseball heads speculate on is this:

How many more seasons is Cliff Lee a dominant Ace?

jthig32 · 12-11-2010, 04:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sike

One question I really would enjoy hearing you baseball heads speculate on is this:

How many more seasons is Cliff Lee a dominant Ace?

I think it will be three or four.

sike · 12-11-2010, 05:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

I think it will be three or four.

I would be very happy with 3 and ecstatic with 4.

Male30Dan · 12-13-2010, 12:24 PM

Texas moving aggressively on Beltre per Karl Ravech... Is he plan B, or part of plan A?

Man... If part of plan A... So sweet!!!

If you could keep Lee, add Beltre, sign Vlad, and move MY to 1st as I initially proposed... I might actually shed a tear.

If Beltre is plan B that ALSO includes a trade for Greinke - still very nice... I hope everyone here understands just how much putting Beltre in 3B would do for this team defensively. Even if MY takes us down a notch at 1B (and understand that Mitch isn't a vacuum over there) the overall improvement would still be a major one.

If we want to let Vlad walk and put MY at DH, fine, but you hurt the offense to help the defense (Vlad in 2011 will most definitely outproduce Moreland) and in my opinion you hurt the offense more than the defense is improved.

Is there any chance we could sign Lee, Beltre, AND trade for Greinke???

Come on, someone give me a way that could happen without a MY trade (since that option is so unlikely)...

sike · 12-13-2010, 12:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Male29Dan

Is there any chance we could sign Lee, Beltre, AND trade for Greinke???

I don't see it. Not only would it be triumph for the FO but it would be a colossal failure for the rest of the AL. I can't see the Yanks, Angels, Sawks, etc allowing that to happen.

Male30Dan · 12-13-2010, 01:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sike

I don't see it. Not only would it be triumph for the FO but it would be a colossal failure for the rest of the AL. I can't see the Yanks, Angels, Sawks, etc allowing that to happen.

KC is really the only team that could stop it... The rest is us making the decision to sign the player and the player making the decision to sign with us.

With that said, I was speaking with my tongue firmly planted in my cheek.

Five-ofan · 12-13-2010, 03:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sike

I would be very happy with 3 and ecstatic with 4.

Lee is an interesting case. Control pretty much doesnt go awat but velocity does and there is a serious line in the sand at 91 mph as an average fb velocity. I think hell be lee for 4 more seasons, and i think hell be a good two for the last 3 barring injury

sike · 12-13-2010, 11:37 PM

not a creature was stirring...not even a mouse.

jthig32 · 12-13-2010, 11:58 PM

He's going to Philly. Unbelievable.

Dim499 · 12-14-2010, 12:05 AM

But how is he possibly travelling to and fro to Arkansas from Philly? And Why did he take only 5 years?
Phillies might be favoured every game next season with that rotation. Man this sucks. As soon as a National League team lifted its parfumed inner thigh he jumped at it. He just didnt want to play in 40° Celsius every summer.

jthig32 · 12-14-2010, 12:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dim499

But how is he possibly travelling to and fro to Arkansas from Philly? And Why did he take only 5 years?

Certainly looks like he wanted Philly all along. Which I can't really begrudge him.

It is a real kick in the nuts to think that he might never had any intention of coming back here.

sike · 12-14-2010, 12:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

It is a real kick in the nuts to think that he might never had any intention of coming back here.

I'm not sure there is a reason to think that. He just wanted to play in the NL and considering that rotation, you can hardly blame him. Plus, things are easier over there for his soft tossing ways.

But honestly I feel like we dodged a bullet we didn't have to pay 7 years and the Yanks didn't get him!

JD, go get things done, son!!!

sike · 12-14-2010, 12:16 AM

I'm relieved. All you baseball heads can remind me of this if JD can't work his magic...but I predict this turn out for our good.

jthig32 · 12-14-2010, 12:36 AM

The more I read about Greinke deals the more I'm convinced that we don't really have the appropriate fire power to get it done. They're not really looking for pitching.

I dunno. I'm depressed right now. I trust in JD.

chumdawg · 12-14-2010, 12:40 AM

There was something about that guy that never sat right with me. I think it's that he's not a team player.

jthig32 · 12-14-2010, 12:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

There was something about that guy that never sat right with me. I think it's that he's not a team player.

He just left a minimum of 30 million dollars to play where he wanted to play.

Very odd accusation to make.

jthig32 · 12-14-2010, 12:44 AM

Quote:

TBrownYahoo Tim Brown
With vesting option, Lee could have made $161 mil from Rangers. They were the high bidders.

Um...wow. I'm less depressed now. That is an insane contract.

sike · 12-14-2010, 12:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

There was something about that guy that never sat right with me. I think it's that he's not a team player.

I guess the hired gun wanted to go back to the place where he actually contended for the world series.

That rotation is stupid.

I just don't want to hear anyone with Rangers talking about CJ or Colby as "Ace Type Stuff"...nope, gotta go get a real one.

chumdawg · 12-14-2010, 12:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

He just left a minimum of 30 million dollars to play where he wanted to play.

Very odd accusation to make.

Think about what you just said. Carefully.

jthig32 · 12-14-2010, 12:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

Think about what you just said. Carefully.

So he's supposed to have loyalty to us because of three months? That doesn't make any sense.

I'm bummed he didn't sign (although getting less bummed by the minute based on the contract numbers) but the guy left at least on guaranteed year and tens of millions of dollars on the table. It's ridiculous to disparage him in any way over this.

sike · 12-14-2010, 12:59 AM

I can only imagine that this would have gone down differently if the rangers make it close in the world series.

jthig32 · 12-14-2010, 01:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sike

I can only imagine that this would have gone down differently if the rangers make it close in the world series.

I really doubt that had anything to do with it.

sike · 12-14-2010, 01:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

I really doubt that had anything to do with it.

so you're suggesting he doesn't play for money or winning....

please, do tell.

chumdawg · 12-14-2010, 01:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

So he's supposed to have loyalty to us because of three months? That doesn't make any sense.

I'm bummed he didn't sign (although getting less bummed by the minute based on the contract numbers) but the guy left at least on guaranteed year and tens of millions of dollars on the table. It's ridiculous to disparage him in any way over this.

The dude just spent tens of millions of dollars on himself. If that's not selfish, I don't know what is.

jthig32 · 12-14-2010, 01:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

The dude just spent tens of millions of dollars on himself. If that's not selfish, I don't know what is.

Very strange way of looking at someone putting winning over money.

sike · 12-14-2010, 01:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

The dude just spent tens of millions of dollars on himself. If that's not selfish, I don't know what is.

So you're assuming his wife didn't want to go to Philly?

jthig32 · 12-14-2010, 01:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sike

so you're suggesting he doesn't play for money or winning....

please, do tell.

Well, two things:

1. First I don't think it was ALL about winning. He supposedly really, really enjoyed his time in Philly. I've read that from several different places even before this all started.

2. Why would two games being different in the WS change his view of this team going forward? That doesn't really make sense.

sike · 12-14-2010, 01:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

2. Why would two games being different in the WS change his view of this team going forward? That doesn't really make sense.

Really?! If they were one game away from a world championship, that doesn't alter his "view"?

This, of course, is raw speculation at its rawest...but if the Rangers fell one game short and he left of in the name of "winning" it all, I would think he was crazy.

as it stands, the Rangers choked enough in the series to really justify him look at the Philly and saying, "Yeah, they really are closer to winning it all."

edit to say: And honestly, I agree with him.

jthig32 · 12-14-2010, 01:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sike

Really?! If they were one game away from a world championship, that doesn't alter his "view"?

This, of course, is raw speculation at its rawest...but if the Rangers fell one game short and he left of in the name of "winning" it all, I would think he was crazy.

as it stands, the Rangers choked enough in the series to really justify him look at the Philly and saying, "Yeah, they really are closer to winning it all."

Sorry Sike but that really, really doesn't make any sense (to me). Baseball is WAY too unpredictable to base any decision on two games.

The Phillies with Cliff Lee are closer to winning it all than the Rangers with Cliff Lee. Period-end-of-story. So I don't see how the Rangers winning a game or two more last October/November would have made any difference.

If anything, Cliff Lee strikes me as the kind of guy that would take full responsibility for the Rangers not doing as well as they had hoped in the WS (not that that would really be true).

fluid.forty.one · 12-14-2010, 01:20 AM

chum

If he goes to a team he doesn't want to play for but is offering a lot more money, he's greedy and doesn't really care about the team or the game.

If he goes to a team he does want to play for and they offer less money, he's being selfish and should have taken more money elsewhere for his family.

Not sure how he could come across well?

I'd imagine his reason for choosing Philly was winning. Well, isn't that the reason why Dirk left money on the table during his last contract discussion? Is he selfish for not taking more money? (The humor in that sentence I guess is what I have a problem with). I know he's not married yet, but it's a similar deal. Take less money to win more.

chumdawg · 12-14-2010, 01:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fluid.forty.one

chum

If he goes to a team he doesn't want to play for but is offering a lot more money, he's greedy and doesn't really care about the team or the game.

If he goes to a team he does want to play for and they offer less money, he's being selfish and should have taken more money elsewhere for his family.

Not sure how he could come across well?

I'd imagine his reason for choosing Philly was winning. Well, isn't that the reason why Dirk left money on the table during his last contract discussion? Is he selfish for not taking more money? (The humor in that sentence I guess is what I have a problem with). I know he's not married yet, but it's a similar deal. Take less money to win more.

I said that he is a guy who to me looks like he doesn't put team first. That was based on observing his behavior when he played for the Rangers. He seemed a lot more concerned with Cliff-Lee-the-One-Man-Corporation than with anything else.

Maybe his heart was always in Philadelphia and it's a Disney story come to light. But more likely, his heart was never anywhere, and he just decided where the One-Man-Corporation should lease its home office.

sike · 12-14-2010, 01:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

Sorry Sike but that really, really doesn't make any sense. Baseball is WAY too unpredictable to base any decision on two games.

How does being 1 game from being world champs not serve to motivate differently? In the very same way that being embarrassed by the eventual world champs also motivates. (And I believe we are seeing the fruits of that embarrassment) Remember, thig, you don't have to agree with something for it to be rational. Losing in a seven game series is not the same thing as being embarrassed.

The Rangers were embarrassed and that can only have made the decision of going back to the Phillies that much easier. That is what I am saying. Contending that it wouldn't make any kind of difference seems disconnected with human emotion.

fluid.forty.one · 12-14-2010, 01:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

I said that he is a guy who to me looks like he doesn't put team first. That was based on observing his behavior when he played for the Rangers. He seemed a lot more concerned with Cliff-Lee-the-One-Man-Corporation than with anything else.

Maybe his heart was always in Philadelphia and it's a Disney story come to light. But more likely, his heart was never anywhere, and he just decided where the One-Man-Corporation should lease its home office.

I'm saying that if he doesn't care about the team, why would he take substantially less money so he could hand pick the team he wanted. He could have easily taken the 161 million from the Rangers and been a One-Man-Hella-Paid-Corporation.

The team aspect obviously had something to do with it... unless there are some great hookers in Philly or something.

sike · 12-14-2010, 01:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

But more likely, his heart was never anywhere, and he just decided where the One-Man-Corporation should lease its home office.

I distinctly remember getting the vibe that he didn't care about the Rangers as a franchise after listening to several of his interviews.

But I don't blame the guy one bit. He was what we thought he was...a hired gun.

I remember him talking about how nice it was to see the Philly's lose to the Giants bc they "didn't want him"...

I agree that he has probably just chosen the team that he feels has the best chance to get him rings. And he is probably right.