The Rise Of Jim Crane, The Fall Of Tom Hicks And Some Perspective
Pretty appropriate picture, don't you think?One immediately got the sense that something strange was brewing when freight-forwarding magnate Jim Crane was permitted to re-submit his ownership bid days after the original December 7th deadline for bid modification had passed, and it now appears that whatever might have been brewing has come to a head, as numerous sources -- including MLB.com's T.R. Sullivan -- are reporting that Crane has emerged as the front-runner in the Texas Rangers ownership sweepstakes.
Not impressed yet? Today is the purported baseball-imposed deadline by which Tom Hicks must offer his ownership recommendation. And, thusly, time is now of the essence.
According to Daniel Kaplan of the SportsBusiness Journal, Crane's bid -- which is apparently north of the $500 million mark; the values of the proposals presented by Dennis Gilbert and Chuck Greenberg are less certain -- would offer two appealing features to Hicks and his close-trailing creditors: (a) Crane would allow Hicks to remain on board as a minority investor in the franchise and (b) Crane's bid is thought to be financially superior to the competition and offer the best terms to the banks.
From the outside looking in, there seem to be numerous variables holding varying amounts of sway in the bid-selecting process; whichever offer best satisfies Hicks' creditors is the inherent favorite (and rightly so), but then there is Hicks' desire to retain some sort of ownership stake, the value of the backing of numerous regional investors, the influence of Nolan Ryan, the lobbying of Jerry Reinsdorf and friends, the owners' disdain for Crane, the manipulation of Bud Selig ... did I miss anything? There's so much talk about the value of the human element in the game of baseball itself, but never has the human element seemed more consequential than it has in this sale process to date.
The other main thought that springs to mind concerns the apparent division of the ownership-concerned fan base into pro-Greenberg or pro-Gilbert factions, a phenomenon which I'll freely admit to having contributed to. See, I'm part of the problem. I readily bought into the "Beware Dennis Gilbert!" hype on the basis of work from non-impartial columnists such as Jon Heyman and Randy Galloway; in actuality, both have their own personal agendas and biases, with Heyman's seeming preference of Gilbert being reflected in his writing and Galloway obviously preferring the Ryan-backed Greenberg.
When you get right down to it, we think we know who these guys are, but in reality we don't really know them at all -- 90-plus percent of what we do know about the Greenberg/Gilbert/Crane trifecta has been disseminated through the mainstream media, and that's fine and all for informational purposes, but it's simply not enough to discern whether one prospective owner is really better for the future health of the franchise than the other. Losing Ryan in the event of Gilbert's triumph is a certainly a compelling reason to root for Greenberg, but what would that really tell us about the business acumen or the baseball knowledge or, heck, the all-around competence of any involved party? Not much.
After filtering out the hearsay and the speculation and the personal biases, here's what we're pretty much left with: Greenberg has allied with Ryan, has the backing of local investors and has been successful in running several minor league franchises; Gilbert has some very progressive ideas (Mexican baseball academy, regional sports network, etc.) and wants to work in baseball operations; Crane has lots of money. Those are really the only relevant and irrefutable facts. That's the fact sheet that we should using. Nobody is going to, of course, and I can't fault anybody for that, but we simply don't have the requisite knowledge to categorically state that "Owner X would be bad for the Rangers."
It wouldn't appear that Tom Hicks deserves that same benefit of the doubt, however, because we know what he has done: leveraged not only the Rangers, but also the Dallas Stars -- whom he couldn't leverage in advance of the February 2007 Liverpool FC purchase because he had already saddled them with $200-plus million in debt well beforehand -- to a point where the debt exceeded 80-plus percent of each of his teams' values.
That stratagem could have theoretically paid off if the economy hadn't tanked, but it did tank and it didn't pay off, and now Hicks has, in effect, financially crippled his baseball team, ticked off MLB and the NHL, incensed his lenders by funding operating losses for the Rangers and Stars out of an interest reserve connected to his defaulted $525 million loan, and backed himself into a corner from which there doesn't appear to be any escape. That's a pattern of financial irresponsibility across multiple professional sports franchises that should prompt his eternal banishment from the local sports scene.
Quick Hits: The Max Ramirez-for-Mike Lowell trade remains on hold indefinitely, with no apparent timetable for completion; NESN's Peter Gammons reported on Monday that Lowell may require thumb surgery, further jeopardizing the deal ... If the three-team megadeal that might send the Mariners' Phillippe Aumont, Tyson Gillies and J.C. Ramirez to the Phillies in exchange for ace left-hander Cliff Lee ultimately goes down, the Rangers need to be very worried, and here's why ... Boston is reportedly close to signing free agent right-hander John Lackey to a five-year, $82.5 million contract.
Before recently non-tendered ex-Royals catcher John Buck was snapped up by the Blue Jays with a one-year, $2 million deal, the Rangers offered Buck a one-year contract with less guaranteed money that was, of course, rejected ... ESPN.com's Buster Olney reports that Nelson Cruz recently incurred an ankle injury while playing in the Dominican Winter League, but an MRI determined it was merely inflammation.
17 Comments | in Analysis, Rumors, The Off-Season
Reader Comments (17)
"we think we know who these guys are, but in reality we don't really know them at all"
JM, the primary reason I typically only post on this site anymore is because of the honesty and integrity you show to your readers. It annoys me to no end to read bloggers who arrogantly post their thoughts and opinions as stated facts. Inevitably their followers end up in multiple hundred post commentaries having taken heated pro/con positions on nothing more than someone's conjecture. Keep your integrity at all costs, you've a great future. Thanks.
Oh, and to respond to the Mariners imminent deal for Lee, I'll quote the greatness of the Nature Boy himself, from Charlotte NC, Ric Flair
who said
"If you wanna BE the best, you got to BEAT the best, woo"
Well I dont know what to say........ I like the "guy with the most money" if he will spend it on BB. And I like Nolan..... period. And I like what AS said about JM..... keep telling it like it is. I really get tired reading the blogs..... knowing they dont know what they are fussing about.... BBTIA you are refreshing and I can trust you....
I sure wish it was time for baseball....
But I hope I never hear the word "hicks" again...
cheers, y'all
oh, Merry Christmas from the old man who goes back to the Rebels and Eagles days.... a Parkland product of '34.... looks like I will spend my life here, except for my Korea experience in the 50's..
Cheers again, play ball....
Here we go again... I feel like a Nortel Networks employee!
I still don't get Crane as the favorite after backing out on the Astros a few years ago (which is another thing we can safely say we KNOW about Crane) unless his bid is so far past Greenberg or Gilbert that it can't be ignored. I believe I read somewhere (Maury Brown maybe?) that Crane might have been allowed to re enter the bidding in a last ditch attempt to drive up the bidding between Greenberg and Gilbert - though I don't recall reading they submitted a new bid.
My thoughts on the purported M's-Jays-Philly trade:
1. I have to give credit to the M's for at least being active this off-season. Even if it's just for one year, the one-two punch of Felix and Lee will make Seattle a lot more dangerous.
2. Last season, I predicted that the AL West would surpass the AL East as baseball's toughest division within two years. I was a year off - next year is going to be murder. Even Oakland will have young arms who are a year older.
3. Aside from possibly Drabek, I see the Blue Jays basically giving Halladay away for an underwhelming group of prospects. I used to like Toronto.
4. Too bad the Rangers couldn't get involved - the Jays could have gotten a lot better prospects from Texas than from Seattle. And a rotation of Lee, Harden, Feldman, Holland and Hunter would have be quite tasty!
Jim Crane has never actually dropped out of the bidding and is the best candidate besides just the finances. Things you need to know about Jim: He was an All American pitcher for the Central Missouri Mules and loves baseball. He is a phenomenal business man who came from less than nothing and built a great freight company all over the globe. He will do the right thing by the fan base and team. He did not walk away from the Astros they tried to change the terms at the last minute one too many times. Support Jim's bid you wont regret it fans. Don't ever count this man out he is saavy. GO JIM and RANGERS!
Seattle seems to be following the path the Rangers took early this decade. They're overconfident in their team and it seems like they are gambling everything on 2010-11. This does worry me short term, because I think they may not yet be done making moves. They can make themselves better pretty quickly if they continue to pursue Sheets. However, I think this is pretty risky for their future. Seattle had what was considered a weak farm system before trading their top two prospects and signing a type "A" free agent in Figgins. There are only a few teams that can compete with weak systems, and Seattle is not one of them.
As for the present, Lee's addition gives Seattle a great tandem at the top of their rotation, but Lee will basically just replace the 35 good starts the M's got from Bedard and Washburn last year. Will replacing Beltre with Figgins be enough to push them over the top? I doubt it.
The Mariners scored a league-worst 3.9 runs per game last year, despite career years from Branyan and Ichiro. I just don't see where big enough improvements are going to come from to justify sacrificing the future. Hopefully, the Rangers will put them away this year, and put the Mariners through a decade like the one we just experienced.
I like that deal for the Mariners, but I don't know if I'd call it a heist. I have compared the package of prospects the M's gave up to Main (Aumont) Moreland (Gillies) and Boscan (Ramirez). Obviously that's far from perfect in terms of actual skill sets, but I think it is fairly accurate in terms of overall value.
As a Mariners fan, I would at least be asking why the team didn't get a little more aggressive with Harden, whose 6.5M plus a 1M opt out next year guarantees him 7.5M, is actually 1.5M less than Lee and without giving up three second tier prospects.
I also don't completely follow/adhere to the valuation of prospects vs first round picks. How can three kids who have all had success at A ball or above be valued around the same as two first round picks a year down the road?
"I still don't get Crane as the favorite after backing out on the Astros a few years ago (which is another thing we can safely say we KNOW about Crane) unless his bid is so far past Greenberg or Gilbert that it can't be ignored. I believe I read somewhere (Maury Brown maybe?) that Crane might have been allowed to re enter the bidding in a last ditch attempt to drive up the bidding between Greenberg and Gilbert - though I don't recall reading they submitted a new bid."
The other theory that seems to be getting propagated is that Hicks might select Crane knowing full well that the owners won't green-light him as a stall tactic to buy him another 30-60 days of time. I don't know whether that notion has any real basis in reality, but it wouldn't surprise me to see Hicks pull out all of the stops to try and wriggle his way into a position where he can maintain majority interest.
Also, Greenberg and Gilbert both re-submitted final proposals on Monday, Dec. 7, which was the original deadline for final bids. Then Crane came along some 3-4 days later with his own bid, and now it appears that Hicks/MLB are permitting Greenberg/Gilbert to modify their own bids before the end of the day. What a mess.
Thanks for the response Joey...
Again, nothing I've read online has painted Crane being in the good graces of Major League Baseball, and certainly not Bud Selig after the Astros situation, whether that be their fault or his own. As for Hicks using it as a stall tactic, I wonder if Selig can demand he send in his top two offers in case he would be angling to try something like that.
And a final question for anyone in the know... is there no way MLB can purchase the Rangers from Hicks and then flip it... or would that be entirely too much of a hassle? In that case, MLB would essentially FORCE Hicks to sell the team so they can then chose the best course of action rather than Hicks dragging this out. The whole situation screams Hicks trying to get every last dime he can out of the team to pay off the debts he's accrued.
Anyone interested in the latest, there's a couple of posts over at bizofbaseball.com
Alleluia!
http://startelegramsports.typepad.com/foul_territory/
OK looks like Greenberg's got his chance to get the team. Let's hope this takes closer to two weeks than the 45 day allotment. While we don't know too much about Chuck Greenberg, we know that Nolan is already on board with him.
I'm glad to see the Greenberg group get this recommendation. I think that Ryan is an asset to the team and I want him to stay on board.
I think the details of the financial position that HSG has been in over the last couple of years should, if people think about it, quiet some of the more vociferous critics. Hicks was not too cheep to spend; he was going broke, had his teams leveraged to the max to pay the bills and was desperately trying to grow his way out of trouble. Yet, at this time the Rangers were still paying over slot for their draft picks if needed, building for the future and putting a plan in place that would produce a winner for a decade rather than buying a championship for a single year. They didn't cut back on scouting and player development. They didn't quit trying to build a winner like they have in KC. I can understand Tom's frustration. If he'd been able to hold it together for another two years at most he might have pulled it off.
Whoever the new owner is, I hope that they have the grace and class to acknowledge the contribution that Hicks has made to the Rangers over the last 3 to 5 years since they put the re-build plan into place. If the Rangers win this year it is because of the vision JD got Tom Hicks to buy into. This is team is on the cusp of being very good for several years and that is Hicks' doing.
So, even though there is a lot of areas where I can be and have been critical of Tom Hicks, especially his first few years as owners, I want to say "Thank Tom. You grew into a good owner. You a better owner in many ways than Jerry Jones who can't win with money or Mark Cuban who is a jackass in many people's eyes. You are leaving the team in better shape than when you bought it. You're welcome to share a coke and hotdog with me at the ballpark anytime (Assuming I ever fly into Arlington from China where I live to see a game) my treat. Otherwise Tom, if you are ever in Hong Kong, let me know I'll buy you lunch"
people should stop listening to the media..... you get bad info and you dont know or understand the truth. as for as the poster rob.... crane didnt back out of the astro's deal... the ownership kept changing the deal.....the owner was nuts... crane got tired of screwing with him. crane would be refreshing for the mlb.... he gives to all levels of baseball including high school and college..... a true lover of the game.....plus a great businessman..... get a clue!!
You can always tell the guys still getting paid by Crane, another source for character references on Crane would be from those not getting paid by him, just saying