Texas Rangers vs. Chicago White Sox 8/23-8/25

[romeo212000]

I'm not questioning JD. Pretty big supporter of him actually. As far as Grimm is concerned, I don't like giving up on a 25 year pitcher. Don't ever think he's going to become a top of the rotation kind of guy. However, he sure helped plug a rather large hole for us this season. And we did give up 2 other promising young arms! Regardless if we resign Garza or not, that's a lot to give up, IMO.

It was a lot, but I feel JD has earned the benefit of doubt on this one.

1) From what I saw Grimm just want ever going to be more than a spot starter/long man for us. His fastball was too straight, and his only real out pitch was a pretty nice curveball. If he wasn't hitting his spots and/or didn't have his curveball he gets hit hard. I'm ok with giving him up.

2) He's a very solid prospect but I believe CJ Edwards' numbers may be misleading. They're eye popping but remember he's in Low A ball. As he ascends through the system I believe that will change, and considering his stuff is actually fairly similar to Grimm's. A high 80's to very low 90's fastball (usually touching 94 or so in the first inning and never again) that's pretty damn straight, with a nice big hook. Sound familiar? As the game wears on he pretty much falls into the soft tosser category.

Luke Jackson is the guy I didn't want to give up.

3) mike Olt. I was not quite ready to give up on this guy, but I trust Texas talent evaluation and if they believe Olt helps us more in this trade than on our team then I think they've earned the benefit of doubt. Very similar to another trade Texas made by letting Smoak go.

 

[ESPN Refugee]

Didn't get to see any of the game last night but followed on my phone and saw some highlights this morning. Great win and Oakland while still solid is finally looking human. Just keep the pedal all the way down and mow through the teams they're supposed to and win every series.

 

[donaldson79]

It was a lot, but I feel JD has earned the benefit of doubt on this one.

1) From what I saw Grimm just want ever going to be more than a spot starter/long man for us. His fastball was too straight, and his only real out pitch was a pretty nice curveball. If he wasn't hitting his spots and/or didn't have his curveball he gets hit hard. I'm ok with giving him up.

2) He's a very solid prospect but I believe CJ Edwards' numbers may be misleading. They're eye popping but remember he's in Low A ball. As he ascends through the system I believe that will change, and considering his stuff is actually fairly similar to Grimm's. A high 80's to very low 90's fastball (usually touching 94 or so in the first inning and never again) that's pretty damn straight, with a nice big hook. Sound familiar? As the game wears on he pretty much falls into the soft tosser category.

Luke Jackson is the guy I didn't want to give up.

3) mike Olt. I was not quite ready to give up on this guy, but I trust Texas talent evaluation and if they believe Olt helps us more in this trade than on our team then I think they've earned the benefit of doubt. Very similar to another trade Texas made by letting Smoak go.

No argument from me! But weren't you one of the guys saying, "you can never have two much pitching?" Grimm may become a back of the rotation kind of guy, and Edwards go moved up to high A ball and struck out the first 7 guys he saw. EXTREMELY small sample I know. Bottom line: We've got a solid front office, good scouts and I'll abide by their recommendations! Not worried really.

 

[romeo212000]

No argument from me! But weren't you one of the guys saying, "you can never have two much pitching?" Grimm may become a back of the rotation kind of guy, and Edwards go moved up to high A ball and struck out the first 7 guys he saw. EXTREMELY small sample I know. Bottom line: We've got a solid front office, good scouts and I'll abide by their recommendations! Not worried really.

Kind of an apples to oranges deal given the talent levels of Perez vs Grimm. Given the talent in our rotation now I really don't think he'd be a long term rotation solution for us.

 

[UK Cowboy]

I'm not questioning JD. Pretty big supporter of him actually. As far as Grimm is concerned, I don't like giving up on a 25 year pitcher. Don't ever think he's going to become a top of the rotation kind of guy. However, he sure helped plug a rather large hole for us this season. And we did give up 2 other promising young arms! Regardless if we resign Garza or not, that's a lot to give up, IMO.

I think the Rangers will resign Garza. I was watching him the other night when he was off, and it seems as though he is really fitting in. He seems like a guy that wouldn't be intimidated by the Texas heat, and wants to be a key member on a contender. I'm betting he is the opposite of Cliff Lee, and re ups quickly

 

[donaldson79]

I saw this stat today and some of ya may get a kick outta this: Mike Trout's WAR is 7.4. Pujols, Hamilton and Wilson combined are 4.7! Ouch!

 

[jta4437]

No argument from me! But weren't you one of the guys saying, "you can never have two much pitching?" Grimm may become a back of the rotation kind of guy, and Edwards go moved up to high A ball and struck out the first 7 guys he saw. EXTREMELY small sample I know. Bottom line: We've got a solid front office, good scouts and I'll abide by their recommendations! Not worried really.

We got the better pitcher in the deal, that's whats important, probably now, in the near future and the long-term

I'd in disagreement about Jackson vs Edwards, I'd have rather given up Jackson, but no one can be certain now what the long term future of these guys is, essentially I'd call it a wash at this moment and time

Neil Ramirez had his chances and just couldn't take that next step, I was a fan but he just couldn't put it together

Grimm is Grimm, rooted for him, might end up finding a cutter, splitter or sinker that gets some movement on the ball and he might succeed, but probably no more than a 4 guy at best

 

[donaldson79]

I think the Rangers will resign Garza. I was watching him the other night when he was off, and it seems as though he is really fitting in. He seems like a guy that wouldn't be intimidated by the Texas heat, and wants to be a key member on a contender. I'm betting he is the opposite of Cliff Lee, and re ups quickly

I think Lee's wife had more than a little to do with him leaving. He like it here, and liked Phil too. But his wife loved Philly and didn't like it here at all! They have a child with "special needs" and I believe they enjoyed the hospital there as well.

It seems like almost to a man, when we get someone from the outside, they damn near marvel at what a great clubhouse we've got.

 

[jta4437]

Kind of an apples to oranges deal given the talent levels of Perez vs Grimm. Given the talent in our rotation now I really don't think he'd be a long term rotation solution for us.

Agreed there's a difference between organizational filler and premium pitching, Grimm and Ramirez were moving towards that surplus of arms range, Edwards the jury was still out on and could end up being a premium guy, but who knows, Perez is a premium guy pitching solidly at the ML level at a very young age

That said, I'd trade Perez for a handful of guys in the league; Kershaw, King Felix, and Matt Harvey being at the top of a short list

Neither of those is happening, so no point in going into detail otherwise

 

[Texas_Pete]

That said, I'd trade Perez for a handful of guys in the league; Kershaw, King Felix, and Matt Harvey being at the top of a short list

Neither of those is happening, so no point in going into detail otherwise

Not sure I'd trade an arm for an arm, however in an alternate universe where the Angels were desperate enough to deal I'd certainly bundle him for Trout.

 

[donaldson79]

Not sure I'd trade an arm for an arm, however in an alternate universe where the Angels were desperate enough to deal I'd certainly bundle him for Trout.

I value Perez a lot. His growth from last season to this is phenomenal. But that said, do you honestly think he has the potential to be Kershaw? This guy is getting better - from already very good - and is pitching like an all time great now. To me Perez can and hopefully will get better. But is he going to be better than Holland? Darvish? I'm not so sure on this, and there's no one in baseball who would consider taking either one of these guys in play of a Kershaw!

 

[Texas_Pete]

I value Perez a lot. His growth from last season to this is phenomenal. But that said, do you honestly think he has the potential to be Kershaw? This guy is getting better - from already very good - and is pitching like an all time great now. To me Perez can and hopefully will get better. But is he going to be better than Holland? Darvish? I'm not so sure on this, and there's no one in baseball who would consider taking either one of these guys in play of a Kershaw!

Try matching Kershaw with Perez at same age, so 2010 Kershaw vs 2013 Perez, see those numbers, or even Holland 2009. Perez is certainly an ace in the making, I will wrap him tight for 10 years as a Ranger if I had a say.

 

[donaldson79]

Try matching Kershaw with Perez at same age, so 2010 Kershaw vs 2013 Perez, see those numbers, or even Holland 2009. Perez is certainly an ace in the making, I will wrap him tight for 10 years as a Ranger if I had a say.

Way to much "projection" for me! You're trying to compare a 22 year old, with a total of 25 games in the bigs against a 25 year old who has delivered quality wins for 6 seasons, and now is considered the best pitcher in the game! IMO, you're looking at the future with rose-colored glasses. No disrespect to Perez. But it's unrealistic to think he will be considered the best pitcher in baseball in 3 more years. That's all I'm saying!

Let me ask: So you think within a season or so, he'll be a better pitcher than Darvish or Holland?

 

[romeo212000]

Way to much "projection" for me! You're trying to compare a 22 year old, with a total of 25 games in the bigs against a 25 year old who has delivered quality wins for 6 seasons, and now is considered the best pitcher in the game! IMO, you're looking at the future with rose-colored glasses. No disrespect to Perez. But it's unrealistic to think he will be considered the best pitcher in baseball in 3 more years. That's all I'm saying!

Let me ask: So you think within a season or so, he'll be a better pitcher than Darvish or Holland?

Can't say he will or won't, but the ceiling is in the Johan Santana range for me.

 

[Texas_Pete]

Let me ask: So you think within a season or so, he'll be a better pitcher than Darvish or Holland?

I'll bite and say better than Holland in 3 years.

 

[romeo212000]

Way to much "projection" for me! You're trying to compare a 22 year old, with a total of 25 games in the bigs against a 25 year old who has delivered quality wins for 6 seasons, and now is considered the best pitcher in the game! IMO, you're looking at the future with rose-colored glasses. No disrespect to Perez. But it's unrealistic to think he will be considered the best pitcher in baseball in 3 more years. That's all I'm saying!

Let me ask: So you think within a season or so, he'll be a better pitcher than Darvish or Holland?

Can't say he will or won't, but the ceiling is in the Johan Santana range for me.

Btw, keep in mind Darvish is only going to get better the next few years.

 

[pegasusredleg]

I see that the A's game is televised on the local Texas Fox station.

 

[pegasusredleg]

I'm all about the eye test and the stats... I just happen to trust the numbers more than some people's eye

People's eye would tell you that Derek Jeter and Michael Young are Gold Glove SS's

and that Raffy Palmeiro "earned" a GG in 1999

You don't want to trust numbers, thats fine, but bring something to the argument other than what you "saw"

You tend to read too much into some posts. I did not say I don't trust the numbers. If you can measure something you do it. But there are intangibles in all things. Even firing a howitzer.

 

[donaldson79]

I'll bite and say better than Holland in 3 years.

Hey Big Dogg.....we're just "opinionating" (not a word) here. And Perez may be just that in 3 years. But ya know what? Holland has been our best starter this season, IMO! If he had the same run support of some of the other guys, Perez included, you might think more highly of him. Holland has made a huge jump in his mental approach, which is all he really lacked. If this season ended today I'd have our rotation for next season as Darvish or Holland # 1, Harrison @ # 3, Perez @ 4 and Garza (??) at # 5. Still gotta sign Garza, if he/we want, and the market is probably going to be sky high for this guy!

 

[romeo212000]

I see that the A's game is televised on the local Texas Fox station.

Not in Oklahoma. Apparently they think we give a shit about puig mania.