I think it was smart for the Rangers to not go after Zito however getting Mulder would be nice despite his shoulder surgery. Gagne was a bargain I'm sure and he'll be great. Gary Matthews, Jr. was a one-time wonder. Wish we'd kept DeRosa though. Just curious as to how you think they'll do.
2007-01-06 05:07:02 · 16 answers · asked by T-money 2 in Sports ➔ Baseball
The Rangers are still building. Outside of DeRosa, they are bringing back their entire infield. And it's not like they're taking a step back by losing DeRosa. Ian Kinsler and Michael Young will make up a very solid middle infield. Ian Kinsler put up quality numbers in his rookie season, and with even more playing time, expect even bigger numbers. If you look at DeRosa's numbers, he mixed in a good year last season after three straight below average years. He's 31 compared to the 24 year old Kinsler. They've also added some veteran possibilities in the outfield. Kenny Lofton is a great lead-off guy and has been for a long time. Newly added Frank Catalonatto, Brad Wilkerson, and nelson Cruz will share time in the corner outfield positions and DH position. This all shows that there is no doubt the Rangers lineup will be stacked with good bats.
The only question in my mind and in several others has got to be the pitching staff. I think they improved but I don't think they have improved enough yet. Mulder would be a good pick-up that would help to solidify the rotation. Milwood and Padilla will both give you 200 IP a piece. The question mark is in youngsters, Tejada and McCarthy their 3 and 4 pitchers. They've both got potential to be great, but banking on two guys with as many starts as they've got is a risk no doubt (Tejeda has 27 and McCarthy has 14). The five spot also can't be too great. Koronka and Loe would contend for it and neither one has ever shown that they have what it takes to be in a Major League rotation. If healthy, Gagne is also a very good pick-up. I think that if they do get (a healthy) Mulder, they have a chance in the West. Right now the Angels are my favorites for obvious reasons, now that the A's are Zito-less, but there are still 4860 major league games to play, so you really never know.
2007-01-06 05:37:49 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
If they want to be legit contenders...first things first, they need to move the walls back about 20 feet. Does it hurt the offense, sure a little bit, but I think Texiera can mash in a bigger field too. They have a solid pitching staff, they just play on a high school field and that's the biggest issue. The offense is solid and has kept them in the hunt late into the season the last few years, but without a solid pitching core it's never going to happen.
Having both Otsuka and Gagne to round out the bullpen helps. I think if they can move the walls back a bit and make one or two solid moves to cobble together the right mix of veterans and youngsters, they Rangers can be a very competitive team.
Adding a Mulder to the rotation is an inspired move, but it figures to have more of an impact in 2008, but he would be available down the stretch this season, but that all depends on how his rehab works out.
I'd expect the Rangers to put up a solid fight in the division because neither the Angels or A's have done anything to set them head-and-shoulders above the rest of the division.
PS: Barry Zito definitely was NOT the guy to put them over the top.
PPS: When Carlos Zambrano is a free agent next year...he IS the guy who could do it, assuming they move the walls.
2007-01-06 05:36:00 · answer #2 · answered by tkatt00 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
My predicyions for the 2007 Al west:
1. Angels
2. Rangers
3. A's
4. seatlle
I think the Rangers are going to fall short this season to the Angels for the same reasons they did last year. Crappy pitching.... The Angels didn't get a big bat to back up Vladdy but hey the lineup isn't that bad. Besides they have really good pitching. Overall in baseball if you have good pitching then that will win you games.
2007-01-06 10:38:58 · answer #3 · answered by Michelle R 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They have a legit shot at making the postseason. The Angels and A's haven't made any significant moves to get better and the Rangers got better. I still think the team to beat is the Angels, though.
2007-01-06 05:12:46 · answer #4 · answered by cubsjunkie 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
More and more each year the are beginning to look like the Nationals team. Talent is slowly year by year disappearing.
M. Teixeira
H. Blalock
M. Young
Is all they have left. Can't do much with that. Look for more of the same results as in the past.
2007-01-06 10:03:57 · answer #5 · answered by Wise One 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They will win the World Series.
The Buck Showalter Curse!!!!!!
Leaves Yanks 95---- Yanks win in 96
Leaves Diamondbacks 2000--- Diamondbacks win in 2001
Leaves Rangers 2006-----Rangers ???? in 2007.
2007-01-06 12:05:26 · answer #6 · answered by mddysdddy 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If they ever get any decent pitching they will be good. But for the past 10-15 years they have not had a great staff. They have had some good pitchers but not a gtreat staff.
2007-01-06 07:55:43 · answer #7 · answered by gman 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Instead of 80-82 they'll finish 82-80. The pitching has not improved at all.
2007-01-06 07:48:18 · answer #8 · answered by Stealing Home 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Rangers finish 3rd at best 4th at worst.
2007-01-06 13:30:52 · answer #9 · answered by Play Ball 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no longer bloody probably. keeping season tickets can provide the holder the choice to purchase postseason tickets forward of the final public, and probably regardless of preferential seat decision (in all probability no longer the customary seats). yet blanketed? in no way heard of one in each and every of those element.
2016-11-27 00:02:24 · answer #10 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋