Rangers: Cliff Lee vs. Zack Grienke (My Debate for which to sign)
So heres my question I want to pose to the community and its more of an opinion I want debated here. The ultimate end state question is: If you were Nolan Ryan and the Rangers, which pitcher makes more sense to get KNOWING that a 6 to 7 year contract is inevitable in the end. Now...heres some facts I want yall to consider:
Cliff Lee (Yanks offer 7 years $160) - The guy is 32 years old. Is an inning eater for sure. Very good, confident, mature ace of the rotation no doubt. The last three years heres his stats:
2008 (30 years) - 2.54 ERA 170 K Great BB
2009 (31 years) - 3.39 ERA 181 K Great BB (dominate in playoffs)
2010 (32 years) - 3.98 ERA 186 k Great BB (Dominated until WS)
Now heres a link from his FULL career, and I want you guys to notice his stats from when he was 27 years old. That is about the year 2005. I want this to be the focus when yall make the comparison to Zack Grienke. To compare them side by side RIGHT NOW is unfair being that Lee is as I said a more confident and mature pitcher in his years now, AND has been with two very good playoff teams. Heck, IMO, the yanks and the rangers only really want LEE for his playoff dominace, but thats besides the point.
Zack Grienke (Roayls ACE, trade bait is for some of Rangers prime pitching talents. Has two years left on contract) - The guy is 27 years old, so a 7 year contract would be warranted just from a age point of view. Has won a Cy Young already as a 26 year old which is 4 years EARLIER than Lee. Has a ton of upside, you have to consider he will get even better as he develops with the rangers staff. Put him with a power lineup ALA rangers and you HAVE to figure his wins ect... will be more. Heres some stats to revisit in HIS 3 years:
2008 (25 years) - 3.47 ERA 183 K 56 BB
2009 (26 years) - 2.16 ERA 181 K 51 BB *cy young*
2010 (27 years) - 4.17 ERA 186 K 55 BB
Zack Grienke is a very good pitcher who figures to be even better with the right staff and team. The royals offense didnt really help him at all which is unfortunate. Having a weak offense behind you as a pitcher can really blow your confidence. I mean, how confindent would any of us be if we knew we would have to dang near throw a shutout just to have a chance to win?
My argument is this: Cliff Lee wants a 6 to 7 year deal with no doubt a no trade clause and tons of money to boot. While he is a dominate pitcher the years dont add up for a pitcher whose already 32 years old. Too many things could happen and as much innings as he eats up, you wonder how long his body will hold up. Also, the giants found a way to beat up Lee TWICE in the world series, so you wonder if the book is out on him. Just an observation. Now, zack Grienke has another issue, the royals want either tanner sheppers or martin perez along with other primo talent. However, he is 27 years old and is way ahead of where Cliff Lee was when he was 27. With the right team and right staff, I think greinke could blow past Cliff Lee. If the Rangers traded away their talent, sure it would hurt, but the rangers reload in talent anyways. Grienke is a proven ACE now, and trading away prime talent who COULD one day be as good or better isnt really no problem in my book. You get grienke for at least 2 years and you get prime negotiating rights to him which means you could offer the contract he wants to him. As a GM, the zack Grienke offer makes more sense to me from a financial standpoint in terms of production. Lee is a great pitcher but a 7 year deal for a 32 year old pitcher is no bueno. In a heartbeat I would get Zack Grienke because he has more upside and has more longevity. So whats your argument?
Cliff Lee (Yanks offer 7 years $160) - The guy is 32 years old. Is an inning eater for sure. Very good, confident, mature ace of the rotation no doubt. The last three years heres his stats:
2008 (30 years) - 2.54 ERA 170 K Great BB
2009 (31 years) - 3.39 ERA 181 K Great BB (dominate in playoffs)
2010 (32 years) - 3.98 ERA 186 k Great BB (Dominated until WS)
Now heres a link from his FULL career, and I want you guys to notice his stats from when he was 27 years old. That is about the year 2005. I want this to be the focus when yall make the comparison to Zack Grienke. To compare them side by side RIGHT NOW is unfair being that Lee is as I said a more confident and mature pitcher in his years now, AND has been with two very good playoff teams. Heck, IMO, the yanks and the rangers only really want LEE for his playoff dominace, but thats besides the point.
Zack Grienke (Roayls ACE, trade bait is for some of Rangers prime pitching talents. Has two years left on contract) - The guy is 27 years old, so a 7 year contract would be warranted just from a age point of view. Has won a Cy Young already as a 26 year old which is 4 years EARLIER than Lee. Has a ton of upside, you have to consider he will get even better as he develops with the rangers staff. Put him with a power lineup ALA rangers and you HAVE to figure his wins ect... will be more. Heres some stats to revisit in HIS 3 years:
2008 (25 years) - 3.47 ERA 183 K 56 BB
2009 (26 years) - 2.16 ERA 181 K 51 BB *cy young*
2010 (27 years) - 4.17 ERA 186 K 55 BB
Zack Grienke is a very good pitcher who figures to be even better with the right staff and team. The royals offense didnt really help him at all which is unfortunate. Having a weak offense behind you as a pitcher can really blow your confidence. I mean, how confindent would any of us be if we knew we would have to dang near throw a shutout just to have a chance to win?
My argument is this: Cliff Lee wants a 6 to 7 year deal with no doubt a no trade clause and tons of money to boot. While he is a dominate pitcher the years dont add up for a pitcher whose already 32 years old. Too many things could happen and as much innings as he eats up, you wonder how long his body will hold up. Also, the giants found a way to beat up Lee TWICE in the world series, so you wonder if the book is out on him. Just an observation. Now, zack Grienke has another issue, the royals want either tanner sheppers or martin perez along with other primo talent. However, he is 27 years old and is way ahead of where Cliff Lee was when he was 27. With the right team and right staff, I think greinke could blow past Cliff Lee. If the Rangers traded away their talent, sure it would hurt, but the rangers reload in talent anyways. Grienke is a proven ACE now, and trading away prime talent who COULD one day be as good or better isnt really no problem in my book. You get grienke for at least 2 years and you get prime negotiating rights to him which means you could offer the contract he wants to him. As a GM, the zack Grienke offer makes more sense to me from a financial standpoint in terms of production. Lee is a great pitcher but a 7 year deal for a 32 year old pitcher is no bueno. In a heartbeat I would get Zack Grienke because he has more upside and has more longevity. So whats your argument?
oNotPromoteQF/> <w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther> <w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w
Comment