1B is a position you MUST get some power from. LaRoche was second in OPS behind Hamilton. If you're going to try to "spread the loss" of Hamilton across a couple positions, 1B is a prime position for upgrade. Personal bias aside, LaRoche would be a nice addition to this already stellar defensive infield.

I love Mitch as much as anyone else, but he's never produced more than 0.7 WAR in any season with the Rangers. He's still very raw and does not hit lefties very well. LaRoche would solidify 1B, blocking out MY from playing 1B on a regular basis.

I'll probably type some tl;dr post later saying how great of an idea this is. I'm on board.

Regarding Michael Young: He's in no position to get upset now. Wash gave him all of 2012 as benefit of the doubt. The team needs more on a daily basis than he can give to a single position. He can still be a solid bench asset (albeit overpaid) because he can play multiple positions. He can earn even more respect in the veteran leadership department if he brings the same hard work ethic to that role in 2013. If he's on the team in that role, i'll be rooting for him.

Nompton wrote:

"LaRoche would solidify 1B, blocking out MY from playing 1B on a regular basis."

A compelling case for a good first baseman. Add that it increases the Rangers ability to help TB fill one of their holes, and this FA deal adds a lot of value.

Could also put Moreland in RF and DH Cruz, or trade Cruz.

@gg

Moreland is a terrible OF'er and would probably end up making people more upset than if you just left Cruz out there.

I'd be in on LaRoche, but only for a 1-2 yr deal. It doesn't make much sense to sign him long term, especially if you think Olt will hit at the MLB level.

No offense gg, but how many of'ers do we need. Moreland is not a good or even average OF'er. We have 4 OF'ers now so unless we unload a couple of them you guys should forget Moreland, Olt or even Kinsler playing the OF.

I initially started this post because i was not sure how I felt about the Adam LaRoche rumor. After a little research I think its a bad move. I looked at both LaRoche and Moreland through their first 3 years in the league. While this comparison is terribly skewed due to Moreland's approximately 400 fewer PA's the numbers show that both players are earily similar. I prefer to roll with Moreland's 500k per year to Laroche's estimated 13M. I realize that signing LaRoche frees up Olt/Moreland as traide bait and should reduce MY's playing time but the cost involved would hamper other potential signings as well as the possibility of resigning or extending current Ranger players. I would like to see what Mitch can do with an entire season either as the everyday first baseman or in another platoon situation.

The numbers are coutesy of Baseball Reference the first is LaRoche second is Moreland

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/l/larocad01.shtml#2004-2006-sum:batting_standard

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/m/morelmi01.shtml#2010-2012-sum:batting_standard

And yes I realize I am comparing an everyday player to the left side of our platoon, but Murphy also used to be a platoon only player.

While their is slightly more pop in LaRoche's bat there are not 13M more reasons to sign him unless we are able to package Moreland and others for an ACE!

@gtown
100% agree. If we were talking about Swisher, maybe. Only bc he has positional flexibility for 1B/OF. But if acquiring him meant this was a precursor to a Shields/Price trade, I would be ok with it.

@gtownfan. Lower that price difference by the price of WAR (5, 6mm?) multiplied by MY's WAR, reduce further by the value of a PADMY less a PADAL, and the price becomes bearable.