Texas Rangers 2019-2020 Offseason Thread

[saddles]

 

[scotsman1948]

alright we are set: Rangers sign Matt Duffy to a minor league deal. come on ST

 

[saddles]

poor banny.

Maybe Banny will call the Astros every day in hopes that he can get them to change their mind. Because...he never ever quits.

 

[scotsman1948]

Or Leclerc, Odor, Lynn or Minor, Taveras, Tejeda

your suggested trade would be dead in the water before the talks really got started

 

[saddles]

your suggested trade would be dead in the water before the talks really got started

Good, then it is just as likely as Adam's was.

 

[scotsman1948]

Good, then it is just as likely as Adam's was.

you just don't want this team to get better

 

[saddles]

Lately, we have once again had a few of the "we don't know what goes on behind the scenes" arguments made. It is a very logical and sound statement because unless we are there we have no way of being absolutely sure what went on. Even then who knows what is in the minds of the decision maker(s) in question.

you just don't want this team to get better

You just cannot let yourself try and understand exactly how I do want it to get better.

 

[saddles]

Lately, we have once again had a few of the "we don't know what goes on behind the scenes" arguments made. It is a very logical and sound statement because unless we are there we have no way of being absolutely sure what went on. Even if we had been there, who knows what is in the minds of the decision maker(s) in question. I have been hearing that same argument since long before Wash left us. It is a very sound statement so lets apply it across the board.

For one thing, in saying that we don't know, and then going on to imply that something more positive has to be what is really going on, one is guilty of doublespeak. If we don't know that the negatively perceived argument is so, then we cannot know if the positive one is so either. For some illogical reason though, I never hear the "we don't know what is going on behind the scenes" argument used against someone who has what is perceived as a positive take. That seems to imply that the otherwise seemingly logical and sound argument, is only being used when it is convenient to further an agenda. It is also possible that some use it because they heard it and think it seems like a sound argument, which it is when used across the board.

Another thing we need to keep in mind, is if we really don't know what is going on, then we could be wrong when we praise what we think are good or great decisions by the decision makers. Maybe a recent signing that we seem to like isn't really that good of a signing after all. We don't know what they could have signed that player for had they been better negotiators. Maybe they got bad scouting reports and chose to ignore them in certain cases. Maybe they knew exactly what was wrong with Prince and signed him any way. Maybe they could have very easily refit the Ballpark with a roof and decided they would rather get a brand new stadium. Maybe a decision maker is purposely trying to sabotage the team due to a personal vendetta, a mental illness, or because someone from another team is paying them to. We don't know that those things aren't so.

We could go on and on with examples of seemingly great decisions actually being bad ones if we knew everything there is to know. After all, we don't really know these things. I don't hear the same guys who use this argument against what they perceive as negative opinions, use the same argument when ownership, the GM, or the manager is being praised for seemingly good or great decisions. That is what you call a double standard, and it is not a fair and honest way to discuss any topic.

If we are going on the assumption, that since we don't have all the facts, then we aren't entitled to an opinion, then this board serves no purpose whatsoever. I know, I know, no one has said they aren't entitled to their opinion. It is pretty close to that though when you are implying they really have no basis for their opinion because their opinion is based on something that they are ignorant about. Instead, why don't we realize that if you follow the game long enough that you can pretty much tell by the externals what is going on. No, you can never be 100% certain, but you can form a sound opinion even if you aren't privy. It is certainly disingenuous, at best, to use a double standard, all the while claiming the intellectually moral high ground.

 

[scotsman1948]

Lately, we have once again had a few of the "we don't know what goes on behind the scenes" arguments made. It is a very logical and sound statement because unless we are there we have no way of being absolutely sure what went on. Even then who knows what is in the minds of the decision maker(s) in question.

You just cannot let yourself try and understand exactly how I do want it to get better.

but not now but sometime in the future when a "window" opens

 

[scotsman1948]

Lately, we have once again had a few of the "we don't know what goes on behind the scenes" arguments made. It is a very logical and sound statement because unless we are there we have no way of being absolutely sure what went on. Even if we had been there, who knows what is in the minds of the decision maker(s) in question. I have been hearing that same argument since long before Wash left us. It is a very sound statement so lets apply it across the board.

For one thing, in saying that we don't know, and then going on to imply that something more positive has to be what is really going on, one is guilty of doublespeak. If we don't know that the negatively perceived argument is so, then we cannot know if the positive one is so either. For some illogical reason though, I never hear the "we don't know what is going on behind the scenes" argument used against someone who has what is perceived as a positive take. That seems to imply that the otherwise seemingly logical and sound argument, is only being used when it is convenient to further an agenda. It is also possible that some use it because they heard it and think it seems like a sound argument, which it is when used across the board.

Another thing we need to keep in mind, is if we really don't know what is going on, then we could be wrong when we praise what we think are good or great decisions by the decision makers. Maybe a recent signing that we seem to like isn't really that good of a signing after all. We don't know what they could have signed that player for had they been better negotiators. Maybe they got bad scouting reports and chose to ignore them in certain cases. Maybe they knew exactly what was wrong with Prince and signed him any way. Maybe they could have very easily refit the Ballpark with a roof and decided they would rather get a brand new stadium. Maybe a decision maker is purposely trying to sabotage the team due to a personal vendetta, a mental illness, or because someone from another team is paying them to. We don't know that those things aren't so.

We could go on and on with examples of seemingly great decisions actually being bad ones if we knew everything there is to know. After all, we don't really know these things. I don't hear the same guys who use this argument against what they perceive as negative opinions, use the same argument when ownership, the GM, or the manager is being praised for seemingly good or great decisions. That is what you call a double standard, and it is not a fair and honest way to discuss any topic.

If we are going on the assumption, that since we don't have all the facts, then we aren't entitled to an opinion, then this board serves no purpose whatsoever. I know, I know, no one has said they aren't entitled to their opinion. It is pretty close to that though when you are implying they really have no basis for their opinion because their opinion is based on something that they are ignorant about. Instead, why don't we realize that if you follow the game long enough that you can pretty much tell by the externals what is going on. No, you can never be 100% certain, but you can form a sound opinion even if you aren't privy. It is certainly disingenuous, at best, to use a double standard, all the while claiming the intellectually moral high ground.

of course we are allowed opinions and they may be right or wrong because we may not know all the facts but it fun to have them

 

[saddles]

but not now but sometime in the future when a "window" opens

I want a WS championship, plain and simple. We have had this same discussion numerous times and yet you continue to mis-characterize my goals. The basics are this. You think I am foolishly patient. I think you are foolishly wanting to waste resources for short term improvements that aren't enough to get us a WS championship.

 

[scotsman1948]

I want a WS championship, plain and simple. We have had this same discussion numerous times and yet you continue to mis-characterize my goals. The basics are this. You think I am foolishly patient. I think you are foolishly wanting to waste resources for short term improvements that aren't enough to get us a WS championship.

and you mis-characterize my goals by assuming I want to waste all our resources for short term improvements which i'm not. but when you have multiple similar assets available and an opportunity comes up that would improve the team I think you make the move.

 

[saddles]

and you mis-characterize my goals by assuming I want to waste all our resources for short term improvements which i'm not. but when you have multiple similar assets available and an opportunity comes up that would improve the team I think you make the move.

Well at least we are even then. lol

 

[DTC]

Dustin Diamond? Screech? Didn't know he had such a good armView attachment 231262

lmao!!
That’s hilarious
I meant Thomas Diamond

 

[scotsman1948]

well apparently the Reds have beat us out for Pedro Strop. is it a matter of JD not putting out much of effort or overspending on the part of the Reds?

 

[DTC]

atleast he’s a high OBP guy

 

[Nightcrawler]

is this guy any good?

santana came in with a similar deal I remember.

It still sucks that other teams like the reds are signing people to major league deals while we are doling out minor league spring training invites.

 

[DTC]

is this guy any good?

santana came in with a similar deal I remember.

It still sucks that other teams like the reds are signing people to major league deals while we are doling out minor league spring training invites.

maybe the can make an easy tweak to his bat angle and he can increase his power numbers
If he keeps up his OBP and contact skills and adds a little power he maybe a good addition

 

[jta4437]

is this guy any good?

santana came in with a similar deal I remember.

It still sucks that other teams like the reds are signing people to major league deals while we are doling out minor league spring training invites.

He's a solid option at 3B if he can stay healthy, not much power but solid defense and average and obp

 

[scotsman1948]

well apparently the Reds have beat us out for Pedro Strop. is it a matter of JD not putting out much of effort or overspending on the part of the Reds?

well the Reds are signing him to a 1 year $1.825M deal so it appears that JD just didn't make much of an effort