Texas Rangers 2024-2025 Offseason Thread

[saddles]

There once was a young player who hit .200 in his first 90 at bats. He hit .215 in his first 195 at bats.

That wasn't big enough of a sample size to judge him by.

 

[Duane1952]

Harris has only been here for 6 games (played in 2), so I can't really say he should count as being denied significant playing time by Bochy.

As for Foscue and Huff, playing time has to be earned, not just given. Foscue put up OK numbers in the minors and looks completely overmatched at the MLB level. Huff has better MLB numbers and you can make the case he's never gotten significant playing time in his MLB career. But he first got called up in 2020, and Bochy didn't start managing here until 2023. And Huff's 2024 AAA numbers were down across the board. Feels like this is more of a FO decision with him instead of being a Bochy thing.

And in Harris’s second game that he played he hit two homers. And he didn’t play again. Remind me who makes the lineup. But he would put 2 catchers in the lineup at the same time, neither could hit.

 

[scotsman#1948]

What do you think constitutes a big enough sample size?

minimum 550 to 650 at-bats and keep them in the lineup no matter what until they have reached the lower number

 

[saddles]

minimum 550 to 650 at-bats and keep them in the lineup no matter what until they have reached the lower number

No, only give them 2 at bats and if they take a strike or swing at a ball even once during those 2 at bats, we launch them to the moon.

 

[WastinSomeTime]

No, only give them 2 at bats and if they take a strike or swing at a ball even once during those 2 at bats, we launch them to the moon.

Unfortunately you don't have the luxury of giving everyone a decent sample size unless you are in a complete rebuild. It's the nature of the beast.

 

[scotsman#1948]

Unfortunately you don't have the luxury of giving everyone a decent sample size unless you are in a complete rebuild. It's the nature of the beast.

i agree. the only way we can grade if a prospect is ready is to put him on the field and give him enough at bats to see how he performs against a quorum of pitchers and the different pitches they throw and to do that you either go into a total rebuild or something similar. we did it with Langford but that was with Carter going down. if Carter hadn't, we would have been struggling to give both sufficient playing time with Taveras and Garcia also in the outfield mix and then there's Harris, Smith and Duran. and we've got Seager, Semien, Jung, Lowe and Heim tying up all the infield positions which makes it difficult to find enough playing time for Smith, Duran, Foscue, Huff, Crim etc. and all this with only 13 positional spots on the 26-man roster

 

[saddles]

Unfortunately you don't have the luxury of giving everyone a decent sample size unless you are in a complete rebuild. It's the nature of the beast.

Yeah, but when Huff is the better option and you go with someone else instead then that is wrong, rebuild or not. That was the case at times last year.

This year we should have seen a lot more of the young guys in the last several weeks. We had nothing to lose.

 

[saddles]

i agree. the only way we can grade if a prospect is ready is to put him on the field and give him enough at bats to see how he performs against a quorum of pitchers and the different pitches they throw and to do that you either go into a total rebuild or something similar. we did it with Langford but that was with Carter going down. if Carter hadn't, we would have been struggling to give both sufficient playing time with Taveras and Garcia also in the outfield mix and then there's Harris, Smith and Duran. and we've got Seager, Semien, Jung, Lowe and Heim tying up all the infield positions which makes it difficult to find enough playing time for Smith, Duran, Foscue, Huff, Crim etc. and all this with only 13 positional spots on the 26-man roster

But ar the same time, "minimum 550 to 650 at-bats and keep them in the lineup no matter what until they have reached the lower number." Right?

 

[saddles]

Unfortunately you don't have the luxury of giving everyone a decent sample size unless you are in a complete rebuild. It's the nature of the beast.

Let me state that your accessment is 100% correct.

That is why, when you do go through a rebuild, it is important that you do it right, even if it causes you to lose more games In the meantime. Some call it tanking, but it is simply trying to make honest assessments.

The Rangers have been past the rebuild mode ever since they hired Bochy. No one expects Bochy to act as if we are in a rebuild.

That will cause us to have to make some premature evaluations on some young guys, though. Case in point, could be this year if we traded Lowe. We would have to make a decision on if we think we have his replacement in-house or should we acquire a first baseman. We would have to decide if one of our in-house options are what we should go with and who it should be without any kind of trial period.

The same could be said for putting Rocker in the rotation. If we acquired 2 good starting pitchers, we are pretty much saying we don't know enough about Rocker to trust him. If we only acquire one good starting pitcher then we are thinking we can count on Rocker or another in-house option.

Those decisions can backfire, but they are necessary at times.

It can also keep you from trying someone like Ragans in the rotation and not finding out his true worth so that he is considered trade fodder.

 

[saddles]

From Bob Nightengale:

There are 144 players who officially hit free agency…and counting

 

[saddles]

There should be a lot more conversation-worthy topics dealing with this team going forward than there are topics that look back, but for some reason the ones that look back generate the most responses.

There is nothing wrong with bringing stuff up from the past. I just find it Interesting which topics generate the longer conversations.

 

[saddles]

Nick Martinez has opted out.

 

[Kelleyman]

Yeah, but when Huff is the better option and you go with someone else instead then that is wrong, rebuild or not. That was the case at times last year.

This year we should have seen a lot more of the young guys in the last several weeks. We had nothing to lose.

This is the happy medium. We played the vets even when out of the division for the integrity of the game but the good of the team must be a factor

 

[Kelleyman]

I think we keep Lowe due to his better last 2 months
I doubt we trade Leody due to the uncertainty of Evan. Adolis is a question mark due to his apparent hidden injury

 

[saddles]

I doubt we trade Leody due to the uncertainty of Evan.

What if they are expecting Langford to play CF. Doesn't that free up Leody?

 

[WastinSomeTime]

Yeah, but when Huff is the better option and you go with someone else instead then that is wrong, rebuild or not. That was the case at times last year.

This year we should have seen a lot more of the young guys in the last several weeks. We had nothing to lose.

Huff is one of those that I do have to agree with you on because in this case it was the perfect situation to give him some at bats without affecting the team in a negative way. They blew that opportunity. Then you have high draft picks like Langford and Jung who they already have in the plans to put them on the MLB roster and hope they can be an integral part of the team.
In Carter's case he got an opportunity and came out of the gate like gangbusters.
Others like Foscue and such have immense pressure to do what Carter did when the opportunity arises but they will
have sporadic at bats which leads to the pressure unless an opening occurs that allows them extended playing time.

 

[saddles]

This is the happy medium. We played the vets even when out of the division for the integrity of the game but the good of the team must be a factor

From June 11 until the end of the year, Jankowski hit .169. I think they could have brought up someone from Hickory and mustered up that much integrity. Lol

 

[saddles]

Huff is one of those that I do have to agree with you on because in this case it was the perfect situation to give him some at bats without affecting the team in a negative way. They blew that opportunity. Then you have high draft picks like Langford and Jung who they already have in the plans to put them on the MLB roster and hope they can be an integral part of the team.
In Carter's case he got an opportunity and came out of the gate like gangbusters.
Others like Foscue and such have immense pressure to do what Carter did when the opportunity arises but they will
have sporadic at bats which leads to the pressure unless an opening occurs that allows them extended playing time.

That's right. I would have never expected them to give Foscue or Harris as many at bats in 2023 as they might need to get acclimated.

 

[saddles]

John Moore agrees with me.

"Nick Martinez peaks my interest. He can start and come out of the bullpen. Put up good numbers in Cincy last year."
"Rangers need depth"

 

[saddles]

From The Prospect Times:

Texas Rangers prospect, Leandro Lopez, had a strong outing for the Surprise Saguaros:

- 3 IP
- 0 R
- 0 H
- 1 BB
- 7 SO
- 45/30 strikes

Josh Stephan continues to impress in the Arizona Fall League.

He followed Leandro by throwing 4 innings:

- 4 IP
- 0 R
- 0 H
- 5 SO
- 54/40 strikes

And then Avery Weems.

- 1 IP
- 1 H
- 2 SO
- 20/14 strikes

1.69 ERA