Byrd is the wordSuddenly, almost out of nowhere, there is a ton of crowing from fans of the Texas Rangers and the media that cover them. The team, that is, not the fans.
All about Marlon Byrd.
Byrd's an interesting bird. He's having an outstanding year. A career year, really. He's matched his career single-season totals for homers, and doubles. He should beat single-season numbers for games played, at-bats, hits, runs, RBI and who knows what other categories.
He's had a tremendous year. I can not deny this. My initial feeling in the off-season was to trade him over the winter. I was wrong. Byrd's had a career year and his value was never as high as it was at the trade deadline and it will only go up as the season wanes and maybe, if Byrd walks, the Rangers get a compensatory pick in the draft.
Or maybe Byrd comes back.
See, that's what all the hubbub is about currently regarding Byrd. He's finishing out a 1-year deal and he's probably going to look to get paid in the off-season. Soon, he'll be 32. This is probably his last chance at a long-term, big-cash deal.
The question is if the Rangers will pay him or another team.
Many media and fans apparently can't imagine the Rangers without Byrd and could never imagine, giving his current output, the Rangers simply letting him walk.
Don't get me wrong, Byrd is most invaluable, mostly because he's cheap. But also because he can hit anywhere in the line-up, he can play all three outfield positions, and he'll club a big hit here or there.
However, is he in the future plans of the Rangers? Should he be.
Let's be frank: Byrd is putting up a career year in a contract year. If Vicente Padilla was out there tossing shutout complete games in his contract year, we'd be pissed off royally to see a guy underperform only to show up when there's money to be made.
Byrd's kinda doing the same thing. The only difference was that he wasn't making any money to begin with.
Remember, Byrd is a guy who underwhelmed the baseball word since 2002. He'd never played more than 130 games, had more than 500 at-bats, 10 home runs, 70 RBI. He's a career .279 hitting with a paltry .340 OBP.
The guy was pretty spare. The Rangers took a chance and turned him into an everyday player.
Is this a guy you would throw three years at? Is he a guy you pay $10 million a year for?
I don't know about everyone else, but I wouldn't. Not that I don't like spending Tom Hicks' well-earned cash, but I can't see paying that much for that long for a guy that is kinda old and still kinda not all that great. He's good, but he's not Joe DiMaggio.
I take the three years and $10 million per from Milton Bradley's deal from last winter.
Bradley was 30 when he got that much from the Chicago Cubs following a career year with the Rangers were he had 22 homers, 32 doubles, a .327 average, a .436 OBP and 414 at-bats.
Byrd's older, but his power numbers could be a little better despite the lesser average. So I would fully suspect Byrd to attract $10 million per this off-season.
Again, Byrd's putting up his career numbers when it was most desirable to put up his career numbers.
For me, I stay away. If he drops a couple of million dollars over two years, I give him a good look. But the Rangers are currently knee-deep in outfielders already not getting enough time. I would hate to see Byrd taking up valuable innings and at-bats from Julio Borbon, Brandon Boggs and other (cheaper) youngsters in the Rangers farm system.
I love the Byrd-man, but between him and the future, I think the Rangers can win without him.
Labels: Contracts, Free Agency, Rangers