Is Jim Reeves a Unicorn?

Jim Reeves wrote a column yesterday suggesting that Tom Hicks would slash the Ranger payroll after the 2009 season (you can read it here).

I'm sorry - but Reeves is bordering on insanity. Like Galloway, Reeves has transformed into nothing more than a shock-value mouthpiece.

Here is a specific excerpt from the story:

"If we have a chance to get a great Ben Sheets type player at the right price, we’d do it," Hicks said..."

The message Hicks is sending here is twofold.

One, it’s obvious that the Rangers won’t be adding any salary, or likely be in a position to even eat the $6 million they’d owe outfielder-DH Frank Catalanotto if they decided they wanted to cut him to make room for outfielder Andruw Jones on the roster.

Two is that Hicks, like the rest of us, has obviously been hit hard by the bottoming-out economy in many of his businesses and he’s looking to stabilize future expenses wherever he can.

Here are several other Hicks' quotes that litter the story:

"I like the energy of the young guys," Hicks said. "I like [Justin] Smoak. I like Max Ramirez. Next year, I think you’ll see Feliz and Holland in the rotation. It would be nice to see [Brandon] McCarthy step up this year."

"We’re in the mind-set that we’re going to be in the race this year and not in the mind-set of dumping salaries, because we feel like if we’re successful on the field, what we haven’t been able to accomplish this off-season in renewals we can make up with walk-up attendance if we’re in a pennant race," Ryan said.

So, based on those quotes, Reeves ascertained that Hicks is committed to slashing payroll? Really? Some have suggested that Reeves is grasping at straws, but that might be giving Reeves too much credit. This is more like grasping at...unicorns or leprechauns...because they don't exist!

Nothing that Reeves quotes indicates that Hicks is intent on slashing payroll. On the other hand, several comments were made suggesting that Texas would not do so, like:

"There’s no direction for [Ryan and Daniels] to cut payroll," Hicks insisted Monday.

I know that newspapers are crumbling, but how does a piece like this get through the editing process? I have to imagine the editorial meeting sounded something like:

Reeves: I've got a story about the Rangers slashing payroll.
Editor: Really? What support can you provide?
Reeves: Uh...well, Hicks did say that "there’s no direction to cut payroll," does that work?
Editor: Revo, you normally need two sources for a story.
Reeves: Nolan said that they "are not in the mindset of dumping salaries," will that do?
Editor: Hell yeah it will! I was just testing you - the story was printed an hour ago. You know that we don't "edit" around here!

It may not be word for word, but it can't be far off. Grandpa urine - welcome Unicorn Revo to the asylum!