It's curious to me why they'd give three years to Ross, who's essentially a platoon outfielder. This gives them Gerardo Parra (signed through 2015), Justin Upton (through 2015), Cody Ross (through 2015), Adam Eaton (6 years of control), and Keon Broxton (6 years of control).

That's a lot of outfielders. I still believe Upton gets traded at some point this offseason, and I'm still not ruling the Rangers out.

this only makes sense if Upton or Kubel are going...

Precursor to big trade? Getting that feeling. Uptown to the rangers would make a nice pre Christmas gift.

Yeah I can't imagine them keeping Upton anymore either. Kubel wouldn't even net them a top player to build around like Olt. They need to trade Upton if Towers is really thinking about the future of that franchise. If it was me, I just would've kept Upton and moved along.

Jim Bowdin reporting the DBacks weren't in until he met with Texas. Thinks a trade is coming.

Think Texas played match maker for Ross and the diamondbacks to get Upton?

http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/blog/jon-heyman/21435764/rangers-met-with-of-cody-ross-but-checking-into-michael-bourn

I don't care to trade away for Upton when the hope is still out there to get a 2 or 3 year deal with Bourn on the cheap.

the AJP singing was one of the best values of this off-season, and if we can fill our other gaping hole without giving up prospects this would quietly be an awesome off-season.

@Joby

Not that I'm especially enamored with Bourn, but I see no reason the Rangers could not acquire both Upton and Bourn. The Upton trade would likely center around Olt and would not likely include any of our outfielders. That would leave us with both the Bourn-displaced Gentry and Martin, which we could later package for a pitcher perhaps. This is to say nothing of my preference to have a Gentry/Martin platoon instead of Bourn in CF for 2013, just merely addressing your point.

Seriously, what is some of you guys' obsession with Bourn. He's a speedy OF'er who plays great defense. We have one of those and he's much cheaper. Then we have a young LH CF who abdolutely tore up AAA last year. Both are significantly cheaper than Bourn. So why would you want to give a big contract to him?

@LC

I'm not "enamored" with Bourn either, I don't like now Speed ages, but getting something for nothing is much better than getting something for something.

I just don't want to part with Perez, even if he's only penciled as a #2/3 guy. Olt still could be a phenomenal cost controlled DH in the short term, and I feel like his trade value is too low right now anyways.

Gentry/Martin are what they are, replacement level and starting Upton, Bourn or preferally both is ideal. I'd give up Olt for Upton if a long term deal is worked out.

@Romeo212000

Man, I just looked up Craig Gentry's fangraphs stats for last year and man! I didn't realize the end of year numbers he put up.

That being said, it is boosted by his platoon splits, and is above average vs Lefty's and well below average for Rightys.

wRC+
vs. L 136
vs. R 83

I'd still rather roll out Bourne, Cruz and then let the Murph/Gentry/ whoever scrap for AB's after that

@ Joby
We have no idea what Martin is capable of at the big league level. We only know he tore AAA up last year. He deserves a chance.

@Joby

...getting something for nothing is much better than getting something for something.

Bourn will cost a draft pick, iirc, so signing him it will cost something more than just the nothingness of money. Also, this statement seems to draw an equivolence between Upton and Bourn, as if they are similar in value to the point that trading prospects for Upton would be a less profitable deal than signing Bourn just for cash, forgetting the draft pick for a moment. That's debatable I suppose, but to my thinking Upton - despite undeniable underachievement to this point in his career - is a significantly superior asset to Bourn, if for no other reason than the potential he has yet to realize. Even if he only improves in Texas marginally, I see him as a better investment regardless of what prospects/players in the Mike Olt/Derek Holland tier we send to acquire him (obviously excluding the elite tier of Profar/Darvish) than a Bourn-for-cash deal. And I disagee that Martin/Gentry would only contribute at a spare, replacement level if given the chance. I think they would significantly exceed that.

@Joby: I wouldn't call a wRC+ of 83 "well below average", and I definitely wouldn't call 136 "above average". More like "below average" and "all-star". But that's just my own labels. The point is, 136 twice as far above 100 as 83 is below it.

Also, Murphy had a much, much better year than Cruz. He absolutely deserves a full-time job, at least unless his lefty hitting falls off a cliff. Also, Cruz needs to be moved to DHing more, his defense is noticeably subpar.

And again I say, I have no interest in paying probably $70-80 million, plus giving up a 1st round pick, for a left-handed Gentry with more of a track record.

Truthfully Murphy has a better bat than Bourn, look it up. He strikes out almost half as much, his BA/OBP/SLG/OPS/OPS+ are .304/.380/.479/.859/124 to Bourn's .274/.348/.391/.739/99, Bourn strikes out 22% of the time, and in 180 less plate appearances than Bourn, Murphy had 15 home runs to 9 for Bourn and 61 RBI's to Bourn's 57. It would have been even uglier if Murphy would've had 700+ plates appearances, but it is not fair to Murphy to say that he is barely replacement level. Look Murphy up compared to other left fielders in the league. His UZR last year was 9.4 which borders on great and ranks him at 5th place out of 219 players who played left field last year, Where does everyone get the idea that he's barely replacement? Yes, I know Bourn is a CF and Murphy is LF, it is the comments throwing Murphy out with the wash water that make me wonder if the people who post this crap have even looked him up. You know, using SABR stuff.

Signing Bourn doesn't fill a hole b/c CF is not a hole on this team. This team lacks in the power department and Bourn does not help in that area.

@Procurion: most of the people that are labeling Murphy at or near replacement level are probably assuming significant regression to the 4th outfielder he was most of last year. There's certainly a chance of that. I don't expect him to repeat his success against lefties as much as he did this year, but I expect he'll be worth his price, and might be an everyday player all year. I expect he'll have that opportunity starting the year, anyway; LF is his to lose.