Rangers GM Jon Daniels cast doubt on the idea of the team making any marquee additions in comments yesterday to the media, including MLB.com’s TR Sullivan. Daniels called it “unlikely” that the club would end up with a top starter, though he said he also wouldn’t “close the door” on a market that includes former ace Yu Darvish. More likely, it seems, would be a depth addition of some kind, though Daniels also emphasized that the organization is not close to any new deals. Broadly, the organization remains steadfast in its “realistic” assessment of its abilities and needs. While the anticipated roster mix is likely “to create some challenges,” says Daniels, that doesn’t mean it will vary from its strategy entering the winter. The Rangers, he says, were “not going to go all-in, spending big dollars this year, nor were we going to be looking to trade all of our young players.”
More from the American League:
- The Angels received some promising news on righty J.C. Ramirez, GM Billy Eppler tells Jeff Fletcher of the Orange County Register (via Twitter). Ramirez is continuing to show healing in his right elbow, where he suffered a season-ending partial UCL tear. Stem cell treatment has been promising to this point, giving the team some renewed confidence that it will receive a contribution again from Ramirez, who agreed to a $1.9MM arbitration salary after turning in 147 1/3 innings of 4.15 ERA ball in 2017.
- As the Red Sox prepare for an arbitration show-down with star outfielder Mookie Betts, Michael Silverman of the Boston Herald argues the team never should have put itself in this position. The sides have a $3MM gap at present ($10.5MM vs. $7.5MM) and indications are they’ll resolve it in a hearing, meaning the Sox will be put in the position of presenting Betts in a less-than-positive light before an arb panel. With a prior disagreement over his 2017 pre-arb salary, the financial relationship between the sides isn’t exactly off to the most promising start. For what it’s worth, MLBTR contributor and arbitration guru Matt Swartz argued before numbers were exchanged that Betts is likelier to command a first-time arb payday on the lower side of the existing gulf.
- Speaking of arbitration, the Orioles will evidently not commit to going to trial over their remaining cases, per Roch Kubatko of MASNsports.com. Rather the club is still willing to engage in negotiations with both infielder Jonathan Schoop ($9MM filing versus $7.5MM counter) and righty Kevin Gausman ($6.225MM filing versus $5.3MM counter). Whether that’ll mean avoiding a hearing isn’t yet known, but the seeming strategic shift will at least leave remaining room for talks on a few players of quite a bit of importance to the organization’s future.
If the Red Sox go through arbitration with Betts 3 times, that difference could be over $10m total. That’s a pretty reason to fight for the lower salary.
I would think it would be good for relationship if they overpay a bit for his arbitration years to keep him happy and wanting to sign long term if he becomes a star of the game consistently. I think as Yankees handled Betances wrong last year the Sox are lined up to spoil relationship early with the player. As we see when players sign anywhere for more money, it’s always about the money. If they treat money end better early there may be a chance for a “hometown discount” if that still exists.
Betts is an awesome player no doubt but he’s asking for Bryant arbitration money. Bryant’s pulled in a ROY, MVP, and a World Series trophy… Betts has come close but doesn’t have the hardware. I think something the 8.5-9 range seems fair.
I’m not saying this because I’m a Red Sox fan, but he was totally robbed out of the MVP in 2016. That being said I also voted in favor to Verlander over Porcello but imo that one was too close to really argue. But Betts was the better player in 2016. And even if people do think Trout had the better season, the Sox made the playoffs, the Angels didn’t.
How was he robbed? Trout had the better season, and it wasn’t even very close. His OPS plus was nearly 40 points higher. And the MVP is an individual award, not a team award so playoffs shouldn’t determine it.
So what you’re saying is that Trout was more valuable to himself than his team?? Got it. And why shouldn’t a team making the playoffs have any implications in the MVP race?? So say for example this season, The Braves somehow make the playoffs and Freddie Freeman leads the charge, hitting, oh, I don’t know, let’s say the following: .315-110-40-3-37-126, while Kris Bryant hits let’s say: .305-125-45-5-43-130 while Chicago once again makes the playoffs…Are you seriously saying Freeman doesn’t deserve the MVP for essentially leading his team out of nowhere into the postseason??!! Your logic and thinking is seriously flawed
Trout destroyed every candidate that year period. Nobody was robbed
I’m a Sox fan and I wanted Betts to win the award. In the moment, I talked myself into believing he was the most deserving candidate. But looking at the numbers without the blinders on, Trout was the MVP. If winning more games or helping get your team to the playoffs was truly a deciding factor than Stanton would not have won the NL MVP in 2017- the argument should be made both ways. Like, how much worse would this team have been without the guy…
Last with him and last without him
we are saying it is an individual award.
If everyone else on the Cubs struggles, but the Braves all have career yeats, yeah, it goes to Bryanr.
He would be more valuable.
You can’t give examples in a vacuum or give it solely because a team makes the playoffs.
Amen.
Andre Dawson is an example. without him that uear, Chicago would have been wtetchef.
standings are an artificial gauge.
My team might win 1000, but may have won 95 without me.
The other guy may have won 75, but would be at 59 minus him
And no, I’m not talking WAR. We all know it’s about more than stats
It’s the best player award, not the best team award. Individual accomplishments shouldn’t be so muddled with varying factors like team success otherwise it’s not very individual at all.
It’s almost like pointing to Cy Young winners and their W-L record. Some stuff isn’t completely in their control when there are 24 other players.
Worst MVP award ever going to Dawson. Unbelievable still that he won that year. The cubs finished last. No reason not to pitch to him in that bandbox called wrigley. They finished last with him or without him. Not very valuable at all if he couldn’t even lead them out of last place. Harry Carry always rooted for him to win that award in every broadcast. What a joke that was that year. Undeserving is an understatement.
Every other stat favored Betts and Altuve over Trout by a wide margin. MVP should have gone to one of them for sure. I would not argue against Trout being the best in the league but he didn’t deserve that particular award.
Codeeg- I can’t agree. The best player pushes the team to win. That is why Judge was 2nd in voting. Without him last year, they are not in the playoffs.
Judge was 2nd because he was arguably the best or second best player depending on the stat metrics you follow. Trout was easily on his way to the MVP again before getting injured.
I think people get confused with Player of the Year vs MVP. Nobody would ever claim that Kirk Gibson was the Best Player when he won for the Dodgers. He was, however, a deserving MVP. Mike Trout has been the Player of the Year several times. Personally, I would have only given him the MVP once.
The problem with the Gibson comparison is there were several players who all ranked similar to him in statistical categories. There was no obvious choice for the NL that season.
If a team can finish first, add a mike trout and finish first again. Does mike trout magically become mvp worthy if he’s clearly the best player on the team?
Or does a team need to just barely scrape by to get this stupid accolade definition?
and that has nothing to do with the MVP. It’s not a team based award.
No matter if it’s 3.5 million or 10 million it’s still a bargain for him. Sox just give him the 9-10 million and move forward smh
If teams gives into arbitration demands, then what is the point of the system?
This isn’t some fringe player though. I understand your point of view but come on this is Betts here lol
+1
No it’s not a bargain because every player goes through this progress. Why should we have to pay him the amount a team had to pay a guy who won RoY, MVP, and a WS?
Process*
Because Betts has been more valuable than Bryant over the last three seasons. Those awards are irrelevant to the discussion and Bryant didn’t single handedly win his team the World Series. Bryant 19.7 WAR over the past 3 seasons Betts 22. Betts is a better player and should be paid at least as well.
WS? Cubs still win it without Bryant. Plus you forgot strikeouts, Betts has never struck out 100 times in a season. And you forgot those 2 gold gloves. And a 5 War advantage in less than 300 extra at bats.
Mookie Betts is worth more overall.
Rest of the West better follow suit and throw in the towel like the Rangers.
Let’s just go straight to the postseason
Seattle did nothing. Angels added a guy headed for TJ surgery. Astros added guys thinking they will put up the same numbers next season. Yeah.
The entire Angels pitching staff should just undergo TJ now to get it over with lol
Adults should be emotionally capable of handling a hearing where their salary comes down to one of two very large numbers. Few of them stick around after free agency anyway, so who cares whether they enjoy arbitration?
Orioles have plenty of time to come to salary agreements with their arbitration players since they always wait out the free agent market. The problem is they are now waiting out the slowest free agent market in history (aside from the collusion year), and nobody really knows what’s going to happen by the end of March.
True but that could be said of a lot of teams.
I don’t know all of Betts comparables but based on his numbers and services time, I think the Red Sox offer at $7.5M is more than fair for first year arb eligible. Bett’s is going to lose this arb. Remember the arbiter doesn’t meet somewhere in the middle…….it’s either the teams number or the players number….they don’t meet half-way once the arbitration goes forward.
So Betts can’t “lose”
Every year’s figures matter because of the multiplying factor involved of the previous year’s reward. One of you guys posted this interesting fact not too long ago. That’s why the two parties argue their cases regardless of the figures because the reward will have an impact on the next years arb case.
Spot on. The long-term domino effect of this far outweighs the $3M that said team and player are fighting over. If Betts wins this, how much does Judge get a couple years from now, according to previous numbers AND inflation? Near, if not more than $50M for his arb years. Fine for the Yankees, but let’s just hypothetically say that coveted prospect Lewis Brinson breaks out in a ridiculous way for the small market Brewers, and has a Betts-esque MVP caliber season. His arbitration years would be pushing $50M for Milwaukee. Ouch. This would have an effect on free agency and QO numbers over time as well.
I have been kind of hard on Daniels over the last several years as far as signing some “marquee” type player, but on the other hand, through local media in Dallas, have stressed that he keep building the farm system, and not trade them away for “rentals” or other over-the hill.” players. My concern with those present in their farm system are whether any of these youngsters have the potential to reach the major leagues? They certainly aren’t in the same class as the Astros farm system that are near “major league ready.” Ranger prospects seem to me are at a very long range time table, and whether it would be practical to trade the long range future prospects for players that could help the ballclub now? The Ranger major league roster now still has problems, and won’t be competing for their division any time soon.
Read somewhere, Newberg I think, that the Rangers are in a weird spot as they don’t have anything you can trade away and get much for and don’t have enough projectable talent to trade for much since most of the guys we have are in the lower minors right now. We would have to trade more to get less than if they were a year away type of prospects. Weird spot but the Rangers are better to hold off right now. And on the opposite side, we can’t even really do a tear down because who is there to trade? Hamels and Beltre are about it but you don’t get much for stars that old. The infield is too young and Odor, Gallo and Andrus are the young core you want to build around. In the outfield you have Mazara and Calhoun that you want to build around and ZERO value if you could even find somebody to take Choo. I wish they would sign Yu but am thinking they need him to be closer to the 5/100-120 range to get involved in that.
The Rangers will be very Lucky to finish in 4th Place & this comes from a Die Hard Fan !!!!!
If they were smart, they would pay him a bit extra now. They’ll win this arbitration case, but then lose out when he signs elsewhere when he hits free agency. They should have bought out some of these arbitration years already.
So basically the Rangers don’t want to bring in top players and don’t want to tear down and rebuild. We’ve now replaced what the Mavericks were for the last 3-4 years. Keeping a semi-competitive team to appease an old star just prolongs the inevitable. There’s a reason the Astros are so damn good now. They had the top draft pick for many years and drafted studs. That’s how you rebuild.
So who do you trade? Easy to say tear down and rebuild but you have nothing of value. And I am not picking on you by any means as I wish we would have realized the window was closing 2 years ago when the Lucroy trade was made (although I thought we were getting a stud that would be here long term, boy was his decline swift). More of just an exercise of what can we do. Lets also remember the swing and miss that the Rangers made on Dillon Tate with the #4 pick so there is still some luck in drafting.
So let’s go around field and see what could be done:
C – Chirinos, not gonna get much and you would be looking for the exact same player to take his place
1b – Gallo- he is cheap and the exact type of player you want to build around. perfect at 1st until Beltre is gone and Guzman comes up to take over 1b and gallo goes to 3b
2b – Odor – his value couldn’t be lower. you need him to rebound.
Profar – Again, no value anymore. Everybody is hoping to buy cheap and him figure it out. better to keep as potential Elvis replacement.
SS – Elvis – good but none of the good teams need a SS right now. Who do you trade with?
3b – Beltre – Probably the best option but he is old and gets injured so you are trying to get some team to give a good prospect for him. Be hard to make happen. Also a fan favorite and this is a business so butts in seats is still needed. I could see the Rangers trying midseason to let him go to a contender but that would be more about being good to Beltre over getting good picks.
OF – Choo – He is the only one you want to get rid of as you want to build around Mazara and Calhoun and I am sure the Rangers would unload Choo in a heart beat for a bag of balls if somebody would take that contract.
Relief – these guys don’t garner much in trades during the off season. All of the ones we have are cheap and controllable so you don’t want to get rid of them anyway.
SP – Cole is the only tradeable asset right now and for the amount he makes compared to his production you are not going to get a good return, It is also important to have a guy like this on a staff especially with how the Rangers pitching coach is excelling at destroying careers. All the rest were picked up this off season so you could in theory hope that they all pitch lights out in the first half and you can trade them all mid-season but if that happens you are most likely in the hunt and not wanting to trade them.
I would rather ride this out for the next two years to when the young guys are ready and then this core of Mazara, Gallo, Odor, and hopefully Elvis are vets and are ready to lead these new young guys.
I did like your Mavs comment. I actually had that in my post above but deleted it.