The Trade That Got Away

IliketheBullsNBearstoo · Post #1 » by **IliketheBullsNBearstoo** » Mon Oct 29, 2007 5:21 am

Anyone remember a couple years back....

hxxp://www.mlbtraderumors.com/josh_beckett/index.html

That was a steal of a deal and we should have pulled it off asap and ran! Screw those so called pitching prospects. Anyways, after seeing what Beckett and Lowell have done this post season it sure would have been nice to have them on the Rangers. We probably would have been able to keep Tex here too!

sosafan70 · Post #2 » by **sosafan70** » Mon Oct 29, 2007 9:34 pm

We could've also traded ARod for Manny

Post #3 » by **studcrackers** » Tue Oct 30, 2007 4:27 am

IliketheBullsNBearstoo wrote:Anyone remember a couple years back....

hxxp://www.mlbtraderumors.com/josh_beckett/index.html

That was a steal of a deal and we should have pulled it off asap and ran! Screw those so called pitching prospects. Anyways, after seeing what Beckett and Lowell have done this post season it sure would have been nice to have them on the Rangers. We probably would have been able to keep Tex here too!

you're a moron, florida never even gave this deal much thought, someone thought they had the facts straight and ran with the story. florida used this offer (i doubt it was strongly considered) and levied it into a better deal b/c they wanted hanley ramirez, and now he's the best SS in the NL.

Post #4 » by **catalyst** » Wed Oct 31, 2007 7:55 pm

It was not only going to be danks. I think Blalock was to be involved, and others to balance salary. Hicks can whine all he wants about the trade that got away. It just shows ineffective ownership and management.

Post #5 » by **studcrackers** » Thu Nov 1, 2007 7:03 am

where is hicks whining? i hate hicks as much as much as anyone here but how is there ineffective ownership and maangement when this offer was never really on the table and being considered seriously?

blyent · Post #6 » by **blyent** » Fri Nov 2, 2007 2:21 pm

The above link doesn't work anymore, what where the reported rumors to get Becket and Lowell?

IliketheBullsNBearstoo · Post #7 » by **IliketheBullsNBearstoo** » Fri Nov 2, 2007 8:02 pm

The Marlins were in fire sale mode. If you remember back when this rumor was going around it was seriously being considered but Texas management did not want to part ways with multiple pitching prospects along with Blalock who was the centerpiece of the trade and they hemmed and hawed when the Marlins wanted more. So Boston said hey lookie what we'll give you and the Marlins said hell yeah and that leaves us where we are today. I may be a moron but I remember this well and was so happy when I read that this deal was almost done. I'm not blaming anyone I just wanted to point out that the 2 most important players for the world series champs this year WERE very close to being Rangers.

blyent, change the 2 x's in the hxxp: in the link to t's and it will work. Then scroll down a ways.

Click on the Dallas Morning News link on the trade nearly done topic and it goes to the page that says: Sources: Texas in serious trade talks for Beckett

Post #8 » by **DDansby123** » Thu Nov 22, 2007 3:47 pm

The Rangers never had a shot at Beckett. The Marlins wanted a prime SS prospect who was ready for the majors then. Our biggest prospect (Arias) was nowhere close, so the Blalock package was the best thing we could offer. The Sox offered what the Marlins wanted, and we couldn't (not wouldn't...couldn't).

Post #9 » by **catalyst** » Thu Nov 22, 2007 11:16 pm

I defy anyone to show how hicks is an effective owner. He is more interested in a profit, which no fan has any interest in a team being profitable. We want winners, and this team needed pitching. Beckett was and is great. Lowell was overpaid for what marlins needed. Hicks has shown that he is not really interested in winning first. That is not how teams win. Teams are usually cash flow neutral or cash flow negative when the product is poor.

Post #10 » by **studcrackers** » Fri Nov 23, 2007 12:52 am

ok we know u hate hicks and have every reason to but what the hell does this have to with us having josh beckett? they never considered our offer and if they even took it seriously they used it for more leverage for the redsox?

even this torii hunter signing, what does it prove that we spend money? we'd regret the deal this year b/c he's not worth 18 million, he's worth no more than 14 million and i'd be reluctant to give him that.

Post #11 » by **catalyst** » Fri Nov 23, 2007 1:21 pm

I just get sick of being spoken to like a shareholder and not a fan. As silly as it sounds, Hicks is nore interested in a profit than winning. He does not get it that the profit will come when the team wins. And he should act like the winning owners in town and NEVER talk of profit.

Post #12 » by **catalyst** » Fri Nov 23, 2007 1:24 pm

I might be unfairly using this particular forum for this argument, but I get tired of his comparing his teams to his other investments. I am not a ranger fan due to the profitabillty but the team. I have been a fan since they got here, and I do not care if they make money. I want them to win, and that does not seem to be one of the priorities of the current ownership.