KT 90 said:

---

pitching in a rahab game

---

Our SS Farm:
Ornelas (24-AAA): 88G, .251, .322 OBP, 3HR, 9 SB (61-SS) <- 3rd Rd 2018 out of HS
Acosta (21-AA): 99G, .277, .343 OBP, 7HR, 25 SB (64-SS) <- Signed 2019 Venezuela for $1.6M
Walcott (18-A+): 112G, .258, .343 OBP, 10 HR, 24 SB (76-SS) <- #1 prospect
Vargas (19-A): 94G, .278, .321 OBP, 14HR, 28 SB (83-SS) <- #17 prospect

Other
Cauley (21-A+/Rk): 93G, .237, .301 OBP 15HR, 26 SB (47-SS) <- 3rd Rd 2021; #12 prospect

All of the 4 have been at their level for the entire season. I've included the number of G played at SS.

I know Duran and Smith can be options.

Astros lose again. Door still cracked open. Not that we were seriously considering him, but Lowder was picked #7 behind Langford and has been great in his first 2 starts for Cincy.

Rangers up 3-1 in the 6th. Bradford with a good outing, not sure if he comes out for the 7th, was at 90ish pitchers.

Garcia with a 3 run HR early to provide the run scoring.

And laclerq gonna blow this.

sburg2007 said:

---

And laclerq gonna blow this.

---

He escaped! Had them right where he wanted them... he was just setting up the double play

I stand corrected!

alvtimes said:

---

Looking into the 2025 conversations…. is resigning Yates job#1???? I dont see another option in Rangers system and he probably needs a little pay bump if you can get him on another 1yr deal. 1 for 6mm or maybe even 2 for 11?

---

He'd be nice to have, but he's had a great season. He will be wanting to cash in on a multi-year deal... which can be dangerous for relievers. Just depends on what the market is and what he is looking for.

I'd definitely like to keep at least one of Robertson or Yates. Both would be nice, but we will see. We might go value shopping again (like we did when we got Roberston and Yates last off-season).

KT 90 said:

---

alvtimes said:

---

Looking into the 2025 conversations…. is resigning Yates job#1???? I dont see another option in Rangers system and he probably needs a little pay bump if you can get him on another 1yr deal. 1 for 6mm or maybe even 2 for 11?

---

He'd be nice to have, but he's had a great season. He will be wanting to cash in on a multi-year deal... which can be dangerous for relievers. Just depends on what the market is and what he is looking for.

I'd definitely like to keep at least one of Robertson or Yates. Both would be nice, but we will see. We might go value shopping again (like we did when we got Roberston and Yates last off-season).

---

Robertson has mutual option for 7 million nxt yr….based on his yr for the Rangers and him playing at 40yr…I'll be surprised if he isnt in a Rangers uniform nxt yr also.

Yates (37) finishes likely in the Top3 for Relievers in 2024. I can't imagine he doesn't capitalize. He has "only" made $30M. It'd be great if he took a friendly deal, but I'm not sure he has that much commitment to the Rangers.


Here is where we are... with Eovaldi vesting, we're at about $166M towards CBT:

That includes these players:
deGrom $37M
Seager: $32.5
Semien: $25
Eovaldi: $20M
Gray: $14
Mahle: $11
Garcia: $ 7
Total: $146.5+ other commits that don't include Serfs or Arbs.

Arbs: Lowe (Arb3-$7.5M in '24), Dunning (Arb2-$3.3 in '24), Heim (Arb2-$3M in '24), Taveras (Arb2-$2.5M in '24) = $15.8M

Robertson has a $7M mOpt option, as well. I agree he'll likely be a Ranger. I think both like that Option based on '24.

I think the last time I ran the numbers with Arbs+Serfs... we're likely sitting $20-25M from CBT threshold ($241M).

That was why Grant (DMN) ran articles about re-allocating funds like Gray, Lowe, and Adolis.

WestTexasAg said:

---

alvtimes said:

---

Looking into the 2025 conversations…. is resigning Yates job#1???? I dont see another option in Rangers system and he probably needs a little pay bump if you can get him on another 1yr deal. 1 for 6mm or maybe even 2 for 11?

---

Eovaldi in the conversation.

---

I totally agree on Eovaldi….. but as a fan…. I just cant do another season with Leclerc in high leverage positions(yes yes I remember the 23 playoff run) but please make an above decent try at Yates…. I admit I cant comprehend the money these guys make…. but I would love to think that 2 yrs 11 mil would get the deal done after 4 mil this yr

94chem said:

---

fc2112 said:

---

I was at the game last night.

How it feels watching LeClerc pitch

---

I'll keep pounding the drum for Gray to become a high leverage, multi-inning bullpen arm.

---

This has been discussed by several of the beat writers, Jeff Wilson and Evan have both brought it up I believe. The problem is that his salary is too high for that role - there has apparently been discussion about making him a closer, which I personally think he would be much more suited for, in addition to having his salary make sense.

Isn't Leclerc a free agent after this season? If I'm right, that's about $6MM coming off the books, right?

And as for Gray, he's on the books for 2025 anyway. I don't know why you don't maximize his chances of helping the team without taking into account what you have to pay him anyway. If his best fit is a multi inning reliever instead of closer, then do that. I just don't understand fitting a square peg in a round hole because of a salary you are paying even if he sits on the IL all year.

Yep. I've never understood why they don't consider this stuff a sunk cost. Drives me more insane when they act like a guy has to be in the lineup because of his salary. If he's not performing, no he doesn't. You've got to pay him, but you don't have to let him continue to suck on top of it.

In this highly analytical front office world, I highly a decision on whether to move a guy into the bullpen revolves around how much he is being paid.

It likely boils down to:

A) If the team thinks he offers more value as a starter (including improving as a starter)
B) If the team thinks he offers more value in a future trade market as a starter
C) If the player has made it clear he has no interest in being a bullpen arm

If we sweep the angels, the playoff picture could look decent again. Possibly. We would probably need to sweep a few teams in a row to get close tho.

Yes.

$6.25M

Coming off:
Scherzer:$12.5M
Heaney: $13M ($12.5 CBT)
Leclerc: $6.25M
Yates: $4.5M
Urena: $1.75M
Janko: $1.7M
Chafin, Kelly

*Eovaldi

KC hosts Minn for 3 games this weekend.

One of those teams will get at least 2 Ls. IF the Rangers sweep, we're picking up at least 2 G towards the WC if KC loses 2 or 1.5 G if Minn loses 2.

At 8GB KC, we could be as close at 5GB if they get swept.

I'd prefer to pass Houston (7.5GB) and just eliminate them from the playoffs.

You left out a couple of very important factors in your analysis.

First, as much as we'd like to think teams are a bottomless pit of money, they aren't. They have budgets and there are ramifications for going above them (competitive balance tax for example). You assess and allocate your available money based on positional value - why Seager gets the money he gets. Overpaying for a role, even if the money is already on the books, potentially/probably diminishes the money available to address other needs.

Secondly, and don't think for a second this isn't a consideration, other player's agents will use overpaying for a role as leverage to get their own clients more money.

Player agreement to a r change and their acceptance/happiness about plays a huge part,but don't write off Gray's contra as a non-issue just because it's already on the books.

Yep. Zero chance Yates resigns with the Rangers and makes less than Robertson.

rbtexan said:

---

You left out a couple of very important factors in your analysis.

First, as much as we'd like to think teams are a bottomless pit of money, they aren't. They have budgets and there are ramifications for going above them (competitive balance tax for example). You assess and allocate your available money based on positional value - why Seager gets the money he gets. Overpaying for a role, even if the money is already on the books, potentially/probably diminishes the money available to address other needs.

Secondly, and don't think for a second this isn't a consideration, other player's agents will use overpaying for a role as leverage to get their own clients more money.

Player agreement to a r change and their acceptance/happiness about plays a huge part,but don't write off Gray's contra as a non-issue just because it's already on the books.

---

None of this supports any kind of stance that a team will not make a move that might net them more wins simply because of the already sunk contract.

Don't confuse a teams calculation of probability that a player returns to a previous form as them not making the move due to the sunk cost. If Gray is making $50m/year and there is zero chance he will be a value at SP in the future but poses value as a RP, he'll be a RP.

"We're paying him starter money so he's a starter" is bad front office management circa 1990. That's some talking heads filling airtime. The Rangers aren't employing this. If they really felt that Gray would be more productive in the bullpen than he will be as a starter going forward, then the reluctance to do so is due to Gray's/Gray's agents wishes involving his wants/future-value, or the Rangers wishes involving his future-value.

Hard to believe the Braves are fighting for their WC lives, the Padres achieving addition by subtraction.

A lot of flawed teams out there. Rangers just ran out of real estate.

Yup never understood that concept. You have to pay him no matter what. Last year I suggested to consider maybe moving DeGrom to the BP since he can't stay healthy and I rather him pitch 60 innings in the BP rather than 0 innings since he's hurt. The only counter argument I got is that you don't pay a BP guy that much money. I didn't mean to make this a DeGrom post but the same point stands. If you gotta pay a guy no matter what wouldn't it be best to put him in a position that helps us win ball games?

With DeGrom (and possibly Gray), it's always going to boil down to the wishes of the player.

A guy like DeGrom likely isn't going to agree to any move to the bullpen because it significantly lessens his value as a future free agent (and with some guys it's simply a pride thing).

There's only so much you can force any player to do, and even with that you run the risk of being a less desirable destination come free agent season... You don't want DeGrom telling everyone willing to listen that the Rangers don't know how to handle starting pitchers. (lets be honest, the world already knows that!)

I think as fans we just assume that the front office will do anything to put the team in the best position to win. And we assume players want to win and be the best contributor they can to the team. It seems like a simple and logical concept but there's obviously 1000 different things going on behind the scenes that us normal fans don't see or consider.