D

Live Blog Feed

The Rangers And Roy Halladay: Is It Possible?

Posted on July 8th, 2009 11:16pm by Evan Grant
Filed under Baseball, Rangers notes, Talkin' baseball, Texas Rangers

ANAHEIM, Calif. – It seems the height of irony. For years, the Rangers positioned themselves to have financial flexibility at the trade deadline only to find themselves with neither the record or the young talent to make a deal. This year, they have both the inventory of talent and the record for a deal to make sense, but the finances seem to be a mess.

And on top of it all, Toronto has announced to the world that Roy Halladay, one of the few true aces in the game, could be had in a trade for the right package. In those bygone years when the Rangers went to the playoffs, a true ace was really what separated the New York Yankees from the Rangers.

All that considered, with the team up for sale and the financial status so bleak Hicks Sports Group has defaulted on an interest payment on a $525 million loan, is there any way the Rangers can land Halladay?

A day ago, it’s a question I would have – and did – quickly dismiss. Now, I’m not so sure.

Start with Wednesday’s announcement from Tom Hicks that the Rangers would investigate what it would take to land a player who could make a real difference in the playoff race. Hicks didn’t mention Halladay by name, but its clear the owner understood the gravity of questions about the club’s ability to add to its veteran talent.

“Any time you’ve got your minor league system well-stocked, you’ve got the opportunity to do some deals, if that is what you choose to do,” Hicks said while visiting Angels Stadium of Anaheim Wednesday. “But we’re going to be careful about it and only look to do something if it helps us now and helps us be a winnnig team, a contending team, for the next five years.”

“Obviously, [GM] Jon Daniels is working hard on the possibilities. But we are going to be judicious about the young players we know aboput. We’ve worked too hard to put ourselves in this position to jeopardize it.”

For the Rangers to get Halladay, the work would have to come in three phases.

First, the Rangers must be certain he’d be willing to waive his no-trade clause to come to Texas. That’s no small hurdle. Though Halladay is a workout fiend, the Texas heat has always been a real concern in trying to lure pitchers to Arlington. I’d be willing to bet that when Josh Hamilton, Michael Young and perhaps Ian Kinsler run into Halladay at the All-Star Game in St. Louis next week, they’ll be trying to allay any fears he might have about the heat.

Second, the Rangers would have to get creative to afford what’s left of his salary through the end of 2010. Figure the deal doesn’t get done until close to the deadline. That’s about $4.5 million remaining of this year’s salary and all of the $15.75 million he’s owed next year. You could make an argument that next year’s salary would be covered by the elimination of Vicente Padilla’s $11 million and Hank Blalock’s $6 million. But that doesn’t take into account significant raises in pay for a number of arbitration-eligible players and guys who have big jumps in their multi-year deals. And, on top of that, there is no guarantee the Rangers will be able to operate with the same payroll next year as the $68 million on the books for this season.

But focus on the more immediate issue: Adding $4.5 million to the payroll this year. How does a team that is in default on a loan, is up for sale, has taken an advance from MLB and has laid off employees come up with that kind of money? Well, Hicks has loaned Hicks Sports Group money in the past. He could look at it as his going-away gift to Rangers fans.

Another option: Ask players with big contracts such as Michael Young and Kevin Millwood to defer more money. Not sure this is a great idea, though. First, Young and Millwood have already deferred money in their deals so the Rangers could have financial flexibility. Second, Does Hicks want to saddle any potential new owner with more debt? The Rangers got into this financial mess in the first place by buying free agents they couldn’t afford and borrowing against the club to get the money. Now, HSG is finding that painful bill coming due.

That said, when I asked Young about his willingness to make more financial sacrifices in order to land a big piece in a trade, he didn’t threaten my personal safety.

“I’ve never made any secret about my desire to win here,” he said. “The only thing on my mind is winning in Texas. I recognize there are certain players out there who could potentially make us better, but there is no point in me commenting on hypotheticals. If I’m approached about it, that’s something else. I haven’t been approached about it.”

If the Rangers figure all that out, then comes the final hurdle: Putting together a package that would interest in Toronto. The Rangers could do that, without blinking. The question is: Would they? Or, perhaps better yet: Would they have to?

Yes, the Rangers got a haul from Atlanta when they were willing to deal Mark Teixeira with 1½ years left on his deal. But they didn’t get any of the Braves top three prospects. Elvis Andrus was probably No. 4. Jarrod Saltalamacchia, who went into the season as the No. 2 prospect, had already gone to the majors and had struggled some. The Rangers would likely make Justin Smoak and Elvis Andrus and at least one of Neftali Feliz and Derek Holland untouchable. From there, they could still cobble together a deal with an elite pitching prospect, a catcher, perhaps a young hitter such as Engel Beltre and a younger pitcher like Kasey Kiker or Robbie Ross.

That’s more hurdles than in most Olympic track and field meets. It would no doubt be a high priace to pay and would require creativity in the financing and deal-making. But this is a true ace the Rangers are talking about. This is a guy who would make the entire starting rotation better. And it’s a guy who would be signed through for 2010 to give the rotation continued girth while Derek Holland, Tommy Hunter, Matt Harrison, etc., continue to mature.

It might not be a deal the Rangers can afford to make.

But it’s one they can’t afford to simply dimiss.

30 Comments to “The Rangers And Roy Halladay: Is It Possible?”

Fred @ July 8th, 2009 at 11:29 pm

Chris Davis
Nelson Cruz
Michael Main
Harrison, McCarthy or Feldman
Joaquin Arias (Or another Minor SS)
Another pitcher other than Feliz, Holland, Perez
Stephen @ July 8th, 2009 at 11:35 pm

@Fred:

I don’t think the Rangers trade Feldman in a deal for Halladay. Feldman has pitched like a top of the rotation starter this year (.217 BAA, and 3.25 ERA as a starter).

I also think dealing Chris Davis now would be a bad idea; his value is as low as it will probably ever be. Same goes for Michael Main.

I think any deal would probably start with Feliz or Smoak (maybe both) and 3-4 other solid, but secondary pieces.
Chris @ July 8th, 2009 at 11:38 pm

“The Rangers would likely make Justin Smoak and Elvis Andrus and at least one of Neftali Feliz and Derek Holland untouchable.”

I totally agree with this sentence. This better be a stipulation.

Also If a deal is done .. There better be an extension. I really dont want to see the Rangers trading away good prospects to rent players. If there were filling one hole away from a championship .. then ok. But they have several holes.
SSHorn @ July 8th, 2009 at 11:46 pm

I do Feliz, Salty, Beltre and Main, Ross or Kiker in a heartbeat. I’ll throw in a Poveda or something too … maybe take Barajas back in the deal to help with our C depth.

I don’t move Smoak or Holland or Perez … because I don’t think you have to …… I don’t think the above deal can be matched by anyone else.
keith @ July 8th, 2009 at 11:49 pm

@Chris– I think the tendancy is to look at this thing as not there yet, or having a bunch of holes to fill. Its the Rangers, its the way it has always been. But I think we need to start getting used to the fact that they are alot closer than we think, and with the young talent already producing for the big club, its likely that they are going to get better. I think the “holes” you speak of are not as great as we think. A true top of the line ace is a hole, and a CONSISTENT run producing 1st baseman seems to me to be all that prevents this thing from being a true contender. I think Hallady is worth the chance in trading a guy like Feliz, or pretty much anything in the farm short of Smoak or Holland. I would also like to see a deal for Nick Johnson made, I don’t think you could do both Johnson and Halladay. But what would be the cost for say, Cliff Lee and a N. Johnson?
Brett in SD @ July 9th, 2009 at 12:07 am

I’d be more excited about Roy Halladay joining the Rangers if he wasn’t already 33 years old. I’d prefer to keep the five or so premium young prospects it would take in order to get him from Toronto.
Ryan @ July 9th, 2009 at 12:08 am

Ryan said:
Jul 8th @ 10:24 pm
I might be in the minority, but I do the deal provided a few contingencies are met:

1. In no way do I do a deal without an extension getting done. I would want a 72 hour window to negotiate an extension

2. Under no circumstance is Smoak, Kins, Elvis, or Josh to be included in the deal

3. Everyone else is fair game, provided I will only trade one of the Holland/Feliz/Perez pitching trio.

I think any deal would start with Feliz (i prefer to keep Holland), Kiker, C. Davis, and probably Valejo or Borbon (don’t want to trade him, but would for right guy). I don’t think Toronto would take Hank or Padilla, so we would be picking up a little salary for this year, but would lose Hank and Padilla deal in the offseason.

My basis for all this is that there is no need to develop such a great system and not use it. You don’t win the world series with the a great AA team. You win by turning the prospects into commodities you need to fill holes or put you over the top.
texaslifter @ July 9th, 2009 at 12:19 am

In the next year, the Rangers will have more ML-ready pitching prospects than roster spots on the 40-man. So deal the surplus talent who will likely not receive legit opportunities to perform in Arlington.

Grant’s suggestion of Saltalamacchia, Beltre, Kiker and Holland/Feliz seems reasonable for Halladay. However, I would substitute Thomas Diamond, Omar Poveda, Fabillo Castillo, and Michael Kirkman for Holland/Feliz. The set of players above are certainly more than Texas received for Teixeira AND will be more than any other offer presented to Toronto.

Foremost, the deal must answer the question: What difference will Halladay make?

Will he significantly increase the Rangers chances of winning the division? I believe so.

Will he make the Rangers 4-man playoff rotation competitive to the Yankees and Red Soxs? I believe so.

So…..do the deal and preserve the top talent. The Rangers can handle a payroll of $70 million per year. Hicks has deep financial connections that are based on highly leveraged money. Living on borrowed money is his life….. and making deals that his successors inherit has been the M.O. of his business operations. I dont buy the media’s hard-sell of Hicks being in financial straits.
Ben @ July 9th, 2009 at 12:35 am

Can’t we talk about something that is realistic, like, how are you supposed to park at The Ballpark vs. the Twins on Aug. 19 when Paul is playing across the street?

Legitimate question. Lemme hear from ya Ranger fans.
Fred @ July 9th, 2009 at 1:00 am

“Fred”-
2nd time I’m asking you to add an initial or a number or something to your name to avoid confusion.
Please consider.
RAT @ July 9th, 2009 at 5:04 am

I’ll take a pass on Halladay.

Use the money to sign Ben Sheets for next year.
Doug @ July 9th, 2009 at 6:24 am

People focus on Padilla’s and Blalock’s money coming off the books after 2009, but they forget about the rest — Cat, Benoit, etc.

They’ve got $30M coming off the books after 2009 before you factor in raises to existing players.
Ford @ July 9th, 2009 at 6:47 am

This talk is premature, being competitive with a devastated Angels team in the West is 1 thing. I don’t want to watch Feliz or Holland for the next 10 years in Toronto so we can lose to Boston in the first round. It’s obvious we have something special brewing in Arlington, let it continue to simmer. Don’t ruin the meal by trying to heat this up in the microwave. 2010 baby 2010. Just keep saying it.
Power Ranger: Andruw Jones Delivers Three Homers As Rangers Pound Angels, Recapture First @ July 9th, 2009 at 6:50 am

[...] • Is it possible for Rangers to get involved with Roy Halladay? [...]
Power Ranger: Andruw Jones Delivers Three Homers As Rangers Pound Angels, Recapture First « wire2 @ July 9th, 2009 at 7:02 am

[...] • Is it possible for Rangers to get involved with Roy Halladay? [...]
Bobby in Bryan @ July 9th, 2009 at 8:04 am

Like many of you, I’m gunshy about trading away good, young, developing starting pitching. We’ve seen enough of that these last few years, haven’t we?

Trade only surplus players, ones that have good young players ahead of them at the major league level. It’ too early for the Rangers to tell about most of its young pitchers. I’d trade Nippert & McCarty, Arias, Teagarten or Ramirez, and an outfielder for Halladay.

Toronto cool for Texas heat, Roy?
Brent @ July 9th, 2009 at 8:31 am

No on Holland, Feliz, Perez, Beavan, or Smoak. Don’t trade any of those guys unless you’re getting an ace in his 20s. I like Halladay, but not so much that I’m willing to watch our homegrown can’t miss prospects pitch in Toronto for the next decade or so while we have an overpriced, aging, former ace here into his late 30s. I’d rather be patient.
James @ July 9th, 2009 at 9:14 am

There’s no such thing as a “can’t miss prospect.” There is such a thing as an ace, however, and Halladay is one.

Let me think–a playoff rotation of Halladay, Millwood and Padilla. Yep–my sports pants are getting very happy.
gbm @ July 9th, 2009 at 10:07 am

Feliz, Main, Beltre, Lemon, Teagarden
Sean @ July 9th, 2009 at 10:09 am

Hey Evan, while I was thinking about the team’s potential pitchers in 2010 and beyond and considering the possibility of Halladay, I realized that Eric Hurley is almost a forgotten man on this team. Was his injury bad enough for the Rangers not to expect anything much of him moving forward, or is he a piece that the media and fans are forgetting about?
jakeblues @ July 9th, 2009 at 10:18 am

Let’s tap the brakes on this deal. Halladay is on the wrong side of 30. If you are looking to extend him past 2010, you’re going to be talking to a pitcher who is going to be 35 years old during the first year of the extension. If we have captured lightning in a bottle and this is the only year that we have a chance to win, I would do the deal. But this team has the chance…and I know it’s a chance…to be very good for a very long time. Looks to me that Tom Hicks has caught JD’s vision for the future when he states that any player acquired in a trade needs to help the team be competitive for five years.
Part Time Ranger Fan @ July 9th, 2009 at 10:39 am

@James: I couldn’t agree with you more. It’s amazing to me how many people think that it is just a given that these prospects are going to come in and be “can’t miss” kids. Everyone acts like the rest of the division and/or league is going to lay down in 2010 and the Rangers are the undisputed favorites for 2010 and beyond.

Now, are there things that have to be taken into consideration before dealing for Halladay? Certainly. However, you can’t just dismiss it and say “look what our prospects are doing in the minors…stay the course…we will be great next year.” If you have a chance to get a true ace, which there aren’t many of in the league, then you have to explore it.
Samags @ July 9th, 2009 at 10:44 am

First, I’m not sure we should give up the “Haul” suggested. halladay is 33 and statistics suggest he will begin to regress anytime now. If we do the deal, do so with only the current term of contract in mind.

Second, if we are taking on $20.25M in salary, why do we need to also give up the farm?

I would suggest we take the $20M on and give them solid but not our top five prospects. No more than three prospects, with only one top 10 included. After all, it’s all about salary $.
Sean @ July 9th, 2009 at 11:12 am

Why are people concerned that he’s going to decline any time now?

Randy Johnson, Roger Clemens, Nolan Ryan…plenty of “true” aces have remained highly competitive well into their 40s.
Jim @ July 9th, 2009 at 11:37 am

TexasLifter makes a great point about the 40-man roster. We will lose good young players every year unless we make deals exchanging multiple Rule 5 eligible guys for proven stars, for younger/less experienced talent OR both. The key is balance – knowing what we have across the entire system and not getting too thick anywhere. Scott Lucas has a nice list of current Ranger property who would become available over the next couple of years at http://www.rangers.scottlucas.com/site/rule5.htm. We’ve got at least 3 guys to get on the 40-man roster or we will lose them – and it gets much worse after 2010. The point is – as much as I want to hang onto and develop all our young players – MLB has set it up where you have to promote them, trade them or lose them to another team.

That said, I would love to see us get a true ace like Halladay even if it’s only for 1 1/2 seasons. And it’s clear that we’ve got the pieces to make a deal happen. I would be more willing to let go of 2-3 near ML ready guys if we also got back some very young prospects. We can improve the ML team and fill the pipeline with talent that will keep us in contention down the road.
Chris Hartman @ July 9th, 2009 at 11:57 am

Feliz or Beavan plus
Davis or Ramirez or Beltre plus
Madrigal

Rangers need to think about adding an additional 2 to 3 years to Halladay’s existing contract to make it work long term….
RangerFan @ July 9th, 2009 at 1:11 pm

All this trade talk has me very nervous. I think it is utter stupidity to trade away the farm for a 1-year player. We have waited so long to be in a position like this, the position to be able to compete for years to come. If we add Halladay, we’ll greatly improve our chances to take the division but do you think that puts us over the top? Can you take out Boston or New York in a series? I don’t think so. Trading the farm for the final piece, ok. Hopefully that comes next year but not now. It just doesn’t make sense.
Part Time Ranger Fan @ July 9th, 2009 at 2:51 pm

@samags: The Jays wanting to trade Halladay has absolutely nothing to do with saving salary. It has everything to do with the fact that they don’t want to lose him and get nothing in return if he walks after he becomes a free agent after next year.

@Chris Hartman: I totally agree. If they are going to do this it would be great to be able to add a couple more years to his contract. If the Rangers had him at the front of the rotation for the next three and a half or four and a half years they’d be in a great position.
HubZ @ July 11th, 2009 at 10:29 am

Prospects are what they are… nickels, dimes & quarters, that one day Rangers HOPE adds up to a “Dollar Bill” or two. Halladay is a true Ace & Dollar Bill. I do trust JD/Ryan will make the correct use of our “change” in farm system, in a trade for a needed rotation arm. If it’s there and Halladay can agree to an extension, it will get done. I know the angles are being worked out, as I speak.
HubZ @ July 11th, 2009 at 10:43 am

JIM~ That is exactly how the Club views it. The Fan should take notice of your input. Logjams are what they are; Opportunities. Not all prospects can fill the Big Club. One has to understand a Banking Philosophy. Farms are there to make the Club better. Majors are the Money and the bottom line. Halladay, OR any front line rotation pitcher we acquire in trade, will improve the CLUB as a whole. Championships certainly do. Money in the Bank.

InsideCorner is a daily blog-slash-online sports page, covering Dallas teams with original reporting, statistical analysis, obvious observations, and undeniable charm.

Subscribe via RSS (What is RSS?)

Follow InsideCorner on Twitter

InsideCorner Email Newsletter (Sign up!)

Email:

Browse the Archives

Browse the Archives

About/Contact

Meet the Bloggers