According to mlbtraderumors.com Upton could be dealt sometime in the next few days, but don't misunderstand, this thread doesn't center around Upton and that drama. As far as I'm concerned the quicker he is dealt the happier I will be. I'm tired of hearing his name repeatedly come up, and even more tired of hearing it tied to the Rangers. And I don't even want to get started on Kevin Towers.

No, my focus is more on Michael Bourn, and what happens if Upton does actually get dealt. According to mlbtraderumors.com the Rangers and Diamondbacks haven't engaged in conversation for weeks, and I honestly believe that. At some point I believe JD came to realize that Kevin Towers is somewhat insane. Now, why it's hard to imagine that watching Upton get dealt to another team would motivate the Rangers to make a move in any way I can't help but wonder if they felt in some way or another there was still a chance to obtain him. I could be completely wrong in my assessment and in all actuality I probably am.

However, if the Rangers were indeed waiting to see the outcome with the Upton fiasco maybe now would be a good time for them to make an effort to sign Bourn. Now, stay with me on this because I'm sure there are some of you out there rolling your eyes. I'm sure there are a lot of people that see better value in Losche, but I'm not one of them. Maybe it was watching Dempster come over from the NL and utterly fail in the AL west that has shaken my confidence in NL pitchers.

I know it's not a fair evaluation and to be honest I haven't even taken the time to compare the two against one another, but regardless I have my concerns.

Now, the reason I like Bourn is because Texas would finally have a prototypical lead off hitter and a CF with a hell of a track record. I love Gentry in the outfield, but only as a platoon guy, and I haven't heard to many positive things on L. Martin and his defensive capabilities. Bourn saved the Braves a ton of runs defensively which means he could potentially help improve a pitching staff. That may be a far fetched idea, but it's not an unrealistic one. You can't argue with gold glove status.

Secondly, I would love to see Kinsler move down in the batting order and get more RBI opportunities. Moving in the 5 or 6 whole can give Kinsler the chance to sacrifice a little bit of OBP for power which could potentially lead to driving in more runs. And of course with the departure of Hamilton and Napoli, we need all the power we can get. I could go on and on about this theory, but I have typed enough. You can rip me apart or agree whatever you want to do. Go for it.

Forget Bourn....I'd rather see Martin and Gentry and save the draft pic. It would take too much money to get bourn as well. If Bourne was such a great and outstanding player Atlanta would have re-signed him.

I wouldn't sign Bourne or Loshe.

Gentry is capable of batting in the top spot, but wont get the opportunity. Martin probably needs a year at the bottom of the order to see what he can do. The only time a leadoff really matters is in the 1st inning. So, for 162 games we need a player to arrive at first by walk, HBP, or base hit for 30% of the time or better. I think Gentry can do that.

Oh I would only sign bourn if his price comes down. And the rangers got a draft pick with the angels signing hamilton so it wouke be a trade off

If a frog had wings..but Bourn's price won't come down, years maybe, but not price. Then If the Ranger's got him, will we ever find out why Martin signed such a nice offer and never played? I'd still rather see what Martin has to offer.

Bourn's price could drop quite a bit if the Braves get Upton since they won't have any room for him even if he signed for the minimum there. Obviously he wants get paid, but he's in the latter stages of his career and I bet he goes to a contender. Not many contenders have the $$$ and job available. I've been saying this for a while now, and not bc I want this to happen since Gentry/Martin is perfectly fine to me, but I see Bourn coming here. His market has been in a nosedive and will go down even further if the Braves do in fact make this trade. We will bitch and moan if he signs here, but it does free up some more trade pieces for Price/Stanton. The Beltre deal looked like a reach at the time and this may too. But there are far worse things than to have a 5-6 WAR center fielder at a probable discount.

Pitchers in catchers report in about 20 days

At what point does Loshe or Bourne cease to cost a draft pick?

It would be interesting if the new CBA caused teams to wait on some marginal FA signings to avoid the loss of the pick

The only pieces it frees up in a trade is Martin/Gentry/Murphy/Cruz. Not much value in return for the first 3 because of our managers reluctance to play them

P1 Stefen.. nice I agree totally.

Someone mentioned an intriguing concept the other day... Sign and Trade.

We could, conceivably, offer Craig Gentry to Atlanta to have them sign Bourn FOR us. Gentry would compensate them for losing their draft pick and give them a really nice 4th OF/PR (which is a premium on NL teams). They won't need Bourn anymore if they get Upton.

We could do the negotiating with Boras, get the deal done, have Atlanta put their John Hancock on the contract then swap Bourn for Gentry and we keep our draft picks.

1) Would Atlanta prefer Gentry (known commodity) over a post-First Round pick (sandwich round) and the Allocation $$$ associated with that pick? Would Gentry be enough?
2) Would Bourn want to play for Texas?
3) Would Martin slide over to RF (or LF) if Cruz (or Murphy) leaves?
4) Would the Rangers want to do that deal?
5) Would the CBA prohibit S&Ts?

I don't understand how people can be content with a 29 platoon center fielder in Gentry and an unproven player in Martin who from all accounts I have read about, needs a lot more work in the outfield. Bourn is a gold glove CF who will steal you 40 bases and score a ton of runs not to mention save the pitching staff runs scored against them... but hey, we have Gentry and Martin why do we need Bourn??? If Boras wants to get Bourn BJ Upton money, then HELL no. But its Jan. 23. At one point do you have to say to yourself I'm not getting him the money he wants?

The Rangers don't have a black hole in CF. It will cost a lot to have Bourn fill it, both in terms of his salary and the draft pick they'd give up. I'm not interested. I want Martin to get his shot, and Gentry to get substantial time too. If they both suck, and Bourn is still unsigned around the all-star break (which shouldn't happen), only then am I the least bit interested.

Don't do it, Rangers. Save that money. If you have to spend it, spend it on Lohse, as he'd be a bigger upgrade to our 5th rotation spot than Bourn would be to our platoon.

1) Would Atlanta prefer Gentry (known commodity) over a post-First Round pick (sandwich round) and the Allocation $$$ associated with that pick? Would Gentry be enough?
2) Would Bourn want to play for Texas?
3) Would Martin slide over to RF (or LF) if Cruz (or Murphy) leaves?
4) Would the Rangers want to do that deal?
5) Would the CBA prohibit S&Ts?

Yeah, no. Sign and trades don't happen in baseball. And I have a hard time (a) believing Gentry would be enough for Atlanta or (b) that the CBA would be okay with this type of collusion. Why does anyone want Michael Bourn?

@Cosmo: Compensation is required right up to the Draft in June. I believe, once the order and sandwich slots are all made permanent (a day or two before the draft), no further changes can be made to the Draft Slots. After that, they can be signed by anyone without penalty.

@eric: Didn't say I WANTED Bourn... just got intrigued by the S&T concept in baseball. It's been around in basketball for years.

@David Draggle: I don't know if they're expressly prohibited, but on MLBTR they've repeatedly said MLB would likely view them as collusion and would veto the trades.

@SR17: look at Gentry's and Bourn's numbers. With the exception of a few dingers (Bourn's probably good for 5-10 a year, Gentry not so much), they're actually pretty similar. UZR loves both of them, and Gentry's wRC+ was actually a point higher than Bourn's this year.

Many people think Gentry will probably not look quite as good offensively, overall, if he played more against RHP. They might be right. I don't care. I still think any upgrade Bourn might provide over the platoon isn't worth the $12-15m it will cost them more than they're paying Martin and Gentry already.

I question if Bourn is 40 bases and all that and a bag of chips, why does Atlanta want to get rid of him?

Andy writes, look at Gentry's and Bourn's numbers. With the exception of a few dingers (Bourn's probably good for 5-10 a year, Gentry not so much), they're actually pretty similar. UZR loves both of them, and Gentry's wRC+ was actually a point higher than Bourn's this year.

Many people think Gentry will probably not look quite as good offensively, overall, if he played more against RHP. They might be right. I don't care. I still think any upgrade Bourn might provide over the platoon isn't worth the $12-15m it will cost them more than they're paying Martin and Gentry already.

Also, Gentry's numbers look better because he was mainly a platoon OF. Hard to compare a part-time player and a full-time player. The way I look at it is, if you're going to acquire Bourn on a one-year, $12 million deal, would you give the same contract if it was Gentry? Absolutely not.

Defense and speed will probably make Bourn a 4.5-5.0 fWAR player again in 2013. I would be happy with a 4-win platoon of Martin and Gentry in CF, though that number could jump if Martin comes out strong. Is that extra win worth our first round draft pick? I don't think so. Not for Michael Bourn, at least.

I can't imagine wanting either of them.

Is everyone disregarding the point I made on Kinsler??

Kinsler isn't likely to move down much because one way or the other we don't have the player we want to slot up in the top part. If we sign Bourn, a massive if, then Bourn should be leadoff and then you figure out where Elvis or Kinsler moves to. It probably would be Kinsler because he has a bat that would still play lower in the batting order.

That being said the issue with Bourn is the years/dollars and the loss of draft monies tied to the draft pick we lose for signing him. i just don't think we are going to sign him.

ANOTHER Upton moronic late (3hrs) to the forum overkill

I love when ppl throw out insults and have the inability to understand what the column is about....

The Rangers FO have announced, actually again, that they like the team as is. A sign of a #5 starter and utility player is still possible. But Bourn and Lohse are definitely not in the plans. So signing either is a dead issue. Look for a Nate Robertson type signing [ Jurrjens, Matsuzaka, Sanchez, maybe even Zambrabo but all highly unlikely], and what is on hand [ Grimm, McClellan, Perez, Ross] are better options. Likewise for utility, if Garcia & Olt & Profar are headed for Round Rock, then Snyder and Solarte are probably better options then free agents still unsigned.