Pro, none of that makes Murphy the best overall outfielder on the roster. You made the claim, and offered nothing to back that up. He has poor range, a lack luster arm, and has little power. Gentry has a better range and arm. Cruz has more power and a better arm. So how is he the best overall? Murphy to me is a less talented left handed version of Hunter Pence.

Eric you use fWAR in a matter-of -fact way.. Keep in mind it is still a stat, a top one I agree in evaluating a player utilizing a single number because of profound factors in its derivation in the Leibniz sense. But keep in mind because of its origination has as much variability as any other stat. I give you just three examples of its variability: Ian Kinsler has a range of 1.6 to 7.1, Adrian Beltre a range of 0.6 to 9.3 and Josh Hamilton a range of 0.4 to 8.4 over their established careers. I am agreement with your that fWAR has a massive usage to differentiate the value of an individual player, but it does have as exampled an expanded range even on highly successful players, and that is best to take into profound consideration. With those three players alone, and the ranges considered has variance to the point it can in single cases make a difference of first place or third in any division

If anyone believes Murphy can sustain a .433 BAbip against LH pitchers, I'd be happy to sell you an ocean view in West Texas.

^^^^
Cat makes a good point.

WAR is heavily influenced by playing time. Your use of range for this particular stat isn't exactly accurate. WAR also isn't a predictive stat. It's a peek into the past. Assigning a range based on a particular player's lowest output via WAR (which could be influenced by a myriad of factors) and their ceiling or highest output to date is much too simplistic.

TB - he had ridiculous reverse splits. All of a sudden one abnormally great year hitting against lefties (.433 BABIP!!!) excuses him from a career of mehpoop (.320 BABIP, .299 wOBA, 75 wRC+) against same handed pitching?

Regression. Coming.

I'm not saying Murphy won't regress some, but I believe he made an adjustment to his stance last year (standing closer to the plate as I recall). That, almost certainly, had something to do with his improvement last year, particularly against lefties. There's no way that WAR can possibly factor in those types of adjustments.

Obviously I like Murph. He is the type of player all teams need; predictable at a reasonable price.

NOW, have you guys ever considered why Arizona is trying so hard to trade Upton? Well, you should.

This guy would not have lasted 15 minutes in MY's club house. He might not last 20 minutes in the currently

configured club house. Most of my family lives in Phx, one works very close to the Dbacks. This guy needs a

new team, I just hope its not my team the Rangers.

Good move on resign Murph.
Now I hear the Rangers want to extend the contract of NELSON CRUZ.
Please, NO!

Now I hear the Rangers want to extend the contract of NELSON CRUZ.

If you're going to do it, I guess now would be the best time. We like to think we could do better, but looking at the 2014 list of free agents, there aren't a lot of talented guys there to dream on (Jacoby, Pence & Granderson). And unless you think Joey Butler or Engel Beltre are the answer, we don't have anyone in the system who has played above Low-A yet. We're looking for a stopgap.

If you told me the Rangers would offer an extension (say 2-3 years) to either Murphy or Cruz, I'd opt for Murphy. Cruz will hit more HRs, but that's the only thing I think we can say with relative certainty that he'll do better than Murphy. Murphy's defense has improved where Cruz's has declined. Same for OBP, even if you expect a bit of regression from Murphy against LHP (which I do). Plus, Cruz is a year older, and based on his higher ISO than Murphy, will probably cost a little more - we know people still put the highest premium on power, after all.

I could be alright with Murphy in LF for the next couple years, especially if we had a guy like Stanton in RF.

^ Yup, yup.

Finally... lol... whew!

Some Murphy acceptance! I love me some Murph!

Perhaps sometimes in the search for meaning in stats, we leave out the possibility that the player has actually improved. Last year was the largest batting sample of his career and Murphy was really good. From when I was at spring training on it seemed he made adjustments and worked specifically hard on putting together good at bats vs LHP. Also, his defense has improved (another point of emphasis for him last spring), he's got decent speed, and if he got 600 plate appearances I think he'd hit 20+ HRs.

Look, I'm not expecting him to hit .400 against LHP again or anything, but his career baseline he would regress to might not be that bad. Lefties tend to have bigger splits anyway, and the lack of exposure to left handed pitching in the past makes me optimistic about his chances. In 2010 he got 125 PAs against lefties and hit .272. He struggled against lefties in 2011, but again, with just over 100 plate appearances how much to you want to read into it? I don't think his true ability vs LHP is as good as 2012, but it's also not as bad as 2011.

Not sure if the Rangers are, but I'm betting that what we saw last year is a bit more indicative of this "true" ability vs lefties than 2011. If Murphy "regresses" to his overall career of .285/.350/.450 then an extension now would be a tremendous deal for the Rangers. A .285/.350.450 with 20 HRs is going to put him in line for 8 million plus in free agency.

Resigning CRUZ to an extention *raise is crazy. Very expensive DH, if Stanton or Upton signs.
Has NC's value dropped so much, that FO wants to actually inflate his salary = to a dead piece?
What is JD thinking? Very weird off-season

"Now is the time to do it..."
Ugh, FO is going the opposite way of what they should do.
Sign Cruz to an extention? Put the 5Hour Energy Drink down.
FO is catching what Hambone had in his last summer swoon.
Bugeyed crazy. Yeah right, sign an extention with more money?
Whatta maaaaroooon.

Perhaps sometimes in the search for meaning in stats, we leave out the possibility that the player has actually improved.

That's why batting average and RBI don't mean as much as wOBA and wRC+. That's why pitching wins and losses don't mean as much as ERA.

A .433 BABIP vs. LHP is what you call "lucky." The league average BABIP in 2012 was .297, and Murphy exceeded that by well over a hundred points. There is no way that level of production is sustainable, and if the Rangers thought he was closer to how he hit last year vs. LHP as compared to his lifetime .261/.313/.361, then he probably would have been signed to a longterm extension a long time ago.

I'm not sure it was all luck. I remember about 374208 times when Murphy just reached out and hit a dinky little single just over the infield on a low ball. I think it was something he worked at. I'm sure there was some luck, but it looked to me like lefties tried to throw him low and away and he learned how he can handle those pitches. The question is, when pitchers inevitably make adjustments to the way they pitch him, will he be able to adjust too? I don't expect a .433 for his BABIP vs. LHP again, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was still respectable.

Murphy was going along last year in a typical Murphy manner, a good #4 outfielder, but he could be pitched to by pounding the outside corner. A suggestion was made, Murph steps closer to the plate, and a +. 300 batter is created. Beyond all the stats, the game is a game of adjustments. Murphy made that adjustment, and in that one change, took a massive step forward that will be reflective in his future stats. The change does not increase his power, but a much improved plate coverage does increase his run production, and that is what the game is all about from the batter's perspective.So an extension for Murphy at a deal I previously suggested is a strong possibility after 2013 was compromised to $5.8 to avoid arbitration hearing.

Kinsler suggested to Murph, "Hey, move a couple inches closer to the plate", and he did. The results were very, very good.

Now, Murph... suggest to Kins, "Hey, start driving into the ball more rather than swatting at it..." Favor returned.

Of course his .400 BABIP was lucky. But how can you discount his previous struggles as not being unlucky? You really can't have it both ways. I mean, the guy has just now over his career accumulated an almost full season (600 or so at bats) vs LHP stats. And, this is over a 6 year period where he really never got much of a chance to establish anything.

I don't see how you can take a sample of 400 at bats and declare that is Murphy's true ability but ignore the last 120 at bats. Especially when these at bats occurred over a 6 year period. I understand the need for regression and I get the luck factor. In fact, in Murphy's situation, a good case can be made that we should regress his early struggles against LHP toward the league average. That is, maybe he was unlucky and not as bad as we thought.

I could see him with a .270/.335/.420 triple slash with 3 HR in 140 plate appearances against lefties this year. That might not be great, but give the guy his due when he goes .290/.385/.520 with 20 HR against righties in 550 plate appearances. And, what if last year represented real improvement against lefties? Then the Rangers have quite the commodity at a great price. I would tend to give more weight to last year post adjustments than what he did in sporadic work the previous 5 years when Wash relegated him to pure platoon basically.

I'm not nominating the guy for the HOF, I'm just saying my opinion is that last year (though admittedly lucky) also represented some true improvement in his ability to hit LHP.

But how can you discount his previous struggles as not being unlucky?

Because the ML average for BAbip for LHB v LHP is slightly under .300 - which is much closer to Murphy's 3 year average from 2009-2011.

He's a hard worker and an argument can certainly be made that the change in approach (pulling his hips out, keeping the bat in the zone longer) enables him to bloop those balls over the infield at a higher rate. BUT, there is just way too much room for regression there. I fear we saw Murphy's ceiling in 2012 and it isn't all that high.

Thank God for not-so-high ceilings! I will take a team full of Murphy's instead of a team full of Cruz's and Hamiltons-and win championships with them with good pitching :) Like I have said, it isn't all about watching sparklies shoot up and listening to the Lion King. Speaking of regression, your boy Cruz is what you would call a classic regression case. He will hit more like 2012 in 2013. You heard it here, folks :) flame me now but be ready for a torch after it happens! Mwa-ha-ha-ha!!!!!!!!

Three quick things-

1. Maybe we are still ignoring what a small sample this really is for Murphy against LHP. I mean, 600 at bats over 6 years. Man, I let that sink in and I would hate to judge Josh Hamilton on his 150 plate appearances during his doldrums last summer. If Murphy had just 15 more hits over 6 years against LHP (say 5 in 2008, 2009, and 2011) he would have a .293 career avg against lefties. (I know, I know, average isn't everything, but again, you can't talk regression without regressing both ways when the sample is this small.

2. Ron Washington may not be the best judge of when to deem a player a platoon guy and limit his at bats. Not sure what that did to Murphy's development, but something to consider.

3. Saying that Murphy's ceiling was last year is obvious and I don't think even a point of contention. Proclaiming said ceiling "not that high" is a bit of a stretch.

Attitude. Spunk.

Love me some Murphy!