What is your opinion of the A.J. Pierzynski signing?
MJH on accountability
I, like all of you, have been deeply intrigued by the possibility (albeit less than 1%) of a trade for Stanton. There isn't a single team that wouldn't love to have this guy on their team, and especially for a ridiculous 500,000 this season. The question seems to be how much do you give up for him?
This question bothered me for a very long time. Is one guy really worth auctioning off the top of your farm system? Well I know of one GM that thought that at one point. When Texas traded Tex to the Braves he had a year and a half left on his contract. The Braves gave up Andrus, Feliz, Saltalmacchia, Harrison, and a throw in for a year and a half of Tex. All of those guys aren't guys that the Rangers just "got lucky" on either. They were all VERY highly regarded prospects. The rest is history as Tex never delivered for the Braves eventually being traded the following year to the Angels, and the Rangers, thanks in large part to that deal, went to back to back World Series.
I've often found myself wondering how the Braves fan base feels about just being absolutely raped in that deal. Is that how we would feel if we auctioned off our highly regarded prosepects for just ONE guy?
My feeling is no. Tex had far less control left on his contract. 4 years of Stanton is worth far more than 1 1/2 years of Tex. Obviously Tex never materialized into the great 1b that many thought he would, but Stanton is already ahead of where Tex was when he was traded. So if that's what Tex was worth with so little left on his contract then it should be easy to say that Stanton is worth far more considering that he is better, younger and has almost 4 times as much time left on his contract.
I think JD is gun shy on trading prospects because of his first experience in doing just that in Arlington. The trade which I won't mention may have scarred JD, and made him very scared to give up prosepects. Now, it seems, he only wants to stockpile them.
I can understand when looking at the Giants and Cardinals models that he just wants to fill the losses of players with FA signings or young in the program players. It's hard to argue against when they have won the last three World Series, but sometimes there just comes a point where you're faced with an opportunity to trade top prospects, and that time is NOW!
Stanton, I think we can all agree, is a superstar talent. He has the size and skills to continue to improve. He is maybe the strongest man in baseball. His ability to hit the abyss that is Miami is proof positive that he's a true hitter, and not just someone that is the product of their park.
Going back to the Tex trade, while the Braves didn't really end up with the on the field results they were hoping for, it didn't kill them in the long run or deplete them as a program. Similarly, if Texas were to trade Profar, Olt, Perez, Martin (sign Bourne and Andrus long term) they still have so much depth on the farm that would be no hindrance to player development whatsoever. The depth is there so you CAN trade players. What's the point of having so many great shortstop prospects or 3b prospects, or pitching prospects if you don't plan on ever trading them. You're just going to end up with guys that are major league caliber stuck in the minors, and eventually lose them to the rule 5 draft or run out of options on them, and then never get anything in return for them.
Sometimes this game, especially if you're in a management position, makes you take a leap of faith and roll the dice on a player. JD's strategy is to play a numbers game and roll the dice on multiple unproven players full of potential. Which I agree with 95% of the time. It is a numbers game, but sometimes those numbers aren't numbers of quantity, but the quality numbers in which one person has put up in the Majors and proven himself a god amongst men. JD should roll his dice, and make the biggest prospect/player trade of his Career since his epic haul for Tex. Please bring us Giancarlo.
Good post. I'd love to see him, at almost any cost.
The Rangers have plenty of opportunities to "roll the dice" this off-season. Every time, they've backed away - or even run the other direction.
In light of that, no reason to think they'd take the even riskier path of gutting their organization for a single player, even Stanton They'll stick to the safer path where there's less risk (and less reward as well).
The Rangers will never find the FA market to be an optimal source of upgrades. There will always be a handful of teams with greater financial resources. Their success will be a smart and crafty use of prospects. They need to identify them, develop them, and use them. Sometimes the prospects fit their needs. But when they don't, they have to trade them to fill those needs. They have to take a chance.
The LA teams and other big market teams can always spend money to fill holes and fix mistakes. The Rangers can't buy their way into opportunities or our of mistakes; they have to use their prospects, one way or the other. I have noIdea what prospects are required to land a Price or a Stanton. But they do not have this type of talent in house so they have to trade to get it.
The nice thing about even thinking about acquiring Stanton: The Rangers are one of a few teams that could actually come up with a package MIA could live with and certainly would have to seriouslyconsider. The factors & choices are almost endless. Money, Talent & High Prospects. JD & Staff are not sleeping. I'm sure the wheels are turning and phone lines open.
Mark Teixeira actually played really well in his time in Atlanta, and I don't agree that he "never materialized into the great 1b that many thought he would". I would consider Mark Teixeira one of the best 3 at his position over the last decade. If that's not great, then it's exceptionally close.
As for the idea the Rangers should bury all their top shelf talents for Stanton, it's debatable. One of the bad things about having such a good farm system is that not every team's 1-10 prospects are the same. The Rangers probably have 6-7 different guys who could be the #1 prospect in a lot of other systems. However, the strength of our front line crop of Minor Leaguers probably takes a little leverage away from JD in trades.
It looks right now that he's sticking to his guns and trying to get the truly objective value out of his players, and I can't say I have a problem with that.
Good Read Colt1317. I agree that we cant just let good players sit on the bench which is what will currently happen with Profar or Olt and MM depending on the infield alignment the next couple of years. Presently and for the future, sometimes the best way to get the most out of your current roster and farm system is to trade them for what your current roster and farm lacks, ie - OF like Stanton or Upton.
I really appreciate the FO making good baseball decisions and not overpaying in years or $$ for free agents, nor making unnecessary trades like KC, but this is probably a case where trading good players like Olt or Profar and more could make the team better both now and in the future, even making them a WS caliber team and with financial flexibility for the next few years.
@eric, I know that Tex played well in Atlanta, but I was saying he didn't end up taking them to the playoffs as they had hoped. Also, completely disagree that he's a top 3 1b. I'd go with Pujols, Fielder, Votto, Cabrera (prior 2012) Morneau (prior injuries), and the point I was making is people thought he'd be an all-time great 1b, and defensively he is, but the offensive consistency never came through for him. He still remains an extremely streaky hitter with above average power, but who never hits for a great average.
I also understand what you are saying about JD not being able to trade our lower tier prospects because everyone wants the top eventhough they are good enough to headline other clubs prospect list, but my point is this: if can resign Andrus long term and sign maybe Bourne, then we can get rid of the front line prosepects, and allow those later guys to move to the top of our prospect rankings because we won't have a need for a few years to have to bring anyone up, so they will have time to develop since most of them are in the lower levels of the minors. The ability to get someone as good as Stanton, but at the same time as cheap as he is for as long as he has left doesn't come along very often. I don't know how hard JD has really thought about it, but I think it definitely merits quite a bit of consideration, especially when you are basically the only team with the ability to pull this trade off. With all of that said, I know this is basically a pipe dream, and I'm happy moving forward with the guys we have coming up, but it's just something that has been nagging at me.
I don't get the type of thinking that some GMs seem to get into. They seem to get focused on the positional rank in the system or just flat out on the position. Towers traded Chris Young for Cliff Pennington, to me a serious down grade of players. Then he managed to turn Bauer into a SS that no one knows if he is going to hit yet. All because he was so focused on needing a controllable SS. Olt was a better prospect at a position that they also needed but he preferred a lesser prospect at the position that he wanted. Maybe it ends up being the right choice in the long run but right now it really just feels stupid to me.
It seems like flexibility is something that all the best GMs have. They don't get locked into only one player or position.
Does Stanton's mounting injury history so early in his career - particularly his knees - scare anybody? It does me. I see the potential for him to turn into a player like Josh that may never put a full healthy season together. To me that is a significant risk factor that makes me question his long term value relative to parting with Profar to acquire him.
Notify me of follow-up comments via email.