The Officially Official Off Season Thread (2016)

[saddles]

Waco gets new guy Ruggy and still-not-sure-about guy Freeman. Not really worth it.

No stop in Burleson this year and they have been here for the past several years.

 

[saddles]

prospects are just that prospects there is no guarantee that they will pay off in the long run and depending on the fact they will could have long term impact on their wallets

In a sense there is no guarantee even veterans will have success from one year to the next. Look at 2014 for Prince and Choo. Look at what happened to Gary Matthews Jr. and Hamilton after they left here. Look at what happened to Baines and Chan Ho after we acquired them.

 

[saddles]

it was, but I've seen it stated in many articles that as far as the Rangers go, that move was so big that it basically encompassed what they would/could have done this offseason.

I know it isn't exactly the same thing, but the media making excuses for them with the Hamels deal makes me think how about they lambasted Wade Phillips when he suggested playing good enough to get a first round bye was like winning the first round playoff game. Both situations seem like making excuses to me. The local media is completely different in how they criticize the Rangers and the Cowboys. They make excuses for the Rangers while heavily criticizing the other team for doing the same. You can make the argument that each team had a legitimate excuse/reasoning in those situations, but it is almost comical how different the media reacts to it.

 

[scotsman1948]

In a sense there is no guarantee even veterans will have success from one year to the next. Look at 2014 for Prince and Choo. Look at what happened to Gary Matthews Jr. and Hamilton after they left here. Look at what happened to Baines and Chan Ho after we acquired them.

That is true but with a veteran you have something to base expectations on with a prospect you don't know what to expect. Sometimes you get a stud and sometimes you get a did. What they do at AA, AAA or even winter play does not mean they will be ML star.

 

[saddles]

That is true but with a veteran you have something to base expectations on with a prospect you don't know what to expect. Sometimes you get a stud and sometimes you get a did. What they do at AA, AAA or even winter play does not mean they will be ML star.

But many veterans surprise folks every year. Some in a negative way and some in a positive way. Neither is a sure thing. It is a game of gambles and the smaller the budget the more you have to gamble on prospects since you can't afford to gamble with money on veterans.

 

[jta4437]

I know it isn't exactly the same thing, but the media making excuses for them with the Hamels deal makes me think how about they lambasted Wade Phillips when he suggested playing good enough to get a first round bye was like winning the first round playoff game. Both situations seem like making excuses to me. The local media is completely different in how they criticize the Rangers and the Cowboys. They make excuses for the Rangers while heavily criticizing the other team for doing the same. You can make the argument that each team had a legitimate excuse/reasoning in those situations, but it is almost comical how different the media reacts to it.

Don't really see it as making excuses... minus a potential deal for Cespedes (or other LFer)

Places in need of improvement:
- LF has been discussed in depth but I think most would agree this is a situation of throwing money at a short term fix when the solution is probably less than a year away... with multiple possible options
- Catcher, Not much was ever out there, Wieters was an option and he took the QO, Lucroy was discussed but many think he has move to 1B in his future due to concussion issues... Only other option I saw was maybe getting a young upside guy for Mitch or someone else... but many would've seen that as a step backward anyway
- SP was discussed and we were never going to pursue any of the big name guys and most of the mid level guys aren't or aren't much of an improvement over internal options... plus Darvish is coming back soon...

 

[True Rangers Fan]

I know it isn't exactly the same thing, but the media making excuses for them with the Hamels deal makes me think how about they lambasted Wade Phillips when he suggested playing good enough to get a first round bye was like winning the first round playoff game. Both situations seem like making excuses to me. The local media is completely different in how they criticize the Rangers and the Cowboys. They make excuses for the Rangers while heavily criticizing the other team for doing the same. You can make the argument that each team had a legitimate excuse/reasoning in those situations, but it is almost comical how different the media reacts to it.

Just for the record, the articles I've read included direct quotes from JD about how the Hamels trade took care of a big part of their goals for 2016, including what would be accomplished this offseason. So it wasn't really the media making excuses. Just legit reporting.

 

[saddles]

Just for the record, the articles I've read included direct quotes from JD about how the Hamels trade took care of a big part of their goals for 2016, including what would be accomplished this offseason. So it wasn't really the media making excuses. Just legit reporting.

Just saying there is a huge discrepancy in the way they report on the Cowboys and the Rangers. They rarely ever challenge anything done by the front office or the manager and challenge things all the time with the Cowboys. It has nothing to do with the success of the franchises either. They could have agreed with Wade about the point he made that I mentioned previously, but they didn't. That could have been judged to be legit reporting as well.

I remember when a national media member questioned Wash In the postseason once and our local media was shocked. They weren't used to a media member thinking Wash was wrong.

 

[saddles]

Don't really see it as making excuses... minus a potential deal for Cespedes (or other LFer)
Places in need of improvement:
- LF has been discussed in depth but I think most would agree this is a situation of throwing money at a short term fix when the solution is probably less than a year away... with multiple possible options
- Catcher, Not much was ever out there, Wieters was an option and he took the QO, Lucroy was discussed but many think he has move to 1B in his future due to concussion issues... Only other option I saw was maybe getting a young upside guy for Mitch or someone else... but many would've seen that as a step backward anyway
- SP was discussed and we were never going to pursue any of the big name guys and most of the mid level guys aren't or aren't much of an improvement over internal options... plus Darvish is coming back soon...

My point was more about the media and the different way they cover the two teams and less about the validity of the excuse or reasoning.

 

[True Rangers Fan]

Just saying there is a huge discrepancy in the way they report on the Cowboys and the Rangers. They rarely ever challenge anything done by the front office or the manager and challenge things all the time with the Cowboys. It has nothing to do with the success of the franchises either. They could have agreed with Wade about the point he made that I mentioned previously, but they didn't. That could have been judged to be legit reporting as well.

I remember when a national media member questioned Wash In the postseason once and our local media was shocked. They weren't used to a media member thinking Wash was wrong.

You're not wrong, I just didn't want my contribution lumped in with your point

 

[scotsman1948]

But many veterans surprise folks every year. Some in a negative way and some in a positive way. Neither is a sure thing. It is a game of gambles and the smaller the budget the more you have to gamble on prospects since you can't afford to gamble with money on veterans.

We're running in quicksand. You don't want to spend on veterans because you want to spend it on prospects who are more of a gamble and there's a limit on how much you can spend on them. How much do teams blow on prospects every year and never see anything in return. Is the object of the ML team to save or make money? You make money by putting butts in the seats. Fans aren't going to do that unless the team is competitive which means you better have a good veteran core

 

[donaldson79]

My point was more about the media and the different way they cover the two teams and less about the validity of the excuse or reasoning.

Jerry Jones is an easy target and he wears it so proudly.

I heard just today in the drafts from 2009-2014, which is 6 years, we drafted 33 guys after the 2nd round and not one of em is even a starter for us today.

Don't want to turn our Ranger site into JJ bashing zone, but the Rangers have had much greater overall success than the Cowboys over the past 15+ years, and this probably has something to do with the media coverage.

 

[saddles]

Jerry Jones is an easy target and he wears it so proudly.

I heard just today in the drafts from 2009-2014, which is 6 years, we drafted 33 guys after the 2nd round and not one of em is even a starter for us today.

Don't want to turn our Ranger site into JJ bashing zone, but the Rangers have had much greater overall success than the Cowboys over the past 15+ years, and this probably has something to do with the media coverage.

It was the same way back when Jerry's teams won 3 out of 4 Super Bowls as well though. And it was the same when Wash first got here and the Rangers weren't winning anything. The media simply lobs softballs the Rangers way and have done so for years.

 

[saddles]

We're running in quicksand. You don't want to spend on veterans because you want to spend it on prospects who are more of a gamble and there's a limit on how much you can spend on them. How much do teams blow on prospects every year and never see anything in return. Is the object of the ML team to save or make money? You make money by putting butts in the seats. Fans aren't going to do that unless the team is competitive which means you better have a good veteran core

Personally, I am all for spending on veterans. I also like building a team through your system. They could have taken their pick of those two ways a couple of years ago and I would have been fine with either.

 

[saddles]

Jerry Jones is an easy target and he wears it so proudly.

I heard just today in the drafts from 2009-2014, which is 6 years, we drafted 33 guys after the 2nd round and not one of em is even a starter for us today.

Don't want to turn our Ranger site into JJ bashing zone, but the Rangers have had much greater overall success than the Cowboys over the past 15+ years, and this probably has something to do with the media coverage.

How many of the Rangers top 7 rounds of draft picks are starting for us now?

 

[donaldson79]

How many of the Rangers top 7 rounds of draft picks are starting for us now?

I'm not sure, but the comparison doesn't ring as true in baseball as it does in football and you know it.

You've made your point about how the media piles on the Cowboys, and allows the Rangers latitude. Frankly, I haven't noticed it like you have. Not saying it isn't true, just having made this jump.

 

[True Rangers Fan]

It was the same way back when Jerry's teams won 3 out of 4 Super Bowls as well though.

Nope.

 

[saddles]

We have had some fun comparing the media's treatment of the Cowboys and Rangers today and Jamey Newberg's report today also did a little fun comparison work between the two teams. According to Jamey this is the third time that both teams have drafted in the same spot in the first round in adjacent drafts. The two previous times were way back in 1973 and 1974. Those drafts netted the Rangers David Clyde and Tommy Boggs while the Cowboys came away with one Hall of Famer and another guy who probably should be in the HOF. Those two drafts saw the Cowboys get Too Tall and the Manster. This time the Rangers got Dillon Tate and hopefully the Cowboys will get someone else in the Jones/White stratosphere. Hopefully Tate fulfills the potential he has as well.

 

[saddles]

I'm not sure, but the comparison doesn't ring as true in baseball as it does in football and you know it.

You've made your point about how the media piles on the Cowboys, and allows the Rangers latitude. Frankly, I haven't noticed it like you have. Not saying it isn't true, just having made this jump.

Oh, I know it isn't the same, but surely you agree that at least one of them should be starting here now don't you. I believe the only position player who starts and was drafted by us at all is Moreland and he was not taken until the 17th round.

I actually can't remember right off hand who our last position player was who started for us on a regular basis and who was drafted as high as the top 7 picks. I thought of Ian, but he like Moreland was a 17th rounder. Hopefully all of that is about to change.

 

[donaldson79]

Does anyone know the rationale behind baseball not allowing teams to trade draft picks?

Seems to work really well in most other sports doesn't it?