Skip to main content

Replies sorted oldest to newest

I find it interesting that they didn't pursue Wilson, who has been established in Texas, but are set to throw much more money at Darvish, who has never thrown a pitch in the Major Leagues. It obviously remains to be seen if this is a good decision or not, but just an interesting observation from an outsider looking in.
Last edited by J H
It is my understanding they scouted him extensively and like what they see.

Sounds like the biggest factor for the Rangers was while unproven he is only 25 and six years younger than Wilson.

If they get a deal done they likely will move another of the five pitchers.

You can argue that the Blake Beavens(?) trade with Seattle was a miss by Rangers, but all and all Jon Daniels has been pretty spot on so far. With that said this is a big one.
It's not that puzzling on Wilson. Wilson didn't earn the money he was asking for and was not well liked in the locker room either. You notice no one in the clubhouse expressed dissapointment at his leaving....it speaks volumes.

On beavans, how would you consider that a miss? They held him as untouchable forever until they had a chance to get Lee. You don't get a Lee for nothing.

Say what you will about the Rangers, but their front office has proven they know talent and can manage it. The Rangers are soon to be in a better position this year than they were in either of the past two. Daniels and Ryan know what they are doing.
Last edited by Tx-Husker
Darvish has a MUCH higher ceiling than Wilson. Wilson also failed time after time on baseball's biggest stage. That is part of the reason NY and Boston did not pursue him too much. Wilson has already had arm problems in the past. All of these things add up. Wilson is NOT a No.1 pitcher, more of a number two and with any decline at all, a three or four. The Angels vastly overpaid for him.
Because CJ Wilson cant win a ballgame when it counts....thats why the rangers didn't want him. Isn't that why they pay him? Because he chokes when it matters the most. Two years in a row hes choked in the WS. He is the first guy in MLB history to not win a game in the ALDS,ALCS,and WS. Think about that for a minute. They know what they are getting out of CJ, and they think they can get much more obviously out of yu.
One other huge factor--Darvish is 25 while Wilson is 31. You all know this is huge in baseball terms. Wilson may actually be starting his decline phase. Also for the last 3 to 4 years Texas has done everything right while the Angels have made one Knuckleheaded trade or signing after another. Kind of coincides with the term of Daniels and Ryan working in tandem. Even the way the Angels are using Trout is not too smart and he was one of the top two prospects in all the minor leagues.
I don't disagree with any of the above. However, Darvish will cost the Rangers more than $100 million when it's all said and done. I understand the aspect of talent pertaining to what they've seen with him, but that's a whole lot of money for a player that has never played at this level. Wilson, despite everything listed above being true, has still had success in the Major Leagues, and is cheaper than Darvish.

I could be wrong, and Darvish could come in and win Cy Young Awards. But skepticism is present to me when there's so much money involved.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Tx-Husker:
On beavans, how would you consider that a miss? They held him as untouchable forever until they had a chance to get Lee. You don't get a Lee for nothing.

QUOTE]

Personally I don't think it was. Just think it is the only move that others might argue was a miss.

I wholeheartedly agree that the Rangers are in great shape with Daniels and Ryan at the helm.
As am I. He's implemented several aspects of training that have proven to be successful as well. Certainly a huge bright spot for an organization that was left as a disaster by the Hicks/Hart regime. Take my opinions for what they are, a Devil's Advocate sort of approach that probably doesn't hold water because of their experience and scouting resources, and my lack of all of the above.
As a Nationals fan, I was glad the team passed on Wilson. Too old to help the team after the younger pitchers get going in a couple of years. He also has a lot of walks. I think the Angels realy overpaid.

I will be curious ot see how the impact of signing Darvish has on the rest of the league. With the Nationals having Strasburg & Zimmerman having to be resigned in the future, I see the price tag going a little higher today.

Also, I would trust Nolan Ryan's assessment of pitchers over all other owners in the game.
With the Red Sox signing of Dice-K what they didn't get in on the mound productivity was more than offset by the interest and revenue generated in the Japanese market. DOn't forget this are businesses trying to make money.

That aside, how many Cuban or Japanese phenoms have signed for millions and actually provided return on investment on the field commensurate with the money spent?
Forming a major league roster certainly involves risk in the way revenue is allocated for talent. Taking Darvish IS a risk but a highly calculated and intelligent risk in my book. There are not that many number one level pitchers out there and when they are avaiable, they cost mega-money as did Sabathia and Lee. Even if the chance to acquire one while he is at the top of his game occurs, it would require gutting a franchise's minor league system if they even have the level of talent to interest the team trading the ace. This is what makes acquiring King Felix so prohibitive. Darvish has not been worked especially hard in innings pitched although Japanese training methods are quite different so he will have to make an adjustment.
quote:
Originally posted by Out in LF:
You think the buzz is getting big now, wait to see how much it generates if he actually signs in the next 30 days. If he does, the hype and speculation will go through the roof in anticipation leading up to opening day.
Yep, just like Dice-K. Look how that worked out long term.
To all the people that were complaining about High School Draftees getting paid too much money out of high school....the real question is this, would you pay 100 million for a unknown free agent in a forein market, or would you pay an 18 year old throwing 98mph $8 million. If you had a businees model, which one would you pick.

Everyone was always up in arms about the high school kids getting 8 million in the first few picks of the draft, but in reality it is a freaking steal for the major league ball clubs and owners.

Now they are having to fork a ton of money over to someone just as much an unknown.
Last edited by Ricky Vaughn
Darvish has pitched against MLB hitters. Unlike some of the other Japanese pitchers who have come over here, Darvish is very big... 6-5/230 or something like that. He doesn't lack experience and he is far from being an unknown.

No high school pitcher has ever received $8 million to sign. I'm not sure what Darvish is worth, but if there were enough 8 million dollar high school kids (which there isn't) I would take 12 of those over one Darvish or any other free agent. 8 million is first pick of the draft type money.

Using that theory, I could have one Darvish or instead, for a lot less money, I could have Josh Hamilton, Adrian Gonzalez, Joe Mauer, Delmon Young, Justin Upton, Luke Hochever, David Price, Tim Beckham, Stephen Strasburg, Bryce Harper, Gerritt Cole. Or for that matter name any 12 MLB players you want, because all of them signed for less than 8 Million signing bonus.

What would you do? Then again, one single team never gets a chance at all those draft picks.
quote:
Originally posted by PGStaff:
Darvish has pitched against MLB hitters. Unlike some of the other Japanese pitchers who have come over here, Darvish is very big... 6-5/230 or something like that. He doesn't lack experience and he is far from being an unknown.

No high school pitcher has ever received $8 million to sign. I'm not sure what Darvish is worth, but if there were enough 8 million dollar high school kids (which there isn't) I would take 12 of those over one Darvish or any other free agent. 8 million is first pick of the draft type money.

Using that theory, I could have one Darvish or instead, for a lot less money, I could have Josh Hamilton, Adrian Gonzalez, Joe Mauer, Delmon Young, Justin Upton, Luke Hochever, David Price, Tim Beckham, Stephen Strasburg, Bryce Harper, Gerritt Cole. Or for that matter name any 12 MLB players you want, because all of them signed for less than 8 Million signing bonus.

What would you do? Then again, one single team never gets a chance at all those draft picks.


Thanks for proving my point!
Last edited by Ricky Vaughn
This Yu Darvish thing is very interesting.

Three points. First, there are many experts that agree this guy is a talented individual. He has the frame, velocity, command and capabilities to get Big Leaguers out. So I think most of us agree the guy will fit nicely in any MLB rotation. He'll have adjustments to make with the MLB baseball, mound, 5-day rotation, and MLB off-day work out routines. One of his former teammates was interviewed on MLB-TV yesterday, and he said Darvish is a leader and a stud on the mound. Many MLB scouts and GMs were drooling over this guy.

Second point is he worth a $51.7 million posting to negotiate. I don't see the value when that money could be used to get an established talent, or draftable talent. The Rangers have just put themselves in the never ending spending game for the foreseeable future along with the rest of the big market teams. A $51.7 salary is a three year deal for a pretty darn good pitcher in this market, and the Rangers decide to not use that money to go toward someone's salary in this economy. The Rangers must have struck oil in TX, because that is not chump change. Even though Darvish is talented this is a huge financial risk in my mind. I was never excited about the Dice-K posting VALUE either.

Third point, and many of you brought it up already with regards to CJ Wilson. They could have used that $51.7 as part payment to secure CJ Wilson for a few more years. It intrigues me why they did not pursue that option. That really has bothered me.
Last edited by fenwaysouth
Many interesting theories here. Especially the idea of the Rangers seeking to create a BRAND. Does this mean that they will place less value on winning and more on ticket sales and merchandising? Kinda sounds like the Cubs. Who cares if they actually win...they still fill Wrigley most days.

I'm just not sold on Asian players. How many of them were worth the money? Chan Ho Park maybe? Ichiro, for sure. But Matsusaka? Hell no. Byun Yung Kim? Sure if you're opposing batters in the 9th inning!

And I'm all for capitalism but $51M just to talk to him? As a father of (cross my fingers) a future draft pick or two, I wish more money and effort were spent on American players.
quote:
The only way to know for sure is measure Darvish's results 5 years from now and compare them to Wilsons. I think Darvish will win hands down.



Let's say hypothetically that Darvish makes $10 million per year for the 5 years you mentioned. That's a $50 million contract on top of a $51.7 million posting fee...$101.7 million in total, or $20.34 million per year that Darvish will cost the team. Wilson's contract with the Angels is $15.4 million per year. I think Wilson was vastly overpaid, but Darvish is a dangerous investment at $5 million more per year than Wilson.

Wilson's bWAR value in 2011 was 4.9. His 4.9 in 2011 tied him for 8th in the American League with Jon Lester and Gio Gonzalez, and was behind...in order...Justin Verlander, CC Sabathia, Jered Weaver, Josh Beckett, James Shields, Ricky Romero and Doug Fister.

Darvish's worth is nearly 33% more than CJ Wilson's. Will he be 33% better? 33% better bWAR would put him only behind Verlander, Sabathia and Weaver for 2011...a tall task for a rookie in the league.

Of course the financial appeal is another thing, and RJM is probably correct about that. Darvish's rockstar status in Japan will bring in huge Japanese markets for the Rangers and boost their profits. I don't have access to enough information to make estimates about how much they'll earn through this influx, but I'm sure it'll be a pretty penny.

I'm still inclined to agree with PGStaff...I'd rather sign 50 18 year olds with a 95 mph fastball and play my odds with them than put $100 million into one 25 year old without MLB experience outside the WBC.
Last edited by J H
The only brand they are working on is as one of the top teams in MLB....wins. Ryan isn't the kind of guy that spends money like this just for anything other than wins.

Comparisons to Wilson's regular season stats are not relevant to a team that now measures themselves by post season performance. Not sure Wilson could even make the roster based on his post season stats.
CJ wore out his welcome, under performed and pouted in response to criticism of his 2011 post season starts. Maybe its a huge risk, signing YD, but there is no doubt resigning Wilson was going to have a continued negative impact in the clubhouse.

An interesting web-article came out today, polling 10 MLB scouts/executives with international experience and 1st hand exposure to Darvish. These dudes were asked to scale Darvish, comparing him against a list of 5 right-handers, varying from good to great. The question was this: "Based on talent alone, would you take Darvish ahead of this pitcher?". The 5 guys in question were Ricky Nolasco, Ian Kennedy, Matt Garza, Zack Greinke and Justin Verlander.

The vote, a unanimous 10-0.

So, I guess we'll see. GED10DaD
Exactly, gunem. No one knows Wilson better than the Rangers. And the Rangers know Darvish as well as anyone...they have had him followed in Japan full time for the last two years. The Rangers clearly think $77m on the 31 year old declining Wilson is more risky than ~$125m total on the 25 year old Darvish on the way up. As you said, gunem, MLB scouts are clear there is no question on the talent....comparing to an unknown and untested 18 year old is not a valid comparison.
If a team could sign fifty 18 year olds with 95 mile an hour fast balls--an impossibility-the team would be lucky if one of them became a number one pitcher. As all of them had been tested only against high school and travel ball hitters on a consistant basis, the team would have no idea which one or if any of them really would develop after three to five years in the minors. Darvish is 25 years old entering his prime and has faced the best international hitters in the world. Look at his stats in the Japanese Leagues--absolutely dominating. I am really surprised that so many people are so leary of a Japanese pitcher. There have been quite a number of older, smaller ones that were quite servicable but none have been as young or accomplished as this fellow, nor as big. Darvish has an excellent chance of being the first real diamond of a pitcher somewhat like Ichiro was the first great regular player from Japan.
I'm sure those 10 MLB scouts/executives know more about Darvish than I do. That said, I would without a doubt take Verlander and I think the Rangers would too if they had the chance. Only Verlander would be even more expensive.

All 10 would take Darvish over Verlander? Guess that means they think Darvish will be the best pitcher in baseball. Sure will be interesting to see how this plays out, either way.
Three Bagger,

You might be right, but IMO they would be extremely unlucky if they were wrong on all 50. Some of these types have won Cy Young awards in the past couple years. Seeing that this is an impossible example guess there is no reason for debate.

Regarding Darvish, I don't think anyone questions his ability or potential. But we all know there are other factors involved. Will Darvish be uncomfortable or will he fit right in. Will he dominate right away and what if he doesn't? Will he adjust to all the changes, not just pitching, but in his life?

No matter what happens, it's going to be real interesting. Whether Ryan cares or not (I'm pretty sure he does) this will make the Rangers even more popular and there is true value in that. It will create more interest in baseball and that's a good thing.

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×