A Few Words On Rocco Baldelli
Joey Matschulat
Rocco Baldelli smashes the game-winning single in Game 7 of the American League Championship Series on October 19th, 2008.Prolonged exposure to the yearly ritual that is baseball's hot stove season has taught us that, in general, the month of November is reserved for the "feeling-out period" between executives and agents, whereas the months of December and January -- excluding the Christmas-time cessation in activity -- comprise the bulk of baseball's winter transactions. February, then, is the time when teams go bargain-shopping for back-of-the-roster pieces who have been injured, inconsistent, incendiary or some nasty combination of the three.
This loosely defined pattern in off-season activity became even more evident exactly one year ago today when, on February 8th, Texas took a Rudy Jaramillo-spearheaded flier on Andruw Jones; two years earlier, the Rangers famously stirred up the masses by signing Sammy Sosa on the penultimate day of January, which supplied some milestone-fueled thrills down the line but, like the Jones signing, very little in the way of quantifiable value. Thus, in light of recent history, why should we adopt any position other than hard-line skepticism towards this year's apparent February object of intrigue: Rocco Baldelli?
We've already mused at some length about the logical foundation underlying this Baldelli-to-Texas notion, which, at a glance, doesn't appear all that remarkable from an upside standpoint. Conversely, going out and snagging Baldelli via the incentive-laden minor league deal also wouldn't seem to entail much in the way of downside, in the sense that his durability-related limitations and a dearth of major league-quality outfield depth are likely going to prevent any sort of playing time crunch and/or overexposure -- two leading concerns of mine regarding last year's Jones signing that fortunately proved unfounded.
Here are the two thoughts that keep boomeranging around my head, neither of which concern his potential on-the-field value (we'll run through that discussion if/when a signing actually happens): first, Red Sox general manager Theo Epstein has been absolutely smothering Baldelli in praise (describing him as "a great person, an excellent teammate and an asset to any organization), and with certain people "in the know" assuring me that the Rangers are going to miss Marlon Byrd's leadership qualities more so than most realize, you find yourself wondering if Baldelli might be a suitable short-term successor to that Byrd-vacated clubhouse role.
That second thought concerns (what else?) the tenuous state of Baldelli's health, which certainly works against him, but not to the extent that it might with another team relying upon him to fill an expanded role. Put another way, if Baldelli might only be good for 40-50 games divided between first base, center field and designated hitter, then the fit might be optimal for both sides -- particularly when you consider that the Rangers' medical staff currently ranks among baseball's best, a team attribute that would most certainly behoove Baldelli as he attempts to return to prominence.
Reader Comments (17)
could thr Rangers be silently waiting on Lowell to heal? so MY could have relief?
just wondering....
Let's hope that it is not Lowell we are waiting on....too expensive and Greene should be able to spell MY periodically. Joey's thoughts on a Baldelli deal make sense to a certain extent.
Yeah. If we're not going to make a trade for an OF who can hit lefties, then RB makes the most sense since he is at least familiar enough with 1B to back up Davis.
But if we're willing & able to trade Murphy to get an OF who provides the depth/insurance that Murphy gives us against another potential '09 by Josh Hamilton ( vs RHPs) who ALSO fills our actual, existing OF hole vs LHP (preferably someone who can play LF since JoshH should be in center during those games)... then Baldelli is still a 25th man option after such a trade,... but 2 more attractive options in that scenario are internal:
1) Matt Brown (for his 1B/3B experience and his lefty-killing splits);
2) Using the last roster spot to carry a 13th pitcher-- whether it be a sixth man for our rotation, or Snyder as a Lefty-One-Out-GuY, or even Mendoza as a mop-up man, to develop into an All-Star trade-package-chip (given his youth, ground-ball/strikeout rates/promising winter) instead of just dropping him.
I should have added: Given the fact that Baldelli makes sense in both those (pre- & post-trade) scenarios, and that our best alternatives are internal, and don't have to be added to stay on the team, but could be if Baldelli or Vlad or Josh or anyone else goes on the DL...) Baldelli really does make sense.
Now that I just read (from TR) that Ogando & OBeltre don't have to be added to the 40-man until the END of Spring Training, getting Baldelli ASAP makes more sense than ever.
I guess this is ok as long as he isn't guaranteed anything. Maybe he comes in on a deal similar to Greene. It would only make sense if that were the case.
I'm NOT in favor of buying broken down vets when there's a clear opportunity to develope youngsters. With that said, it can't hurt to invite him to spring training and see what happens.
This poor kid... I remember him coming up and looking like a perenial all star... that must be heart breaking!
In a fly on the wall kind of way I wish I could understand why your contacts feel Byrd was so important. Surely someone else can step up into that role among the solid folks in the clubhouse. I think Feldman can be one of those guys, at least for the pitchers. It seems like David Murphy has some of that good guy mediating quality in him too, as far as an outsider can tell, and I could see Elvis maturing into that role pretty quickly, too.
Having said that, I'd be fine with Baldelli for all the reasons you mentioned.
tball - very good question. Maybe Byrd was an inspiration because he was probably the least talented guy in that locker room, yet he gave 110% everytime, all the time.
Those are the type of players that I think you need to build a champion. You obviously can't have a buch of them (because you would have little talent)... but a guy like Byrd will be missed more than the fans will ever know.
I'm sick of the prima donnas... and I feel that outside of a small handful of players (CJ, Vlad... maybe), the Rangers are fortunate to not have any.
I think we should be as careful with name-calling regarding players as we are with each other.
Despite seeming unreal to some extent for their fame & fortune, these guys are still dads, brothers, sons of real familes... neighbors, citizens in real communities, ... i.e. actual people, not video images or action figures.
I'm not saying they don't ever need to be called out, as any of us may need to be, but, Pabloesque,
a) name-calling never seems to help; and
b) are you confusing Vlad's past actions w/ Manny's? From what I can tell, people have had a ball with Vlad, and even home-cookin' by his mom!
Pabloesque - I am certainly not in favor of players that get "too big for their britches" in baseball (or any other sport for that matter). However, I wouldn't include Vlad as one of those players. Vlad the Impaler may be a Ranger killer from the past I belive he's a humble man. When he was introduced as a Ranger, and had to hear JD gush about what a great player he's been, Vlad seemed to almost be embarrassed. When the press conference was wrapping up, he was greeted by Young, Kinsler, and Hamilton (and he had a huge smile on his face). Basically I just don't believe there's any prima donna in Vladdy; I think he'll fit in quite well in the clubhouse.
If you think Byrd was the least talented guy on this team, you've never tried to play multiple outfield positions solidly, hit for a decent average, and throw with a strong, accurate arm, all at the major league level. He did all of those things for the Rangers. Don't disrespect this guy's athletic ability. He's not an all-star, but he is a very good baseball player in addition to a good leader.
If I were Vlad, I don't think I'd want to be compared with Vladimir the Impaler!
He was possibly one of the menaest guys of the 16th century
So we are looking for a right-handed hitting outfielder with occasional power who will be a clubhouse leader? Wow, maybe JD can work a trade with the Cubs to get Marlon Byrd!
Bobby, I think they are looking for someone who can play 1B and 3B primarily. I still think that guy's going to be Smoak this season, but probably not until summer.
Bobby, as much as many of us like Byrd, whether our 25th man be a righty or lefty, it's important that he, unlike Byrd, be able to hit lefties, in order to play LF when JH plays CF for Borbon. If he hits both righties and lefties, then we have the lee way to trade Murph (who also only hits righties), and carry the 1B/3B back-up who hits lefties (in case Davis still struggles in that department)... ie Matt Brown.
I am liking this Matt Brown more and more. And if needed , bring Smoak up midway into the season. We are actually deeper in talent than I have ever seen. This should translate into a strong summer record and the needed boost into the playoffs....GO RANGERS THIS IS THE YEAR.............................
Thing is, right now there's no room on the roster for Brown unless he proves in ST that he's athletic & savvy enough to play outfield. We need to use the only spot left on someone who plays LF pretty regularly vs lefties. Murph backs up everyone in the OF, including DH, vs righties, maybe Hamilton & Vlad more than Cruz or Borbon (for 250ABs?) but we need someone even more regularly in the OF vs Lefties plus backing up Vlad & Davis vs lefties (for between 250-400 ABs). That's why Baldelli makes sense, but that squeezes out Brown if we still carry Murph. ... Which is why a trade for a JWillingham or an Allen Craig makes sense-- it could be almost all the benefit of Murph & Baldell in one guy so we have room for one more on the roster... Matt Brown or a 13th pitcher.
ps in "(250-400ABs) scratch the 400 unless that new someone hits vs lefties AND some righties-- Baldelli maybe, Allen yes, Willingham even more than that.