http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2013/01/rangers-moving-on-from-justin-upton-1.html

Evan Grant wrote it. I don't buy it.

We can only hope that thr Rangers are moving on.

We all know that Eric knows more than Evan Grant. LMAO

My dog knows more than Evan Grant.

I think we all know only 1 maybe, maybe, 2 people know what the Rangers are going to do

Colt, I would expand that to the THE RANGERS FO and scouting staff, otherwise totally agree.

Really I would not have offered Holland and Olt plus for Upton. If anythign Perez, Olt, and mid level guy. Arizona has to trade Upton now or he becomes a distraction and loses value. Plus Upton has shown he is willing to block a trade to the teams on his list so that lessens his value even more. If Towers is stupid enough to hang on to the guy until the trade dealine then he will watch his clubhouse disintegrate before his very eyes. Upton has a reputation as a disruptive guy already I can only imagine what it will be like in that clubhouse now!

Upton to the Rangers for Olt and Holland makes sense. Arizona gets a potential all star caliber pitcher that could be very great pitching in the weak NL West under control for I believe another 4 or 5 years, If your team is bad, this Holland kid has a lot of trade value in the upcoming years and Olt would solve their 3B problem.

Let me ask you this Chuck,
Would Upton be a distraction in Ron Washington's clubhouse? I think he would like the guys he plays with everyday myself.

Wouldn't trading Dutch mean a big hole for our already barely there rotation? That would leave us with Yu, Harrison, Ogando and who? Perez? Even then that's only 4. We trade for Upton and then sign whom? Would we then count on Grimm for 4th spot? We've got 3 pitchers who won't be ready opening day.

Holland is not an ace and has definitely struggled but, to beat a dead horse, our outfield is fine --please don't trade away what decent pitching we do have for OFs we don't 'need'. Is he a trade strictly for 'power'?

I agree, Michelle. I would only support trading Holland for Upton if we were able to fill that void. Even if it's with Kyle Lohse.

Or, basically, is it okay to give up your #25 pick, and it's corresponding $$, to upgrade Cruz or Murphy to Upton? I certainly can't see trading Murphy or Cruz for a pitcher that will certainly fill Holland's place in the rotation, even for 1 year.

I've been beating this dead horse myself a lot, but I'm still convinced that, in this era, pitching (and defense) is still a bit more important than offense. For how many years did the Rangers try to slug their way into the playoffs, and fail? The Giants are winning a lot, and they were dead last in home runs last year. Function of their ballpark or not, they're winning with very little power, and their records at home and away were almost identical (2 game difference).

"Wouldn't trading Dutch mean a big hole for our already barely there rotation?"

Yes, but the over-reaching forum lust for Upton knows no bounds. Olt and a pitching prospect or two is more likely the best the D-backs can get from Texas.

As for the idea that the Rangers "are moving on," I suspect they can just as easily UN-move on if AZ's price comes down to a level they are willing to pay. He hasn't been traded, and second-hand whispers that the Rangers may no longer have interest don't carry any degree of permanence, as I'm sure BOTH Towers and JD know.

Chuck,
If you were an all star who signed an extension with thought you were going to be a cornerstone of the franchise...yet were in trade talks literally nonstop since, wouldn't you be pissed? Notice none of the players have come out saying Upton is a horrible guy in the clubhouse. Was Michael Young a clubhouse cancer bc him and JD didn't get along? No. Use some common sense before believing half the crap you read.

My opinion:
This is not over with the Rangers. Harold Reynolds, the brother of Upton's agent (so I take his info to be more on the truth side), said today that Upton made it clear he would never accept a trade to Seattle from the beginning. This is obviously just posturing by Towers. Grant reported a 4th player was added to the trade at the end and reports have said from the get go that ownership was ready for Upton to go, before reports said they wanted him to stay(slip up on their part). A bunch of us may be pissed that the trade wasn't made earlier with Elvis, but JD is playing this right. Everyone knows Arizona won't get any impact players/prospects for Kubel. Upton is their only valuable piece. We have the 2nd best offer on the table, hopefully it doesn't include Holland...but there will be more moves, and Towers is in a corner, trade Kubel for a pittance and probably lose on the trade or trade Upton for the best possible deal. The Rangers have the top available* offer. Only reason Towers says no, is so his ego can say he wasn't ninja'd by JD. And by all reports, he's about to be.

It's not a leap to say I fully expect to see Upton in RF without giving up Elvis or Profar now. I assure you there are some great teams with high end pitching looking for SS's if we give up Holland too (Pirates and Cardinals to name a few).

Keep the faith.

Andy,

The Giants have freakishly good starting pitching.

The Giants have a massively run suppressive park that benefits their strength.

The Rangers have a massively offense beneficial park.

Especially in the absence of freakishly good pitching, which would not be as good because of our park even if we had it, we need to play to our strength and make our park work for us.

We need power. I don't find the Giants record at home and on the road being roughly the same convincing at all. Simply because their home and rode records are similar does not mean that they were not massively aided by their freakishly good pitching in their freakishly run suppressive park. In other words, there are many many factors at play that decide win totals. It makes little sense to isolate one and hang your hat on it.

Obviously the approach that attempts to win through power is dumb, but we need more than good pitching to win, more than the average team on account of our park effects. Teams who have great pitching and still lose because of poor offense are not rare, perhaps not as common as teams with great offense who lose because of poor pitching, but definitely not rare. The fact that the Rangers park works against pitching strength means that we need power more than the average team.

I see the reasoning that sees Upton as a marginal upgrade over Murphy and Cruz, but that logic starts to break down if we lose Berkman to injury or if he is unable to regain his old form. Furthermore, we don't have Murphy and Cruz for much longer and we are already looking at developing young guys in Center. Bottom line, I sympathize with your line of reasoning but our power depth isn't there. I don't want to pay anything near what the Mariners gave up for Upton in their dry run trade, but it sure would be nice to add him keeping in mind he would be under team control for years to come. I hope this latest notion that the Rangers are moving on is a leverage play, and I hope that the Snakes cave and take our offer. Its probably unlikely considering they could likely get more near the trade deadline, but the Arizona clubhouse is not going to digest the Upton situation well and come trade deadline the Snakes may be down for the count because of it. Anyways, I don't think that is enough to pry him lose. He will likely stay with Arizona, be traded to some other sucker before the season starts, or be traded for massive overpay near the deadline. I suppose we could be in the mix near deadline if we need more power, but I don't see us being the sucker.

I guess we really are moving on from this. If we are really going to start Olt and Profar at AAA I worry about the Rangers without an infusion of much needed youth at the big league level. However, that infusion could come later if we need it once those guys get more time in the Minors.

Pay no attention to any media report claiming insight into the Rangers plans. None of those people know anything.

I am with Chuck, Michelle and Andy as far as trading Holland goes. The team lacks starting pitching depth. On the other hand, Holland was lackluster last year, though I hope AJP can make him a better pitcher.

AZ has apparently changed its objectives again, moving from the infield to the pitching mound. If this remains the case, a terribly uncertain assumption with respect to Towers, then the Rangers will face competition from Atlanta, SD, and maybe even Boston. I wonder if ATL has made a formal offer to AZ.

I still think the Ms offer was a major overpay, but I think I can see their logic. They are the inverse Rangers. They cannot attract FA batters so they are better off trading for hitting and developing and buying pitching. This gets to Andy's point about pitching. We certainly need more of it, can't seem to get it on the FA market, so the Rangers should be trading for it. As much as I want Upton to be a Ranger, I would rather see Olt plus bring in a 2-3 spot pitcher.

Last, Towers seems very difficult to work with. If Upton was dead set against SEA, Towers should have explored what it would take, if anything, for Upton to waive his no trade clause.

@Joe: yes, the Giants have great pitching. But as I said, they had almost identical W/L records home and away this year. Their division rivals include 2 of the most hitter-friendly parks and 2 of the most pitcher-friendly parks. They certainly didn't win only in pitcher's parks.

I am not hanging my hat on one point; I could have listed more, but I was trying not to be overly long-winded. Of course we need power more than the Giants do, we play more games in hitter's parks. But playing in hitter's parks so often means we can't ignore pitching and attempt to outslug our opponents, because often enough they'll have an offense that, at least on paper, looks better than ours (e.g. Angels). If I have a choice between Holland and no Upton, or Upton but Holland is replaced by, say, Grimm, so that we're rolling with Perez and Grimm in the #4 and 5 spots, I'd take Holland.

I agree with Andy. Small ball, speed, defense, and "doubles power" play anywhere, and some of those doubles even go flying over the fence at the Ballpark. Pitchers who throw strikes and keep the ball down play anywhere.

If those types of players aren't available, then you probably look to maximize your park effect.

We could use another bat. AJP is a nice add, but you just can't rely on 36 yo catchers. I love the Lance signing b/c it is low risk, but the O/U on him is probably 300 PAs and 15 HRs. Maybe.

So those are good signings, but they don't mean we should be done. I agree that Holland+Olt for Upton seems a bit strong. Olt is a piece I"m good with losing because we don't have a place for him and he's not the uber-prospect that Profar is. Olt isa good piece that needs to play--like Smoak or Davis. Tradeable.

I'd like to see us give up Olt + Murphy or Cruz for him. If we give up pitching, we need pitching in return. Even if it's a downgrade in pitching, we need someone we can slot into the 4/5 spot in the rotation. We're not deep in the SP ranks, especially if the unknowns (Lewis, Ross, Ogando, Grimm) don't play out. And that's counting Perez amound the semi-known quantities. I think Holland is going to bounce back and Harrison could take a slide back or injury so I rather see Dutch here this year.

Can't wait for opening day to see how this all plays out!

For all we know JD is ready to pounce on Lohse to replace Holland if the Snakes consummate the deal. Either way I would do the deal as I don't hold out too terribly much hope that Holland will turn into the solid number two everyone hopes he will some day. It is a price but you are creating a lineup to go toe to toe with any out there. Furthermore, you have reinforcements on the way in Colby and Neftali. And there are always some low risk guys you can sign to give you more options until the cavalry gets here.

It seems to me like elite sluggers with decent to plus defense are harder to come by than average starting pitchers. And we would get him for four years if I'm not mistaken?

Really guys? You wouldn't do that deal? There are any number of pitching options to give us average numbers still on the market. Markum, Zambrano, Lohse, etc.

We would get Upton for 3 years, but I completely agree with you. For all we know, Elvis or Profar could be traded into a front line starter (Price) or an ace prospect like Garrett Cole or Shelby Miller. Prospects would arguably put up the same pitching line as Holland last year...but could make drastic improvements along the way like we've been hoping for but only see flashes from Holland. And like you said, Lohse could be signed here for a bargain compared to the market and he would arguably put up better numbers than Holland. There are just so many options if we can get Upton without losing Elvis or Profar.

Pitchers and catchers report in a month. Can't wait to see what JD has up his sleeve.

Holland seems like a steal to me at 5y/$37M, which means he has good trade value but also good value for us. I don't see the Rangers adding Lohse for, what, 3y/$36M?, losing a draft pick, and dealing Olt/Holland for Upton. That would add somewhere in the neighborhood of $18M to the budget for a moderate upgrade that would also force them to do something with Cruz. I don't see it.

I don't think that the Rangers would put Holland in an Upton trade. I suspect if the snakes come back and are willing to take Olt + then I think a deal can still happen. I also think that if we can do a straight up Elvis for Upton or Elvis for Upton+ a little then I think we seriously consider it. If its going to take a deal involving a top 10 prospect and 2-3 more top 100 level prospects then I just flat out don't think that we are going to trade for Upton, to me that is the level deal that was discussed last night as being what was offered from Seattle.

I really do wonder if that was an attempt to get Atlanta or Texas to seriously up their offer. If that was the primary purpose of that then I think it failed because I don't think either Atlanta or Texas is going to be pushed into offering what they think is a bad deal by a very quickly leaked trade rumor.

You don't have to add Lohse. There are many options for average starting pitching that are cheaper than that.

That is what Holland is as much as we hope he might at some point be consistently brilliant.

Furthermore, you get Upton for 3 years while you only keep Cruz for one more year and Murphy for one more year.

Here is an idea for Cruz. Put him in right against LHP with Upton in left and sit Murphy because Murphy has traditionally been bad against LHP and Cruz was pretty bad against RHP last year. You keep him as insurance and as a lefty killer until you sell him high before deadline for whatever you need. If Murphy falls off from last year you make him compete with Cruz for playing time. Does anyone think Murphy can hit lefties like he did last year consistently?

Problem solved. No, you don't have to add a bunch of salary. No, no, no.... This is emotion people, that makes us want to hold onto Derek at the expense of Upton.