Pete Pascarelli struck a blow for the old guard in his ESPN Baseball Today podcast on Wednesday. He was discussing the Rangers’ foibles, and with obvious derision stated that their mistake was hiring a “boy genius” like Daniels, and that “like other boy geniuses he has had a problem making good decisions.” I, like other statistically inclined Generals, immediately thought that Pascarelli was pulling a Murray Chass. But was he right??

Daniels clearly got off to a bit of a rough start, making both the Soriano trade and the Adam Eaton trade. We can have our doubts about the Soriano trade, and perhaps in an alternate universe Soriano boarded an Oceanic Air flight and ended up on an island with Yunjin Kim and Evangeline Lilly (though that is my dream, not his), while Wilkerson ended up as a perennial All- Star. But it appears to me that, for now, Daniels has righted his ship.

The Rangers’ starting pitching stinks but none of those guys were brought in by Daniels. All pre-existed his tenure and you can’t expect him to build an entirely new pitching staff in a short time. Granted, he re-signed Padilla, but that was a market valued contract, albeit it doesn’t look so great now, at 3 years at $34M. Padilla’s 2006 was very good, 200 IP, 7K/9 IP and 3.2 BB/9 IP. Not a stud, but 200 innings of this will be well worth the money, and he surged a bit in the second half, making some solid overall gains, so it appeared to be a reasonable contract. Was it a gamble?? Surely, but at least it was at the market rate. Pascarelli, I am sure, never read my column on Process vs. Results!

Who did Daniels acquire in the offseason? Sammy Sosa, Kenny Lofton and Frank Catalanotto. How have they worked out? Pretty well so far. Sosa, to date, has exceeded virtually anyone’s expectation, mine included. Sosa is at .245/.304/.454. Is this great?? No, but that isn’t the standard. Sosa has 10 HR 48 RBI a 30% hit rate and a 72%contact rate. So we would not expect a great decrease in his performance to date. He is what he is, a low batting average slugger. Not the old Sosa to be sure, but given everyone’s dire predictions on his acquisition this clearly has to be a win so far for Daniels; he was right and the rest of us were wrong, at least so far. When you can outsmart the masses like this it has to be a mark in the credit column, not the debit column.

Lofton is another data point in his favor. Last year: 91% contact rate, 9% walk rate .301 BA and .362 OBP with 32 steals. Who would expect a repeat?? Apparently Daniels: Lofton has a 90% contact rate, a 12% BB rate and 16 steals. His BA is a bit on the low side for such a lofty contact rate, only .267. But, he has a 28% hit rate, that will likely climb to the 30% range and will drive an increase in his BA. This will lead to more steals. Overall, this clearly is a win for him.

Catalanotto? He is a solid player with positional flexibility and can play at least average defense at multiple positions. So far he has been a disaster; and is a data point in Pascarelli’s favor. However, he has been HUGELY unlucky with only a 16% hit rate. He has an 87% contact rate, and his xBA in Shandler’s terminology is .288 and he is walking at a healthy 9% clip. Not every decision will work out and luck is a factor, but a turnaround is legitimately to be expected. Still, though it is a loss right now, but at least not a washout if the luck pendulum swings. Catalanotto is also hurt and that may be an explanation for his struggles.

The McCarthy/Danks trade?? With Danks’ early success this is certainly an impetus for Pascarelli’s position. There was much caution over McCarthy’s HR penchant, and those fears seem justified. However, we are talking about two very young pitchers, and the jury is unquestionably out on both. On the other hand, there is no justification I can give right now; McCarthy has been legitimately horrible.

Of course, we haven’t addressed the Soriano trade. I won’t go into great detail here, clearly a loss for Daniels. However, the readers may recall that at the time of the Soriano trade there were many people who thought it was a win for Daniels, including folks at Baseball Prospectus. Soriano was moving from a hitter’s park to a pitcher’s park, and Wilkerson’s comment in the BP annual was “Frittered away in another Bowdenian indiscretion, Wilkerson has a date with a long-overdue dose of stardom ahead of him as a member of the Rangers, where he`ll be hitting in the perennially lefty power-friendly Ameriquest Field.”

Their comment on Soriano: “The park factor in Arlington has always been one of the highest in the AL. There`s no better example of that in 2005 than Soriano, who hit .315/.355/.656 at home and .224/.265/.374 on the road. As measured by MLVr, Soriano was the fourth-best hitter in baseball at home, and the third-worst on the road-essentially changing from Alex Rodriguez to Cesar Izturis. His 2004 was similar, though not as extreme. Now that Soriano has been dealt to the Nationals (for Brad Wilkerson and more), his offense will sink to the level of his defense-seeing Soriano move to his left is like watching a wagon train go west in real time-and if the Nats’ plan to move him to the outfield sticks, they`ll discover what Derek Jeter pointed out years ago, that Soriano has the vertical leap of a sumo wrestler. He`s about to become a massive disappointment. “

Clearly at least there was reason to make the trade, and there were many learned commentators who thought at the time that it would be a good deal for Daniels. It hasn’t worked out that way.

Is this a mixed bag?? Probably. But Pascarelli’s position is essentially based on the stathead vs. scout debate. Daniels clearly does not have trouble making decisions, and the Rangers’ current last place position is driven by a bit of hard luck, but also by failures of players that weren’t acquired on his watch. Like a college basketball coach, you can’t really judge him until he has all of his own recruits on hand. Pascarelli, however, merely decided to launch a salvo against the new breed of GM, railing against the changing power structure in baseball. Were it otherwise he simply could have commented on Daniels without bringing up the straw man of “boy geniuses.” Turning around a team mismanaged so badly by John Hart is a challenge that would
make it tough on Branch Rickey.

The rest of this year will be key in determining if Pascarelli is right. Daniels has a chance to rebuild now, and the rumored deals involving Teixeira are just the beginning. The crucible of a rebuild will determine if Daniels is indeed a “boy genius” or just a flop.