Gagne to Texas ($6 mil, 1 year)

Yeah, but

You can't forget how totally dominant he was before that. I mean how many closers can say they won a Cy Young? This could still be a good deal if Gagne is healthy and can resemble his former dominant self.

Hey fish, leave those kids alone!

by The Congo Hammer on Dec 12, 2006 1:11 PM EST reply actions

True

And compared to the money given out to Gil Meche, the deal doesn't look so bad.
Worst case scenario, if it doesn't work out... Texas is used to eating bad contracts: 8 million dollars is a mere pickle compared to the sh*t sandwiches Tom Hicks is used to eating.

by SmokeyJoeWood on Dec 12, 2006 1:17 PM EST up reply actions

or...

just a real bad move. I know that MLB teams need to apply the high-risk / high-reward method to make things work, but this is nuts. Hard to believe that they couldn't invest their money in something better for one year.

by melt12 on Dec 12, 2006 1:49 PM EST up reply actions

Agree

What are the odds that he's back to normal health-wise? 20? 10?

I know people love these "high risk, high reward" deals, but this seems like a much higher risk than reward.

by eazyb81 on Dec 12, 2006 3:41 PM EST up reply actions

Texas

I wonder if Hicks is willing to pay 2008 free agent closer Eric Gagne Wagner money?

And if he isn't, then why pay Gagne $8MM to rehab?

Fake Teams

by ephinz on Dec 12, 2006 1:21 PM EST reply actions

insane

absolutely insane. 8m for one year? Does Hicks think the Rangers can go all the way in 07? And that post-steroid ban Gagne is going to be dominant (yeah, i said it, you all were thinking it)?

This is my pick for worst F/A signing of the off-season, what a shock that it's a deal done by the rangers.

God rested one day out of 7, Felix rests 4 out of 5.

by CrimsonLiederhosen on Dec 12, 2006 1:32 PM EST reply actions

Worst deal?

I dunno. It's hard to argue against the Gary Mathews Jr. deal.

I was listening to MLB radio on a plane trip yesterday and they were discussing how Gagne, with the amount and type of injuries he had, probably will never end up throwing like he used to. That being said, it's hard to imagine committing $8 mil to that type of player.

by Lunkwill Fook on Dec 12, 2006 1:44 PM EST up reply actions

draft pick?

I haven't been following the draft picks, but if the Rangers didn't lose a draft pick, the worst this deal can be is a complete loss, and I'm sure that several signings this offseason will turn out to be worse than burning $8MM in a bonfire.

In terms of ratio of dollars:upside ratio, I think the Henry Blanco extension is the worst so far. How does one begin to defend that move?

by BobbyMac on Dec 12, 2006 1:54 PM EST up reply actions

Not sure

how anybody can say that committing 6M/1yr to Gagne is the worst deal of the winter. I think it's a great deal and at worst will not hurt them at all in the future, unlike Matthews, Pierre, Meche, Padilla, etc, etc...

by rothe on Dec 12, 2006 4:08 PM EST up reply actions

The deal

Was being reported as 8M for a pitcher who has been injured for the better part of the last two years and whose particular prowess has been questioned by some on its source (skill v. pill).

God rested one day out of 7, Felix rests 4 out of 5.

by CrimsonLiederhosen on Dec 12, 2006 4:56 PM EST up reply actions

Ignoring the obvious hyperbole....

....of saying the worst deal is 1 year, $8 million for a dominant-but-perennially-injured pitcher in the same off-season as Juan Pierre, Gary Matthews, Gil Meche and Alfonso Soriano, among others, were handed huge, LONG contracts -- I just want to focus on your "steroids" statement.

Obviously, I have no idea if Gagne did or didn't do steroids. I don't know where you got the impression he did, but I'm willing to accept a world of steroids in baseball in which EVERY PLAYER is at least half-guilty until proven otherwise. I don't see any reason to think he did, but, if you do, more power to you.

Having said that, Gagne, if healthy, will continue to dominate. Maybe you're saying he needs the steroids to stay healthy (again, I can't argue), but, if you think Gagne needs the steroids to enhance his performance, I think you're blatantly wrong.

Because of the injuries, he's lost quite a few MPH on his fastball over the past three years; he was really 88-92 during spring training/April of 2006. More than that, in every year since his stunning 2003, he's lost his pinpoint control on his always fairly flat fastball.

Did that end his dominance? Hardly. His change-up is the best single pitch in baseball. During the brief period he was pitching this past year, I would guess he was throwing it over 80% of his pitches, and still no one could pick it up. He also started throwing his huge curveball more, which is a pretty devastating pitch in its own right. Obviously, 88-92 is pretty slow to throw as a right-handed closer, but Trevor Hoffman's done alright with it, and Gagne, when healthy, has much better stuff than Hoffman.

Anyway, the contract's somewhat of a risk, obviously. I'm not devastated for the Dodgers to have lost him, because I have serious doubts about how many innings Gagne will ever be able to pitch (or at least when he'll be healthy enough to pitch them). On the other hand, one-year contracts are never that big a risk; Nomar and Frank Thomas got the same last year, and they turned into a huge bargains. If Gagne never pitches, at least the franchise won't be saddled with his contract for long.

by bleedjaxblue on Dec 12, 2006 5:12 PM EST up reply actions

Worst

The thing is, if Texas seemed like a team that was just THAT close to being a serious World Series contender, this deal would make a lot more sense. They aren't though (or certainly don't look that way from here).
Their Starting Pitching needs a lot more work than their bullpen did and I'm not sure Otsuka is going to bring the kind of help they need. Nor does Texas have the kind of track record in trading players that would make me think they COULD pull off a steal of a trade (Remember the Chris Young trade?).
Just watch, they'll end up with a number 4 an overpaid #3 or a dubious prospect in return for Otsuka.

God rested one day out of 7, Felix rests 4 out of 5.

by CrimsonLiederhosen on Dec 12, 2006 5:51 PM EST up reply actions

Dude

it's a six million dollar deal. Stop being such a bitter homer.

by Brett Perryman on Dec 12, 2006 6:16 PM EST up reply actions

What

Does homerism have to do with it? If anything, as a Sox homer, I'm glad about this because that puts Otsuka on the market for the Sox to go after.
From a pure baseball standpoint though, it's a questionable (at best) move by the Rangers. I look forward to Theo talking them into taking Clement for Otsuka.

God rested one day out of 7, Felix rests 4 out of 5.

by CrimsonLiederhosen on Dec 12, 2006 7:24 PM EST up reply actions

I agree.....

....with comments like this when you're talking about, say, the Cubs signing Soriano, the Rangers signing ARod, or the Mariners signing Sexson and Beltre. But those were all big, long deals. They basically limited their roster mobility for 5+ years (depending on the deal) based on one player who, at best, would put them in contention to play .500 baseball. Besides, I thought the same thing for all the Tigers free-agent signings of the past few years, and look how that turned out.

Anyway, this isn't 1984. One year, $6 million hardly makes an impact on payroll at all. And, given that it's one year, I struggle to see where else the Rangers could have spent $6 mil that could have offered them better results. They aren't trading away or blocking prospects with this move.

And I think your argument -- that only a team more sure to make the playoffs should bid for Gagne -- could be dead backwards: It should only be worth spending the $6 million on Gagne for a team that would need THAT BIG a payoff IF he works out in order for the move to make sense. In other words, why should the Rangers have spent that $6 million on some marginal player who couldn't POSSIBLY impact the team enough for them to be any better (from a practical, "making-the-playoffs-or-not" standpoint)? Unless your argument is that all teams who aren't projected to win the division should give up and fold -- refusing to sign anyone, period, and merely filling out their roster with double- and triple-A retreads -- I don't see why THIS free-agent signing seems like the worst. After all, some of the other big free-agent signing have been by teams such as the Cubs, Royals, Astros, Giants and Blue Jays, all of whom I think stand little chance at making the playoffs; why is the Rangers' move of bigger sin?

Also, I would be surprised if they actually plan on moving Otsuka. I assume they will look to shorten games/pitch fewer innings with their poor starters when Gagne's healthy, and thank their lucky stars that they have Otsuka as a back-up when he's not.

by bleedjaxblue on Dec 12, 2006 7:37 PM EST up reply actions

Worst

Pretty sure I haven't actually argued this as the Worst deal since the salary was revised.
I wouldn't argue that only a contending team should try to compete. I would argue that signing Gagne to a 1 year $6M contract when you already have Otsuka makes far less sense for a non-contending team than it does for a contending team.
$6M is still $6M. The $6M you don't spend this year, can be spent next year instead and could be the difference between landing a player at 3/$32M or not landing that player because you offered 3/$30M.

God rested one day out of 7, Felix rests 4 out of 5.

by CrimsonLiederhosen on Dec 12, 2006 9:17 PM EST up reply actions

Red Song Pants

Your name is spelled wrong. Lederhosen.

Why can't the Rangers go all the way in '07? The Cardinals were hardly dominant in '06, winning just a couple games more than TX, and the AL West is very winnable. TX had the best Pythagorean record in the division so one could argue it was just luck that they were so far out at the end of the season.

No team in the AL West is very strong, Jon Daniels would be a fool not to go for it.

by t ball on Dec 12, 2006 10:36 PM EST up reply actions

Don't think it's a bad deal.

Assuming Hicks wants to take the risk on Gagne, he is now free to trade Otsuka. So long as he can move Otsuka for what equates to more value than what the $8m would buy him on the FA market, he's done a good thing.

Honestly, I don't see why more teams don't do this more often. For instance, the Angels don't want to deal their strength (pitching), but really need 3B help. Why not go get a reasonable 3/4 type such as Maddux, Suppan, etc for $10m. They could then trade Ervin Santana or Lackey for a really nice 3B, which doesn't exist on the FA market, who would have cost them more than $15m/yr if there was one.

by FredUD on Dec 12, 2006 3:27 PM EST reply actions

$6M is so much better...

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=Amk8llQw75pg9okiT3g8kxQ5nYcB?slug=ap-rangers-gagne&prov=ap &type=lgns

by cooper7d7 on Dec 12, 2006 3:32 PM EST reply actions

Otsuka

What do you think this means for Otsuka? I assume they'll move him, but does this mean his days as a closer are over?

by laughlin on Dec 12, 2006 3:42 PM EST reply actions

Yahoo rumors

had AO being moved for starting pitching if he does not return to "setting up".

Boston?

by cooper7d7 on Dec 12, 2006 3:49 PM EST up reply actions

Comments.....

Gagne is most likely to have an injury putting him on the shelf for 07'/ This deal is only good for Gagne. Texas paying 8m is money down the drain.....
Otsuka to Boston (closer) and another friend for Dice-K sounds good to me...

Fan of Fenway

by bodyiq on Dec 12, 2006 7:05 PM EST reply actions

six million

pay attention

by Brett Perryman on Dec 12, 2006 7:06 PM EST up reply actions

option

The only problem I have with this deal is that Texas did not insist on a team option for $8 or so. That way he has the potential of being a bigger bargain and also has more trade value when Texas is out of it in July.

Arthur: "Look, you stupid bastard, you've got no arms left!" Black Knight: "Yes I have." Arthur: "Look!" Black Knight: "It's just a flesh wound!"

by pedrophile on Dec 12, 2006 7:21 PM EST reply actions

6 or 8m...

Either way, this is a waste of money. And Otsuka was bad last year?
He threw up some decent #'s.
Closing games out is not one of the Rangers big issues if they are going to contend.

Fan of Fenway

by bodyiq on Dec 12, 2006 9:36 PM EST reply actions

Well

Their bullpen right now consists of Otsuka and many young, solid, but unproven arms. I would say building a strong bullpen is pretty damn important for a team thats lacking in all facets of pitching year in and year out. And if you've been reading this post at all, we've already mentioned how this could easily be a preliminary move to Daniels moving Otsuka for a legit starter.
This move is not really as risky your making it out to be and it could very well pay-off in the end.

by yacck23 on Dec 13, 2006 4:59 PM EST up reply actions