Really? Throw in a semi-cautional white flag? What the Wide World of Sports
does that line project? Umm, whatever happened to the "Make the team better"
approach? I find the Ranger Organization has made a C+ only, for the off season.

where did you see this quote? a Lync might be helpfull.

I assume you're alluding to this article from Evan P Grant.

In which case all I can do is shake my head.

I prefer not acknowledging anything Evan Grant says. He's a bleacher report caliber writer in my opinion. We'llcompete all season with Darvish and Harrison manning our rotation. All we need is for Berkman to have a Berkman year and the younger guys to step up.

OT: I do believe that LightningOlt is one of my favorite screenames on this site now.

Whether this forum pertains to Grant's article or if you even like Grant's article,
both the article and this forum are dead on. It's not brain surgery to figure the focus.
Way too many questions. Two pitchers & Berkman aren't going to carry this team.
We don't need half of the kids to succeed, but all of them... and in a big way.
Oh, there's always cross your fingers.

I read that article. Five minutes of my life I'll never get back. The Rangers front office never said that this is a transitional season, and moron Evan Grant contradicts himself in saying the team is transitioning from being a veteran team into a team of younger players and then right after that he acknowledges that there probably isn't room on the active rosters for Olt and Profar to play every day. How can the team be transitioning to younger players when they've signed two old vets (AJ and Berkman) and still don't have regular spots for their two best prospects? I appears once again that it is an Evan Grant world and we're all just living in it.

Oh c'mon Marktown. You're good at broadening the scope of even Evan Grant.
We all know that Olt & Profar are but an inch from being called in as replacements.
That not only makes the team transitional, but a hell of a lot younger. It's not even
out of the box thinking. Is it easier to dis Grant, rather than comment to truths before us?

Its a trasnsitional year in which they "still expect to compete" I think JD said that on XM.

How does "transitional" equate to a white flag?

I try not to deal in what if, I try to deal in what is. Olt and Profar are an inch away from being called in as replacements? So what? Every single starter COULD tear an achilles first day in spring training and this team would get MUCH younger overnight. Who cares? The facts remain that in regards to the lineup we lost Mike Young (36) and Hammy (31) and Napoli (31) and they are being replaced by AJ (36), Berkman (36) and (I believe it will be) Leonys (24). An avg age of 32.6 is being replaced by an avg age of 32. If you think this is a major youth movement in our lineup you'd be wrong.

We need all of the kids to step up and in a big way??? What kids are you talking about? Because the only "kid" in the lineup looks like a 24 yr old (Leonys) that needs reps, the rest is made up of people who have been there and done that. Andrus, Beltre, Moreland, Kinsler, Murphy, Cruz, all veterans that know how to perform, add to them Berkman and AJ and the presence of Dave Magadan bringing a more balanced approach and our lineup will be just fine.

Perhaps the kids you are talking about are in the rotation? Darvish is no kid, neither is Harry, nor Dutch, nor Ogando. If you're saying our possible 5th starter (Martin Perez presumably) needs to step up in a big way then I say you need to ease off the caffiene and not be so dramatic. We are in a great position that only our 5th starter is likely to experience growing pains.

My whole argument is in response to Evan Grant's article where he says that the Rangers are transitioning to a younger team and then contradicts himself by then saying that the youth don't have a place to play. If you want to complain that the Rangers may have a lean year I wouldn't disagree. If you want to complain that the Rangers aren't going all in this year by only handing out some one year contracts and not throwing stupid money at stars then you'd have a point. I'd disagree with you, but you have the right to not like that. If Andrus gets dealt then I'd agree that the pressure is on Profar. If Beltre tears his hammy then I'd agree that Olt gets the job and needs to come through. But until those things happen all of the "kids need to step up" nonsense is just over-reacting mumbo-jumbo by someone who isn't looking at the whole picture.

Our lineup as currently constructed will be fine. Our rotation as currently constructed will be fine. Our bullpen as currently constructed will be fine. We have a front office that actually has a sound plan and won't sacrifice the future so he can cross his fingers for one year. The Metroplex already has a franchise that has been trying to reload for the past 15 years when they need (IMO) to blow the whole thing up and start over. (I'm looking at you, Cowboys.)

Ease up off the crack people, our team will be just fine.

1 "This is a Transitional Season..." .....JD and the Rangers didn't say that. Grant and his headline writer did.
2 As JD better explained it: The Rangers, if they want to be a perennial contender, have to embrace change and youth at various times, because you can't keep the same roster forever. This season will be an example of that.
3 Here's what Grant (not JD) said, in his own words: "The Rangers aren’t interested in simply chasing remaining free agents. They appear to have made peace with 2013 being a transitional year. That is not to say they envision transitioning from a winner to a loser, but rather transitioning from veteran talent to young, untested talent."
4 Grant should have used the wording it would be a "different" roster rather than "transitional" to keep from misleading away from what he was trying to convey; the word "transitional" carries connotations of a temporary lessening of quality that I don't think he intended. As a writer for a living, he should know better.

"They appear to have made peace with 2013 being a transitional year. That is not to say they envision transitioning from a winner to a loser, but rather transitioning from veteran talent to young, untested talent."

Apparently you guys are taking Evan Grant out of context. This is how he defines "transition year."

Yes, I heard JD's transitional remark on a couple of radio sites.
The OF is rather void of ______, as is the middle batting lineup.
Yeah, fill in the blank, because Daniels has chosen not to adjust.
Saved some bucks though. Owners can go to Cabo again and bask.
Spent more on the stadium than players.Good "on the cheap" job JD.

is it a bad thing to have two guys ready to step in like olt and profar. My guess is daniels would prefer to start
those guys with the big club but knows they will sit the bench under washington. so. they will either fire wash if the team starts badly or he will be convinced he has to play the young guys because the vets are not any good. If everything goes well on the big club then you have lots of options to add at mid season and still have the financial and positional resources to make the moves. If things go really bad keep olt and profar and trade a couple of veterans to get something more to add to the mix. not rocket science here daniels is playing this right given how the offseason played out.

Personally, and I love MY, I think the lineup was upgraded when Young got dealt. His lack of production meant they didn't have to sign huge bat left by his departure. His lack of productivity meant it wasn't going to take much to get some value out of the 6 hole from someone else. I know Napoli was a huge fan favorite, but I saw him strikeout to many times with a runner on 3rd and less than two outs. Maybe AJ will hit 20 bombs In Arlington and hit .260-270 idk but I really like the AJ signing. He outs getting old so who knows, but Nap has a hip issue so its hard to say what he would have given u, besides AJ stays healthy. Huge plus.

DMN headlines are regularly misleading, but the headline of this thread is just inaccurate. EG's quote, not Rangers FO.

^^^^ you're not listening to the radio then.
Now we have Nellie PEDing out.
Pretty much forcing the Rangers hand to make a move in the lineup.
A. Beltre might be a new choice of thinking. Weak OF choices in our
supposidly strong farm system. Stanton rumors speed up now.

One day later.
Maybe I should have said Red Flag, though I did say "semi-causional".
If your not making the "team better", as JD noted will be his main focus,
the team is not improving. White flag-red flag, it's a deflated team for 2013.
Now we need two big bats in the middle order? Transitional JD, really?
Thinking of Olt, Moreland and whomever platooning in right, is a red flair.

Wonder if Beltre will be playing 3B for a New contending team this July / August?

Beltre is leaving? I would hope not. Can't see the Rangers' letting him go.

Everyone always seems to forget Gentry...........why? Just my personal opinion but with enough playing time I think this young man and become a very good everyday player. He has speed; good defensively; with everyday playing time I think he can be a .280 to .300 type hitter..............don't rule him out. Of course with all of our young guys they all still have to get past the anti-young guy Ron Washington who will stick with a veteran even if that vet strikes out in every plate appearance. Just my humble opinion.

Waaaaaagghhh