scotsman1948
Well-Known Member
And they'd probably be a lot better off in many cases
how do you figure that?
And they'd probably be a lot better off in many cases
in my opinion pitchers are the only ones really worth the money
Beg to differ...
Someone that plays EVERY day > someone who plays every 5th day.
Pitchers have to depend on the guys behind him. He isnt striking everyone out.
Hitters control their own (and really the game's) destiny.
Yes, but pitchers have much more of an affect on the outcome of the game they pitch in over any batter on any given day.
Still.... 150 > 32
5x the chances to make a difference.
in my opinion pitchers are the only ones really worth the money
how do you figure that?
Large contracts hamstring player payrolls and affect decisions in regards to draft pick compensation and player development in other places
Up until the recent attempts to limit teams abilities to bring in talent from Latin America that is
most teams, including the Rangers, don't see it that way or there would not be the annual chases after the superstar free agents that we see. and depending on level of the free agent player or pitcher they even consider the draft choice compensation worth it and i haven't seen any drastic effect on player development from a team bringing in the occasional signing of a free agent superstar.[/cnUOTE]
There's exactly how they got back to relevance, avoiding big free agents, since their 1st ws run, that's when they started dipping back into the running for free agent prizes and even then being very selective about who they choose to go after Beltre, lee, greinke etc
As far as how the rangers do things, I've been right far more times than i've been wrong,.I can't say the same for you
most teams, including the Rangers, don't see it that way or there would not be the annual chases after the superstar free agents that we see. and depending on level of the free agent player or pitcher they even consider the draft choice compensation worth it and i haven't seen any drastic effect on player development from a team bringing in the occasional signing of a free agent superstar.[/cnUOTE]
There's exactly how they got back to relevance, avoiding big free agents, since their 1st ws run, that's when they started dipping back into the running for free agent prizes and even then being very selective about who they choose to go after Beltre, lee, greinke etc
As far as how the rangers do things, I've been right far more times than i've been wrong,.I can't say the same for you
did i mention any particular player? all i did was disagree with your assessment
most teams, including the Rangers, don't see it that way or there would not be the annual chases after the superstar free agents that we see. and depending on level of the free agent player or pitcher they even consider the draft choice compensation worth it and i haven't seen any drastic effect on player development from a team bringing in the occasional signing of a free agent superstar.
Name the FA SP off season signing that powered TEX to its strong 2009 season, successful 2010 and 2011 seasons, and 2012 season run?
Like JTA am not opposed to a $20mil/year contract ... just not for anything more than 5 years. Like most fans we'd love having King on our roster but SEA signing him for 7 years is analogous to TEX and NYY Rodriguez' contracts or LAA's Wells and Pujolos contracts. Or MY's $16mil contract that lasted 2 years too long.
Back end will kill ya in big $$$ for below replacement performance.
Actually its the the last 2 years of his current contract and then a 5 year extension