MOD: Rangers

Rangers priorities

High-ceiling over statistically proven. Big pitchers who throw hard over those who paint. A need for corner outfielders who bang, catchers to build an inventory of, perhaps a third baseman to develop. Overall, best player available probably applies.

by Jamey Newberg on May 28, 2005 10:24 AM EDT reply actions

Hi

Just wondering, why would you want a 3B to develop when you have Hank Blalock over there?

by ohad @ Minor League Ball on May 28, 2005 2:57 PM EDT up reply actions

wow jamey newberg

i was going to say, why do we need to develop a young 3b, but im not argueing with him. thank you for all of your ranger coverage. im assuming everyone is now doing the best player available thing, but i truly think that is the wasy to go with this club.

by TexasHeat on May 28, 2005 11:04 AM EDT reply actions

3B

The reason is you always want to have depth at a position, for trades and in case of injury on your own club. Marshall McDougall is the best bet among minor league 3b in this system, but he's more suited to a utility role if and when he makes it. Travis Metcalf has a chance, too, but he's had an uneven first half.

by Jamey Newberg on May 28, 2005 11:10 AM EDT reply actions

Opposite of what Jamey said

I'd take statistically proven from major college programs over toolsy players. Other than that, it should be the best player available regardless of position. For the 1st round pick, I'd take Weaver for sure if he falls that far. My next choices would be Crowe and Ellsbury. Whatever you do, please do not take that pitcher from Baylor that can't hit the broad side of a barn.

--Brian

by BCanfield on May 28, 2005 11:24 AM EDT reply actions

Wade Townsend

What would you do if Townsend slipped to the Rangers? He was drafted #8 overall by Baltimore last year. Below is the latest from the BaseballAmerica Draft Tracker:

15. Wade Townsend, rhp, Dripping Springs, Texas
5/24 Update: Touring Florida camps in Tampa Bay and then Dunedin, he had his best outing of the spring in Dunedin; facing live hitters in extended spring training, Townsend threw in the 90-93 mph range with a sharp breaking ball, though he gave up a homer to new Jay signee Leance Soto

Regards, Brandon Wilson

by Brandon Wilson on May 28, 2005 1:01 PM EDT reply actions

Maybe I misunderstood...

I thought Brandon's job was to stand in for Ron Hopkins and execute the Rangers' plan. When I suggested what I did (ceiling over production, etc.), it was to suggest that that's what I think Texas will do. Not necessarily my own tendency.

by Jamey Newberg on May 28, 2005 1:07 PM EDT reply actions

My Objective

We weren't really given directions on whether to make the pick that we think the organization would make or should make...

Which do we want to do? It would be fun either way. I open to either suggestion. Let's hear arguments for and against. Then make a decision by the end of the weekend (Monday). That will give us a full week to talk about potential player picks.

Regards, Brandon Wilson

by Brandon Wilson on May 28, 2005 1:37 PM EDT reply actions

up to you

It is entirely up to you whether you "simulate" what the Rangers will do or make your own judgment. It is wide open.

by John Sickels on May 28, 2005 2:20 PM EDT reply actions

I think we should

Have it set as "doing what the actualy team would do". I think it would be better that way.

by ohad @ Minor League Ball on May 28, 2005 3:00 PM EDT up reply actions

My .02

Either an outfielder or high-ceiling power pitcher in the first round. As the farm system's pretty well stocked with arms from the past three drafts, I'd lean offense early on, with the corners and catching as the primary targets.

My tendencies are pretty similar to those of former scouting director Grady Fuson, though I'm not averse to taking the occasional high school guy if he's the best player available.

by RCCook on May 28, 2005 3:36 PM EDT reply actions

Two more cents...

In terms of what the Rangers are actually targeting, I'm going to have to (unfortunately) agree with Jamey. (Not unfortunate in the sense that I mind disagreeing with him, of course, but unfortunate in the sense that I think that the high ceiling/tools goofs types players that they are going to target is the wrong direction to go in).

In terms of what they should be targeting, I agree with RCCook...particularly after the first couple of rounds, guys who can pitch and college hitters. With the way that TBIA plays, I think it has been proven that Hart's type of pitchers -- the big guys who throw 95 and are wild -- aren't the types who succeed there. Control pitchers who keep the ball down, who don't strike out tons of guys, but who don't walk anyone and limit homers, are the types of pitchers the Rangers should be targeting.

by Adam J Morris on May 29, 2005 12:32 AM EDT reply actions

Coachability

Is it a valid assumption we are all making that "high ceiling" hard throwing pitchers cannot be taught to throw a two seem fastball down in the zone like the current group is doing at the big league level?

Are we saying that we believe that these players are not coachable or do we just question their ability to ever gain command of the strike zone?

Is there not a happy place we find a high ceiling player that is coachable and can command the strike zone... where is our Jake Peavy?

Regards, Brandon Wilson

by Brandon Wilson on May 29, 2005 7:09 PM EDT reply actions

Here's the problem...

I'd analogize it to the Rangers' Drew Meyer pick in 2002, a pick that I thought at the time was very questionable, and that looks awful right now.

Meyer has all the tools...speed, great arm, can play defense at the up-the-middle spots, and (supposedly) a great attitude and great instincts. The one thing that he couldn't do, coming out of college, is hit with a wood bat. Fuson took Meyer, I believe, thinking that Meyer would end up being a major leaguer either way, if nothing else as a Donnie Sadler-esque utility guy, and if he learned to hit with wood (something Fuson seemed to believe he would do), then Meyer ends up being a home run.

However, with a first round choice, particularly a high one like Meyer, I don't think you can roll the dice on such a critical component as whether the guy will learn to hit. A guy who can hit, but can't do anything else, can still be a very good player. A guy who can do everything except hit is a career AAA guy who has to hope he gets on the good side of someone like LaRussa or Dusty Baker or Buck Showalter to have a major league career.

Similarly, a guy who can throw hard, but can't pitch and doesn't keep the ball down, is problematic anywhere, but is particularly a killer in TBIA. Given the nature of the park, free passes are a killer, particularly when combined with flyball tendencies. To use a first or second round pick on a guy with a live arm who you hope can be taught to throw the two-seamer effectively, and that you also hope will develop command and control, seems like much too big a risk.

Now, after the first few rounds, if you want to roll the dice on a player like that, no problem. If you want to use a 23rd round pick on a draft-and-follow, and end up giving him 2nd round money, that's fine. But I hate the idea of taking "projects" with early picks, particularly project pitchers who don't project well for our home park.

Maybe it is just the awful memory of Sandy Johnson passing on Frank Thomas to take Donald Harris, but I want to see the Rangers take players, not experiments.

by Adam J Morris on May 29, 2005 11:17 PM EDT up reply actions

Agreed

Good points, Adam. Having said that, it seems to me that the sentiment is to simulate what the Rangers will do (we will just try to make them as smart as possible).

So, a high schooler by definition is probably a "project", but there may be one available that interests us. Will the Rangers lean towards a college pitcher or a high school pitcher? Obviously if a top prospect falls, the Rangers would jump on it right? Precluding that possibility, will the Rangers lean towards a Pitcher or Hitter at #19?

Here are the players in the Rangers pick area according to Baseball America (this is talent based not a predicted pick order):

Chris Volstad, rhp, Palm Beach Gardens (Fla.) HS
Wade Townsend, rhp, Dripping Springs, Texas
Mark Pawelek, lhp, Springville (Utah) HS
Brian Bogusevic, of-lhp, Tulane U.
C.J. Henry, ss, Putnam City HS, Oklahoma City
Cesar Carrillo, rhp, U. of Miami
Matt Torra, rhp, U. of Massachusetts
Mark McCormick, rhp, Baylor U.
Trevor Crowe, of, U. of Arizona
John Mayberry Jr., 1b, Stanford U.
Jacoby Ellsbury, of, Oregon State U.

http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/2005draft/drafttracker.html

If Volstad or Pawelek is available are the Rangers interested?

Regards, Brandon Wilson

by Brandon Wilson on May 30, 2005 12:15 PM EDT reply actions

Volstad/Pawelek

Volstad: Yes. The guy is almost a sure quick sign from what is reported.

Pawelek: I'd like to say yes, but this is highly unlikely. Boras' highschooler usually go to college. He is probably unsignable.

Eric Belin

by Eric Belin on May 31, 2005 11:43 PM EDT up reply actions

preferences

"Big pitcher who throws hard over those who paint:" Volstad

"Corner OFer who bangs:" Jordan Danks

With Danks' free fall, could we get both?

Eric Belin

by Eric Belin on May 31, 2005 11:41 PM EDT reply actions

Jordan Danks...

I'd want to KNOW that he'd be willing to sign with Texas before I'd use a high pick on him.

Given that his brother is in the organization, the team should have an idea about whether the UT commitment is a smokescreen, and what it will take to get him.

If Jordan is willing to sign with Texas if he gets first round money -- but only because he could play with his brother, and otherwise would go to UT -- then I think you can use a 3rd or 4th rounder on him.

Otherwise, I'd wait until later in the draft.

by Adam J Morris on Jun 4, 2005 5:12 PM EDT up reply actions

Danks

I'll be surprised if Danks is not taken by the time the Rangers pick in the second round. I would be tempted in the second round if he is there, but I will probably wait until the 3rd.

Regards, Brandon Wilson

by Brandon Wilson on Jun 5, 2005 10:07 AM EDT up reply actions

My dime..

First round, I'd take the best player available. My favorites for around the Rangers' pick are: Brian Boqusevic, Matt Torra, Trevor Crowe, Jacob Ellsbury, or Colby Rasmus.

Second round, I'd look for a steal. If he's healthy, I think I'd make a reach for Miers Quigley. Sure, he had some problems with the law and underage drinking, but I don't think that's serious enough to redflag him. His health, with tendonitis, is. If surgery is needed, I'd pull an Angels trick and take him with a lower round and push to sign him.

Biggest system needs for the Rangers are: 3rd base, catcher, lefty pitching, and outfield.

As much as I hear about a changing philosophy with the Rangers dumping Fuson, I wonder which direction it will really go. Hopkins, from the A's organization and a friend of Fuson, is the scouting director. Chiti is from the John Hart side of the coin. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out.

by tlovett on Jun 5, 2005 11:39 AM EDT reply actions

Townsend

Any interest in Townsend if he makes it to the Rangers? He slid past th D-Rays in out mock draft...

Regards, Brandon Wilson

by Brandon Wilson on Jun 5, 2005 2:36 PM EDT reply actions

Townsend gone...

Townsend gone...
Volstad or Bogusevic?

Regards, Brandon Wilson

by Brandon Wilson on Jun 5, 2005 2:48 PM EDT reply actions

1st round

Volstad and Bogusevic went with the two picks before Texas...
The only player that had slid based on Baseball America's rankings was HS OF Jay Bruce.
BA say he is compared to Larry Walker. Toolsy player.
Not sure if it what the Rangers would have done, McCormick and Torra were available, but their scouting reports (from BA) did not impress me much.
I considered Ellsbury, but ultimately settled on a player that could be a better fit in Arlington and has high upside (read trade-ability) which I think Hart favors.

Regards, Brandon Wilson

by Brandon Wilson on Jun 5, 2005 3:01 PM EDT reply actions