Rangers Sign Desmond To One-Year Deal

The Rangers have reportedly agreed to a one-year, $8m contract with Ian Desmond pending a physical as first reported by Ken Rosenthal.

First, the Desmond profile...

-Former SS will be used as a LF, primarily, if not exclusively.
-7-year MLB career all with the Nationals.
-RH hitter, which is important to the Rangers
-One-time All Star and three-time Silver Slugger as a SS.
-Coming off worst year since he established himself with a .233/.290/.384/.674 slash and 187 K.
-Supreme athlete...maybe the best on the Rangers' eventual 25-man.
-Very good arm.
-Has averaged 22 HR/year over his last four seasons.
-Has averaged around 20 SB/year since 2010, though is coming off a career low since (13) being an everyday guy.

Based on Twitter, this is a polarizing move amongst Rangers fans. I get that rarely does a move get 100% fan approval, but I'm confused by the degree to which some fans disapprove. Before we move forward, the Rangers DO NOT pay me for this type of work and also provide me the freedom to discuss this stuff honestly and without the need to wave a Rangers flag. Don't want to hear that crap.

Here's why I like the move (in no particular order).
1. It's a one-year deal. There's no long-term strangle if it doesn't work out.

2. LF was an obvious hole for the Rangers (and maybe it still is), but Ian Desmond is an aggressive move with great upside who can provide middle-of-the-lineup type offense as a right-handed hitter.

3. He's coming off his worst year, but still offers power to a lineup that is without a true 30-HR power threat. He probably won't hit 30 HR either, but he'll challenge for the team lead (and likely--hopefully--come up just short) if healthy.

4. For those with defensive concerns, his athleticism and arm suggest he'll make the transition well. Gold Glove? No. But the Rangers were poor defensively in left field last year and Desmond won't make them worse.

5. The addition of that athleticism is very welcomed, too. That wasn't a strong suit for the team.

6. He will likely be used a LF, primarily, as well as a utility infielder and outfielder. Athleticism will allow him to play CF.

7. The move further ensures that the Rangers won't feel the need to rush one of their promising prospects, specifically Nomar Mazara.

8. If he has even a decent year, which I believe he will, then the Rangers will extend a qualifying offer that Desmond will reject. When he does and signs elsewhere, the Rangers will receive a compensatory pick. Will it be as high as the #19 they'll lose in 2016? No. It will likely be in the low 30s. Still not bad.

9. I'm a big believer in the mental side of things. For whatever reason, he didn't capitalize on a contract year opportunity last year. But he has something very dangerous: a second chance. I tend to believe that a guy with, at 30 years old, possibly his last chance to sign a big-money deal will take advantage of it.

In response to the critics...

10. I want to make this clear: I totally understand and respect those who don't like the move. I just disagree...

11. I just see SUCH LITTLE downside with it being a one-year deal.

12a. The lost 19th pick will likely produce a very talented player. But that talented player, even if he is an All-Star caliber guy, won't contribute to the MLB team for another three-to-four years, at least.

12b. This team has a great opportunity to win in the next two years with both Hamels and Darvish here. When you can go for it...GO FOR IT.

12c. This organization is very good at drafting, which is one reason why losing 19 does stink, but it is also why I have confidence their drafts will acquire enough talent to where we don't feel the effects of this thing.

13. His numbers have declined in a lot of relevant categories. Very fair. They have. He's 30, though, and not 37. He's without a long list of injuries (has played 150+ in all but one year since he became an everyday guy, and in that year he played 130). And, again, I'll point to the second chance at a contract year.

14. He isn't blocking any of the youngsters. If Mazara is ready, Mazara will play. Desmond has position flexibility.

If Ian Desmond is absolutely horrendous and the worst player to wear a Rangers uniform, it comes at the cost of a one-year, $8m deal. That deal won't hurt you moving forward at all. You lose the pick and if he is horrible, you won't extend a QO and thus won't receive a comp pick for him, but if all I lose for a creative and aggressive move with plenty of upside is a stinking draft pick for a team that can win now, I'll live with that loss. There's risk in every move. This is no different. But I'd rather make a calculated risk for one-year than a long-term, $100+ million risk for multiple years. This is a low-risk move that could pay off great dividends. This will not cripple the Rangers and if it doesn't work out early on, the Rangers have the ability to make appropriate moves.