What happens to Taylor Teagarden

by Ophidian on Jun 11, 2009 2:25 PM EDT Comment 10 comments

So I'm curious to hear what others think about Taylor Teagarden's future. He's getting extremely sporadic playing time (only 57 PA so far) down in Texas right now, which can't be good for his development. He's also year and a half older than Saltalamacchia, but reportedly the significantly better defender and it's not like Salty has been some kind of world beater in the past year and a half (he currently has a lesser wOBA than such luminaries as Kenji Johjima, Brad Ausmus, and Miguel Olivo). I'm aware that Teagarden hasn't been great offensively either, but I'm inclined to chalk some of that up to "young catcher with long swing getting extremely sporadic playing time in first taste of the majors".

What is Teagarden's future? Does he become a starter? Does Texas hang onto him and stunt his development? Does he get traded for help at the deadline? Was he always going to be a career backup anyways? (I find that last one hard to believe given his great glove and decent patience/power combo).

0 recs | Comment 10 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Good questions

and I don’t think anyone knows the answers, maybe not even anyone in the Rangers organization. Salty’s development was kind of bumpy too, and he’s still quite young, so the comp to a guy like Johjima or Ausmus hardly seems fair. The Rangers have praised the improvements he’s made on defense and his bat still has plenty of time to develop.

Max Ramirez has been dealing with an injury that may be behind his disappointing numbers so far this year. I have to think that at least one of the three is gone before next April. It wouldn’t surprise me if Teagarden remained a backup through the rest of this year.

G G G E-flat_______ F F F D__________....

by t ball on Jun 11, 2009 3:15 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

The point of the comp

I wasn’t really trying to say that Salty is going to be a mediocre hitter, but more to give context to how poor his performance has been so far this year. It heads off the “Salty is playing because he’s a better hitter even though he’s not as good a defender” argument in advance. Salty may end up being a significantly better hitter, but in my mind he isn’t such a better hitter right now that it makes sense to me to keep Teagarden nailed to the bench like this.

Part of my concern is actually that Teagarden might end up stunted by not playing given that he’s older and has less time to complete his development offensively.

by Ophidian on Jun 11, 2009 3:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

shoulda been traded

The Rangers had 3 coveted catchers at the top of their value during the last off-season: Salty with his big Winter Lg reviving his offensive potential rep; Teagarden with his brief burst of SSS heroics in the majors, and his stellar defensive rep; and Max Ramirez coming off a great season as a hitter and had at least some arguing he could stick as a C, and with most saying he had enough bat to stick at 1B/DH, if not.

Now…not so much. I know rumors were that the Red Sox, for example, offered Bowden + for Salty (and for Teagarden, too? not sure), but the Rangers held out for Buccholz +.

Of course, I don’t know the details of what was offered and, frankly, have a foggy memory of even what the rumors were. I think the bloom is seriously off the rose of these guys: Salty isn’t hitting, Teagarden isn’t a hitter, and MaxRam was overrated. In answer to the question, I think Teagarden will be a long-term back up. But my larger point is that the Rangers blew it by not recognizing that at least 1 of these guys should have been traded when their value was higher.

by scooter on Jun 11, 2009 4:18 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Just some thoughts

The Red Sox have refused to give up Bowden for anything less than a perennial All Star, and even then they’re awfully reluctant. They seem to be much higher on him than a good percentage of scouts (and the GMs of other teams for that matter), but they’re insisting on other teams trading for him at Boston’s valuation. I really can’t believe that the Red Sox were willing to move him in a trade for a catcher whose defense has never been inspired and whose bat has really gone backwards in the last couple of years.

The Red Sox really liked (and probably still really like) Teagarden, but I’m guessing that prospective packages being considered on the Boston end of things never involved Bowden.

by mrkupe on Jun 11, 2009 4:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The Rangers demanded Buchholz...

Not sure how the Sox have “refused to give up Bowden for anything less than a perennial All Star.” They offered him for Teagarden, Salty, Miguel Montero and others. I, for one, (and Keith Law, John Sickels, Kevin Goldstein for others) believe the Sox properly value Bowden. He’s about equal in value to Teagarden. Maybe Im not following you here… are you saying you dont believe the Texas rumors? Many sources reported they offered him straight up for Montero, at least.

Im also not sure teams were ever as high on Teagarden anyway. I was 100% correct about Max… sadly, because I drafted him in my fantasy league,. Basically a 1B/DH who isnt that great a hitter. Whoop de doo. Massively overrated. People were slobbering all over him on here. I was hoping i could get a few years of him qualifying at catcher… I took him with a late pick… thought it was a value. Should have stuck to my gut.

by alskor on Jun 11, 2009 6:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

All we have are rumors

we don’t really know who was offered for whom.

G G G E-flat_______ F F F D__________....

by t ball on Jun 11, 2009 6:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yep.

I don’t believe the Texas rumors. You might be able to convince me that they at least thought about trying to move Bowden for Teagarden, because Boston has always really liked Teagarden. The rest of the guys I’d have to actually see it happen to believe it, especially Salty.

by mrkupe on Jun 12, 2009 9:33 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs