The Rangers have now completely retooled their starting rotation without losing any of their better prospects. They have filled a long-running hole at Centerfield and, in ridding themselves of Soriano, will have surely improved their defense. This must be one of the most improved teams over the off-season.

I liked this deal better the first time when it was called "Chan Ho Park."

The other thing I find entertaining is how this pretty much ends the gleeful crowing about how Scott Boras lost big with his Millwood negotiating tactics.

Scott Boras need never fear, as long as Tom Hicks has access to his checkbook.

"This must be one of the most improved teams over the off-season."

I think the biggest arguement against that is getting rid of Chris Young for Adam Eaton.

The Rangers have now completely retooled their starting rotation without losing any of their better prospects. They have filled a long-running hole at Centerfield

Chris Young would still be the second best SP on this team, and he's locked up for half a decade.

If Wilkerson starts in CF, I don't think their defense will really be improved.

I think their alignment should be: Wilkerson and Mench in the corners, Nix starts in CF, and Dellucci is the DH. Against RHP, of course. Against lefties...they'll struggle. I don't think Wilkerson has the range to play CF well. Nix is a terrible hitter, but Matthews isn't that good either, and if they don't have Nix out there there's going to be a lot of fly balls that aren't caught.

The other thing I find entertaining is how this pretty much ends the gleeful crowing about how Scott Boras lost big with his Millwood negotiating tactics. With the mutual option exercised, Millwood would have made roughly $40 million from the Phillies for the 2004-2007 seasons. Now, for the 2004-2007 seasons, Millwood will have made roughly $42 million. And still have another 2-3 years at $12 million a pop in the big.

Sure, it definitely worked out in the final analysis very nicely for Millwood and Boras. But only because Millwood remained healthy and effective for 2004-05. Millwood assumed a great deal of risk to get that extra $24M over 2 years; it blows out his arm in 2004, then he's only made ~$10M or whatever. Maybe I'm just a pessimist, but I'd rather have the $40M in the bank and then look at anything post-2007 as a nice little bonus, rather than risk $30M to get an extra $24M.

I cannot believe how little credit Millwood gets. He's a very, very good and consistent pitcher. He has consistently put up K/BB ratios in the 2.5/1 range, while keeping HR below 1/9 IP. The guy's only recent, bad ERA was 04, a year in which he maintained his good K/BB and low HR in a great hitter's park and in front of some pretty lousy defenders.

As far as all the drooling over Burnett, Burnett has not been as healthy, and he walks more batters. He surrenders less HR and Ks more, but he has pitched in a much more pitcher friendly park. His best ERA+ was 4 years ago, and it was only 121 for 203 IP. Millwood's bested that 3 times, and one of them was his 143 last year.

A 4/48 deal for Millwood is a superior option to a 5/55 for Burnett

I cannot believe how little credit Millwood gets. He's a very, very good and consistent pitcher.

Millwood's ERA +'s since 1998 -

1998 - 104
1999 - 162
2000 - 100
2001 - 102
2002 - 127
2003 - 103
2004 - 90
2005 - 143

I don't think that ERA+ is a be-all, end-all statistic when it comes to individual pitchers, but it pretty clearly shows that consistency isn't Millwood's strong point.

Now, an ERA+ of 100-105 for 200 innings is nothing to sneeze at, but that's pretty much what you're counting on from Millwood, with the hope that he can put together one of his occasional outstanding seasons.

A league average ERA for big innings is a valuable commodity. The occasional bursts of greatness make him a very valuable commodity. Given the available options this was the best case scenario acquisition for the Rangers this winter.

A league average ERA for big innings is a valuable commodity. The occasional bursts of greatness make him a very valuable commodity.

No question.

But $12M/year valuable? That's a bit harder to swallow.

No question.

But $12M/year valuable? That's a bit harder to swallow.

He's no Paul Konerko...

I don't think that ERA+ is a be-all, end-all statistic when it comes to individual pitchers, but it pretty clearly shows that consistency isn't Millwood's strong point.

It's not all Millwood- his peripherals, K/9, K/BB etc tend to be more consistent than his ERA, his BABIP fluctuates wildly for some reason (and that drives his ERA swings)

Given the available options this was the best case scenario acquisition for the Rangers this winter.

The best case scenario would have been to keep Chris Young. I don't know what Daniels did, but I like the fact that Hicks is finally willing to spend some money again. The best window for the Rangers is the next few years where Teixeira, Mike Young, and Blalock (assuming he lives up to his potential) are still under contract for a reasonable price. Now is the time to collect the pieces to make a run, but Eaton is not one of them.

He's no Paul Konerko...

On Konerko -

(1) He's overpaid, yes;

(2) Position players are, as a whole, more valuable than pitchers;

(3) He's a fan favorite and someone viewed as integral to a championship run, which drove up his cost considerably vis-a-vis the White Sox.

It's not all Millwood- his peripherals, K/9, K/BB etc tend to be more consistent than his ERA, his BABIP fluctuates wildly for some reason (and that drives his ERA swings)

Okay, but his peripherals point to him being a slightly-above-average pitcher (as ZiPS suggests above). Is that what the Rangers think they're getting here? If so, that's fine, but if they think that they're getting an elite pitcher, or even someone that can give them a lot more than what Kenny Rogers gave them over the last four years, they stand a really good chance of being disappointed.

Is this a Chan Ho Park signing? Probably not, but it's not a great signing, either.

"Is that what the Rangers think they're getting here?"

That is certainly how he was portrayed in the Dallas media the day they found out Millwood was visiting. On the ESPN affiliate, the people asked listeners to call in and make a sales pitch to Millwood. Almost everybody, the hosts included, saw Millwood as the "ace" pither the Rangers have always lacked.

Okay, but his peripherals point to him being a slightly-above-average pitcher (as ZiPS suggests above).

Millwood's FIP of 3.77 last year ranked him 5th in the AL, just 4 points behind #4 Sabathia. He put up a FIP of ~3.80 the previous year, and around 3.70 in 03 (not sure where those would rank). Those numbers suggest to me that he's a very good pitcher, at least as likely as Burnett to be worth his salary.

That Chris Young trade was atrocious.