Would you go after Tanaka

Interesting to see a Dodger fan saying no. From what I read except for the fact they are over the luxury tax cutoff they are not bumping against their limit. They are over $200 mil. But from what I understand they have a regional tv contract that will be paying $250 mil a year. They could dedicate all that to salary and still have their share of MLB revenues plus ticket sales, other advertising, and merchandise revenue to make a profit with.

Magic Johnson seems determined to have the best of everything in LA. Though with his all out approach he could end up painting himself in to same corner yankees did in past going too long term with players too old to avoid having bad deals on the back end. But right now I do not see any Arod style anchors poised to drag them down.

If Kemp and Ramirez are healthy in 2014 that will be a solid offense.

Interesting to see a Dodger fan saying no. From what I read except for the fact they are over the luxury tax cutoff they are not bumping against their limit. They are over $200 mil. But from what I understand they have a regional tv contract that will be paying $250 mil a year. They could dedicate all that to salary and still have their share of MLB revenues plus ticket sales, other advertising, and merchandise revenue to make a profit with.

Magic Johnson seems determined to have the best of everything in LA. Though with his all out approach he could end up painting himself in to same corner yankees did in past going too long term with players too old to avoid having bad deals on the back end. But right now I do not see any Arod style anchors poised to drag them down.

If Kemp and Ramirez are healthy in 2014 that will be a solid offense.

Agreed, Kemp is the real wild card on the team. If he can be the old Kemp the offense will be very good. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see them sign Tanaka. Just saying if it was my team I think there are safer bets out there. Tanaka will end up commanding ace starter money, and I think it's quite likely that he'll be more like a #3 starter. Meanwhile, Beckett Fife or Lee could hold down a rotation spot until Billingsley is ready.

to expand a bit, If it were my dollar I think they can start the season with what they have and then if help is needed snag someone at the trading deadline. I think better bargains can be found that way and it keeps more options open. It worked well last year when they snagged Nolasco for practically nothing because they were willing to take on the contract. there's bound to be another "Nolasco" out there at the trading deadline this year

Tanaka will end up commanding ace starter money, and I think it's quite likely that he'll be more like a #3 starter.

As a fan and if I were an owner that would be my greatest concern. And is the reason I would not be disappointed if the Rangers avoid the temptation.

I suppose in some ways though this question as a fan is really about how much you trust your team. How much do you trust the people running it to make good baseball decisions and the scouts employed by it to make the right recommendations.

Just to add to the discussion. Here is a Baseball America scouting report on one of Tanaka's games, which has him touching 96 mph and sitting at 89-94 mph for most of the game:

http://www.baseballamerica.com/internat ... t-sept-13/

as well as a bleacher report article comparing Tanaka to Darvish, which also says Tanaka touches 96 mph:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1890 ... yu-darvish

So, apparently there are conflicting reports out there on how hard Tanaka actually throws. However, if the above reports are correct, I can see why so many teams are competing to spend big money on him. There aren't many pitchers out there with excellent command of four pitches, excellent control, and who can throw that hard.

Thanks lstrether. That was a good article with more of a detailed scouting report than most I have read.

No problem, Valen. I'm glad you enjoyed it.

Tanaka will end up commanding ace starter money, and I think it's quite likely that he'll be more like a #3 starter.

As a fan and if I were an owner that would be my greatest concern. And is the reason I would not be disappointed if the Rangers avoid the temptation.

I suppose in some ways though this question as a fan is really about how much you trust your team. How much do you trust the people running it to make good baseball decisions and the scouts employed by it to make the right recommendations.

here's the quote

I would not spend, "whatever it takes" for ANY player.

I forgot about this thread. Glad someone dug it back up.
It is still early but based on what I have seen so far I would be all in for spending whatever it took. Those who predicted he would be outstanding were dead on.

Of course if my Rangers had spent the money on him the way things are going around the team these days the news would be about the injuries he has suffered. I was just thinking this past week if I were a Ranger and not yet hurt I would be sending my agent in to Daniels office to demand a trade. Get out of there while I could still walk. I do not remember a team I ever rooted for being this jinxed.

I forgot about this thread. Glad someone dug it back up.
It is still early but based on what I have seen so far I would be all in for spending whatever it took. Those who predicted he would be outstanding were dead on.

Of course if my Rangers had spent the money on him the way things are going around the team these days the news would be about the injuries he has suffered. I was just thinking this past week if I were a Ranger and not yet hurt I would be sending my agent in to Daniels office to demand a trade. Get out of there while I could still walk. I do not remember a team I ever rooted for being this jinxed.

Thanks, Valen. Considering I was the only one on this thread who both predicted considerable success for Tanaka and argued he was worth the financial gamble needed to sign him, I appreciate the props. As you know, I responded to your post on the latest Tanaka forum (titled "Tanaka", May 15, 2014, 1:09 Pm start date). I'm curious to know your response to it, and if you still have the same views on "#1 and #3 starters"...