Outside the Texas Rangers - May 17

I know it’s been a few weeks since I took the time to look at Evan Grant’s Inside the Texas Rangers and answer questions that I wasn’t asked.

I know I fell behind my goal for 7 posts in 7 days. Hopefully I’ll be able to get a pair of them in today. It’s not like I’m lacking for ideas – I added 2 more half-posts to my documents yesterday.

If you don’t know, here’s the deal. Someone asks the Dallas Morning News’ Rangers writer Evan Grant a question. Without reading his answer, I provide one myself as I try to maintain my critical thinking skills.

His answers can be read here.

Q: Given the Rangers' disastrous beginning to the 2007 season, will they have the strength to stay the course and continue to try to build a team around pitching and defense or will they waffle like they have many times in the past?

Bob Womble

A: Bob, I don’t think the Rangers have a choice but to dance with the one’s who brung em – even if it means getting their toes mangled, backs thrown out and, um, calves strained.

There’s not really much they could do to try and reinvent the roster. Some bullpen arms, Ian Kinsler, Mark Teixeira and (for the time being) Michael Young are desireable commodities, but you can’t say that much for the rest of the team. Sure you could try to deal Brandon McCarthy, but you won’t get near what you gave up. The rest of the guys aren’t being asked about too much, I don’t guess. The farm is near barren, so you can’t even raid the silos for magic beans.

This team hasn’t hit, pitched or fielded well thus far, so if Jon Daniels wants waffles, he has to buy milk, flour and a waffle iron. I don’t think he has the budget to do that mid-season. The question comes after the year – when Tom Hicks has to determine if being pancaked in the standings is enough reason for him to look for a different chef.

One last thing to mention however, we know that Ron Washington has been with under performing teams at this point in the season. He’ll be a steadying force for the team, and history tells us the players will play better. It might be a reach for Michael Young to get 200 hits, but I don’t think he’s going to be a top of the order albatross all year. It COULD get better.

Q: I know Nelson Cruz hit the game-winning home run on Mother's Day. But am I the only one who thinks that even John Mayberry Jr. could post those same numbers, if not slightly better? A batting average of .193, with only one home run?

Josh and Tom are always raving about his power displays during batting practices, but obviously that hasn't transferred into any game display. Are the Rangers looking at the trade market to see if any other options are available, or is Victor Diaz gonna have to do if Nellie continues to struggle?

Michael Botello, Jacksonville

A: Who would you have them trade? As discussed before, there’s not many pieces to disassemble in a fire sale. Trading Eric Hurley for an outfielder is stupid, trading Ian Kinsler for an outfielder is stupid. The only thing they can do is make stupid trades unless we’re talking bullpen arms or finally telling Mark Teixeira good-bye.

But if you trade Akinori Otsuka you’re left in a position where even if the outfielder you get hits, and the other guys on the team follow suit, you still don’t have any assurances that you’ll win games 7-5 when the bullpen (as witnessed in the series opener versus Tampa Bay) can’t get a lead.

So they’re looking at the market – I’m sure Jon Daniels has called Omar Minaya about Lastings Milledge, but you don’t have much to give up for him and there’s no guarantee he’d be better than Cruz or Diaz at this point.

With Wilkerson on the DL, the Rangers brought up Kevin Mahar who could hit, but more than likely becomes bench fodder who’ll then be optioned down after batting below the Mendoza Line in about 18 at bats. Then they’ll try to clear him from the 40-man roster to pick up a spot starter off the scrap heap.

The only thing you can do, and this is solid advice, is pay more attention to Cowboys mini-camps and OTAs. It’s looking like a long, hot, swealtering, long, long summer in Arlington. Right now, the only thing worth the trip there is seeing construction progress on Beyond Jerrydome.

Q: Based on the season so far, the Rangers will not contend for the division, therefore players like Eric Gagne and Kenny Lofton will be available to trade. What can they get in return in the form of top prospects? What teams would be interested? I would like to hear your input on other possible scenarios.
Jose Orozco

A: In terms of top prospects how do the names Ricardo Rodriguez and Edwin Jackson sound? Lofton is less than worthless in trade now, and Gagne might want to remain off the DL for a month if he’s looking for a ticket north (or west, east or south).

For those guys you’ll be lucky to get much, and in terms of top prospects you might get another team’s Edinson Volquez, who’s had his fastball closer to the plate than his name to any prospect lists recently. That’s really not a complement.

Then again, sometimes top prospects who don’t get playing time and get lost in one organization’s shuffle end up amounting to something, so it never hurts to pick up talent that one team has given up on. The Rangers have done this in the past. Remember when Todd Hollandsworth was getting at bats? OK that didn’t work out for them, really. As hard as it is to believe, one team gave up on Travis Hafner and Adrian Gonzalez. Though, I suspect that doesn’t make you feel better.

Also, at some point, they’ll start talking about moving Mark Teixeira, and he’ll bring in some top prospects in return.

Q: Do you think what we are seeing with the Rangers is the product of a system change? Do you think that the skipper is trying to change mind-set and showing he believes in these young guys? Like Nelson Cruz? Also, I see Mark Teixeira as not being clutch. Am I mistaken?
John K., Cleburne

A: Lets go from bottom to top here, John, and start with the Teixeira question. I believe I agree with you. With the team in the middle of a battle for the division in April he looked horrid.

Last September, with a pennant on the line, he wilted as well. Let’s not pretend he’s been futile in games that count, because, well, he hasn’t been in many games that count.

The idea of “Clutch” is hard to quantify, but Mark Teixiera is usually hitting, or he’s not. In April he was never clutch, because he was never hitting. As he heats up he’ll be clutch because he’ll be getting hits.

I wouldn’t necessaraly say you are or aren’t mistaken, I’m saying it is still a question.

As to your question about change – there are definatly things that have changed. In 2004, there were no expectations on the club. They went out for most of the year playing like Kenny and 24 kids. This year there was talk of playoff runs and resources (money, prospects and draft picks) put into free agents. These things led to increased expectations.

Ron Washington came in and told the players it was their team. Perhaps what we’re seeing is THAT change – from Buck Showalter’s team to the players’ – is one that these guys weren’t ready for.

More than game decisions, that’s the effect of the Washington regime. It’s not young guys who aren’t hitting. It’s young guys, guys in their prime, and the over-the-hill gang that’s stinking. He doesn’t have a ton of veteran options to turn to, he has to win and lose with the guys he’s got.

Q: Anybody besides me starting to see a similarity in Ian Kinsler and Alfonso Soriano/ Steve Sax? In the words of Barney Fife, Ian better "nip it! nip it! nip it!"

Dick Barron, Fort Worth

Steve Sax got baseball’s version of the yips. Couldn’t clear his head to make throws, and then his body followed. Seems that Kinsler’s errors are because his mind isn’t getting his body in the right place. Not to say he’s disinterested and watching bugs in the lights, but he’s not getting himself to the right spot. .

When he starts thinking about what he’s thinking about – then we’ve got a problem. As it is, he’s still gaining experience. While looking for reasons the team has played as it has, it’s easy to look at Ron Washington and question. But no one will question his reputation as an infield instructor. I’d expect Kinsler to start fielding his position better; Washington will get that much out of this team.

Q: A few years back, Tom Hicks was going to create a new regional TV network with the Rangers. Then Fox Sports drove a dump truck of money up to his house, and that idea was forgotten about with the FSN contract. My question is this: What is the status of that TV contract – when does it actually expire, and has there been any talk of Hicks revisiting this idea now that he owns a third sports franchise?

Joe Siegler

A: Tom Hicks played the media game before merging his AM/FM radio group with Clear Channel, so he’s shown he can be successful. Though he’s also won a title with the Stars showing he can be a successful owner, but it hasn’t translated to the diamond.

Contracts like that one are exceedingly hard to break, and it was a long, LONG term deal if I recall correctly.

I’d suspect that the talk from Hicks was done to make sure FSN didn’t try to low-ball him on the new contract. He did the TV Contract version of a parent counting to three, and Fox backed down at 2 and 7/8ths.

Fox knew that prime realestate like baseball teams was the only way to stay viable in the market, and when there was a potential alternative they came back to the negotiating table. So the talk served it’s purpose.

Unless I missed something, Hicks’ third team is a soccer franchise. I think he’s smart enough to see that creating a network out of a futile baseball team, a hockey team and a soccer team would be a little bit like starting a beauty paegent with a midget, an amputee and a girl with no teeth.

Q: I read in a blog recently that Ron Washington is already a washout, the gap between Buck Showalter's heavy hand and Washington's "no hands" is too great for this mediocre team to bridge. I don't think so, but I am interested in your thoughts on the matter.

David W. Motley, Chicago

A: I’m willing to write off the season as a loss. I’ve done it in prior years, and I’m close to that point now.

But there’s no way that I’m willing to sell Washington down the river yet. He’s managed less than half a year, and there’s certainly a learning curve. His has been steep, sure. His top pitcher has gone on the DL, his top slugger stunk, and pretty much everyone fell below expectations. Part of that goes on him, sure, but the majority goes to the players.

It’s up to the manager to push the right buttons on a team, but so far one button has released a hungry bear, and the other a tiger. There’s not been much he could do.

There’s also growing discontent with Rudy Jaramillo and Mark Connor, but if you look across sports the most successful teams are the most consistant teams. Right now, the only thing that will help long term is for the entire organization to make a committment.

Look at Bill Cower – one year his Steelers were in the bottom 10 of the league, then they had the best record, then won a Super Bowl, then they missed the playoffs. Was he any worse of a coach during the bad years than the good years?

Q: Is there truth to a Tom Hicks-Ron Washington meeting after Monday's loss? Is Hicks about to give the dreaded vote of confidence?

Chris

A: This is a question I don’t think I can answer without ripping off Grant or one of the other writers who are with the team every day. So I won’t field it.

I will say that if a hypothetical meeting did happen, Hicks needs to tell Washington he supports him behind closed doors, then ignore any questions about the meeting or his confidence in Washington. There’s nothing good that can come from the “vote of confidence.”

Q: Tom Grieve stated in a recent broadcast of a game that the Rangers have been outscored in the first inning 68-20 this season. How is this affecting the morale of the Rangers and their ability to trust their pitchers? How do you see keeping the team's morale up? What do you see Ron Washington doing about this?

A: C’mon, you can do better than, “Is falling behind early bad?” It’s been a mailbag with not many comments to take issue with, but this one takes the cake.

Let me answer your questions directly though: It means they can’t trust the starters, the team’s morale couldn’t be lower if they started losing control of their bodily functions, and I see Washington asking Jon Daniels to get pitchers who don’t blow goats.

How’s that?

Q: While I am not yet ready to give up on this year, would the Mets be interested in Vicente Padilla and whom for Lastings Milledge to fix our center-field hole long term? What are the realistic chances of Torii Hunter coming here in free agency?

Gary, Richardson

A: The Mets are certainly looking at options for their rotation, but a guy who’s due more than 30 million dollars and has an ERA that’s 100-times the legal limit isn’t much of an option. Due dilligence would also likely tell the Mets that he’s not a fit for New York. Padillia’s likely a Ranger for the long term.

That doesn’t mean that the Rangers can’t pry away Lastings Milledge. He’s likely done in New York. Other teams know this, and Omar Minaya knows they know. Milledge is currently on the DL, and even when healthy probably isn’t going to be traded immediately. The Mets lose nothing by leaving him in AAA, and will be able to wait until someone comes up with an offer that helps them get past the Braves.

At this point, there are no realistic chances of Hunter signing with Texas. He’s not a free agent, and won’t be for more than 5 months. The team doesn’t know how it will be made up in July, much less in November. Chill out.

Q: Hey, where’s my question?

Adam J. Morris, Houston

A: I was asking the same thing!