*****Official Texas Rangers 2025 2026 Offseason Thread*****

62,629 Views | 752 Replies | Last: 1 day ago by CowtownAg06
fc2112
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
5:16a, 12/23/25
I guess my point is - if we'd been under, we could have made a run this year if we wanted to.

But perhaps we never were going to and it doesn't matter.

Us being over is still inexcusable. There is a whole office of people doing the math on that. Someone fouled up their job royally.
Reply Quote
Proposition Joe
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to fc2112 • 6:47a, 12/23/25
fc2112 said:
I guess my point is - if we'd been under, we could have made a run this year if we wanted to.

But perhaps we never were going to and it doesn't matter.

Us being over is still inexcusable. There is a whole office of people doing the math on that. Someone fouled up their job royally.


This is a great example of the twitterverse not really understanding the entire financial picture and letting a few people make a mountain out of a molehill. Fans mad at moves during a playoff race because they might cost the team a few million more years later...

Be upset that Young couldn't swing any deals for a bat. Be upset that Davis isn't interested in playing in the Top 5 payroll market.

But silly to be upset over going over the CBT threshold on playoff race acquisitions by the wrong amount and maybe (but probably not) having to pay an extra couple of million next year.

We're paying $37MM to Joc Pederson. A small chance at an extra couple of million in CBT tax is not in the Top 20 list of Rangers issues.
Reply Quote
6
1 edit
fc2112
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Proposition Joe • 3:59a, 12/24/25
No one is upset about paying tax on $100,000.

But we should all be upset that it means we absolutely cannot play in the free agent market this year.

We easily could have pressed the reset button on that restriction but didn't watch the numbers close enough to avoid it. There is a whole office of people at Globe Life Field who dropped the ball on that.
Reply Quote
1
Proposition Joe
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to fc2112 • 6:24a, 12/24/25
fc2112 said:
But we should all be upset that it means we absolutely cannot play in the free agent market this year.

We easily could have pressed the reset button on that restriction but didn't watch the numbers close enough to avoid it. There is a whole office of people at Globe Life Field who dropped the ball on that.


What does "watch the numbers close enough to avoid it" mean? Offer less on a trade deadline offer and possibly miss out? Do you really want your GM approaching the trade deadline in a playoff chase with restrictions revolving around staying under a CBT that in all likelihood won't matter the next season? You'd rather have super clean books then, I don't know, try and win?

As many are trying to tell you, our overage last year will have almost zero impact on our ability to play in the free agent market this year.

Yes we could have easily pressed the reset button if we didn't decide to make acquisitions at the trade deadline. I'm not sure why we'd be applauding not going for it in a playoff chase. As others pointed out, we cut the division to 2 games in September. I'd personally take that over punting in July so we can 100% reset our CBT threshold that... by all indications we have no intention of going over significantly anyways.

Unless you thought we were going to be sporting a $280MM payroll this season (adding $100MM or so from this point), then the overage did.not.matter. You're upset because some beat writer pointed out that we might could have been more efficient on something that in the grand scheme of things for 2026 wouldn't have mattered either way.
Reply Quote
2
2 edits
fc2112
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
6:41a, 12/24/25
Quote:
What does "watch the numbers close enough to avoid it" mean?


How about don't pay Eovaldi an All Star bonus he didn't earn?
Reply Quote
Proposition Joe
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to fc2112 • 7:08a, 12/24/25
fc2112 said:
Quote:
What does "watch the numbers close enough to avoid it" mean?


How about don't pay Eovaldi an All Star bonus he didn't earn?


So no added goodwill towards a guy that put up 4.3 WAR for us in 2025 even in limited innings. A guy that by all accounts has been one of the leaders of the team and who, depending on how the next two years play out, you might have to ask that he waive his no trade clause.

Great... You're still $90k over. What move do you not want to make at the deadline or whatever player you want to get stingy with on bonuses so that we can have a $280MM payroll in 2026 (that zero people ever thought was a likelihood)?

Evan Grant is a beat writer and not a GM for a reason. It's focusing on the wrong things.
Reply Quote
2
fc2112
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:15a, 12/24/25
Why do you keep mentioning beat writers?
Reply Quote
rbtexan
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:31a, 12/24/25
S
I think a possibility that is being overlooked in this discussion about the CBT is that the decision to get the figure lower/beneath it has nothing to do with the "tax" or whatever you call it, but rather is a conscious move to keep the salaries at a certain level, period. As has been pointed out, we were ranked something like 7th in total player salaries last season, so it's not like the organization hasn't spent money.

I think Davis et al have a number that they feel they can operate under and be competitive and still profitable. Spending money like a drunken sailor on leave sounds great when it's not your money. It's easy to sit here and say "we should sign Kyle Tucker!, we should sign Ranger Suarez!, we should sign Cody Bellinger!", but the simple fact of the matter is, the Rangers ain't the Dodgers or Yankees, and we're never going to spend like that.

I think there is absolutely an argument to be made that, with aging players like deGrom and Eovaldi, maybe the Rangers should dive headfirst into the FA market or trade market and go for a couple of championships now, and damn the cost. But again, really easy to say/think that when you aren't looking at the balance sheets and signing the checks. JMO
Reply Quote
3
Proposition Joe
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to fc2112 • 8:13a, 12/24/25
fc2112 said:
Why do you keep mentioning beat writers?


Because I feel guys like Evan Grant tweeting it and framing it like the Rangers completely **** the bed on the budget and now it's going to hinder what they can do this year is what has caused people to be discussing it like it matters. Evan just wants engagement.

We were never going to spend $260MM in 2025.

But if we did, going over the threshold at the deadline getting the guys we wanted to go after might have cost us $4MM or so in the grand scheme of things.

By all indications, we were going to be under $244MM in 2026 and whether we went over the 2025 threshold by $1 or $100MM didn't matter.

It's not some major blunder. It's insignificant.

Chris Young deeming Joc Pederson a worthwhile pickup at 2Y/37M is 1000 times more damning of his job performance than any CBT overage.
Reply Quote
7
3 edits
rbtexan
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Proposition Joe • 8:19a, 12/24/25
S
Quote:
Chris Young deeming Joc Pederson a worthwhile pickup at 2Y/37M is 1000 times more damning of his job performance than any CBT overage.

Yep
Reply Quote
6
fc2112
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to rbtexan • 9:44a, 12/24/25
rbtexan said:
Quote:
Chris Young deeming Joc Pederson a worthwhile pickup at 2Y/37M is 1000 times more damning of his job performance than any CBT overage.

Yep

I think we can all agree on that. But going for it in 2026 was, imho, at least a possibility if we'd stayed under the cap.

And I was preaching about staying under the cap all year long.
Reply Quote
CowtownAg06
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to fc2112 • 10:54a, 12/24/25
AG
I don't think the tax reset would have moved the 2026 budget .01.
Reply Quote
3
Proposition Joe
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to fc2112 • 11:57a, 12/24/25
What salary would you have considered going for it?
Reply Quote
pattybrhg
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:37a, 12/25/25
I agree with the thoughts on the difference in taxes likely being negligible for the most part. I thought the bigger worry all along was the loss of draft picks that came with repeatedly going over the threshold though?
Reply Quote
1
rbtexan
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to pattybrhg • 1:09p, 12/25/25
S
Probably so, but as poorly as the Rangers typically draft in the early rounds it shouldn't matter
Reply Quote
Water Boy
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:46p, 12/25/25
AG
I have no problem with us staying under the tax if we fully commit to it. Can't be in a situation again this year near the trade deadline where we ultimately decide to go over only to get players we didn't need and still miss out on the playoffs.
Reply Quote
fc2112
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:09p, 12/25/25
Reply Quote
7
CowtownAg06
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:45a, 12/26/25
AG
Pirates singed Ryan O'Hearn for 2/$29M. He's a guy I would have loved us to look at if not for the Joc clog.
Reply Quote
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.