Rangers fans hoping for a Cliff Lee acquisition can breathe a sigh of relief. GM Jon Daniels told Anthony Andro and Jeff Wilson of the Dallas Morning News that the team would be willing to deal within the AL West.
"I'm not opposed to trading in the division, if it's the best thing for our club," Daniels said.
MLB.com reported last week that the Rangers had inquired on Lee. The Mariners don't appear to be shopping him and there's no guarantee that they would trade within the division if they make him available. Lee will become a free agent after the season, so the M's would presumably be open to trading with the Rangers if they don't see themselves contending in 2010.
Rangers manager Ron Washington said he's happy with the team's current rotation, which features Colby Lewis and C.J. Wilson along with Scott Feldman, Tommy Hunter and, in Rich Harden's absence, Dustin Nippert. But that doesn't mean Washington would be opposed to adding an ace.
"If we don't, we can't concern ourselves with something we don't have," Washington said. "But certainly we want a front-line starter."
Lee currently profiles as a Type A free agent, so his team will have the chance to obtain a pair of top picks in next year's draft.
I really think they could get him for Ogando, Chris Davis, and One of their 3 Chatching prospects (Salty, Tegarden, Max Ramirez) And with the two picks they will get at the end of the year I dont think thats a lot to lose.
I don’t see the Mariners doing that deal. They’ll ask for Smoak instead of Davis and a Tommy Hunter or a Tanner Scheppers. No way should the Rangers rent Lee for this season…he should accept an extension or no deal. Overall though, I don’t see the deal getting done. I think the Rangers and especially Nolan Ryan are gung-ho about getting Roy Oswalt from the Astros and probably would cost them less in prospects since they have to eat so much money.
I’m not a fan of Oswalts contract, but it is the better buy. Texas will absolutely run away with the division with Oswalt, and 2011 isn’t looking much better for Seattle/LA, and they get to keep prospects
I’d really like to see TX make this move.
I prefer Oswalt, but would “settle” for Lee. (Almost) anything to get an actual #1 starter for a playoff run. I don’t want to see the Rangers give up too much, especially in young pitching.
Oswalt would not be a legit #1 for the Rangers; that’s why his price would irk me a bit for any AL contender. But Lee, despite being a legit #1, will just cost too much to acquire for most teams. Even for an AL team, Oswalt is the way to go and I hope the Rangers can work out a good price.
I suppose so. I just think Oswalt would be a more legit #1 than Millwood was when he was their #1. His price would be high, but I think (if healthy), he gives you good talent and of course, he would attract increased attendance in Arlington. I also think Oswalt can be better with proper run support and he definitely would get that from the Rangers.
Oh, both of those things are true: he’ll benefit from run support and he’s head & shoulders better than the rest of the rotation. I just meant in terms of the performance one expects for #1 money.
Still worth it though.
Again, the Rangers are not in a financial position to eat Oswalt’s contract.
not until July 9 at least.
Do you really think everyone is forgetting that? Or do you think maybe it’s more likely that everyone acknowledges it but understands that’s likely to change before the deadline, so it’s not worth repeating constantly. It certainly doesn’t preclude discussion.
Stop repeating it. It’s not new insight.
I don’t really think everyone is forgetting that, just the previous posters.
I also agree, it isn’t worth repeating constantly, but it is worth reminding those who speak about eating Oswalt’s contract.
I also agree that it doesn’t preclude discussion, so why are you trying to preclude my viewpoint in the discussion?
As a previous poster, I have never forgotten about the money issue with Oswalt’s contract, but I know the Rangers either will: A)Get an infusion of cash if the sale goes thru soon before the deadline, B)Beg MLB to allow the deal if they maybe give up enough money in another contract to Houston, or C)Get Houston to pay much of Oswalt’s way in exchange for better prospects. I prefer option A, of course.
It’s not possible to preclude a viewpoint you goof – not that you expressed one; you just stated a fact. And what I said was the fact of the Rangers’ financial situation doesn’t preclude discussion of the Rangers acquiring Oswalt, salary and all. I said that in response to an apparent effort on your part to stomp it out by citing its impossibility.
Cutesy, but stomping out an effort to stomp out a discussion just isn’t the same thing as stomping out discussion in the first place bro. In fact, it’s the opposite.
Wow. Let it…go. I won’t even address your assumption(s) and partial win in the war of symantics, too much “vein babbling” (look it up).
There’s no reason for Jack Z to be opposed to trading within the division, as long as the Rangers offer the best package of prospects. I actually think that the Tigers will be in on one of Lee/Oswalt, and the Rangers standing pat and trying to win the division with what they have.
that’s exactly how i feel, as long as it’s benefitting your team, why shouldn’t you do it?
I really think the Rangers would regret trading for Lee. The price is likely to be ridiculous.
I agree with this, and that’s why I said I don’t see them actually making the trade. I would hate to see them mortgage their future for a rental.
if their was a single team in baseball that can handle a hefty loss of prospects and still have an awsome farm system and a competitive major league team, its the rangers. their farm is absolutely LOADED.
Every team “can handle it”. None of them should. Rangers included.