Dallas Morning News Article re: Mancini

[Moose Milligan]

I'm curious as to the logic behind the statement that all Mancini would cost is upper level prospects.  The armchair geniuses here would love to agree but probably know better. 

[interloper]

1 minute ago, Moose Milligan said:

I'm curious as to the logic behind the statement that all Mancini would cost is upper level prospects.  The armchair geniuses here would love to agree but probably know better. 

I don't really know what "only upper level prospects" means. Like, if AA is considered upper level, then DL Hall is an upper level prospect assuming they start him there this season. Lowther and Wells and Diaz are upper level. Those are some quality players, so I'm not sure what the "only" refers to. 

[Moose Milligan]

2 minutes ago, interloper said:

I don't really know what "only upper level prospects" means. Like, if AA is considered upper level, then DL Hall is an upper level prospect assuming they start him there this season. Lowther and Wells and Diaz are upper level. Those are some quality players, so I'm not sure what the "only" refers to. 

Makes sense.  I assumed it meant highly rated/regarded.

[Philip]

5 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

I'm curious as to the logic behind the statement that all Mancini would cost is upper level prospects.  The armchair geniuses here would love to agree but probably know better. 

That’s just what Evan Grant wrote in the article. I guess it is because 1) Mancini can hit, and hit better than whomever he’s replacing 2) the Rangers don’t have a focus on defense, so his D wouldn’t be that much of a negative 3) The Rangers are “win-now” so a prospect cost is affordable and 4) Mancini or someone like him is one of the few remaining needs to get back into WC contention, and he would be an improvement over Mazara.

I personally think that Houston/Anaheim/Oakland are all better prepared and Texas will battle Seattle for fourth, but Jon Daniels has a lot of questionable moves on his resume. Wouldn’t mind seeing another one.

[Philip]

5 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

Makes sense.  I assumed it meant highly rated/regarded.

That’s how I understand it as well, and that’s reasonable. Grant didn’t mean AAA guys, he meant first tier ranked prospects. Don’t they have Josh Jung?? 

[Moose Milligan]

12 minutes ago, Philip said:

That’s just what Evan Grant wrote in the article. I guess it is because 1) Mancini can hit, and hit better than whomever he’s replacing 2) the Rangers don’t have a focus on defense, so his D wouldn’t be that much of a negative 3) The Rangers are “win-now” so a prospect cost is affordable and 4) Mancini or someone like him is one of the few remaining needs to get back into WC contention, and he would be an improvement over Mazara.

I personally think that Houston/Anaheim/Oakland are all better prepared and Texas will battle Seattle for fourth, but Jon Daniels has a lot of questionable moves on his resume. Wouldn’t mind seeing another one.

The Rangers would be smart to tighten up their defense and pitching.  They've always been an offense only team, with perhaps a few exceptions.  It never works out for them.

[BRobinsonfan]

I've always been a Mancini fan - but for the right package I'd trade him.  If the Rangers are in "win now" mode then we might be able to get a decent haul.  Hans Crouse, Cole Winn and Nick Solak look interesting. Not suggesting they would trade all three but some combination that includes one or two of them might work.  

[weams]

1 hour ago, Moose Milligan said:

The Rangers would be smart to tighten up their defense and pitching.  They've always been an offense only team, with perhaps a few exceptions.  It never works out for them.

Didn't Nelson Cruz lose two world series for them with his glove? 

[wildbillhiccup]

21 hours ago, Philip said:

Those are valid points. Mazara is an outfielder though, and Mancini would presumably be brought on board as a 1B/DH. He’s older than Mazara but seems to be a far better hitter by OPS(.788 to .999 for Trey) WAR, WRC, well everything, actually. Trey outhits him completely.

Comparing the two hitters Doesn’t make me wonder why the Rangers got rid of Mazara, But it sure makes me wonder why the White Sox didn’t trade for Mancini instead.

If they didn't view him as a OF then probably because they already have Abreu, Encarnacion, and even Grandal to a lesser extent who should all see time at 1B. No question I'd rather have Mancini over Mazara though as a pure hitter. 

[NCRaven]

If used primarily at 1B, I don't think Mancini's defense will have a negative impact on any team.  He'd be an upgrade for them at the plate.  

[Philip]

1 hour ago, NCRaven said:

If used primarily at 1B, I don't think Mancini's defense will have a negative impact on any team.  He'd be an upgrade for them at the plate.  

Yes I agree. But the reason I Mentioned it is because even as a right fielder, his negative defense probably would not be bad enough to be a dealbreaker for the Rangers

[SteveA]

4 hours ago, Moose Milligan said:

The Rangers would be smart to tighten up their defense and pitching.  They've always been an offense only team, with perhaps a few exceptions.  It never works out for them.

They are going into the season with the best looking rotation they have had in many, many years.   Kluber, Minor, Lynn, Kyle Gibson.   Seems to me they have followed your advice already this offseason, at least when it comes to pitching.

[Moose Milligan]

8 minutes ago, SteveA said:

They are going into the season with the best looking rotation they have had in many, many years.   Kluber, Minor, Lynn, Kyle Gibson.   Seems to me they have followed your advice already this offseason, at least when it comes to pitching.

Yes, glad they've been listening to me.  Forgot that they picked up Kluber.

[Philip]

2 hours ago, weams said:

Didn't Nelson Cruz lose two world series for them with his glove? 

No, just the one...but it was a big one. And Ron Washington takes the blame for being so stupid he didn’t put Endy Chavez in as a defensive replacement, grrr.

[7Mo]

5 hours ago, Moose Milligan said:

I'm curious as to the logic behind the statement that all Mancini would cost is upper level prospects.  The armchair geniuses here would love to agree but probably know better. 

He probably meant it wouldn't require anyone from the major league roster.