BBTF's Newsblog Discussion :: Dallas News: Grant: Texas Rangers’ seek catcher-for-pitcher deal

Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Sunday, November 02, 2008

Dallas News: Grant: Texas Rangers’ seek catcher-for-pitcher deal

Want an experienced big league starter whose contract is still affordable and who would be under a club’s control for more than one year? There is Gerald Laird, who can’t become a free agent until after 2010.

Aren’t too worried about defense, but need some power and plate discipline? The Rangers can discuss Max Ramirez.

Want to gamble on a toolsy top prospect who has struggled at the major league level but has the potential to be a franchise catcher? That would be Jarrod Saltalamacchia.

The Rangers could deal all of them and still hold on to Taylor Teagarden, who hit .319 with a 1.205 on-base-plus-slugging percentage in September.

Other scenarios could have the Rangers holding another catcher and discuss Teagarden – if the pitching return is great enough.

“There have been several inquiries about our catchers,” Daniels said. “We’re still in the process of sorting it all out. We still haven’t gotten to the point where we have been made any offers. The [meetings] will give us a chance to talk face-to-face and follow up on some things.”

Thanks to The Art of Quirk.

Repoz Posted: November 02, 2008 at 08:03 AM | 18 comment(s)
Related News: General, Texas

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 1 of 1 pages

1. OCD SS Posted: November 02, 2008 at 09:59 AM (#3001277)

People have been talking about the Red Sox' pitching and the Rangers' catching for almost a half a year now. I'm curious as to what Rangers fans think about a deal.

From the Sox point of view, they seem to be fixated on Salty (which I guess aligns with the Rangers' preference to keep Teagarden); I think there are still some questions about whether or not he'll stick behind the plate so I doubt the Sox would give up Buchholz for him, but I think they'd let Texas choose between Bowden and Masterson as the basis for a deal.

2. philly Posted: November 02, 2008 at 10:11 AM (#3001282)

but I think they'd let Texas choose between Bowden and Masterson as the basis for a deal.

At least as of last July the Rangers didn't seem to think much of Bowden. As you'll recall, BA reported that the Rangers preferred Kason Gabbard to Bowden in the Gagne deal.

Now, Bowden has probably upped his value since then and the report was a little vague so it may be leaving out important pieces of information, but it's a serious potential hangup in the supposedly obvious Tex catching for Sox pitching rumored deals.

Sox fans don't want to give up Buchholz for any of the Rangers catchers. And while Sox fans may think of Bowden and Masterson as very valuable plan B prospects to deal, the Rangers may see those two as a guy they liked less than Gabbard not so long ago and a nice ROOGY setup man.

If so, then it's going to be tough for the Sox and Rangers to find a match even though each team does have excess of what they other team wants.

3. It's Steve... a proven RBI-guy Posted: November 02, 2008 at 10:29 AM (#3001288)

Bowden's a nice prospect, but his stuff profiles as a middle-of-the-rotation starter. I don't think the Sox are going to be able to build a package around him. Masterson is more enticing, but if I'm Jon Daniels, I'm not going to settle... what's the rush? FWIW, I don't see the Sox landing a young catcher this winter, despite all the buzz about a match with the Rangers.

4. Justin T Posted: November 02, 2008 at 10:34 AM (#3001290)

Props to the headline writer for this one.

5. Bob Dernier Cri

Posted: November 02, 2008 at 10:40 AM (#3001292)

I wonder if being so awash in catchers means that the Rangers will get good value for some of them in trades (because they have cornered the market) or paradoxically the reverse: since clubs know they are just inevitably fixing to trade a catcher, then maybe the deal for any one of those catchers will not be so great. Problem is, trading anybody for some unestablished pitcher, maybe even for an established one, is the equivalent of tossing baseballs blindfolded at stacks of milk cans, hoping to win a big stuffed animal. And if there is one thing that Jon Daniels has shown, it is that he has no idea which pitchers are going to amount to anything. Maybe just bad luck so far, but he is like oh-for-forever.

6. snapper Posted: November 02, 2008 at 10:43 AM (#3001294)

I think there are still some questions about whether or not he'll stick behind the plate so I doubt the Sox would give up Buchholz for him

I don't see how Texas gives up Salty for less than Buchholz. Elite catching prospects are certainly at least as scarce as elite pitching prospects, and Buchholz hasn't exactly established himself at the big league level either.

Whatever risk there is of Saltalamacchia not sticking at C is certainly matched by the risk of Buchholz flaming out. I'd say the risk of the pitcher is likely to be greater.

7. Dayton Moore is a Big Fat Idiot (AG#1F) Posted: November 02, 2008 at 10:56 AM (#3001295)

8. OCD SS Posted: November 02, 2008 at 12:13 PM (#3001308)

At least as of last July the Rangers didn't seem to think much of Bowden. As you'll recall, BA reported that the Rangers preferred Kason Gabbard to Bowden in the Gagne deal.

I had forgotten about Gabbard. However we don't know exactly how the offer for Gagne was structured; I don't think the Sox offered Murphy, Beltre, and Bowden or Gabbard with the Rangers choosing Gabbard. I think the offered deals were either Murphy, Gabbard, and Beltre or Murphy and Bowden (maybe + something) with the Rangers prefering Beltre to Bowden.

Elite catching prospects are certainly at least as scarce as elite pitching prospects

If Salty were an elite catching prospect, he wouldn't be available at all. There are too many questions about his ability to stick behind the dish (with the rumor being that the Rangers don't think he'll stick, but the Sox thinking he will). He doesn't have much value as a 1Bman. Based on his stuff, I think Buchholz has a lot less "flame out potential."

9. snapper Posted: November 02, 2008 at 12:16 PM (#3001309)

Based on his stuff, I think Buchholz has a lot less "flame out potential."

Most of the "flame out" potential for a 23 year-old SP is injury. Stuff has nothing to do with it.

10. Zach Posted: November 02, 2008 at 12:17 PM (#3001310)

I can see how mentioning Chris Davis could put a real chill on the conversation.

11. Dr Stankus and the Semicolons Posted: November 02, 2008 at 01:15 PM (#3001324)

Mike Piazza?

12. OCD SS Posted: November 02, 2008 at 05:21 PM (#3001372)

Most of the "flame out" potential for a 23 year-old SP is injury. Stuff has nothing to do with it.

This is a good point, but at the same time it's the boat the Rangers are in by wanting young pitching. I think any team would have a much harder time making a case for going into negotiations saying "we are actively trying to trade for a riskier commodity. And because the commodity we want carries more risk, we expect to get a better return." I think most teams expect the distribution of risk to be based on the players in question.

In this case it is probably up to the Rangers to do their due dilligence on the medical records of their potential trade targets (and in this case both Masterson and Bowden are at least guys with big, pitcher's frames) rather than taking an approach where they should get a much better prospect by assessing risk across an abstract population.

13. The Piehole of David Wells, Red Sox Colostomy Bag Posted: November 02, 2008 at 09:20 PM (#3001430)

I'm not too high on salty either, but what the he'll are the sox going to do if varitek goes elsewhere? Is bard viable tradebait?

14. Jeff K. Posted: November 02, 2008 at 11:10 PM (#3001452)

The Royals need a catcher and the Rangers have been asking a lot about Greinke, but it would probably take Chris Davis to get the Royals interested, and I don't see the Rangers parting with him for Greinke.

I was going to make fun of this post, but I:

1) Had no idea Greinke was still only 24. It seems like he's been in the majors for 8 years. (He has been a regular for 5, since he was 20.)
2) Had no idea he threw 200 IP of 120+ ERA+ last year, after being moved back to the rotation.

15. fra paolo Posted: November 02, 2008 at 11:22 PM (#3001456)

Chris Davis is a slugging 1b/3b infielder who has a bad reputation with the glove. We just had three threads on how adding Mike Jacobs was creating an excess of this sort of player on the Royals, and now people want to add one more?

16. Dayton Moore is a Big Fat Idiot (AG#1F) Posted: November 02, 2008 at 11:25 PM (#3001457)

17. Jeff K. Posted: November 02, 2008 at 11:43 PM (#3001462)

Chris Davis is a slugging 1b/3b infielder who has a bad reputation with the glove.

Whoo, boy. The one game I made it up to from Austin this year, Davis played third. He for goddamned sure doesn't *look* any good with the glove. His arm isn't very good, either. I grew up watching Steve Buechele and Dean Palmer. I know from, um, "interesting" fielding third basemen. Davis is no 3b.

18. Elston Gunn Posted: November 03, 2008 at 12:31 AM (#3001471)

Umm, Chris Davis =/= Mike Jacobs.

The problem with Jacobs is that he's bad, not that he's a first baseman.

Page 1 of 1 pages

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

<< Back to main

Sunday, November 02, 2008

Dallas News: Grant: Texas Rangers’ seek catcher-for-pitcher deal

Reader Comments and Retorts

Support BBTF

My Bookmarks

Hot Topics