Official Rangers off season thread - Page 5 - Dallas-Mavs.com Forums

jthig32 · 12-08-2010, 12:17 AM

I personally have never really had that high of an affinity for MY. It would be mildly sad to see him go just because of how long he's been here and what a good locker room guy he's been. But he's about as overrated as any player that's ever played here and I would be ecstatic if we could move his contract and upgrade to Beltre.

Male30Dan · 12-08-2010, 12:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mavspwnage

I'm loyal. Noooooo Young, please don't gooooo!

Someone beat this man with a hard pipe.

Male30Dan · 12-08-2010, 12:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

I personally have never really had that high of an affinity for MY. It would be mildly sad to see him go just because of how long he's been here and what a good locker room guy he's been. But he's about as overrated as any player that's ever played here and I would be ecstatic if we could move his contract and upgrade to Beltre.

Beyond ecstatic here... You would be upgrading offense at this point AND making a monumental upgrade defensively. Let's say that we only have to pick up 3-5m of Young's contract per year. Let's then say that Beltre gets 4/60 instead of some of the crap he has been initially asking for (that he MIGHT get). You would be talking about 18-20m for your 3B for 2011. That is some serious coin but man, you have to do it and smile considering MY was scheduled to make 16 per over the next 3 years himself (48m remaining on a contract that runs through 2013).

Male30Dan · 12-08-2010, 12:43 AM

MY says he would approve a trade to Colorado - they are not on his list of teams he would block... Legs indeed! Please God make sure you have Beltre lined up before you make this damn trade. Don't do it to get a utility player like Ty Wigginton back from Colorado to play 3B (a guy they wanted at the deadline this past year when they went Cantu instead)!

jthig32 · 12-08-2010, 12:48 AM

I will say that I don't think it would end up being a huge upgrade offensively. I don't see Beltre repeating his year from last year. But even a minor upgrade offensively combined with a huge upgrade defensively would be a big deal.

And there's always the possibility that you could get another career year or two from Beltrea, and that would be unbelievable. He was one of the best players in baseball last year.

Edit to add:

Although, if Young does have to move to another position, then he really starts to become a liability offensively and creates flexibility problems with the lineup.

This would be a huge, huge move if it were to happen. I think it might put us out of the Lee sweepstakes and squarely targeted on Greinke though.

Five-ofan · 12-08-2010, 01:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Male29Dan

Exactly 0 other people outside of myself qualify...when you consider the point of that link was to show BOTH the interest in Beltre and the relocation of Young from 3B to 1B.

If you want credit for it thats fine, but im firmly in favor of both of those things(well actually i wouldnt move young to first, id move him to dh).

Male30Dan · 12-08-2010, 01:13 AM

He is leaving a hitters park for a hitters park. He isn't moving to Oakland here... He may not have a career year offensively, but he will definitely be better than we would have received from Young. Ultimately I think we are suggesting the same thing with our posts and just wording it a bit differently.

Regarding defense, yes, huge. Huge. When you factor in the enormous plus from D, decent plus from O, and only at 2-4m more per year than what we were going to be paying for that player? Oh please let it happen - please.

Just imagine the possibility of the following:

SS - Andrus
2B - Kinsler
3B - Beltre
CF - Hamilton
RF - Cruz
DH - Konerko (or Vlad)
LF - Murphy
1B - Moreland
C - Torrealba

Considering Washington's comments this week you are unfortunately looking at Borbon in the lineup instead of Murphy so flip Josh to LF and insert Borbon in CF if we are to believe that statement, but still. That pushes all batters up and likely inserts Borbon in at the 9 spot. Very strong.

If we could then sign Lee AND trade for Greinke you would be talking about roughly a 95-100m payroll. There are certainly feelings that low to mid 90s is quite possible, and if the right team can be built I could see even more spent.

If you miss out on Lee and get Greinke you would suddenly have 20+ per year to throw at a good pitcher and hitter or one stud hitter.

To me, if you guaranteed me we could trade for Greinke, I would almost prefer we miss out on Lee if you could also guarantee me that we would still invest the dollars we were going to pay him into the offense. I can't even fathom how dangerous we would be with Crawford AND Konerko inserted into this offense with Greinke replacing Lee and (tee hee) Feliz joining the rotation as well. Just for a moment, imagine it:

SS - Andrus
LF - Crawford
3B - Beltre
CF - Hamilton
RF - Cruz
2B - Kinsler
DH - Konerko (or Vlad)
1B - Moreland
C - Torrealba

1 - Greinke
2 - CJ
3 - Lewis
4 - Holland (if around after Greinke trade)
5 - Feliz

I would still rather Lee stay with us (preferably with Greinke as well), but if the numbers become 7/165+ plan B starts to look pretty damn sexy. If we can't get Lee, throw offense at this bitch.

Male30Dan · 12-08-2010, 01:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Five-ofan

If you want credit for it thats fine, but im firmly in favor of both of those things(well actually i wouldnt move young to first, id move him to dh).

Exactly - others were cool with that. That link was about 3rd to 1st. I thought it was a good idea and no one agreed. Anyway - I am starting to sound like you with the back patting so let's move on...

Male30Dan · 12-08-2010, 01:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

This would be a huge, huge move if it were to happen. I think it might put us out of the Lee sweepstakes and squarely targeted on Greinke though.

I don't believe that at all if we are only talking about an increase of 3-5m for the overall swing. If Beltre ends up getting closer to 4/75 instead of 4/60, well yeah, I could see that too. Bottom line, we had a VERY low payroll and have discussed low to mid 90s for next year. You have a lot of options if you can increase payroll 40m (even after you factor in your internal raises). Remember we have a lot of money falling off too (Harden, Molina, etc).

Five-ofan · 12-08-2010, 02:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Male29Dan

I don't believe that at all if we are only talking about an increase of 3-5m for the overall swing. If Beltre ends up getting closer to 4/75 instead of 4/60, well yeah, I could see that too. Bottom line, we had a VERY low payroll and have discussed low to mid 90s for next year. You have a lot of options if you can increase payroll 40m (even after you factor in your internal raises). Remember we have a lot of money falling off too (Harden, Molina, etc).

Looking at it VERY crudely Id say the rangers payroll would look something like this currently

SP-Open
SP-Lewis-2.5 Mil
SP-Cj Wilson-6 Mil(Im guessing again)
SP-Derek Holland-400k
SP-Tommy Hunter-600k
Closer-Feliz-600k
RP-FF-4 mil
RP- Oliver-3 mil
RP-Oday-500k
RP-Ogando-400k
RP-Feldman-2.5 mil
RP-Lowe-1.2 mil

C-Torrealba-3.2 mil
1B- Moreland-400k
2B- Kinsler-5 mil(it was 4.2 last year and i believe it jumps to 5 this year but i could be mistaken.
SS-Andrus-600k
3B-Young 16 mil
RF-Cruz-600k
CF-Borbon-600k
LF-Hamilton-9 mil(what im guessing hell get in arbitration/sign for)
DH-Open
OF-Murphy-500k(Im not sure if hes arb eligible, I dont think so, if he is, raise this to about 2 mil)
UTIL-Blanco-500k
C-Treanor-800k
CIF/RH 1b-Open

That comes out to 58.2 million total with the following holes still to be filled #1SP, DH, CIF/RH1b. Based on other players on ML contracts that arent listed I think its safe to add 5 mil for those guys which brings you to 63.2. That also leaves several areas that are obviously open for improvement including SP(bump everyone down one), RP starting at feldman and 1b.

Now if you dump Young im saying you most likely pay 6 mil a year(it drops him down to 10 mil per). That brings you down to 53.2 mil in commitments next year but also brings you another hole in starting 3b. If you then sign beltre for 15 mil a year(its only a years issue, i dont see anyway he gets more than that annually but Dan is right, it has to be worked out BEFORE you trade Young) that puts you at 68.2 mil and again closes the hole at 3rd. If you plug in 23 million (6-138 is what I see him getting)for Lee that puts you at 91 million with DH and CIF to fill. I think you can reasonably fill CIF for 600k to a mil which will put you at 92 Mil. That leaves you with probably 3 million to sign a DH which is pretty close to where I believe we are now anyway. I dont believe that this move would take us out of the running for Lee at all BUT i think it would take us out of the possibility of adding both Lee and Greinke which Im ok with.

Side note, if this was up to me, Id move Hunter to the pen, Ogando or FF to closer and move Feliz to the rotation as well as signing Lee.

Five-ofan · 12-08-2010, 02:15 AM

So in my dream scenario wed end up with this lineup

1. Andrus(id bat kinsler here but we wont)
2. Kinsler
3. Hamilton
4. Cruz
5. Beltre
6. Generic DH(Manny? though id be fine using Murphy for this and rotating our other players through this position)
7. Moreland
8. Torrealba
9. Borbon

With a rotation of Lee, Lewis, Wilson, Feliz, Holland and a late inning bullpen of FF, Ogando, Oliver, Oday, Scheppers(at some point hell be in the bigs). That is imo the best defensive team in baseball, a damn good lineup and an amazing pitching staff. Lets make this happen.

Male30Dan · 12-08-2010, 08:39 AM

Young is told he isn't going anywhere... Great!

jthig32 · 12-08-2010, 09:20 AM

It's all moot now, but one thing to keep in mind when figuring salary is that you can't just worry about this year. Lee and Beltre would be long term commitments, and this team has several players that are going to get a lot more expensive in the next two or three years.

So yeah, maybe signing Lee and Beltre is doable with this year's payroll, but what happens when it's time to extend/re-sign Wilson, and Hamilton and Cruz are either well into arbitration or getting multi-year contracts?

Then you're getting up into the 120-140 range, and that's probably not doable.

Murphy3 · 12-08-2010, 09:27 AM

I would think 120 is doable... I'll have to look for the quotes, but I believe that the Rangers have said that they could manage a payroll in line with the Angels.... I know that the Angels weren't at that point this year I don't believe..but I can easily see them there 3-4 years down the road.

Now, do the Rangers want to make that jump? We'll have to see.

Male30Dan · 12-08-2010, 09:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Five-ofan

Looking at it VERY crudely Id say the rangers payroll would look something like this currently

SP-Open
SP-Lewis-2.5 Mil
SP-Cj Wilson-6 Mil(Im guessing again)
SP-Derek Holland-400k
SP-Tommy Hunter-600k
Closer-Feliz-600k
RP-FF-4 mil
RP- Oliver-3 mil
RP-Oday-500k
RP-Ogando-400k
RP-Feldman-2.5 mil
RP-Lowe-1.2 mil

C-Torrealba-3.2 mil
1B- Moreland-400k
2B- Kinsler-5 mil(it was 4.2 last year and i believe it jumps to 5 this year but i could be mistaken.
SS-Andrus-600k
3B-Young 16 mil
RF-Cruz-600k
CF-Borbon-600k
LF-Hamilton-9 mil(what im guessing hell get in arbitration/sign for)
DH-Open
OF-Murphy-500k(Im not sure if hes arb eligible, I dont think so, if he is, raise this to about 2 mil)
UTIL-Blanco-500k
C-Treanor-800k
CIF/RH 1b-Open

That comes out to 58.2 million total with the following holes still to be filled #1SP, DH, CIF/RH1b. Based on other players on ML contracts that arent listed I think its safe to add 5 mil for those guys which brings you to 63.2. That also leaves several areas that are obviously open for improvement including SP(bump everyone down one), RP starting at feldman and 1b.

Now if you dump Young im saying you most likely pay 6 mil a year(it drops him down to 10 mil per). That brings you down to 53.2 mil in commitments next year but also brings you another hole in starting 3b. If you then sign beltre for 15 mil a year(its only a years issue, i dont see anyway he gets more than that annually but Dan is right, it has to be worked out BEFORE you trade Young) that puts you at 68.2 mil and again closes the hole at 3rd. If you plug in 23 million (6-138 is what I see him getting)for Lee that puts you at 91 million with DH and CIF to fill. I think you can reasonably fill CIF for 600k to a mil which will put you at 92 Mil. That leaves you with probably 3 million to sign a DH which is pretty close to where I believe we are now anyway. I dont believe that this move would take us out of the running for Lee at all BUT i think it would take us out of the possibility of adding both Lee and Greinke which Im ok with.

Side note, if this was up to me, Id move Hunter to the pen, Ogando or FF to closer and move Feliz to the rotation as well as signing Lee.

IF we are at roughly 63.2 right now (assuming Hamilton gets 9 and other factors are true such as 5m for other players) and we sign Lee for 23 we are looking at an 86m payroll right there. If we trade for Greinke we are looking at, what, a 99m payroll.

If those figures are accurate I would say it is one or the other as well (unless Murphy becomes our DH instead of Vlad). I read a link that said we had a 55m payroll last year and I was basing a lot of my calculations off of that number even being lower with several guys falling off (Harden, Molina, etc) but if it is actually close to 8m higher with guys already removed, our flexibility is much lower.

If that is all true and we will not even consider a 100m+ payroll, I must say..... I might just prefer that we lose Lee, trade for Greinke, sign Beltre, sign Vlad, promote Feliz, and run out with the following lineup/rotation/bullpen (roughly a 99m payroll):

SS - Andrus
2B - Kinsler
3B - Beltre
CF - Hamilton
RF - Cruz
DH - Vlad
1B - Young
LF - Murphy
C - Torrealba

Backup - Treanor
Backup - Moreland
Backup - Blanco
Backup - Gentry

SP - Greinke
SP - Wilson
SP - Lewis
SP - Feliz
SP - Holland

RP - Feldman
RP - Harrison
RP - Kirkman
RP - Oliver
RP - ODay
RP - Ogando
RP - Francisco

Now, we all know that we won't be running Hamilton out in CF and Borbon is just going to be given the job despite Murphy outplaying him last year, so the above won't work. Instead you are looking at Murphy as a backup and Gentry in Round Rock, Josh in LF, Borbon in CF (and 9th) and everyone else sliding up. Likewise, given their "tuck their tails" stance with Young we should know they aren't going to risk pissing him off so he stays at 3B, which means no Beltre. We do still have the chance to replace Vlad with Konerko, but that ship will soon sail as Chicago wants to secure him for their lineup pretty quick.

Man... So excited going to bed yesterday... So bummed reading the news this morning. Ugh...

Male30Dan · 12-08-2010, 09:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

It's all moot now, but one thing to keep in mind when figuring salary is that you can't just worry about this year. Lee and Beltre would be long term commitments, and this team has several players that are going to get a lot more expensive in the next two or three years.

So yeah, maybe signing Lee and Beltre is doable with this year's payroll, but what happens when it's time to extend/re-sign Wilson, and Hamilton and Cruz are either well into arbitration or getting multi-year contracts?

Then you're getting up into the 120-140 range, and that's probably not doable.

Well sure... But if success continues crowds get bigger and the entire dynamics change. As long as your goal is to produce a winner AND make a profit (as opposed to JUST making a profit) you can spend according to success and definitely reach the 120s... As long as enough people attend games and playoff trips continue there is no reason we can't be in the top 5-8 payrolls in baseball.

mavspwnage · 12-08-2010, 04:26 PM

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcont...l.38176d8.html

Grant: Long-time Ranger Michael Young could be headed to Rockies

Deal would free up spot, money to go after free agent 3B Adrian Beltre

LAKE BUENA VISTA, Fla. – The Rangers underwent a makeover this year by advancing to the World Series for the first time. And now they may be exploring putting on yet another new "face."

In the shadow of the Magic Kingdom, the laconic Winter Meetings (otherwise known as Disney's Boringland) came alive Tuesday night when multiple industry sources confirmed the Rangers were taking a very interesting route to trying to sign Cliff Lee. It involved potentially trading face of the franchise Michael Young to Colorado in what could be the first of a series of dominoes designed to further enhance the team's ability to pitch and play defense.

Here's the way it might work: The Rangers could trade Young to Colorado, eat some of his annual $16 million salary (through 2013), add a third baseman and use whatever is left over to add on to their Lee offer.

Or an even bolder plan that seemed to be taking shape Tuesday was this: Go after Lee just as aggressively but swap out Young for Adrian Beltre, considered the best defensive third baseman in the game. Beltre, a free agent three years Young's junior, is reportedly seeking a five-year deal worth $16 million annually. Beltre hit .321 with 28 homers and 102 RBIs in 2010.

It's not as easy as simply swapping out Young's $16 million for Beltre's desired salary. In fact, the Rangers chances of actually completing the deal might be somewhere over the rainbow. And a double rainbow at that.

First, the Rangers would have to send money to Colorado to help pay for Young's salary. Second, the clubs would have to agree on players, and the sources indicated any of those conversations are at the very best preliminary. Those talks are not, however, expected to include Colorado third baseman Ian Stewart, who is entering his first year of arbitration and would be quite affordable. Sources said the Rockies would want to move Young back to second base.

And finally there is the limited no-trade clause in Young's contract. It allows him to eliminate all but eight possible destinations, and it still wasn't certain Tuesday night if the Rockies were on the accepted list or if the Rangers would have to ask Young to waive his no-trade clause.

If Young stays in Texas, he would become a "10-and-5" player in late May, meaning he'd have 10 years of Major League service, the last five with the same team. Once a player earns "10-and-5" status, he receives full no-trade protection. Concerns about Young's ability in the latter stages of a contract that runs through 2013 and no ability to move him might be one reason the Rangers have been willing to explore the trade market.

"I wouldn't say that were shopping him," club president Nolan Ryan told ESPNDallas.com after the Fox report. "A lot of players come up in discussions and you listen to what's out there. I think people ask us about all kinds of players and so you see what level of interest some teams have on various things, but it's all just part of the process. We're not shopping him."

No, they are not. They are simply listening to offers, because really, until Cliff Lee decides what he wants to do, what else do the Rangers have to do?

jthig32 · 12-08-2010, 04:58 PM

Um...welcome to last night.

mavspwnage · 12-08-2010, 05:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

Um...welcome to last night.

yes, I was part of the MY discussions last night. But I don't remember the Rockies ever being mentioned until the article I posted. If they were and I missed it, then my bad.

mavspwnage · 12-08-2010, 05:08 PM

ok, just saw your post mentioning the Rockies. Ok, like I said...my bad. lol

dalmations202 · 12-08-2010, 05:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Male29Dan

IF we are at roughly 63.2 right now (assuming Hamilton gets 9 and other factors are true such as 5m for other players) and we sign Lee for 23 we are looking at an 86m payroll right there. If we trade for Greinke we are looking at, what, a 99m payroll.

If those figures are accurate I would say it is one or the other as well (unless Murphy becomes our DH instead of Vlad). I read a link that said we had a 55m payroll last year and I was basing a lot of my calculations off of that number even being lower with several guys falling off (Harden, Molina, etc) but if it is actually close to 8m higher with guys already removed, our flexibility is much lower.

If that is all true and we will not even consider a 100m+ payroll, I must say..... I might just prefer that we lose Lee, trade for Greinke, sign Beltre, sign Vlad, promote Feliz, and run out with the following lineup/rotation/bullpen (roughly a 99m payroll):

SS - Andrus
2B - Kinsler
3B - Beltre
CF - Hamilton
RF - Cruz
DH - Vlad
1B - Young
LF - Murphy
C - Torrealba

Backup - Treanor
Backup - Moreland
Backup - Blanco
Backup - Gentry

SP - Greinke
SP - Wilson
SP - Lewis
SP - Feliz
SP - Holland

RP - Feldman
RP - Harrison
RP - Kirkman
RP - Oliver
RP - ODay
RP - Ogando
RP - Francisco

Now, we all know that we won't be running Hamilton out in CF and Borbon is just going to be given the job despite Murphy outplaying him last year, so the above won't work. Instead you are looking at Murphy as a backup and Gentry in Round Rock, Josh in LF, Borbon in CF (and 9th) and everyone else sliding up. Likewise, given their "tuck their tails" stance with Young we should know they aren't going to risk pissing him off so he stays at 3B, which means no Beltre. We do still have the chance to replace Vlad with Konerko, but that ship will soon sail as Chicago wants to secure him for their lineup pretty quick.

Too much truth.

If Frankie gets right again......that could be one sick lineup. Still need another Left handed RP though, IMO. Harrison and Oliver aren't enough.

muzak · 12-08-2010, 05:57 PM

Looks like Crawford may be an Angel. Possibly. On one side, I'm glad the Yanks wouldn't have gotten him and if they don't get Lee, we can all give them a big eff you. On the other side, it makes the Angels, who well all know is in our division, a little better.

edit: I'm on the keep Young wagon. I know it's personal, but I like the guy. To me, he's the Dirk of the Rangers.

mkat · 12-08-2010, 06:34 PM

i just don't know about Derek Holland. I don't know if he's mentally strong enough to be a starter for this team. He might be the Lefty RP you're looking for...possibly.

jthig32 · 12-08-2010, 11:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by muzak

Looks like Crawford may be an Angel. Possibly. On one side, I'm glad the Yanks wouldn't have gotten him and if they don't get Lee, we can all give them a big eff you. On the other side, it makes the Angels, who well all know is in our division, a little better.

edit: I'm on the keep Young wagon. I know it's personal, but I like the guy. To me, he's the Dirk of the Rangers.

Except Dirk is an elite level player.

Male30Dan · 12-08-2010, 11:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

Except Dirk is an elite level player.

Burn...

mavspwnage · 12-09-2010, 12:58 AM

http://sports.espn.go.com/dallas/mlb...ory?id=5901141

Rangers ponder 6-year offer for Cliff Lee

Quote:

LAKE BUENA VISTA, Fla. -- Texas Rangers president Nolan Ryan said the club has asked Darek Braunecker, Cliff Lee's agent, to let them know what it would take to sign the 32-year-old free agent left-handed pitcher.

Instead of making an offer, the Rangers asked Lee's camp for terms so that the club can figure out if it can put something together so the left-hander fronts their rotation for years to come.

Ryan said he saw the reports of the Yankees' offer of six years for about $140 million and still feels the Rangers are in the mix for Lee's services.

"It really comes down, probably, to whether we're willing to go to six years," said Ryan, who added that he was more willing to consider six years Wednesday than he had been the last few days. "I think if they come back with a proposal of what it's going to take for him to come over, we're going to have to sit down and look at it and talk about it. I think that's where we are, waiting to hear back from them.
"We've asked them to give us a number for Cliff Lee to come to the Rangers, what it will take."

Ryan said he believes the club will probably hear from Braunecker in the next 48 hours. That makes it possible that a decision could be reached this weekend or early next week.

"We don't want to get into a bidding war," Ryan said. "We want Cliff and [wife] Kristen and his agent to sit down and say, 'Look, what will it take for us to be with the Texas Rangers next year?'"

Ryan said Lee's camp has indicated that they'd like to come back to Texas.

"They made it pretty obvious to us that they were very happy there, that it worked for their lifestyle and for their family," Ryan said. "So we feel like we need to find out where things are and not let this thing linger any further or any longer than it has to.

"The fact is that if we can't acquire his services, we have to look other places and what other options might be out there. The longer is goes on, some of those options will dissipate. In the best interest if improving the ballclub, we need to move the process along."

The Rangers met with Braunecker again Wednesday, the last of a series of discussions at the winter meetings. This comes after Ryan and general manager Jon Daniels made two trips to Arkansas to visit with the Lees since the end of the season.

"We've had productive meetings," Braunecker said before leaving Orlando to fly back to Arkansas and meet with Lee. "They're still in the mix."

Ryan said the club has read the speculation about some teams possibly offering seven years and wanted to get clarity on what Lee wanted.

"All of that speculation is flying around and we felt like what we in our best interest and for us to cut to the chase was to find out where they are and what they feel like it's going to take for us to sign Cliff Lee," Ryan said.

Lee was 12-9 with a 3.18 ERA in 28 starts for the Seattle Mariners and Texas in 2010. The Rangers traded for the lefty in early July, and he was a big part of their postseason push. Lee won Games 1 and 5 of the ALDS and Game 3 of the ALCS as the Rangers earned a berth in the first World Series in franchise history.

The New York Yankees have also been aggressive in pursuing Lee, with general manager Brian Cashman telling reporters Wednesday that the club made an offer before Braunecker left town. The Yankees also flew to Arkansas early in the free-agent process to express interest in Lee.
Ryan has always viewed the Yankees as the prime competition in the Lee sweepstakes.

"I think we all knew the Yankees were going to be big players," Ryan said. "From the time Cashman went to Little Rock, we've heard those kind of numbers thrown around. But I think those numbers were probably talked about as parameters and I think the Yankees put that out there to probably try to discourage us and anybody else that might want to do it."

Ryan said he wasn't discouraged but that the reality of the market is that it's "overwhelming" and that it takes these kinds of deals to get prime players.

"Am I disappointed that it's gotten to that level? Yeah," Ryan said. "But it keeps going and going."

Ryan was pleased by what Lee did for the club in 2010. After Lee pitched a complete game in the victory over Tampa Bay in Game 5, an elimination game, Ryan stopped him on the field after the celebration and told him it was one of the most impressive two starts he had seen.

Ryan was asked if he was optimistic about seeing Lee back in a Rangers uniform in 2011.

"I just think that the realization is it's going to be six years and are you willing to do it," Ryan said. "So that's obviously past my comfort zone, but if that's what we're dealing with, we're going to have to discuss it and look at it. If you're going to have Cliff Lee pitch for you, that's probably what you're looking at."

That's about as close to offering a blank check as you're gonna get.

Five-ofan · 12-09-2010, 01:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by muzak

Looks like Crawford may be an Angel. Possibly. On one side, I'm glad the Yanks wouldn't have gotten him and if they don't get Lee, we can all give them a big eff you. On the other side, it makes the Angels, who well all know is in our division, a little better.

edit: I'm on the keep Young wagon. I know it's personal, but I like the guy. To me, he's the Dirk of the Rangers.

Hes more like the Jason Terry of the Rangers

Male30Dan · 12-09-2010, 08:21 AM

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...

mavspwnage · 12-09-2010, 09:00 AM

The Yankees have upped the ante and offered the golden seventh year for Lee. that might have been the death blow.

sike · 12-09-2010, 09:31 AM

From Evan Grant this morning...what are yall's thoughts on Garza?

http://rangersblog.dallasnews.com/ar...er-for-cl.html

Report: Yankees up offer for Cliff Lee to seven years

The Yankees apparently woke up from their slumber to find Carl Crawford in a Boston uniform and quickly decided to bid against themselves for Cliff Lee. According to SI.com's Jon Heyman, the Yankees have already upped their bid for Lee to a seventh year, which would carry the worth of the contract to nearly $170 million.

The Rangers, meanwhile, are still waiting for Cliff Lee's agent to give them an answer on what it would take to sign the lefty. But, if Heyman's report is accurate, it could drastically change that answer. It's very possible - probable even - that Lee will now inform the Rangers they'd have to match seven years to keep his services.

If that's the case, the Rangers have to bow out. At that point, it's beyond risky business and into the realm of potentially detrimental to the long-term health of the team.

To go to six years and $22 million per season - $132 million - might be the absolute extent of the Rangers' elasticity. If Lee comes back with an offer measurably higher or any longer in terms, then it is clear he is not seeking to stay in Texas, but seeking the best deal. And there is no shame in that.

The fact of the matter, though, is that Lee is 32 and with no discernible dominant out pitch. He wins because of two exceptional skills: Command and savvy. If his fastball drops only a hair in velocity, some of those fastballs inside get clobbered. If he loses only a touch off his command - and as the body moves into its mid-30s and metabolism slows - balance, the key to command, becomes more difficult to maintain. At the end of a seven-year deal, Lee would be 39.

At that point, the Rangers must turn quickly in another direction and here's what I'd suggest: Matt Garza.

Garza won't cost nearly the same price as Zack Greinke. He can't, not without the same hardware that Greinke owns (a Cy Young award). But he's the same age and has special stuff. Yes, he can get excitable on the mound, but Greinke has a history of being clinically depressed, so there is at least some risk associated with every option. The Rangers can't afford to get caught up in long, drawn out negotiations for a pitcher. They believe the Royals want the club's top four prospects (Martin Perez, Tanner Scheppers, Engel Beltre and Jurickson Profar) plus perhaps even more. And that is before Lee goes off the market.

Were I Jon Daniels, I'd get together with counterpart Andrew Friedman, who is rebuilding his team in Tampa Bay, and ask essentially the same question the Rangers asked of Darek Braunecker, Lee's agent: What's it going to take to get your guy? Or better yet, I'd give Friedman a list of players and say pick three and let's go. Again, the Rangers can't afford to let their options get picked off the market one by one.

Give Friedman a list and tell him to pick one from each of these pools and if he can do that, the clubs have a deal:

(A) Tanner Scheppers, Martin Perez
(B) Jurickson Profar, Luis Sardinas
(C) Julio Borbon, Chris Davis, Derek Holland, Alexi Ogando

This might have a triple-sided impact. It might get a deal done with Tampa Bay quickly. Or it might serve notice to the Royals that the Rangers won't be held hostage and that if they want to make a deal for Greinke they will have to come down in price. Or it might get the Rangers nowhere with either Tampa Bay or Kansas City and serve as notice the club needs to move on to the more risk-laden free agent pitchers who are coming back from injury. But at least it would represent progress on some front.

jthig32 · 12-09-2010, 09:51 AM

I think that Evan Grant has lost his effing mind if he thinks the Ranger are going to trade that kind of package for Matt Garza.

The point of Matt Garza is that he won't be that expensive, then Evan basically endorses mortgaging the system for him.

And the four guys in his C group aren't even close to equal in value. Chris Davis is nearly worthless at this point, and Derek Holland is WAY more valuable than anyone else in that group.

Evan's a great beat writer but he continually proves that he needs to leave the analysis to others.

I'd be willing to bet that the Rangers wouldn't trade Holland or Perez straight up for Garza, much less Perez AND Holland AND Profar.

Completely nutty.

Edit to add: Well, they'd probably trade Holland for Garza. I didn't realize Garza still had three years of team control. So they probably would, but it's not a no brainer.

muzak · 12-09-2010, 09:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Five-ofan

Hes more like the Jason Terry of the Rangers

Yes, this is probably more accurate. More like Dirk in tenure. This is why I would be the worlds worst owner or GM. I'd have a hard time treating the players like commodities.

mavspwnage · 12-09-2010, 10:06 AM

From Grant's article: "Greinke has a history of being clinically depressed."

It's gotta be hard not to be depressed when you play for a perennial cellar dwellar like the Royals. I bet he'd be cured if he came to Texas.

Male30Dan · 12-09-2010, 10:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

I think that Evan Grant has lost his effing mind if he thinks the Ranger are going to trade that kind of package for Matt Garza.

The point of Matt Garza is that he won't be that expensive, then Evan basically endorses mortgaging the system for him.

And the four guys in his C group aren't even close to equal in value. Chris Davis is nearly worthless at this point, and Derek Holland is WAY more valuable than anyone else in that group.

Evan's a great beat writer but he continually proves that he needs to leave the analysis to others.

I'd be willing to bet that the Rangers wouldn't trade Holland or Perez straight up for Garza, much less Perez AND Holland AND Profar.

Completely nutty.

Edit to add: Well, they'd probably trade Holland for Garza. I didn't realize Garza still had three years of team control. So they probably would, but it's not a no brainer.

Man - no kidding... Seriously? You would give up one from each of that group Evan? Get the F outa here... Garza is a nice pitcher and I wouldn't be upset if he ends up on our team but you are crazy to offer a package like that. Hell, a package like that is probably enough to get Greinke, and I would have problems giving that much for him.

Regarding the reports of the Yankees offering Lee 7 years... Man, you have to back out if he requires 7 now. You just have to. That is crazy long. 6, do it... 7, shit...

Sucks to have to say that but I think Ryan should make a very comparable offer for 6 at maybe even more per year than the Yankees are offering at 7 and see if Lee favors playing in TX. Considering the tax break he would have here the contract would actually be pretty damn close.

If 7 is required though, move to Greinke.

sike · 12-09-2010, 10:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

I'd be willing to bet that the Rangers wouldn't trade Holland or Perez straight up for Garza, much less Perez AND Holland AND Profar
Edit to add: Well, they'd probably trade Holland for Garza. I didn't realize Garza still had three years of team control. So they probably would, but it's not a no brainer.

I'm no expert, but I could see moving along Holland and one of the higher end prospects for Garza. That guy is legit.

Male30Dan · 12-09-2010, 10:28 AM

The problem with Holland is that you don't want to pull a Danks here. The kid could be pretty special so including him for Greinke/Garza could really come back to bite you in the ass. It is obviously different in that McCarthy wasn't a complete known like Garza/Greinke are, but still. You don't yet know what you have with this guy and he has shown signs of true greatness. I would love to let him pitch for an entire year and give him every possible chance to be a stud pitcher for us, but if he fails you just lost a helluva trade chip as his value would drop. Tough position to be in.

sike · 12-09-2010, 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Male29Dan

I would love to let him pitch for an entire year and give him every possible chance to be a stud pitcher for us, but if he fails you just lost a helluva trade chip as his value would drop. Tough position to be in.

I totally agree...but in these cases, I almost always lean toward acquiring the proven at the expense of the potential.

I know this can bite you occasionally, but a large percentage of the time, potential is never fully realized.

jthig32 · 12-09-2010, 10:51 AM

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

I don't see the point in trading high end prospects for Garza. You already have pitchers that are pretty darn good in Lewis and Wilson. Garza is on that same tier. If you're moving prospects for a pitcher it needs to be an elite guy.

jthig32 · 12-09-2010, 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sike

I know this can bite you occasionally, but a large percentage of the time, potential is never fully realized.

If you're talking about guys still in the minors, then I agree. Once you start talking about guys that have already had some success at a young age in the big leagues, I think the stakes change quite a bit.

The Rangers alone have been bit horribly by this line of thinking very recently. Danks is the example Dan used, but how about Adrian Gonzalez? Can you imagine this team if we still had that dude?

I'm for getting better, but at this point you're already pretty good. If I'm moving Holland AND high end prospects it's for elite pitchers, not pretty good pitchers.

dalmations202 · 12-09-2010, 10:56 AM

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