Game Thread: April 1,2,3 Rangers Take on Houston's Hinchmen

[DT LUNA]

STRO"s not drawing much board interest esta noche.

 

[saddles]

Sampson didn't get much run support last year either.

 

[Nightcrawler]

Can’t believe we only have one hit against brad freaking peacock.

 

[Nightcrawler]

STRO"s not drawing much board interest esta noche.

Boring game for sure.

 

[DT LUNA]

Good move.

 

[jta4437]

Good news folks

Kyle bird sent down. One less poopy reliever to deal with.

Sampson probably going back down since he won't be used for a couple days

Let's see who the call up is

 

[romeo212000]

Jesus, Odor. Didn’t even make it close.

 

[darrylgann]

STRO"s not drawing much board interest esta noche.

Not just on board, Only 18,000 at game. Smallest in series.

 

[DT LUNA]

IKF getting it done.

 

[jta4437]

Not just on board, Only 18,000 at game. Smallest in series.

It's 40ish degrees and a Monday, not surprised

Saturday started out strong but by the 6th it was about half capacity

 

[saddles]

Sampson has started 5 games for us now, all between 5 and 6.2 innings. He has given up 10 ER in 28.2 innings. At some point they need to make him a part of the rotation.

 

[jta4437]

Sampson has started 5 games for us now, all between 5 and 6.2 innings. He has given up 10 ER in 28.2 innings. At some point they need to make him a part of the rotation.

Given the fragile nature of our rotation, there will be chances to be had i'm sure, he just has to take advantage like he did tonight, i'm sure he earned some brownie points tonight

They guys they broke camp with will get a couple turns through the rotation though, if they're still lame ducks, then start replacing them

 

[fordman84]

What a sport. Rangers go from smashing everything and not being able to pitch to losing a 2-1 game. Should rename the team to the Texas Weathers, because if you don't like how the team is playing just wait a few innings.

 

[saddles]

 

[WastinSomeTime]

This is more a baseball question than a Rangers question but thought I would ask it while all is quiet. If we had Trout on the Rangers would you want to keep him and pay him what the Angels ended up paying him or trade him for a number of players. Me personally, I would have traded him and restocked the team but that is just me. Just too much money and too many years for my blood.

 

[DT LUNA]

This is more a baseball question than a Rangers question but thought I would ask it while all is quiet. If we had Trout on the Rangers would you want to keep him and pay him what the Angels ended up paying him or trade him for a number of players. Me personally, I would have traded him and restocked the team but that is just me. Just too much money and too many years for my blood.

You hit the nail on the head.

 

[saddles]

This is more a baseball question than a Rangers question but thought I would ask it while all is quiet. If we had Trout on the Rangers would you want to keep him and pay him what the Angels ended up paying him or trade him for a number of players. Me personally, I would have traded him and restocked the team but that is just me. Just too much money and too many years for my blood.

Something tells me it would be hard letting him go if he was one of our own. I suspect we would all agree about Trout as long as he is on another team, but I think many would want to keep him if he was one of our own.

I remember suggesting that we should trade Beltre and rebuild during that dismal 2014 season. I was still on the ESPN Dallas board at the time and not on here. I couldn't find one person that agreed with me. Rev even stopped by the ESPN board to tell me how foolish my idea was and said he was telling everyone on here about what I was saying. He said everyone here thought I was wrong too.

I still think that would have been the best route to take, but getting anyone to agree to part with Beltre, who had not even been here three full years, was near impossible. I can imagine how hard it would have been to get Angels fans to agree that it was best to trade a guy who had come up through their system and had been there several years already.

Loyalty tends to blind us at times, and others' loyalty tends to look foolish to us at times.

 

[WastinSomeTime]

Something tells me it would be hard letting him go if he was one of our own. I suspect we would all agree about Trout as long as he is on another team, but I think many would want to keep him if he was one of our own.

I remember suggesting that we should trade Beltre and rebuild during that dismal 2014 season. I was still on the ESPN Dallas board at the time and not on here. I couldn't find one person that agreed with me. Rev even stopped by the ESPN board to tell me how foolish my idea was and said he was telling everyone on here about what I was saying. He said everyone here thought I was wrong too.

I still think that would have been the best route to take, but getting anyone to agree to part with Beltre, who had not even been here three full years, was near impossible. I can imagine how hard it would have been to get Angels fans to agree that it was best to trade a guy who had come up through their system and had been there several years already.

Loyalty tends to blind us at times, and others' loyalty tends to look foolish to us at times.

Yeah, but Beltre was not 12 years at $430 million or all of us would have said trade him. If Trout's skills diminish in 5-6 years they are going to still be paying a boatload of money. To me that franchise just does not learn from Vernon Wells, to Pujols and now this.

 

[DT LUNA]

Yeah, but Beltre was not 12 years at $430 million or all of us would have said trade him. If Trout's skills diminish in 5-6 years they are going to still be paying a boatload of money. To me that franchise just does not learn from Vernon Wells, to Pujols and now this.

The question is will he ever take them to a WS while soaking up the money for the next decade? If not, what is the point? If he fails, flipping him will be impossible. Was a terribly bad move on LAA IMO.

 

[fordman84]

This is more a baseball question than a Rangers question but thought I would ask it while all is quiet. If we had Trout on the Rangers would you want to keep him and pay him what the Angels ended up paying him or trade him for a number of players. Me personally, I would have traded him and restocked the team but that is just me. Just too much money and too many years for my blood.

My preference is always to trade to the mega super star if your system needs restocking. I realize most will say "bird in hand" and all that, but if we had Trout and our current system I'd trade him. Why would he want to stick around and spend his best years rebuilding, and we have YEARS until we are ready to go. I could go get a couple of big FA's with the money he would cost and you could start the price at "your top 5 prospects" or "top 3 prospects and 1-2 ML youngsters".