Series Thread: Rangers take on last place Mariners

[WastinSomeTime]

MOST of us here are cheering for Banister to succeed, for all the obvious reasons. But your statement rings WAY TOO TRUE and my disappointment in our fundamental play has been well stated here.

And now he shows us his X & O decision making wasn't solid.

I agree with you on all points including wanting Banister to succeed because it is in the best interest of the team I want to succeed. I never thought after those 2 WS appearances that we would be back to square 1 already. It is really disappointing. I thought we had turned the corner and we would have our little peaks and valleys but not a full blown plunge into the abyss.

 

[UK Cowboy]

This has been discussed to the point of exhaustion. Nelly should've never been out there to begin with since he was hurt, and leaving Chavez on the bench, and he damn sure should've been put in better position. The weak attempt at jumping was likely due to the abdominal tear he suffered earlier in that game.

Was talking about yesterday's game

 

[romeo212000]

Haha.

I am not going to get into this same argument again because I have had this argument over a dozen times in the past year and a half on other boards. I have never been given any proof or anything close to proof once. The kind of "proof" you just gave is a good example of what is usually given.

There is a segment of Ranger fans who will never admit that JD can make critical mistakes. They aren't bad fans and some are really knowledgeable fans. They just let their JD Fan Club card get in the way of objectivity. I have always called these folks the JD apologists. Their thinking goes something like this. "If JD had done that then that means he would have made a mistake. Therefore JD couldn't have done that." Or, "If JD didn't do that then that means it shouldn't have been done or he tried his best to get it done and forces outside of him prevented him from doing so." When it comes down to it you just cannot present any kind of argument to those folks. I have been drawn into trying to do so on a number of occasions, but it is really futile.

I give JD all the credit for building what we had here in 2010 and 2011. He did make some terrible moves before that and he had made both very good and bad moves since. I just don't see why admitting that is so hard.

Fact is, neither you or I know exactly what went down with Cruz, and I find it just as silly that you present your point of view as fact when there's no more concrete evidence to back it up than mine.

 

[romeo212000]

Was talking about yesterday's game

Lol. My bad.

 

[donaldson79]

Haha.

I am not going to get into this same argument again because I have had this argument over a dozen times in the past year and a half on other boards. I have never been given any proof or anything close to proof once. The kind of "proof" you just gave is a good example of what is usually given.

There is a segment of Ranger fans who will never admit that JD can make critical mistakes. They aren't bad fans and some are really knowledgeable fans. They just let their JD Fan Club card get in the way of objectivity. I have always called these folks the JD apologists. Their thinking goes something like this. "If JD had done that then that means he would have made a mistake. Therefore JD couldn't have done that." Or, "If JD didn't do that then that means it shouldn't have been done or he tried his best to get it done and forces outside of him prevented him from doing so." When it comes down to it you just cannot present any kind of argument to those folks. I have been drawn into trying to do so on a number of occasions, but it is really futile.

I give JD all the credit for building what we had here in 2010 and 2011. He did make some terrible moves before that and he had made both very good and bad moves since. I just don't see why admitting that is so hard.

Bennie, I'd honestly like to know who you put in which category. Not kidding, nor being a jerk.

I see JD's flaws, his mistakes, and give him full credit when it's earned. Even suggested about a week ago if ownership is going to freak out if this season turns into a turnstile disaster. Especially if Prince ends up being a good hitter, but with 18 HR power, Choo doesn't have a good season, and EA continues to play non-focused ball. That's almost $ 500 mil over the next 6/8 years.

 

[donaldson79]

Our BP was a mess before yesterday. But now it's a cluster-fuck for at least the next few games.

 

[romeo212000]

Bennie, I'd honestly like to know who you put in which category. Not kidding, nor being a jerk.

I see JD's flaws, his mistakes, and give him full credit when it's earned. Even suggested about a week ago if ownership is going to freak out if this season turns into a turnstile disaster. Especially if Prince ends up being a good hitter, but with 18 HR power, Choo doesn't have a good season, and EA continues to play non-focused ball. That's almost $ 500 mil over the next 6/8 years.

Absolutely. Anyone who says I never fault JD for his bad decisions either isn't paying attention or is being intentionally obtuse. I have criticized him for the Gonzalez trade, signing Choo to his current contract, and giving Elvis his huge extension. Im also still witholding judgement on his manager hire, but have admitted I'm quite disappointed with his in game decisions so far. I'm also realistic and still say he's one of the best GM's in baseball. That doesn't mean I always have JD colored glasses on.

 

[RevSader]

Fact is, neither you or I know exactly what went down with Cruz, and I find it just as silly that you present your point of view as fact when there's no more concrete evidence to back it up than mine.

We will never win this argument. He won't take the multiple reports written on the subject as fact yet he will take his own idea as fact.

 

[Senator_fan]

Not sure if these will make you feel better or not.

Grant: Rangers had much more than just a bad loss against Mariners | Dallas Morning News

Texas Rangers manager Jeff Banister inclined to give Ross Detwiler more opportunity to start | | Dallas Morning News

From the first article: Their set up man, Tanner Scheppers, couldn’t throw a strike, which is issue enough. It also forced manager Jeff Banister to go to a lower percentage play and ask Neftali Feliz to record a five-out save, which he hasn’t done since 2009.

I was under the impression that Banister was one of the de facto Sabermetrics guru's in baseball.

On the second article I would give Debt Wiler more opportunity IF he didn't give up so many fly balls. Especially
the ones that go over the fence.

 

[donaldson79]

From the first article: Their set up man, Tanner Scheppers, couldn’t throw a strike, which is issue enough. It also forced manager Jeff Banister to go to a lower percentage play and ask Neftali Feliz to record a five-out save, which he hasn’t done since 2009.

I was under the impression that Banister was one of the de facto Sabermetrics guru's in baseball.

On the second article I would give Debt Wiler more opportunity IF he didn't give up so many fly balls. Especially
the ones that go over the fence.

Me too. Maybe that's all it was, an "impression."

 

[Nightcrawler]

Just a quick question, but why does the banny rooster always put Tanner Scheppers in the game during the 8th inning? Scheppers hasn't shown anything this year to make me think he's capable of handling that role.

 

[BULLPEN FAILURE]

I was under the impression that Banister was one of the de facto Sabermetrics guru's in baseball.

Anything and everything I've read about Banister simply presented him as including a sabermetrical element to a traditional approach. He does not skew wholly towards either side.

 

[BULLPEN FAILURE]

Just a quick question, but why does the banny rooster always put Tanner Scheppers in the game during the 8th inning? Scheppers hasn't shown anything this year to make me think he's capable of handling that role.

"always"? He's pitched in 2 games, and they were both this weekend.

 

[saddles]

Bennie, I'd honestly like to know who you put in which category. Not kidding, nor being a jerk.

I see JD's flaws, his mistakes, and give him full credit when it's earned. Even suggested about a week ago if ownership is going to freak out if this season turns into a turnstile disaster. Especially if Prince ends up being a good hitter, but with 18 HR power, Choo doesn't have a good season, and EA continues to play non-focused ball. That's almost $ 500 mil over the next 6/8 years.

No, I don't take you question in a negative way at all. I usually let folks place themselves in the category after having lots of opportunities to do so. I came across a lot more of that type of person on the ESPN and DMN boards than I have here. It is the folks who always have an excuse for JD who belong in the category. It is the ones who never mention a critical mistake that they think JD has made and when someone else mentions a mistake of JD's they jump right to JD's defense. If you asked them to name 3 major mistakes that JD has made over the last 2-3 years they would have a very hard time coming up with any. If pushed they would mention very minor issues.

If they want to be that way then that is fine, but I have to always remind myself when getting into a discussion with them about JD mistakes that they will never be able to see the issue objectively. I can understand their way of thinking if they feel they can't be a fan if they think anything negative about the way the team is being run. I just don't feel that way myself. On the other hand, there are those who will never be able to admit that JD has ever done anything right. Those folks make it very difficult to have a discussion with them as well. The ironic thing is that the JD apologists will see the JD haters as not being able to be objective, but never see themselves as being just as bad but in the opposite direction.

I don't take it personally when either of the two types disagree with me. I just try to understand why they feel the way they do and move on. I have come to know guys on some of these boards over the years who fit into one of the two categories and I get along with them very well and have nothing personal against them.

By the way, I don't include you in the category.

 

[DT LUNA]

Just a quick question, but why does the banny rooster always put Tanner Scheppers in the game during the 8th inning? Scheppers hasn't shown anything this year to make me think he's capable of handling that role.

He has been injured and brought up to see how well he could perform in relief. He doesn't have to show you anything since he has only had two opportunities. Check back later and try again.

 

[Nightcrawler]

He has been injured and brought up to see how well he could perform in relief. He doesn't have to show you anything since he has only had two opportunities. Check back later and try again.

I was just asking a question, don't have to grill me sir. Thanks have a good day.

 

[saddles]

"Jon Daniels, in a recent interview on ESPN Dallas 103.3 FM, said the club offered Cruz a multi-year deal at the Winter Meetings, but that at spring training there were "other factors at play." The decision to sign Shin-Soo Choo this offseason was a considerable financial commitment. And it signaled the club was looking in other directions. They gave Choo No. 17, which Cruz wore while in Texas, and they revamped the lineup."

Many 'what ifs' as Nelson Cruz visits Texas Rangers - Dallas Texas Rangers Blog - ESPN

 

[romeo212000]

"Jon Daniels, in a recent interview on ESPN Dallas 103.3 FM, said the club offered Cruz a multi-year deal at the Winter Meetings, but that at spring training there were "other factors at play." The decision to sign Shin-Soo Choo this offseason was a considerable financial commitment. And it signaled the club was looking in other directions. They gave Choo No. 17, which Cruz wore while in Texas, and they revamped the lineup."

Many 'what ifs' as Nelson Cruz visits Texas Rangers - Dallas Texas Rangers Blog - ESPN

So there's your answer. He was offered a multi year deal and turned it down. So go ahead and take your "bullshit" rating back PDay. Thanks for playing.

 

[saddles]

I enjoyed this piece on Nick Williams today from Scott Lucas.

I've written on multiple occasions that Nick Williams would struggle in 2015. Williams has a superior hit tool, but AA pitchers exposed his see-ball swing-bat approach last August. He was going to have to adjust, and I didn't see evidence of that during my (admittedly brief) visit to Surprise in March.

Through ten games, Williams is batting .395/.425/.553. That's not struggling. Is this just a statistical outlier -- everything finding a hole -- or is he going about his business a different way? I haven't seen Williams in person this season, just occasionally on MiLB.tv, so I can't offer an eyewitness account. But statistically, he really is different:

2015 rate vs. 2014 rate (all in AA)
Swing rate per pitch: 47% vs. 61%
Swinging strikes / all pitches: 8% vs. 22%
Swinging strikes / all swings: 12% vs. 30%
Swing rate on 1st pitches: 23% vs. 48%
1-0 counts after 1st pitch: 48% vs. 30%
0-1 counts after 1st pitch: 45% vs. 53%

In essence, Williams is swinging far less frequently, creating more favorable counts and making better contact when he does swing.

Now, this is just ten games. Just. Ten. Games. Please don't initiate a "Free Nick Williams!" campaign or ask me if he'll be in Round Rock by May. Let's just keep an eye on him and see how this progresses.

Voice of the Riders Alex Vispoli asked about Williams' approach and mental outlook in a recent interview.

 

[saddles]

So there's your answer. He was offered a multi year deal and turned it down.

Yes, there is the answer. They never went back to him after his price went down to offer him a one year deal. The Winter Meetings was the last time they tried. My observations on not going after him was based on them not going after him when his price went down and when it made no sense at all not to try and sign him.