Official Rangers off season thread - Page 6 - Dallas-Mavs.com Forums

sike · 12-09-2010, 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

There's a decent chance that Holland is every bit as good as Garza in the near future.

Like I said, I lean the other direction. Garza is already a strong #2 (He just turned 27). The hope that Holland catches up to his potential just doesn't grab me the same way.

Holland is such a light hearted and goofy guy. Garza is fiery competitor...I'll always take the bulldog over the clown.

jthig32 · 12-09-2010, 11:04 AM

I think you're overrating him a bit. But fair enough.

sike · 12-09-2010, 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

I think you're overrating him a bit. But fair enough.

I really could be overrating Garza. But I really doubt I'm underrating Holland. I've seen just about every inning that guy has pitched in the pros and heard a bunch of his interviews with Ben and Skin. He just comes across as one of those goofy, glad to be there guys.

If the Rangers have Garza highly ranked, then I'd just go get him. Not to mention his contract has another 2 years?

mkat · 12-09-2010, 12:13 PM

Give me Garza AND Greinke, or give me death, sirs.

Male30Dan · 12-09-2010, 12:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dalmations202

Rangers sending a team to Arkansas to make one last bid for Lee.....we will see.

Greenberg in tow... Get it done in 6 boys... You know you would rather be here Cliff... Sign!

Male30Dan · 12-09-2010, 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mkat

Give me Garza AND Greinke, or give me death, sirs.

I have to say, this would be a tremendous plan B as well.

Greinke
Wilson
Garza
Lewis
Feliz

Nice.

mkat · 12-09-2010, 01:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Male29Dan

I have to say, this would be a tremendous plan B as well.

Greinke
Wilson
Garza
Lewis
Feliz

Nice.

sadly i think we'd have no farm system left after those two pick ups.

Male30Dan · 12-09-2010, 01:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mkat

sadly i think we'd have no farm system left after those two pick ups.

Considering the age of those guys we would have a few years to build it back up with some really smart guys steering the ship. I see KC eventually coming down to earth and I think Garza wouldn't take a great deal to begin with. The Rays are gutting that team.

Five-ofan · 12-09-2010, 07:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Male29Dan

I have to say, this would be a tremendous plan B as well.

Greinke
Wilson
Garza
Lewis
Feliz

Nice.

Colby is better than garza but not a bad plan at all

Five-ofan · 12-09-2010, 07:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sike

Like I said, I lean the other direction. Garza is already a strong #2 (He just turned 27). The hope that Holland catches up to his potential just doesn't grab me the same way.

Holland is such a light hearted and goofy guy. Garza is fiery competitor...I'll always take the bulldog over the clown.

Garzq isnt a two. Hes between a 3 and a 4

Five-ofan · 12-09-2010, 08:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Male29Dan

Crawford and AGon in one offseason... Not bad at all. Not just offensive improvement, but defensive improvement too. It will be fun to see Crawford's highlights climbing that wall...

If they have any sense at all hell play right field. You just signed a corner outfielder whos biggest strength is that he can run down anything defensively. You have one of the smallest lfs in baseball and one of the largest rfs in baseball. Why would you put hik in left where its impossible to have any defensive value?

Male30Dan · 12-10-2010, 01:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Five-ofan

If they have any sense at all hell play right field. You just signed a corner outfielder whos biggest strength is that he can run down anything defensively. You have one of the smallest lfs in baseball and one of the largest rfs in baseball. Why would you put hik in left where its impossible to have any defensive value?

Oh I agree... I just don't know if that will happen. If it doesn't, at least it will be entertaining watching him try to climb the Fer...

92bDad · 12-10-2010, 05:52 AM

Signing Lee is almost a non-negotiable. If the Rangers sign Lee, then it opens the door to do the next thing, which is to go after yet another piece...Greinke, Garza, etc...

The beauty with Signing Lee is that it only takes money...in other words, the Rangers don't have to blow up the system. They will remain in a position of strength.

Don't forget the Rangers as an organization have done well without Lee so they need to keep focused on what they are doing right and not panic regardless of what happens with Lee. Continue to trust the system, after all it's ranked as one of the best Minor League Systems for a reason, they have talent and it is developing.

We as fans tend to want immediate rewards. We tend to be defeated in the prevailing thoughts that Lee is signing with NY and so we put out some other scenarios that provide us with some other pitchers acquired in a trade. It's as if we believe that doing something versus doing nothing is a good thing. This is were caution must come to play.

Certainly explore the options, however, perhaps if after all is said and done...after making a serious attempt, not getting a deal will not be too bad.

The tricky part and the added value part of Cliff Lee, is that everyone on the team believes that they are the team to beat as long as they have Lee. This is a stat that can not be measured. Baseball is so much about confidence, and we can see that with Lee, everyone plays better with better results. I'm not sure that you would get the same thing with any other pitcher, including Greinke, Garza or other mentioned pitchers.

Get Lee, add one more to the mix and there is no telling how dominant this team can become in 2011!!! I believe that the Ranger brass understand this and thus the reason that they are ready to put an offer that potentially is stronger than the Yankees.

Now if that is the case, I'll be curious to see how Yankee fans react. So many non-Yankee fans have been critical about the Yankees "Buying" players, yet it could be the Rangers who out bid the Yankees...I wonder how these Yankee fans will respond and what type of criticism will be cast towards the Rangers and the Fans. Something tells me that we will see some soar losers, either way and the mud will be slung.

From a business side, this is an interesting process and would be an intriguing study in the art of Negotiations. The next phase will be for someone to issue a time-line so that the final concessions can be made and the deal be decided.

Is there more drama in this negotiation or in the one in which Ryan and company were bidding against Cuban and company?

Murphy3 · 12-10-2010, 09:17 AM

Garza should be about entering his prime. I think we need to look at his numbers and remember that he pitches in the AL East. Is he a two? Perhaps he could be a solid #2. At worst, he's a very good three at this point.

sike · 12-10-2010, 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Five-ofan

Garzq isnt a two. Hes between a 3 and a 4

Underselling much? Between a 3 and a 4????

So you are saying on an average MLB team, Garza is BETWEEN their 3rd and 4th best starting pitcher??

alexamenos · 12-10-2010, 03:12 PM

Sounds like Rangers are probably in the 6 year, $25 mm per territory. It's getting to the point where I'm rooting for Yankees to win this potential albatross.

sike · 12-10-2010, 03:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alexamenos

Sounds like Rangers are probably in the 6 year, $25 mm per territory. It's getting to the point where I'm rooting for Yankees to win this potential albatross.

I'm with ya.

Male30Dan · 12-10-2010, 03:39 PM

I think as long as it is 6 years or less at 25m or less it is a win for us. The kick in the nuts that stealing him from the Yankees provides along with the obvious excitement, confidence, swagger, etc - it is worth it. It just is. If you can sign Cliff Lee at 6/150, do it. If it takes 7/170+, walk. That 6th year won't hurt us nearly as bad as his first 4 years will help us. Do it.

Now, can a case be made to go after Greinke/Garza, sign some offense, and promote some guys internally? Sure, but some of that can still be done after Lee. If you can sign a long term deal with a legitimate ace that could go ANYWHERE he chooses and is the number one target in free agency, what do you think that tells other pitchers about being successful in Texas? There are so many little things that will come from this signing that some of the negative just washes away to me.

Trust me, I have swayed too - gone back and forth, but if you can sign him for 6 years or less at 25m or less per year, you do it.

jthig32 · 12-10-2010, 03:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Male29Dan

I think as long as it is 6 years or less at 25m or less it is a win for us. The kick in the nuts that stealing him from the Yankees provides along with the obvious excitement, confidence, swagger, etc - it is worth it. It just is. If you can sign Cliff Lee at 6/150, do it. If it takes 7/170+, walk. That 6th year won't hurt us nearly as bad as his first 4 years will help us. Do it.

Now, can a case be made to go after Greinke/Garza, sign some offense, and promote some guys internally? Sure, but some of that can still be done after Lee. If you can sign a long term deal with a legitimate ace that could go ANYWHERE he chooses and is the number one target in free agency, what do you think that tells other pitchers about being successful in Texas? There are so many little things that will come from this signing that some of the negative just washes away to me.

Trust me, I have swayed too - gone back and forth, but if you can sign him for 6 years or less at 25m or less per year, you do it.

This.

Plus, you have to assume that the new ownership group is not going to make the same mistakes Hicks did. They know what they can afford, and they know how Lee would or wouldn't affect their budget moving forward.

I trust this group.

Murphy3 · 12-10-2010, 04:14 PM

There will be alot more revenue coming in with this ownership group.. the new TV contract.. the increased ticket and merchandising after the trip to the World Series... Revenue is going to bump up significantly... advertising...concessions..

mkat · 12-10-2010, 04:50 PM

when do we stop paying ARod?

sike · 12-10-2010, 04:51 PM

Pure Hypothetical: what if the choice was Grenkie&Garza OR Lee? for the next 6 or 7 years? (I know there are a TON of other variables...but which of these would you choose?)

Murphy3 · 12-10-2010, 05:15 PM

I like Garza, but I just don't think he'll be worth what you have to give up.

mkat · 12-10-2010, 05:17 PM

I think Greinke has the best stuff out of all three. Garza's price will come down, as will Greinke's. And even if the rangers don't get any of them, there's always trades during the year or trade deadline pick ups that can bolster the team.

jthig32 · 12-10-2010, 05:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sike

Pure Hypothetical: what if the choice was Grenkie&Garza OR Lee? for the next 6 or 7 years? (I know there are a TON of other variables...but which of these would you choose?)

In a vacuum I would take Greinke&Garza. But the cost in prospects would be prohibitive.

Murphy3 · 12-10-2010, 05:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

In a vacuum I would take Greinke&Garza. But the cost in prospects would be prohibitive.

Oh sure, if you didn't have to factor in the cost of prospects... I'd definitely take the two younger guys that can fit into somewhere into the top 4 spots along with Lewis and Wilson. I don't know that Garza would be better than Wilson and Lewis.. Greinke would probably slide nicely into the #1 spot.

sike · 12-10-2010, 05:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

In a vacuum I would take Greinke&Garza. But the cost in prospects would be prohibitive.

there you go banking on prospects again...

give me 2 studs and you can have your 5 prospects. (3 of which won't turn out anyway, and only 1 of which will live up to the hype....maybe.)

Murphy3 · 12-10-2010, 05:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sike

there you go banking on prospects again...

give me 2 studs and you can have your 5 prospects. (3 of which won't turn out anyway, and only 1 of which will live up to the hype....maybe.)

But you also have to pay the pitchers as well.. so you're paying a great sum of money and great sum of prospects... and I wouldn't call Garza a stud.

jthig32 · 12-10-2010, 06:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sike

there you go banking on prospects again...

give me 2 studs and you can have your 5 prospects. (3 of which won't turn out anyway, and only 1 of which will live up to the hype....maybe.)

Or you could sign Lee and turn those prospects into other positions that you might need in the coming couple of years.

You do realize the core of this team is currently constructed on a lot of prospects that have "turned out"....right?

Five-ofan · 12-10-2010, 06:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sike

Underselling much? Between a 3 and a 4????

So you are saying on an average MLB team, Garza is BETWEEN their 3rd and 4th best starting pitcher??

Only had a k rate above 7 per 9 once in his career. Usually good for about a 3 per 9 walk rate. Had a 4.42 fip last year. No im not underselling him by saying hes a 3/4. Derek holland is better than him right now. His biggest strength is that hes avg right at 200 innings the last couple of years

jthig32 · 12-10-2010, 06:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Five-ofan

Only had a k rate above 7 per 9 once in his career. Usually good for about a 3 per 9 walk rate. Had a 4.42 fip last year. No im not underselling him by saying hes a 3/4. Derek holland is better than him right now. His biggest strength is that hes avg right at 200 innings the last couple of years

Dude, come on. You can't just quote FIP and the like without taking into account the amount of work actually put in by the pitcher. Derek Holland is not better than Matt Garza right now.

Male30Dan · 12-10-2010, 07:28 PM

Five-O... Five-O... Five-O...

That is all.

Five-ofan · 12-11-2010, 12:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

Dude, come on. You can't just quote FIP and the like without taking into account the amount of work actually put in by the pitcher. Derek Holland is not better than Matt Garza right now.

Its obviously speculation on my point and i guess i should have been more clear, i expect derek holland to be better this coming year if given the starting job

sike · 12-11-2010, 11:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Five-ofan

Only had a k rate above 7 per 9 once in his career. Usually good for about a 3 per 9 walk rate. Had a 4.42 fip last year. No im not underselling him by saying hes a 3/4. Derek holland is better than him right now. His biggest strength is that hes avg right at 200 innings the last couple of years

Listen, I get that you are a baseball nerd and I'm nothing close that. But the claim that Holland is better than Garza seems stupid to me.

I'm calling right now that Holland NEVER lives up to his arm's potential and will NEVER be more than a 3rd or 4th guy on a good team.

Whereas Garza has been a 2 on a team that won the freakin East last year.

sike · 12-11-2010, 11:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

You do realize the core of this team is currently constructed on a lot of prospects that have "turned out"....right?

Of course. You do realize that EVERY major league line up is made up of nothing but prospects who "turned out"....right?

If your point is that SOME prospects make it, that was never under contention. My point is that betting on prospects at the expense of the proven stud (or realized prospect) is not my favorite recipe for winning.

Would you agree that most 'star" pitching prospects never turn into viable star pitchers?
(I feel that there is an even higher degree of fail to success with pitching prospects)

Once again, I freely admit that I could be overrating Garza.

I think that the spot the Rangers are in calls for moving some prospects to acquire proven talent to help them win it all now. If Garza isn't the talent I thought, then that is on me.

But I'm not the guy who holds out on moving prospects unless its for an established ace.

sike · 12-11-2010, 11:53 AM

My Fear:
"A big league executive told Kevin Goldstein of Baseball Prospectus: “The numbers have gotten to a point where Cliff Lee is a bad contract for either the Rangers or the Yankees.”

read more at: http://www.newbergreport.com/article.asp?articleid=2105

jthig32 · 12-11-2010, 01:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sike

Of course. You do realize that EVERY major league line up is made up of nothing but prospects who "turned out"....right?

If your point is that SOME prospects make it, that was never under contention. My point is that betting on prospects at the expense of the proven stud (or realized prospect) is not my favorite recipe for winning.

Would you agree that most 'star" pitching prospects never turn into viable star pitchers?
(I feel that there is an even higher degree of fail to success with pitching prospects)

Once again, I freely admit that I could be overrating Garza.

I think that the spot the Rangers are in calls for moving some prospects to acquire proven talent to help them win it all now. If Garza isn't the talent I thought, then that is on me.

But I'm not the guy who holds out on moving prospects unless its for an established ace.

Well, I meant specifically OUR prospects. That we decided not to trade, or got lucky with (Cruz and Kinsler).

Yes most prospects don't live up to the peak of their hype. But the thing that I think most casual baseball fans miss when it comes to prospects is just how valuable they are when they do work out. Even if Derek Holland is never more than a third starter, do you realize how valuable a third starter is when he's THAT cheap for that long? CJ Wilson made 3 million last year. Josh Hamilton made 3 million. Nelson Cruz made 400K. Derek Holland made 400K.

THIS is the much less reported reason why building from within is so essential. You simply cannot afford top of the line free agents if you don't fill out roughly half of your roster with pre-arbitration players.

In fact the presence of these players is WHY we can afford to go after Cliff Lee right now. And the farm system's ability to continue to produce these cheap players will be integral in affording the contract if we sign it.

These are things you have to consider when you're talking about trading prospects, ESPECIALLY prospects like Holland that have had some level of success at such a young age.

I'm fully in favor of moving prospects when the time calls for it, and I think now is a time that calls for it. I just think you have to be a bit more selective than you are advocating.

jthig32 · 12-11-2010, 01:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sike

My Fear:
"A big league executive told Kevin Goldstein of Baseball Prospectus: “The numbers have gotten to a point where Cliff Lee is a bad contract for either the Rangers or the Yankees.”

read more at: http://www.newbergreport.com/article.asp?articleid=2105

I agree that in practical terms he won't perform up the contract. So in those terms it will be a *bad* contract.

But you can't look at these things in a vacuum. There is no other 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.

Some would say trading for Greinke would be a better alternative, but there you have to give up a ton of prospects that would either give you a handful of years of dirt cheap production between them, or give you the ammunition to trade for other pieces. AND you still have to give Greinke a giant contract in two years if you want to keep him.

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.

Murphy3 · 12-11-2010, 03:20 PM

It's pretty dang important that the Rangers strike while the iron is hot.. With the team's success and the new ownership group, the fan base is ready to explode if the Rangers make a couple of nice moves this off season. If they don't, many fans will find an excuse to stay away. Signing Lee could do absolute wonders for season ticket sales..merchandising.. advertising..and much more.

sike · 12-11-2010, 03:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Murphy3

It's pretty dang important that the Rangers strike while the iron is hot.. With the team's success and the new ownership group, the fan base is ready to explode if the Rangers make a couple of nice moves this off season. If they don't, many fans will find an excuse to stay away. Signing Lee could do absolute wonders for season ticket sales..merchandising.. advertising..and much more.

I just get so nervous about the idea of singing a guy currently in the middle of his prime to a deal that will far outlast it. Whereas Grenkie is just entering his prime.

I agree that they MUST strike this hot iron.

And any amount of forfeiting of money, prospects, bad contracts are worth it if they win just one World Series.

If that means a terrible contract to Lee or smaller contracts that also cost us much of the farm for the likes of stud younger pitchers...just win.