Comments on: The Rangers And Roy Halladay: Is It Possible?

By: HubZ

HubZ — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 15:43:41 +0000

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.

By: HubZ

HubZ — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 15:29:23 +0000

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.

By: Part Time Ranger Fan

Part Time Ranger Fan — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 19:51:15 +0000

@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.

By: RangerFan

RangerFan — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 18:11:07 +0000

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.

By: Chris Hartman

Chris Hartman — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 16:57:06 +0000

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….

By: Jim

Jim — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 16:37:59 +0000

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.

By: Sean

Sean — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 16:12:54 +0000

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.

By: Samags

Samags — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 15:44:38 +0000

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 $.

By: Part Time Ranger Fan

Part Time Ranger Fan — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 15:39:27 +0000

@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.

By: jakeblues

jakeblues — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 15:18:44 +0000

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.