Official Rangers off season thread - Page 9 - Dallas-Mavs.com Forums

sike · 12-14-2010, 02:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

Losing in five games and losing in seven...I just can't believe that anyone thinks that's enough of a difference to change where he wants to play for the next six seasons. That would be the ultimate knee jerk.

So the Philly's barely losing a series to a certain team without Cliff and the Rangers resoundingly losing a series to that same team with Cliff doesn't do anything in your brain?
I tend to think that it got the wheels in his brain turning. Athletes (especially world class athletes) are nothing if not egotists: "All that team needs is me!"

ok. I'm done with this one.

I'll say it again, I'm glad the Yanks or any other AL powerhouse didn't get him...and for now, I'm glad the Rangers didn't.

chumdawg · 12-14-2010, 02:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

That's highly unlikely given his age.

Highly unlikely that after two more seasons from now he could get a $40MM+ contract? Gimme a break.

Underdog · 12-14-2010, 02:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sike

I'm glad the Yanks or any other AL powerhouse didn't get him.

This seems like the no-brainer outlook on the situation...

sike · 12-14-2010, 02:51 AM

I am equal parts insulted and exhilarated by the following posts!!

Quote:

Originally Posted by LonghornDub

Sike's around a fair amount, but 80% of his posts seem to just be him coming onto me or UD anyway.

Quote:

UD said: Oh, thank god you noticed - I thought I was the only one who was turned-on...

sike · 12-14-2010, 02:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Underdog

This seems like the no-brainer outlook on the situation...

True, but after spending an hour + defending an off handed comment I also thought was fairly no brainerish, nothing is a given.

Five-ofan · 12-14-2010, 04:06 AM

I actually agree that Lee is a little more worried about his own numbers then the team but this decision has nothing to do with that belief. The only reason I believe that is because he consistenly refused to walk people in game situations that called for it, and I believe that it was because he was worried about his historic k/bb ratio. I will admit that it could simply be the athletic arrogance that greatness requires though. I will forever thank Cliff Lee for nearly single-handedly winning the first series in Rangers history and I wish him the best of luck in Philly as long as he isnt playing the Rangers.

Five-ofan · 12-14-2010, 04:14 AM

My next phone call if Im Jon Daniels is to Seattle offering Perez, Holland, Scheppers and Profar for Felix Hernandez and Josh Lueke.

mavspwnage · 12-14-2010, 04:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Five-ofan

My next phone call if Im Jon Daniels is to Seattle offering Perez, Holland, Scheppers and Profar for Felix Hernandez and Josh Lueke.

Seattle GM Jack Zduriencik's response:

Five-ofan · 12-14-2010, 05:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mavspwnage

Seattle GM Jack Zduriencik's response:

I wasn't aware he had signed an extension(not sure how i missed that) and was basing it on the thought he would be a FA after next year. With the extension you are right, theres very little chance they do it.

Five-ofan · 12-14-2010, 06:02 AM

Since thats a no go, my next phone call would be to the brewers to find out what Gallardo and Fielder would cost.

As an aside, i dont see the phillies as a dominant team next year. Clearly they have an absolutely dominant starting rotation but they have serious bullpen issues and i just dont have much faith in their position players. Utley is their best player and is coming off of injury issues and a down year(For him). Werth was their only good rh bat and hes gone. Howard is vastly overrated and cant hit lefties. Rollins isnt any better than elvis andrus(and Id bet even money that Andrus is better next year) Polanco is 35 and coming off of an injury. Carlos Ruiz is a 31(be 32 in january) year old coming off a career year thats literally twice as good as any season in his career thats fueled by a babip thats 60 points higher than his career average with no increase in the underlying skills. Raul ibanez is raul ibanez.

I would also think they are absolutely capped in terms of money for a long time. For just this year Lee, Halladay, Howard and Oswalt will make over 80 million dollars. Im not sure what Utley makes but including him has to push that quintet to close to 100 mil. Lidge also makes 10 mil or so if im not mistaken. Im guessing this puts their payroll in the 140+ mil range with only one person on the entire roster who can hit lefties(utley) and hes coming off of an injury and a potential down turn in his career. This is a move the Phillies had to make at this price but its also nowhere near the surefire dominant team that everyone is making it out to be. They actually remind me alot of the giants last year except they dont have a closer/bullpen NEARLY as good as the giants did. They will obviously be scary as hell in the playoffs but I dont think its a given that they MAKE the playoffs.

mavspwnage · 12-14-2010, 08:29 AM

What's the status of Mark Buehrle? He is a FA after the 2011 season. I have read some reports that the White Sox might use him as trade bait. But I've seen others that say the WS are not letting him go anywhere.

jthig32 · 12-14-2010, 09:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sike

So the Philly's barely losing a series to a certain team without Cliff and the Rangers resoundingly losing a series to that same team with Cliff doesn't do anything in your brain?
I tend to think that it got the wheels in his brain turning. Athletes (especially world class athletes) are nothing if not egotists: "All that team needs is me!"

ok. I'm done with this one.

I'll say it again, I'm glad the Yanks or any other AL powerhouse didn't get him...and for now, I'm glad the Rangers didn't.

The Phillies won one more game.

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

Highly unlikely that after two more seasons from now he could get a $40MM+ contract? Gimme a break.

Your math is way off. His three year extension wouldn't have started until this season. So three seasons from now he would have been a free agent again. At age 35.

And he ended up getting 120 mil guaranteed plus a buyout for 12 mil. So that's almost 80 million he'd have to make up. There's no way that extension would have worked out better.

muzak · 12-14-2010, 09:19 AM

Does anyone else think it might have been a chicken-s move? Not only is it easier to pitch in the NL, but he gets to "hide" behind 3 other great pitchers in Philly. Less pressure. Not saying I believe this to be the case, but I wouldn't discount that it may have had some weight on his decision.

jthig32 · 12-14-2010, 09:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by muzak

Does anyone else think it might have been a chicken-s move? Not only is it easier to pitch in the NL, but he gets to "hide" behind 3 other great pitchers in Philly. Less pressure. Not saying I believe this to be the case, but I wouldn't discount that it may have had some weight on his decision.

Pretty hard to hide in Philadelphia, and I assure you that Hamels and Oswalt are not going to hide Cliff Lee.

jthig32 · 12-14-2010, 09:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

Your math is way off. His three year extension wouldn't have started until this season. So three seasons from now he would have been a free agent again. At age 35.

And he ended up getting 120 mil guaranteed plus a buyout for 12 mil. So that's almost 80 million he'd have to make up. There's no way that extension would have worked out better.

Just to be accurate, apparently the 12.5 million buyout is rolled into the 5/120. Still, he's not making up 60+ million on the open market at age 35.

muzak · 12-14-2010, 09:25 AM

Yeah, but Hamels and Oswalt > Lewis and Hunter, by a long shot.

Certainly the better pitching rotation helped his decision, I would think.

jthig32 · 12-14-2010, 09:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by muzak

Yeah, but Hamels and Oswalt > Lewis and Hunter, by a long shot.

Certainly the better pitching rotation helped his decision, I would think.

Sure but I thin it's pretty safe to assume that it helped his decision because he wants to win, not because he's scared of the pressure.

Five-ofan · 12-14-2010, 09:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

Just to be accurate, apparently the 12.5 million buyout is rolled into the 5/120. Still, he's not making up 60+ million on the open market at age 35.

He did what he thought was best for himself and his family when all factors are considered including monetary concerns. I for one still love the guy and wish him the best.

Male30Dan · 12-14-2010, 09:43 AM

I must say, I didn't hear about this until this morning (fell asleep last night at 8pm battling my 2nd case of Strep in a single months time) and I am just devastated. More so because the team was an unknown and in my head they were never in the mix. I would have bet great money that he would have never considered any team that traded him previously, but sure enough - he signs with a team that is going to have an absolutely amazing rotation. Just amazing.

I also want to add that I agree with Thiggy on these conversations with Sike and Chum because I can't be angry at the guy for wanting to pick the place he works in for the next many years after a slew of trades. As much as I wanted him here, I wish him the best in Philly. I think I would have been more angry if he picked NY, but all the same - good luck Lee. Regarding Sike's contention, I disagree completely about both our competitiveness in the series and that 1-2 more wins would have meant anything else. Not to stir that up again - but just felt the need to add my 2c.

As far as what this means, well, NY and TX are now left needing a SP so that likely means the trades for Greinke/Garza/WHOEVER will be more demanding considering Lee's decision. That sucks for sure. If NY signed Lee, that wouldn't be so much the case because Philly wouldn't have been pushing for a trade for one of these guys in my opinion, but NY now likely is.

Eh well, if we somehow manage to sign Beltre, Vlad, and trade for Garza or Greinke the offseason is still a success. Not as successful as it could have been, but a success all the same.

Male30Dan · 12-14-2010, 09:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

Just to be accurate, apparently the 12.5 million buyout is rolled into the 5/120. Still, he's not making up 60+ million on the open market at age 35.

When I said I disagree with Chum, I meant on the "F Cliff Lee" angle. This from you I actually disagree with - I think Andy is doing pretty damn well on one year deals and he is often compared to what Lee will become as he ages well.

Andy Pettite is 38 and he has made 48m in years 35, 36, 37, and 38. Next year he is expected to make another 10-15m. It can be done for a pitcher that ages gracefully and is a master in the postseason.

That all sounds rather familiar.

Male30Dan · 12-14-2010, 10:02 AM

The sad thing about all of this... The LIKELY result of all of these great offense/pitching possibilities that have been floating around is the following:

SS - Andrus
2B - Kinsler
LF - Hamilton
RF - Cruz
DH - Vlad
SS - Young
1B - Moreland
C - Torrealba
CF - Borbon

Wilson
Lewis
Holland
Hunter
Ogando

Given all of this, I still doubt they give Feliz a chance to start... What a damn let down this offseason has turned into. Sure, there is opportunity still out there, but LA likely won't let Beltre get away and KC/TB trades gut our system. I was more prone to letting that happen WITH Lee, but without Lee and no other offseason addition I am hesitant because it isn't enough to put us over the top. We were good without Lee, don't get me wrong - but we weren't World Series good. We don't get out of that first round against TB without him.

So bummed right now...

jthig32 · 12-14-2010, 10:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Male29Dan

When I said I disagree with Chum, I meant on the "F Cliff Lee" angle. This I actually disagree with - I think Andy is doing pretty damn well on one year deals and he is often compared to what Lee will become as he ages well.

Andy Pettite is 38 and he has made 48m in years 35, 36, 37, and 38. Next year he is expected to make another 10-15m. It can be done for a pitcher that ages gracefully and is a master in the postseason.

That all sounds rather familiar.

Let's break this down:

According to Cots, at the end of 2015, Lee will have made a minimum of 132.5 million (cots does not have the buyout rolled into the 120 figure and I trust them).

If he'd taken the extension, at the end of 2013 he would have made 54 million. And he would be 35.

I have a hard time believing he's going to get a subsequent contract that guarantees him the difference between those two contracts. And he's certainly not going to make up that difference in two years, so you have the time value of money eating into his next contract.

I guess it's possible that he stays healthy enough to earn several one year contracts, which would really raise his average annual value, since on years are generally a lot higher in money due to the low risk. But I'm just not sure how anyone could make the case that taking the extensions would have been the smarter financial move. There's a small, small chance that it would have brought him more money in the long run, but given that he'd never signed a big contract before, it wouldn't have made sense for him to take on that kind of risk.

kg_veteran · 12-14-2010, 10:10 AM

I'm grateful that Lee helped the Rangers get to the World Series, but I don't wish him well. I don't wish injury on him (like Chum did), but I don't want him to succeed elsewhere.

Also, all of the justifications offered as to why Lee should act like a mercenary and fend for himself make some amount of sense, but those that are offering them should remember that he is still nothing but a mercenary. And that, I believe, was Chum's original point.

jthig32 · 12-14-2010, 10:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kg_veteran

I'm grateful that Lee helped the Rangers get to the World Series, but I don't wish him well. I don't wish injury on him (like Chum did), but I don't want him to succeed elsewhere.

Also, all of the justifications offered as to why Lee should act like a mercenary and fend for himself make some amount of sense, but those that are offering them should remember that he is still nothing but a mercenary. And that, I believe, was Chum's original point.

Yeah but his point was also that he shouldn't be. Which doesn't make any sense. He doesn't have anyone to be loyal to.

Male30Dan · 12-14-2010, 10:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

Let's break this down:

According to Cots, at the end of 2015, Lee will have made a minimum of 132.5 million (cots does not have the buyout rolled into the 120 figure and I trust them).

If he'd taken the extension, at the end of 2013 he would have made 54 million. And he would be 35.

I have a hard time believing he's going to get a subsequent contract that guarantees him the difference between those two contracts. And he's certainly not going to make up that difference in two years, so you have the time value of money eating into his next contract.

I guess it's possible that he stays healthy enough to earn several one year contracts, which would really raise his average annual value, since on years are generally a lot higher in money due to the low risk. But I'm just not sure how anyone could make the case that taking the extensions would have been the smarter financial move. There's a small, small chance that it would have brought him more money in the long run, but given that he'd never signed a big contract before, it wouldn't have made sense for him to take on that kind of risk.

Didn't say it was the smarter move - just disagreed with your stance that he couldn't make 60m after 35. Sure he can. Period.

kg_veteran · 12-14-2010, 10:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

Yeah but his point was also that he shouldn't be. Which doesn't make any sense. He doesn't have anyone to be loyal to.

That's not true. He could have been loyal to the team that traded for him and wanted to re-sign him.

Male30Dan · 12-14-2010, 10:17 AM

SO...

Being completely serious here...

Now what do we do?

Realistically speaking... Where does this leave us?

Where we were last year, which was hopeful for a division title but somewhat doubtful?

If nothing else but bringing a Vlad back that is a year older is done, what can we expect out of the 2011 Rangers?

kg_veteran · 12-14-2010, 10:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Male29Dan

SO...

Being completely serious here...

Now what do we do?

Realistically speaking... Where does this leave us?

Where we were last year, which was hopeful for a division title but somewhat doubtful?

If nothing else but bringing a Vlad back that is a year older is done, what can we expect out of the 2011 Rangers?

It's still a good team, but the answer to "what do we do?" is "Go find some more pitching."

Five-ofan · 12-14-2010, 10:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kg_veteran

That's not true. He could have been loyal to the team that traded for him and wanted to re-sign him.

He was....this isnt a lebron situation where he grew up with a team and is screwing them over. Cliff lee has been treated like an asset for tge last couple of years and now hes in a position to capitalize on that asset status to put himself in the best position he can. Cant fault him for that at all. Were we disloyal to molina or vlad not to offer them arbitration? Absolutely not, jd was doing what made sense for the rangers. Same thing

alexamenos · 12-14-2010, 10:28 AM

meh

Male30Dan · 12-14-2010, 10:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kg_veteran

It's still a good team, but the answer to "what do we do?" is "Go find some more pitching."

Yeah, again, didn't mean to come off wrong. We knew they were good last year. We hoped for the playoffs, but knew it could be tough. We are essentially the same team but without the expectations of a pretty good Feldman as a known successful starter. Oakland will be very tough next year. LA will obviously be better.

So yeah, if we are to make it back to even the playoffs we need some work to be done and quick. Improving infield defense (and offense) would be my first plan considering he is definitely wanted by several other teams (Beltre).

2nd step is definitely push for a trade again for starting pitching, unless you want to view this team as a year away from having some major help internally and decide to keep those chips for yourself instead of letting other teams groom them (Perez, Scheppers, etc).

Maybe the best option is to stay with the plan that led us to this point. Take a step back to take two steps forward. Use the money we could have spent this year for next year and hope guys internally can step it up.

Bottom line, I think we struggle to win the division now and likely have limited postseason success. A year ago that would have been exciting to think about. It kind of sucks now.

kg_veteran · 12-14-2010, 10:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Five-ofan

He was....this isnt a lebron situation where he grew up with a team and is screwing them over. Cliff lee has been treated like an asset for tge last couple of years and now hes in a position to capitalize on that asset status to put himself in the best position he can. Cant fault him for that at all. Were we disloyal to molina or vlad not to offer them arbitration? Absolutely not, jd was doing what made sense for the rangers. Same thing

You're making my case for me. All you're doing is offering reasons why he didn't need to be loyal to the Rangers. What we can all agree on is the simple fact that he wasn't.

jthig32 · 12-14-2010, 10:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kg_veteran

That's not true. He could have been loyal to the team that traded for him and wanted to re-sign him.

Philly fits that description as well.

I don't see any reason why he should be more loyal to the Rangers than the Phillies.

kg_veteran · 12-14-2010, 10:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Male29Dan

Yeah, again, didn't mean to come off wrong. We knew they were good last year. We hoped for the playoffs, but knew it could be tough. We are essentially the same team but without the expectations of a pretty good Feldman as a known successful starter. Oakland will be very tough next year. LA will obviously be better.

So yeah, if we are to make it back to even the playoffs we need some work to be done and quick. Improving infield defense (and offense) would be my first plan considering he is definitely wanted by several other teams (Beltre).

2nd step is definitely push for a trade again for starting pitching, unless you want to view this team as a year away from having some major help internally and decide to keep those chips for yourself instead of letting other teams groom them (Perez, Scheppers, etc).

Maybe the best option is to stay with the plan that led us to this point. Take a step back to take two steps forward. Use the money we could have spent this year for next year and hope guys internally can step it up.

Bottom line, I think we struggle to win the division now and likely have limited postseason success. A year ago that would have been exciting to think about. It kind of sucks now.

The only thing I can tell you for sure is that I like the management and ownership, and I'm counting on their desire to win to make the team as competitive as possible. It's pretty hard to get to the playoffs in baseball, and it's incredibly hard to win the World Series. I just want to know there's a chance.

mkat · 12-14-2010, 10:36 AM

Beltre and Greinke or Garza or both.

kg_veteran · 12-14-2010, 10:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

Philly fits that description as well.

I don't see any reason why he should be more loyal to the Rangers than the Phillies.

First, he wasn't loyal to either one.

Second, I struggle to understand why you'd be more loyal to a team that traded you than to a team that traded for you.

jthig32 · 12-14-2010, 10:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kg_veteran

First, he wasn't loyal to either one.

Second, I struggle to understand why you'd be more loyal to a team that traded you than to a team that traded for you.

They traded for him too. For the same reasons. Then they offered him a contract extension before trading him away.

And I agree he wasn't loyal to either one. He chose the situation that was best for him and his family. He had no reason to be loyal to anyone.

kg_veteran · 12-14-2010, 10:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

They traded for him too. For the same reasons. Then they offered him a contract extension before trading him away.

And I agree he wasn't loyal to either one. He chose the situation that was best for him and his family. He had no reason to be loyal to anyone.

We'll just disagree on that. I think he had reason to be loyal to the Rangers. I can understand why he wasn't, but that doesn't mean I think he made the right decision.

jthig32 · 12-14-2010, 11:00 AM

Now that everything has shaken out, it turns out that he actually got a better and more lucrative contract from the Phillies. He still left significant money on the table from the Yankees, but the Phillies actually stepped up and beat the Rangers offer (the Rangers best offer was a few million more but apparently had a lot of deferred money).

He moved to a better team, in a worse league, where by all accounts he very much enjoyed his time, and he got a better contract than he got from the Rangers.

Can't blame him for that at all.

Honestly now that I'm coming out of my depression, I'm bummed that he won't make it through the ballpark this year. I would have liked the chance to give him an ovation.

Murphy3 · 12-14-2010, 11:14 AM

Here's the question.. do you put one in his ribs when the Rangers play the Phils?