Contemplating The Texas Rangers' 2010 Payroll: $68 Million Or Bust?
Doug Davis delivers a pitch against the Mets on Monday, August 10th.Freshly armed with the knowledge that the Texas Rangers' payroll is (somewhat surprisingly) expected to remain right around the $68 million mark, Evan Grant of the Dallas Morning News went about running through the numbers on Wednesday morning and determined that Texas would have something in the neighborhood of $13-15 million to spend this winter. For the purposes of discussion, let us presume that this ballpark figure mirrors reality.
Those of you with particularly acute memories might recall that Jim Reeves of the Fort Worth Star-Telegram wrote some six months ago of Tom Hicks' purported desire to slash payroll by $20 million. Assuming that report was correct, what prompted the change in heart? Maybe, just maybe, it was the recognition that selling low on controllable talent to meet an arbitrary budget cutoff wasn't going to be conducive to maximizing the franchise's sale price. Regardless of where the truth lies, here's a brief smattering of thoughts:
● You're not going to convince me that sinking $20 million into Marlon Byrd over a three-year span is a good idea, but with the widespread perception being that Julio Borbon isn't yet ready to assume the starting reins in center field, it would seem that the organization is going to have to find Byrd's equivalent in the form of a viable backup outfielder who can competently man center field. Failing that, Byrd will probably be handsomely compensated to reprise his role. People will complain. And life will go on.
It had been greatly hoped that Brandon Boggs would take a step forward in 2009 and establish himself as a defensively pliable, OBP-oriented major league outfielder, but his narrative has not been a pleasant one. Beset by recurring right (throwing) shoulder pain since mid-February, Boggs limped through a strange .268/.380/.398 campaign at Triple-A Oklahoma City while spending more than two weeks on the minor league disabled list in July with a badly dislocated left shoulder, and at this stage one has to wonder how much of an indelible toll the injuries have already taken on him.
● There has been unsubstantiated talk that the Rangers could pursue free agent left-hander Doug Davis, whom the Rangers infamously waived in April 2003, lost to the Blue Jays and subsequently watched flourish into a slightly above-average innings eater in the Senior Circuit. It's unclear whether there's even one-sided interest in such an unlikely reunion, but the mixture of pros and cons is interesting, to say the least.
On the one hand, Davis is 34 years old, exiting the final year of a lucrative three-year, $22 million contract and trending in a decidedly troubling direction from a peripheral standpoint, with his declining strikeout rates belying the respectable ERA figures. Conversely, Davis touts a frequently employed cutter -- a pitch which we know is valued highly by pitching coach Mike Maddux -- and, depending on external forces, could be forced to accept a deal below his true market value in terms of both salary and longevity.
He's not a sexy name in the vein of, say, Ben Sheets (whose agent we're still not hearing any health progress reports from, by the way), and he's not the sort of pitcher whom I'm inclined to believe is a real upgrade over the in-house talent, the one thing that can be said for him is that he aligns with the organization's search for a "veteran" starting pitcher. Come to think of it, maybe that's the only thing.
● Finally, bear in mind that fully exhausting this hypothetical cash reservoir on the free agent market is a major strategic risk, given that it would likely hinder the club's ability to pursue a roster-upgrading mid-season 2010 deal. While club management fervently insisted that money wasn't going to be an impediment to the Roy Halladay-to-Texas trade discussions, it nevertheless would have taken some enormously creative accounting to have made that deal work financially.
Knowing general manager Jon Daniels' penchant for creative wheeling-and-dealing, it doesn't seem terribly prudent to eliminate any and all wiggle room as far as being able to absorb a contract in the right situation ... unless, of course, the transition in ownership brings an influx of newfound cash to the front office. And then you're dealing with a double-edged sword, because it's probably all but certain that the leash on Daniels' job security is going to be shortened the minute Hicks Sports Group fades into the background.
17 Comments | in Analysis, Rumors, The Season
Reader Comments (17)
I think the attendance boost, the heightened expectations for 010 as a result of this years run, and the anticipated positive impact on next seasons attendance is what's driving the optimism toward at least maintaining the same payroll.
That puts them in a pretty good place regarding flexibility. Outside of Byrd and/or his replacement most of what they need to add is around the edges. Should they target talent that may currently be undervalued elsewhere (think, BJ Upton, Delmon Young, Andrew Miller, add your own names), they have assets to help facilitate deals. Such a deal allows them to be more judicious, maybe more creative, with their financial commitments. It might even allow them to take on an existing contract in lieu of a FA signing (example -Dan Uggla), a guy that I don't think much of as a ballplayer but who could be a force in a DH role.
pitching depth is never, ever, a bad thing... but Doug Davis? At what cost? Maybe THAT pitching depth isn't all that good of an idea after all...
I agree, Joey, that Byrd _should_ be gone, but probably won't be gone. I'll gripe and move on. :)
However, bringing Byrd back really does limit the value of Borbon, since his offense "works" for CF but in LF we need a bit more pop. I really hope JD and Co. remind Wash that he was brought in because of his reputation as a defensive coach and that he and Petis will just have to figure out a way to get Borbon ready to go in CF.
And... the Rangers took Blalock's $6mil option early in the offseason and then spent the rest of the year trying to find $6mil of room in the budget for moves. I hope they learned their lesson from that...
With regard to the CF situation, I am a big proponent of trading for Chris Young. I think the Diamondbacks have a large enough sample size (3 years) to determine he's not an everyday player, but he's a right-hander that kills lefties and has strong defense. Sounds like a perfect platoon partner for Julio Borbon.
He's arb-eligible, should only cost somewhere close to $2m, and perhaps McCarthy in a trade as the D-backs are not in penant contention mode. That should solidify our outfield and transfer our attention to acquiring a hitter. Sounds perfect so it probably won't happen.
Dean: That's an intriguing suggestion about Chris Young. He has been amazingly consistent against lefties. Nice thought.
dirty, I'm with you on the Doug Davis thing. Perhaps we should say that at some point depth ceases to be depth and turns into just another guy who can kinda pitch. Every organization (at least mostly) has enough "pitchers" to fill all of their affiliates' rosters, but Boston for example couldn't get Clay Buchholz out of AAA until Wakefield's arm fell off and Matsuzaka landed on the DL. We certainly do need pitching depth, but it had better be QUALITY pitching depth.
Again, the person who the Rangers need to target is Adam Dunn!! He meets ALL their needs for a hitter - Power/Run producer who walks. Plays a multiple of positions (esp. 1B & DH), can hit from the right side. I saw a 2-4 player deal that includes the following setup:
1) Young Pitcher: Harrison, Hunter, McCarthy
2) Catcher: Teagarden
3) Outfielder: Cruz or Murphy
4) Minor league Pitcher NOT: Font, Main, Kiker, Perez, etc.
I hope that this is Priority #1 for JD & Nolan to pursue. Everything else will fall into place after this.
I have a question that I would like answered with a few stats and not opinions.
Why are so many posters (and apparently Wash) down on playing Cruz in LF. The Rangers want to get Hamilton into RF. Borbon is the heir apparent at CF (Still do not understand Wash'slove of an average 32 OF). Many posters refer to Murphy as the ultimate 4th OF. That leaves Cruz in LF or trade bait.
It seems to me that his range is excellent. His fielding percentage is not bad. His batting was one of the few bright spots in 2009. He was a legitamate All Star. He is young, on the career upside, and under control.
Yet no love from Wash or many posters.
Why?
Here's the deal Jon...despite his fielding percentage(and lets not forget he played DH a lot) he is a fundamentally poor outfielder...The reason that doesn't translate in the stats is because he doesn't get to borderline balls that he should...considering his speed and ability...He takes very poor angles on balls that get over his head and therefore cannot be charged an error...he takes poor angles on balls in the corner and takes too long to get them out of the corner...he has a great arm but that cannot help you when you catch the ball...look first then...decide "hey I might need to throw this to homeplate"...too late run scores...in the end he makes more inaccurate throws than accurate throws allowing potential outs to turn into runs...The main reason he is discussed as a potential trade bait is because outside of Texas people don't really see this...they see what you see...a good offensive player who can run well and who has power...An all star...This makes him a valuable commodity...one that might get something extremely valuable in return...at least as part of a package to get a #1 pitcher...I don't think you trade him unless you get a high return...I don't think his value will ever be higher than it is right now...Use your assets and maximize their value...if the return i not equitable...keep him
Thanks Jack, but I thought Cruz had a good zone rating indicating that although there have been some goofs on angles that they are the exception to the rule?
So Murphy is a better LF then Cruz and more valuable to the team.
Strange. Very strange.
I do think defensively Murphy is better...Offensively you have a different style of hitter...Murph is a line drive guy while Nelson is a HR guy(Cruz 's production is better)...Cruz has the upper hand as far as value and the biggest return for the trade concept...I think it just boils down to what do we have an abundance of? OF talent...which of those guys would give us a need...ie starting pitcher? Nelson has the highest value thats all...no one is giving us a good starting pitcher for Murphy...Start talking about Cruz and then people will listen...I have to be honest I don't even know what a zone rating is or what it measures...I just rememebr watching almost all of the games and thinking on many occassions how poorly Cruz was playing in the field.
UZR (ultimate zone rating): The number of runs above or below average a fielder is in both range runs and error runs combined. Nelson Cruz graded out ahead of every other RF in baseball at 11.8 (Ichiro was second at 10.1). Although it was very few games early in his minor league career, his UZR in left field was only 2.1.
Thanks Dave.
Due to the extremely small sample size is there that much difference between RF & LF assuming transition time? For example, young's move to 3B from SS seemed to to fairly smoothly given some time to mak ethe transition.
And I guess the better question is why not leave Cruz in RF and move Hamilton to LF?
Sorry for all these questions, but it just isn't adding up in my befuddled mind. It sems to me that a few bad visual mistakes are pushing aside the underlying statistical reality. Shades of Moneyball.
Well, I am by no means an expert on all this, but moving Josh to RF is intended to reduce the wear and tear he puts on his body by reducing the necessary range. I would think that at Fenway, the talk would be about putting him in left field. LF is almost as big as CF in Arlington, so there's one reason they're not talking about Josh to left. The numbers also don't like Josh in CF. He's about a -8.0 in center and a +5 in right. Neither player's arm really factors into the situation as both tend to have pretty strong arms. As for moving moving Cruz to LF, I don't believe he'd bring his 11.8 with him, but somewhere around 6-8 sounds about right.
Overall, I still think Cruz would look better in LF than Byrd or Murphy. He may not "look" better, but the numbers seem to think he'll be better.
This is falling about like I thought it would. Wash doesn't like either Borbon or cruz cause they are rooks. He would much rather play a 32 YO vet on the downhill of his career at center and let Cruz sit while Jones or Blalock hits at DH. Weird choice of a manager for a team rebuilding with youth not trades and FAs.
Meanwhile the fans see Cruz's misfires and his strong UZR goes unnoticed. reminds me of those who did not want to bring Andrus up from AA and move Young to SS. Thank God for JD.
Thanks for confirming my earlier thoughts with some stats. Cruz and Borbon will learn LF and CF while Hamilton finds a home in RF. Meanwhile my favorite player, Murphy plays both corners and DH along with Pudger and Davis. (I want to bring Smoak up at 1B).
New thought. Who is the better back up catcher Pudge or Teagarden?
Wash's favors Pudge, but do the stats back his decision. I think he hits better, but the pitchers ERAs seemed to go up under Pudge. Does he call as good a game as Teagarden?
thanks
Dean
Chris Young is owed atleast 25.25 million dollars over the next 4 years. Arizona signed him to a long term contract after flashed some potential in his rookie year. I'll pass on him.
Joey,
What about Mark DeRosa for a utility role? I believe he is a free agent. He is 35 years old and made $5.5 million this season. Surely he will not recieve that type of offer this off season.