Kinsler's best fit is and always has been 2nd base.

This:

http://espn.go.com/blog/dallas/texas-rangers/post/_/id/4894509/espn-coms-cameron-put-ian-kinsler-at-1b

I assume that Kinsler could develop into a decent fielder in the corner outfield, but I wonder what type of arm strength he has for the throws to 3rd and home. Something tells me he would be challenged often on runners going from 1st ro 3rd or 2nd to home.

I would prefer Kinsler at 1B (platooned with Moreland), since my gut tells me that he will still be rotated around to 2B at times. Might as well keep the guy in the infield.

The Kinsler to 1st base might just be posturing. Maybe they want to show Arizona that we have moved on from the idea of dealing Andrus for Upton, which might be just a negotiating tactic. That, or JD really has moved on.

RFan, Buliking up without benefits is not that difficult. Having been a gym rat for a half century, all that really is needed is to stress dead lifts, bench presses and squats and calories, ie most on that course would comsume 8 to 10,000 calories a day emphasizing protein. Problem could however be with greater bulk a slower swing speed. I recall Bubba Watson tellimg Johnny Damon why his swing speed could not get to 120+ mph, and out drive him, " your to muscular".

KInsler is a stud.

Rangers didn't extend him to make him a utility player.He's an all star at 2b.

That said---Wash has proven that he can get 600 ab's for a utility man. Kin's can do anything MY could do.
I think he could be a good COF.
I don't want him at 1B.

I want Moreland as the primary 1b. Olt would be there too--but i gotta believe he's going in a trade for Upton.

Elvis is definitely an all star ss. We should be willing to pay market and extend him now.
I don''t see why Elvis should be worth more to another team than he is to the Rangers

If he wont extend--we have to trade him--but not for Upton.
.
I'd want something exotic for Elvis--Stanton-Cargo-Felix-Price.

Profar is a major talent and must play every day. That's our nice problem.
Too much infield talent?
About as likely as too much pitching---it will work itself out.

I read over on Newberg we produced only 20 HR's from !B. I think it was 24th in MLB. Moreland is not and has not been the answer. Not that good against RHP and sucks against LHP.

Moreland hasn't been given the chance yet.

Guys, Kinsler will not be in the outfield. HE HAS BAD WHEELS!!! He is 30 years old andhis ankles would never survive playing in the outfield. Why do you think they asked him about first base? It puts less wear and tear on his ankles.
In a different spot in the rotation he hits 30-40 home run without "bulking up"

Moreland is 27 years old with over 1000 PAs. How much better do folks expect him to be? Get over it, he is what he is.

Kinsler's ability to hit is not altered by his position. He's the exact same hitter, no matter where he plays.

And the same goes for every other player on the team.

Ultimately, if you are using your 9 best hitters, then the 'best position" for each will be the result that overall provides the most effective cumulative defense possible. But if you could sacrifice some of that offense by sitting one of your top 9 hitters, allowing you to play a more effective defense in total, the answer to "best position" for one or more players might be different.

So his "best fit" in the field is a comparative analysis, not an absolute one. And it includes huge unknowns, inasmuch as we have no idea how well Kinsler might be able to play the OF or 1B, as well as question marks about players like Profar and anyone else who might be added before the season begins.

In other words, the answer to "what is Kinsler's (or anyone's) best position" on the 2013 Rangers, depends on who else is on the team. And day-to-day, it depends on who else is in the lineup.

Kinsler's ability to hit is not altered by his position. He's the exact same hitter, no matter where he plays.

True, but the value of the offense would change. As some have already illustrated, Kinsler has historically been an elite 2nd baseman. If you take him away from 2nd, you're probably losing value at 2nd and 1st. Hypothetically, if there was an individual season of Ian at 2nd compared to a hypothetical year of Jurickson at 2nd, I'm banking on Kinsler to put up a higher win total. In 2013.

So if, in the hypothetical of Profar playing 2nd and Kinsler playing 1st, you'd be doing more harm than good by getting rid of the platoon of Moreland and Olt. What do we do with these guys? Kinsler would probably produce about the same amount of WAR at 1st as Olt and Moreland combined, but then you'd probably be platooning Moreland and Olt at DH.

There lies the problem with the idea. It creates a value-depreciating chain-reaction within the lineup, and it costs you value at each spot.

Shit would be so much easier if we just traded Elvis.

Ian at 1b feels odd, but Im ok with it. I get Ian would be a great hitting 2b and an average hitting 1b comparing to MLB as a whole. But Im not worried about his "value" compared to other players at that position. Im worried about most wins for the Rangers.

So if we dont trade anyone, then what's going to get the most wins -
Ian at 2b and MM/Olt at 1st with Profar on the bench or AAA
OR
Profar at 2b and Ian at 1b with MM/Olt doing God knows what?

I dont care about his "value" at 1b or 2b in and of itself, I care about the value of 1b & 2b put together. And who do you want playing more, Olt/MM or Profar?

Nonetheless, still a problem of good players not playing no matter how you spin it. They are just trying to do what they can with too many good infielders w/o trading them. I get that. But it just seems like we have "wins" sitting on the bench NO MATTER WHAT instead of trading them and putting them in OF where it will add to the overall "value" and wins for the team.

Not trading for an OF and benching good players may end up being the biggest miss of the offseason vs Hamilton and Greinke.

I'm with Brotha. I don't particularly care about replacement value or lowering Kinsler's value by moving him around the diamond. If it ultimately boils down to your right side being Profar+Kinsler or Kinsler+Moreland/Olt. Frankly, I'd rather have the former: improved speed on both offense and defense, higher likelihood the FO would trade Moreland than Kinsler anyway, very solid middle IF rotation (without needing a backup on the bench), etc.

I think you argue this any number of ways and be correct. If they trade Andrus for a good package and play Profar at short, I'd be all for that. If they keep him and move Kinsler to 1B, I think that would work pretty well, too.

"True, but the value of the offense would change."

Not really. When you're talking about the proposition of where to play him, the "value" of his offense is fixed, and it's based on his ability as a hitter. It's his defensive ability that may vary based on where he plays, and then his value at one position or another is determined not by comparing him to other 1Bs or 2Bs or OFs around the league, but rather to what lineup alternatives each place allows.

The evaluation is different if you're doing roster building. But once the players have been acquired, your 9 best hitters are who they are no matter where they play the field. Then it's the defense of one potential lineup of those 9, vs another, that has to tell you where he has most value to the team. If they learn that Profar is one of their top 9 and is better than Kins at 2B, and Kins isn't better defensively than Cruz in RF, Murphy in LF, or Moreland at 1B, then his best value may be as DH, who knows. Where he has most overall value will depend on comparatives to the defensive abilities of the others on the team available for each position he might play, but his value as a hitter will be the same regardless of position.

@ David - I agree. I'll add that the potential trade value has to be factored in (along with the likelihood it would actually happen). I don't think Kinsler's going anywhere, but I think the FO would be more than open to dealing Moreland in the right circumstance. Kinsler moves to 1B, and MM becomes expendable.

Of course, the rosters aren't exactly set yet, so league-average player value still has some...well...value. But in the end, David is correct that it all comes down to maximizing actual value for your team, not relative value to the league-average.

Well put David.

Where you play does make a difference in how you hit. Where you bat in the lineup makes a difference how you hit. Hit the position or spot or there is a good chance you lose that position or spot.

Of course the value of Kinsler's bat at 1B probably isn't worth the contract he is being paid. If Kinsler is at 1B for the next 5 years, that contract becomes MY V2.0

@Andy. Rod Carew comes to mind as a lead off first baseman.

I beg to differ about where Kinsler hits in the lineup not making a difference. Leadoff is an entirely different animal than any other spot. Leadoff hitters are not really supposed to swing away, and later in the game do not have "protection" behind them that force pitchers to pitch them honestly.

The point was that it doesn't matter where Kinsler plays in the field, because his offensive value to the team would be basically the same. Obviously, a guy who leads off has a different job description than one who hits cleanup....but I don't see that as the issue.

I think Kinsler's lead off days are behind him. His OBP is declining. The lead off needs a very high OBP, not HR %. He also gets picked off a lot if he does get a BB. He needs to bat in the 6 hole.

@DJ, I think Kinsler's contract value at 1st base is not too much $$. There are a lot more over priced 1st baseman in the league. Kinsler just isn't the "prototype" 1st baseman as has been the norm. Generally, the 1st base position is a masher, preferably left handed. Or a younger guy, left handed that will grow in the position. I do not understand Kinsler to 1B honestly.

"I beg to differ about where Kinsler hits in the lineup not making a difference."

Who are you differing with? The debate here hasn't been about Kinsler's value at various spots in the batting order.

It's been about position in the field. The point being, Kinsler is the same hitter (and therefore would bring the same value as a hitter) regardless of defensive position.

Kinsler has averaged 3.6 WAR over the past 3 seasons. The typical player loses about 0.5 WAR per year past age 30. Using 3.6 WAR as the starting point, if Kinsler stays at 2B and declines like the typical player, his expected total WAR through 2017 is 10.5 At $5 mil per win, that's $52.5 mil in value.

A player automatically loses 1.5 WAR when he moves from 2B to 1B. That's a loss of at least $7 to 8 mil in value per season. So Kinsler's expected WAR at 1B through 2017 is 3. That's $15 mil in value.

Kinsler is owed about $70 mil through 2017. So either way, Kinsler's contract looks like an albatross. But if he moves to 1B, the contract is indescribably bad.

Here are a couple of articles for anyone interested in positional adjustments in the WAR calculation as well as player aging curves:
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/position-adjustments/
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/how-do-star-hitters-age/