Texas Rangers 2010 Season

[mavspwnage]

Happy 22nd birthday, Elvis!!

[Flacolaco]

Taking 3 of 4 from the twins...Nice!

Cliff Lee's last two games...not as nice.

[mkat]

Originally Posted by Flacolaco

Taking 3 of 4 from the twins...Nice!

Cliff Lee's last two games...not as nice.

i think it may be time for cliff to get an extra day or two. something ain't right there.

[Flacolaco]

9.5 games to make up over 34 games remaining.

The word P*ayoffs is almost legal to use in conversation. Not yet though. There's still too much time left. Almost though. Almost.

[LonghornDub]

Originally Posted by Flacolaco

9.5 games to make up over 34 games remaining.

The word P*ayoffs is almost legal to use in conversation. Not yet though. There's still too much time left. Almost though. Almost.

I'll break decorum: the Rangers absolutely will make the playoffs, and will likely do so with many games left in the season.

[jthig32]

Originally Posted by Flacolaco

9.5 games to make up over 34 games remaining.

The word P*ayoffs is almost legal to use in conversation. Not yet though. There's still too much time left. Almost though. Almost.

The Rangers are going to the playoffs. Period.

And I'm going to Ranger playoff games. Because there will be some. In Arlington. This year. Without question.

PlayoffsPlayoffsPlayoffsPlayoffsPlayoffsPlayoffsPl ayoffsPlayoffsPlayoffsPlayoffsPlayoffsPlayoffsPlay offsPlayoffsPlayoffsPlayoffsPlayoffsPlayoffsPlayof fsPlayoffsPlayoffsPlayoffsPlayoffsPlayoffsPlayoffs PlayoffsPlayoffsPlayoffsPlayoffsPlayoffsPlayoffs

[Flacolaco]

Originally Posted by jthig32

The Rangers are going to the playoffs. Period.

And I'm going to Ranger playoff games. Because there will be some. In Arlington. This year. Without question.

PlayoffsPlayoffsPlayoffsPlayoffsPlayoffsPlayoffsPl ayoffsPlayoffsPlayoffsPlayoffsPlayoffsPlayoffsPlay offsPlayoffsPlayoffsPlayoffsPlayoffsPlayoffsPlayof fsPlayoffsPlayoffsPlayoffsPlayoffsPlayoffsPlayoffs PlayoffsPlayoffsPlayoffsPlayoffsPlayoffsPlayoffs

All I've known the entire time I have followed the Rangers (not more than 6-7 years) is that...well, they are the Rangers.

I have been trained to expect failure. I have been trained to watch for the rug getting pulled out from under me.

They are the rangers. I will believe it on October 3rd or so.

[Male30Dan]

Originally Posted by Flacolaco

All I've known the entire time I have followed the Rangers (not more than 6-7 years) is that...well, they are the Rangers.

I have been trained to expect failure. I have been trained to watch for the rug getting pulled out from under me.

They are the rangers. I will believe it on October 3rd or so.

Sigh...

[Flacolaco]

Originally Posted by Male29Dan

Sigh...

oh come on.

Seriously think about it. Seriously think about a person whose only evidence is the last seven years. That person is like a battered house wife who has been beaten brutally every August. Take only the last seven years of Ranger baseball into account. That's me. I have been (proverbially) beaten mercilessly over and over and over again.

We all have.

There is no logical, sane reason for anyone to come out of the last 10 years of Rangers baseball and expect anything but a kick in the mother-effing balls. Anything else is completely illogical, half glass full bull sh!t.

Every Ranger fan who has actually followed this team in the last decade should be skeptical until the G D playoff schedule comes out.

[Murphy3]

I'm thinking that one more win in this series and it's done..

who the hell am I kidding... The A's pretty much had to have a sweep.

[Flacolaco]

Their schedule just still looks awful down the stretch. 4 at Toronto...remember what happened last time there? The Yankees, A's, Angels....They have to go back to Minnesota again. Very tough.

[chumdawg]

Playoffs? Playoffs??

[Murphy3]

I don't know what the odds of making the playoffs are for them at this point... but, they've got to be around 95-98% or so.

[jthig32]

Originally Posted by Murphy3

I don't know what the odds of making the playoffs are for them at this point... but, they've got to be around 95-98% or so.

BaseballProspectus has our odds of winning the division at 98.05%.

[Murphy3]

I had 98% originally..but, I didn't want to shoot too high.

[mavspwnage]

Harden is a POS. He pitches well just so he can be granted an extra start where he can **** us over. Go away already.

[Flacolaco]

Do you see what Rich Harden did to my ability to compose intelligible English?

[Male30Dan]

Originally Posted by Flacolaco

Do you see what Rich Harden did to my ability to compose intelligible English?

Did I mention Sigh? You are worse than Harden - at least he is somewhat helpful to the Rangers' goal of winning the division. He can pitch well every other game, but you suck every post.

[Flacolaco]

When Ranger beat writers are attempting to find the exact right 140 characters to berate and tweet about Harden, as many of them have been, my point is a foregone conclusion.

The central point remains, what have the Rangers EVER done in the last ten years to make anyone optimistic? The answer remains: Nothing. Thus the big ass party we will throw when they actually do officially make the playoffs, and not a moment before.

[mavspwnage]

Originally Posted by Flacolaco

When Ranger beat writers are attempting to find the exact right 140 characters to berate and tweet about Harden, as many of them have been, my point is a foregone conclusion.

The central point remains, what have the Rangers EVER done in the last ten years to make anyone optimistic? The answer remains: Nothing. Thus the big ass party we will throw when they actually do officially make the playoffs, and not a moment before.

I will not disagree with you. But the fact is that before this season, the Rangers have come close to winning a division title only once since 1999. And that was in 2004, when we finished in 3rd place, but ended up much closer to first than in 2009. Basically what I'm trying to say is that it's not like the Rangers were ever in first place by a long shot deep into August/early September. These "collapses" that we talk about here aren't real collapses. Sure, the Rangers have had a history of "struggling" late in the season. But I think rather than the Rangers "struggling"...it was the other teams in the division picking it up and going on division-winning tears.

Last season, the Rangers were three games above .500 after the All Star break. Not bad, but obviously not good enough to do enough to win the division. Meanwhile, the Angels were 20 games over .500 en route to winning the AL West. The fact is, the Angels got hot while the Rangers treaded water. I don't see that as the Rangers "collapsing." I see that as the Angels kicking ass and taking care of business.

Basically what I'm trying to say, and to end my long rant, is that the Rangers haven't been in this position the last decade. We haven't had a 8-10 game division lead that we have blown. Now, I'm not here to claim that a playoff spot has been clinched or anything. But there is no reason to believe that any past September "failures" from the 2000-2009 teams (that were in 2nd place AT BEST) will have any weight on the current 2010 team in first place.

[LonghornDub]

Originally Posted by Flacolaco

When Ranger beat writers are attempting to find the exact right 140 characters to berate and tweet about Harden, as many of them have been, my point is a foregone conclusion.

The central point remains, what have the Rangers EVER done in the last ten years to make anyone optimistic? The answer remains: Nothing. Thus the big ass party we will throw when they actually do officially make the playoffs, and not a moment before.

As far as I'm concerned, what the Rangers have done the last 10 years is irrelevant. Different players, different managers, different owners, different team. It just doesn't matter. Hell, the Red Sox had gone 100 years without winning a WS, were down 3-0 to the Yankees, and managed to come back and win the whole thing that year. Their past history was completely irrelevant.

[Kirobaito]

Originally Posted by LonghornDub

As far as I'm concerned, what the Rangers have done the last 10 years is irrelevant. Different players, different managers, different owners, different team. It just doesn't matter. Hell, the Red Sox had gone 100 years without winning a WS, were down 3-0 to the Yankees, and managed to come back and win the whole thing that year. Their past history was completely irrelevant.

And it's not like the Rangers have ever been in first place and utterly collapsed or anything. People talking about the Rangers 'wilting' in the summer heat, etc. is all bs. The Rangers haven't had a team this good.

Records on August 29 the last however many years:

2010: 73-57 (7.5 games ahead of OAK)
2009: 72-56 (4 games back of LAA; finished 10 games back of LAA)
2008: 66-70 (17.5 games back of LAA; finished 21 games back of LAA)
2007: 60-72 (18 games back of LAA; finished 19 games back of LAA)
2006: 68-65 (8 games back of OAK; finished 13 games back of OAK)
2005: 62-68 (12 games back of LAA; finished 18 games back of LAA)
2004: 73-56 (3.5 back of OAK; finished 3 back of LAA)
2003: 61-74 (19 games back of OAK; finished 25 games back)
2002: 60-72 (22 games back of OAK; finished 31 games back)

How many of those years were the Rangers really "in it" on August 29? 2004, 2009, and 2010. I think the only time the team has been in contention and 'faded' is last year. The only example.

The past is completely irrelevant. Even if it weren't, it's not like the Rangers have ever been in this situation before and failed. In the past decade, they've never been ahead, much less this far ahead, much less this late in the season with such sub-par division opponents.

People don't remember the Rangers' history very well. They've generally just not had very good teams in the past. It's not a matter of collapsing at the end, a la the '07 Mets. It's a matter of not being very good, and facing two, sometimes three good division opponents every year. That's not the case this year.

[LonghornDub]

Originally Posted by Kirobaito

And it's not like the Rangers have ever been in first place and utterly collapsed or anything. People talking about the Rangers 'wilting' in the summer heat, etc. is all bs. The Rangers haven't had a team this good.

Records on August 29 the last however many years:

2010: 73-57 (7.5 games ahead of OAK)
2009: 72-56 (4 games back of LAA; finished 10 games back of LAA)
2008: 66-70 (17.5 games back of LAA; finished 21 games back of LAA)
2007: 60-72 (18 games back of LAA; finished 19 games back of LAA)
2006: 68-65 (8 games back of OAK; finished 13 games back of OAK)
2005: 62-68 (12 games back of LAA; finished 18 games back of LAA)
2004: 73-56 (3.5 back of OAK; finished 3 back of LAA)
2003: 61-74 (19 games back of OAK; finished 25 games back)
2002: 60-72 (22 games back of OAK; finished 31 games back)

How many of those years were the Rangers really "in it" on August 29? 2004, 2009, and 2010. I think the only time the team has been in contention and 'faded' is last year. The only example.

The past is completely irrelevant. Even if it weren't, it's not like the Rangers have ever been in this situation before and failed. In the past decade, they've never been ahead, much less this far ahead, much less this late in the season with such sub-par division opponents.

People don't remember the Rangers' history very well. They've generally just not had very good teams in the past. It's not a matter of collapsing at the end, a la the '07 Mets. It's a matter of not being very good, and facing two, sometimes three good division opponents every year. That's not the case this year.

Also a good point.

[BGMaverick9]

If it's 2% that they'll miss the playoffs then yeah, I would say the chances of them winning it all would be bigger...but not by much. Most of the "stock" or percentages would go very heavy on NY and Tampa. Even with 8 teams, I'd still say their chances are low because I don't believe they'll beat either of those two teams. Its more wide open in the NL.

[jthig32]

Originally Posted by BGMaverick9

If it's 2% that they'll miss the playoffs then yeah, I would say the chances of them winning it all would be bigger...but not by much. Most of the "stock" or percentages would go very heavy on NY and Tampa. Even with 8 teams, I'd still say their chances are low because I don't believe they'll beat either of those two teams. Its more wide open in the NL.

A quick perusal of five gambling sites as the Rangers as the consensus second favorite behind the Yankees to win the World Series. The favorite (by Vegas) in a Rangers/Rays series would probably be completely determined by home field advantage.

So I think it's accurate to say discussing the World Series is far more appropriate than discussing whether they will make the playoffs.

[BGMaverick9]

Originally Posted by jthig32

A quick perusal of five gambling sites as the Rangers as the consensus second favorite behind the Yankees to win the World Series. The favorite (by Vegas) in a Rangers/Rays series would probably be completely determined by home field advantage.

So I think it's accurate to say discussing the World Series is far more appropriate than discussing whether they will make the playoffs.

I would say the chances are better if the Rangers had HFA over Tampa, I'd really give them little chance if they had to go on the road to Tampa...their pitchers are dramatically better playing at home.

I just don't buy into the Rangers, their record against the AL East is very suspect.

[mavspwnage]

Cantu was worse than bad today. He was pathetic, and not just at the plate.

[tcat075]

I find our offense offensive. Besides Josh Hamilton sitting there in the middle, the entire lineup is made up of players who can't hit or who aren't hitting. Please, please, please come back this week Nellie, like reports have said.

[Male30Dan]

Nellie should be in the lineup tomorrow and Kinsler will be back by the end of this coming week. It was pointed out in today's game that, given the Rangers faced back to back to back left handed pitchers that Nellie and Kinsler have crushed LHP this year. That could have been a very different series with them both healthy. HOPEFULLY by the end of this coming week we are looking at something like the following lineup for the rest of the year and into the playoffs:

SS - Andrus
3B - Young
CF - Baseball God
DH - Vlad
2B - Kinsler
RF - Cruz
LF - Murphy
1B - Moreland
C - Molina

You can get Treanor in there at times for Molina and Borbon in there for Murphy (with Hamilton sliding back to LF and Julio moving to CF). Cantu will get some 1B starts as well if a lefty is on the mound. The point is, look at that lineup above and you see why we are such a talented team. That lineup is very, very strong. We just have to stay healthy.

[mavspwnage]

Originally Posted by Male29Dan

Nellie should be in the lineup tomorrow and Kinsler will be back by the end of this coming week. It was pointed out in today's game that, given the Rangers faced back to back to back left handed pitchers that Nellie and Kinsler have crushed LHP this year. That could have been a very different series with them both healthy. HOPEFULLY by the end of this coming week we are looking at something like the following lineup for the rest of the year and into the playoffs:

SS - Andrus
3B - Young
CF - Baseball God
DH - Vlad
2B - Kinsler
RF - Cruz
LF - Murphy
1B - Moreland
C - Molina

You can get Treanor in there at times for Molina and Borbon in there for Murphy (with Hamilton sliding back to LF and Julio moving to CF). Cantu will get some 1B starts as well if a lefty is on the mound. The point is, look at that lineup above and you see why we are such a talented team. That lineup is very, very strong. We just have to stay healthy.

I am a fan of that lineup. I personally would probably switch Kinsler and Cruz. But either way is fine. I'm just ready for us to have a full lineup again.

[Male30Dan]

Originally Posted by mavspwnage

I am a fan of that lineup. I personally would probably switch Kinsler and Cruz. But either way is fine. I'm just ready for us to have a full lineup again.

You would want Kinsler in the 5 spot in my opinion because of his ability to get on base. You have to assume with Hamilton/Vlad being 1/2 in HRs and RBI that they are going to typically knock runs in for us and clear bases with HRs so you want a guy like Kinsler with a little pop but mainly a good OBP in front of Cruz so when Cruz comes up he will hopefully have a guy on base to maximize his power. The problem with two power guys in a row is that you will have a lot of solo shots. Get a good OBP guy in front of a power guy to have 2+ run HRs. After all, only Hamilton has a higher OBP this year than Ian and only Kinsler is even close to having as many walks as Ks.

[Murphy3]

I'd personally look to moving Young further down the lineup and Kinsler further up the lineup if Kinsler comes out swinging the bat really well... but I know it'll won't happen.

[Male30Dan]

Originally Posted by Murphy3

I'd personally look to moving Young further down the lineup and Kinsler further up the lineup if Kinsler comes out swinging the bat really well... but I know it'll won't happen.

That is actually a really good point. Having Kinsler bat 2nd would be ideal. I think given the OBP factor, I would then want Cruz batting 5th and Young 6th, but either way would be OK with me I guess. Ultimately Murphy is right though, the BEST possible lineup consists of one that has the best chance to get guys on base for your power hitters. That would consist of:

1 - Andrus
2 - Kinsler
3 - Hamilton
4 - Vlad
5 - Cruz
6 - Young
7 - Murphy
8 - Moreland
9 - Molina

That puts two guys with a decent to good average and most likely to take a walk right in front of Hamilton, Vlad, and Cruz and it allows Young to knock any guys in that are still on base (he would have many more opportunities to drive in runs hitting here instead of batting after Moreland/Molina/Andrus). The problem is that Young has struggled with the BEST protection in the majors hitting right after him so what happens if he now has Murphy hitting after him (or Moreland in the games Borbon plays)? Maybe he thrives given the opportunities with RISP, but I would bet he doesn't get the pitching he has seen so far this year.

Either way, as Murphy pointed out, it won't happen.

[mavspwnage]

We HAVE to take advantage of the next few days. We play the Royals while the A's play the Yankees on the road for four games. We should be able to gain a couple games on Oakland by the weekend. Key word: should.

[mavspwnage]

Tonight's lineup:

Andrus
Young
Hamilton
Guerrero
Cruz
Murphy
Molina
Moreland
Blanco

YAY

[mavspwnage]

CJ continues in full beast mode.

[Male30Dan]

Originally Posted by mavspwnage

CJ continues in full beast mode.

Absolutely... Very nice. Great job working out of the 3-1 count in the 2nd with the bases loaded. Very nice. Too many walks, but a WHIP under 1 is still something you can't argue with. Hell, it can be argued that he had a no-hitter going into the 8th.

It was very nice to see Cruz hit a double in his first AB back as well. Welcome back man - our lineup needs you badly. Hurry up Kinsler and do your part to help make this lineup very scary for opposing pitching. Of course if Blanco keeps this up he is going to take over DH for Vlad to keep his big bat present.

[mkat]

i'm kind of surprised CJ isn't even in Cy Young discussion. I don't think he should win it, but I feel like he should at least be talked about.

[Five-ofan]

Originally Posted by mkat

i'm kind of surprised CJ isn't even in Cy Young discussion. I don't think he should win it, but I feel like he should at least be talked about.

I love cj. Always have(even when everyone else hated him), that said Hernandez, Lee, Weaver, Lester, Liriano and price have all been better. I do agree he should be in the discussion though.

[Male30Dan]

Originally Posted by Five-ofan

I love cj. Always have(even when everyone else hated him), that said Hernandez, Lee, Weaver, Lester, Liriano and price have all been better. I do agree he should be in the discussion though.

5-0,

Just a quick question and then I better get back to work. Were you pointing out that you were right in the past or that you were wrong? Both the situation at hand and past conversations fail to give me the necessary insight on which way you were going there so I just thought I would ask. Let me know so I can better understand if you are prone to pointing out that you are right or, as previously mentioned, that you are wrong. I again apologize for having to ask but if you would just follow one style more so than the other I could likely remember but, alas, that is not the case.

Sincerely,

Male29Dan