| Author | Post |
|---|
LEB
Member
back to top
|
941st Post Thu Oct 9th, 2008 11:18 pm | |
|
Mark wrote: We've already been through all of that. Danks pitched against the Twins because it was his turn in rotation. If he had done his job the previous Friday against the Indians, then the one game playoff would not have been necessary.
Danks did okay this season, but 11 wins in 32 starts ain't all that great.
And how many Rangers pitchers won more than Danks 12 games this year? One. Padilla won 14 but had a 4.74 era. Sure, Harrison won 9 games in 15 starts and looked pretty darn good at times. I think he's a keeper. But he also had a 5.49 ERA.
650 pitchers took the mound this year in the major leagues and only 43 had more wins than Danks. Of those 43, only 13 had better ERA's. I'm not trying to say he's as good as Sabathia or Santana right now. He's not. But he's no slouch.
Frankly, I'd rather have Danks than Padilla, Harrison or naturally McCarthy. It's probable Danks ERA wouldn't have been as low pitching at The Ballpark. In his one game here, he gave up four runs over 7.2 innings. Of course, that was a Rangers team that scored a lot of runs, too. Danks BTW was the winning pitcher on that night so he pitched well enough to win.
|
stemyn
Waiting for my tickets
back to top
|
942nd Post Fri Oct 10th, 2008 03:51 am | |
|
| One season does not a career make.
____________________
People ask me what I do in winter when there's no baseball. I'll tell you what I do. I stare out the window and wait for spring. ~Rogers Hornsby
|
LEB
Member
back to top
|
943rd Post Fri Oct 10th, 2008 04:39 am | |
|
stemyn wrote: One season does not a career make.
Let me know when McCarthy gets even one season in. So far, he's been in the majors for four years and has 275 innings. Danks has 334 innings in only two seasons.
As I said, is he not Santana or Sabathia....yet. But he's light years ahead of McCarthy right now better than any other Rangers pitcher this past year IMO.
|
Dave C
Member
back to top
|
944th Post Fri Oct 10th, 2008 04:40 am | |
|
Leb, will you still be beating everyone senseless with John Danks references ten years from now?
I think half of the posts I read that you write are about this guy.
|
LEB
Member
back to top
|
945th Post Fri Oct 10th, 2008 04:44 am | |
|
Dave C wrote: Leb, will you still be beating everyone senseless with John Danks references ten years from now?
I think half of the posts I read that you write are about this guy.
If the Rangers are still finishing under 500 and I'm still alive, and Danks is winning 15 games a season....yeah, sure! 
(just like Boston fans never let the Red Sox forget about selling Babe Ruth to the Yankees!)
|
Dave C
Member
back to top
|
946th Post Fri Oct 10th, 2008 04:53 am | |
|
Well, I suppose everyone is obsessed about something.
|
Ric
Bayou Bum
back to top
|
947th Post Fri Oct 10th, 2008 05:29 am | |
|
LEB wrote: Dave C wrote: Leb, will you still be beating everyone senseless with John Danks references ten years from now?
I think half of the posts I read that you write are about this guy.
If the Rangers are still finishing under 500 and I'm still alive, and Danks is winning 15 games a season....yeah, sure!
(just like Boston fans never let the Red Sox forget about selling Babe Ruth to the Yankees!)
I've never heard BBS even bring it up.
Why is it that you can look at a glass as being half full when talking about other teams and their woes, yet you can rarely even acknowledge any positives with the local team? I think you like the Rangers... I just don't understand why you can't sit back and enjoy this regimes obvious efforts at putting a championship team on the field? As faras the Rangers are concerned, the glass is always half empty by your comments. Yeah, yeah.. I know the history of the franchise.. But.. it'll all be worth the waitwhen these guys become just a little bit more competitive..
____________________
All I ask is a chance to prove
that money can't make me happy.
"There are 108 beads in a Catholic rosary. And there are 108 stitches in a baseball. When I learned that, I gave Jesus a chance."
|
LEB
Member
back to top
|
948th Post Fri Oct 10th, 2008 05:47 am | |
|
Dave C wrote: Well, I suppose everyone is obsessed about something.
Natually...and since I'm old....sex isn't it anymore!  
|
LEB
Member
back to top
|
949th Post Fri Oct 10th, 2008 06:00 am | |
|
Ric wrote: LEB wrote: Dave C wrote: Leb, will you still be beating everyone senseless with John Danks references ten years from now?
I think half of the posts I read that you write are about this guy.
If the Rangers are still finishing under 500 and I'm still alive, and Danks is winning 15 games a season....yeah, sure!
(just like Boston fans never let the Red Sox forget about selling Babe Ruth to the Yankees!)
I've never heard BBS even bring it up.
Why is it that you can look at a glass as being half full when talking about other teams and their woes, yet you can rarely even acknowledge any positives with the local team? I think you like the Rangers... I just don't understand why you can't sit back and enjoy this regimes obvious efforts at putting a championship team on the field? As faras the Rangers are concerned, the glass is always half empty by your comments. Yeah, yeah.. I know the history of the franchise.. But.. it'll all be worth the waitwhen these guys become just a little bit more competitive..
I think it was Dizzy Dean who once said: "potential just means you ain't done nuthin yet!"
I know they have a highly touted farm system now. I hope they succeed. But after so many years of dismal failure, they don't get the benefit of the doubt. The Rangers are kind of like the Arizona Cardinals of baseball.
You don't hear Red Sox fans complaining about the "curse of the babe" because the RedSox have two world series titles in the last four years. When you win, all is forgiven. But it took about 90 years for the Sox to stop hearing about Babe.
Sure, Jimmy Johnson took Steve Walsh and traded a #2 pick for Alonzo Highsmith. But The Cowboys won three super bowls in the 90's so no one cares about those who don't pan out.
So when the Rangers get rid of four young pitchers who won about 50 games this past year for other teams, they hear about it until they win!
That's why baseball is so much fun to argue about! 
|
gumpbowl
Member
back to top
|
950th Post Fri Oct 10th, 2008 06:59 am | |
|
| I am not going to quote anything, bit I will question how much you hope they succeed. The majority of posts I read from you are too negative for there to be much thought of success. You truly seem to only be happy when pointing out failures. I say this because of how often this is brought up by you. If you truly wish for Ranger success, I apologize for questioning the thought.
____________________
May this be the best day of your life until tomorrow!!!!
|
LEB
Member
back to top
|
951st Post Fri Oct 10th, 2008 01:22 pm | |
|
gumpbowl wrote: I am not going to quote anything, bit I will question how much you hope they succeed. The majority of posts I read from you are too negative for there to be much thought of success. You truly seem to only be happy when pointing out failures. I say this because of how often this is brought up by you. If you truly wish for Ranger success, I apologize for questioning the thought.
I think you and others criticisms of my critiques of the Rangers is fair. I'm not a die-hard fan of the team who is going to say their poop doesn't smell when I think it does.
I admit to growing up a Cardinals fan in STL where baseball is king and the Redbirds have given their fans a lot of reasons to be proud of their team. Which isn't to say they never get criticized for bad trades. The Cards traded away both Steve Carlton and Jerry Reuss in the early 70's that proved to be as bad as the Lou Brock deal was good. Don't think for a second the talk shows never brought that up. But when you win, you're forgiven and the Rangers have never done that.
Personally, I like a winner in this town. There's an energy, a vitality that comes with that winning I think that feeds the community. The vibes given off by the Mavs three years ago when they went to the finals was fun. So has been the Cowboys great success. Even their failure in the playoffs, while frustrating, has still been something you can build on. There is no questioning the will of Jerry Jones and Mark Cuban to winning.
I would think even the most avid Rangers fan does have his doubts about Tom Hicks.
The Rangers have only had a couple years of success the last 35 seasons. This decade has been dismal. With the exception of one season, it seems like this team has been eliminated by the end of April.
So yes, while there is optimism among true die-hard fans who buy their overpriced season tickets and pay $6 for a beer there are those like myself who have seen this before. For two or three years, the Rangers kept building up DVD and how great they were going to be. So what happens? They trade two of them away and they've been successful elsewhere.
All the so-called "experts" say the Rangers have built a good minor league system. Maybe that's true. I hope so. But for right now, they're just prospects.
And until they win, Hicks, Ryan and JD are going to be reminded this franchise traded away people like Ron Darling, Walt Terrell, Sammy Sosa and John Danks and got little in return. That goes with the territory, fair or not.
|
Burley Glen
Whatever...
back to top
|
952nd Post Fri Oct 10th, 2008 02:34 pm | |
|
LEB wrote:
I think it was Dizzy Dean who once said: "potential just means you ain't done nuthin yet!"
And there is the point against your Danks argument...at the time, McCarthy was already in the bigs, and was considered one of the top 5 newcomers in the game...Danks was potential, which means he hadn't done it yet...
____________________
I'd rather be wrong because I trusted someone, than because I didn't...
|
LEB
Member
back to top
|
953rd Post Fri Oct 10th, 2008 02:51 pm | |
|
Burley Glen wrote: LEB wrote:
I think it was Dizzy Dean who once said: "potential just means you ain't done nuthin yet!"
And there is the point against your Danks argument...at the time, McCarthy was already in the bigs, and was considered one of the top 5 newcomers in the game...Danks was potential, which means he hadn't done it yet...
It's not like McCarthy was a proven big league pitcher who had burst on the scene like Dwight Gooden. The guy was 7-9 with a 4.50 ERA in two MLB seasons, pitching about 150 innings. If he was a "top newcomer" then I would sugggest that's a source that should be ignored. If he was that good, why did the White Sox trade him for a guy who hadn't pitched one inning in the show?  
Maybe Chicago saw him as another Roger Pavlik...a guy with a flaw in his motion that was an injury waiting to happen. And let's face it, Brandon has spent more time on the sidelines than he has on the mound in Texas. He's started 27 games in two years. Danks started 34 this year. 
|
Burley Glen
Whatever...
back to top
|
954th Post Fri Oct 10th, 2008 04:39 pm | |
|
whatever, Rangers suck...no one else has ever made a bad trade...Rangers only get lucky on good trades...minor league strength doesn't mean anything...whatever, just don't jump on the bandwagon when it's good...
eta...didn't want to do the research on how highly thought of McCarthy was at the time, because it wouldn't really matter...also, it was NOT Danks for McCarthy straight up...
Last edited on Fri Oct 10th, 2008 04:42 pm by Burley Glen
____________________
I'd rather be wrong because I trusted someone, than because I didn't...
|
LEB
Member
back to top
|
955th Post Fri Oct 10th, 2008 07:06 pm | |
|
Burley Glen wrote: whatever, Rangers suck...no one else has ever made a bad trade...Rangers only get lucky on good trades...minor league strength doesn't mean anything...whatever, just don't jump on the bandwagon when it's good...
eta...didn't want to do the research on how highly thought of McCarthy was at the time, because it wouldn't really matter...also, it was NOT Danks for McCarthy straight up...
luck plays a huge factor in life. the boston celtics got a horrible break when they used a top three draft pick on len bias, and he died the day after the draft.
the Rangers have made some very good deals, like getting Raffy Palmiero, Julio Franco and a couple others. JD may have made some incredible deals for Lofton, Gagne & Tex.
But the simple fact is, they haven't made enough or developed enough talent and all the research you need is their record since coming to north texas.
you are correct in that there were others involved in the danks-mccarthy deal. and it was more than brock for brogilio. but that's all people remember because they were the principals in the deal.
when you win, all is forgotten. i don't even know if JD was alive when the rangers traded ron darling & walt terrell to the mets for a washed up lee mazzelli. but sadly, jd has to pay for the sins of his fathers.
I hope they have turned the corner. 
|
gumpbowl
Member
back to top
|
956th Post Mon Oct 13th, 2008 01:01 am | |
|
LEB thank you for the thoughtful reply to my thoughts. In it you said something about the owner. I will not justify him by typing his name. It is my belief that he is the big problem with the Rangers.
If he lets Daniels or Ryan make the choices they feel are needed then maybe things can change. If he keeps doing things he has in the past, not spending money, then hope is limited. I hope he trusts the people he has put in place.
____________________
May this be the best day of your life until tomorrow!!!!
|
Ric
Bayou Bum
back to top
|
957th Post Mon Oct 13th, 2008 01:06 am | |
|
Not spending Money???! That's the thing. he DID that. Paid more money to a player than was ever heard of. Brought in Chan Ho.. who, at the time, was a legitimate starter. I don't blame him for changing directions again and ging to a build from within approach.
What about the contracts he gave to ensure M Young and I Kinsler stay here as we become a championship ballclub?
You can dislike Hicks for a lot of things, but being cheap ain't one of them. No sir. Not at all....
____________________
All I ask is a chance to prove
that money can't make me happy.
"There are 108 beads in a Catholic rosary. And there are 108 stitches in a baseball. When I learned that, I gave Jesus a chance."
|
Ric
Bayou Bum
back to top
|
958th Post Mon Oct 13th, 2008 04:51 am | |
|
Eventually, in most sports, including the one I prefer to write about, a team takes on the personality of its coach, for better or worse.
The Cowboys achieved that 11 months ago. They’re satisfied with the press clippings that say they are as good as anyone in football (and Wade Phillips’s season-ending gloat last year that they’d gone further than they had the season before since they had a bye that preceded their one-and-out playoff loss). Never mind the fact that Dallas’s last playoff win was in the same year as the Rangers’ last playoff win.
This team makes excuses instead of plays. They show up unprepared, uninspired, undisciplined. Underachieving. Comfy.
In football and in baseball, the ultimate measure of a head coach or manager, as far as I’m concerned, is not how they call a game or when they pull out a trick play or how they manage a bullpen. It’s whether they get their players to play for them. Whether they bring out the best in the multi-millionaires who suit up, whether they bring to work an intensity and an accountability and a level of character that rubs off on the guys who have to make plays.
Are there renegade personalities on the roster? Sure. But that’s even more reason for a stronger personality under the headset than the Cowboys have right now.
I can’t wait to hear Phillips acquit his team’s effort tomorrow in his chronically defensive manner. I can’t think of one reason he shouldn’t be fired before that press conference ever takes place. This team should be so much better than it is. Instead, he’s instilled a personality that seems to have everyone on the field convinced that they’re a lot better than they are. Wade Phillips isn’t going to turn that around.
Apologies for the self-serving, off-topic rant – my football therapy for the day.
Full-blown Newberg Report tomorrow morning.
Jamey
____________________
All I ask is a chance to prove
that money can't make me happy.
"There are 108 beads in a Catholic rosary. And there are 108 stitches in a baseball. When I learned that, I gave Jesus a chance."
|
Burley Glen
Whatever...
back to top
|
959th Post Mon Oct 13th, 2008 05:23 am | |
|
Ric wrote: You can dislike Hicks for a lot of things, but being cheap ain't one of them. No sir. Not at all....
 In fact, the last TWO ownership groups of the Rangers have not been afraid to spend money...
____________________
I'd rather be wrong because I trusted someone, than because I didn't...
|
Ric
Bayou Bum
back to top
|
960th Post Mon Oct 13th, 2008 04:52 pm | |
|
| yep....
____________________
All I ask is a chance to prove
that money can't make me happy.
"There are 108 beads in a Catholic rosary. And there are 108 stitches in a baseball. When I learned that, I gave Jesus a chance."
|
|
|
