To be completely real with you, if you are familiar with my style, you know I'm opposed to the idea of adding Michael Bourn to the Rangers. For the expected amount of money I'm assuming he receives, he would not be worth it.

With that said, there is an argument to be made for acquiring him. I just haven't decided if that will cost us a Nelson Cruz trade to clear up budget space, so for the purpose of this thread, let's assume Cruz is retained.

I'm not of the opinion a 3-year, $15 million AAV contract would be a smart move. However, if he was given a pillow contract, something in the range of one year at about $8-$10 million AAV -- where he could test the fledgling 2014 FA market -- that's a different discussion. As it stands today the Rangers have a CF platoon of Leonys Martin and Craig Gentry. If we could net 4.0 WAR from the tandem, I'd consider that a success. The question is, how much better is Michael Bourn in CF than our platoon? Is it worth $5 million? $10 million? $12 million?

Michael Bourn will produce more wins in 2013 than the combined duo of Martin and Gentry. I see Bourn as a 5-win player. If we acquired him, then, in theory, we could use Lance Berkman as our primary first baseman, play Gentry/Martin on a platoon basis in LF (because they are better fielders than Murphy, so Murphy would go to RF), and making Nelson Cruz our primary DH. It might sound stupid, but it would maximize production.

So, what I'm saying is this:

vs. RHP

1. Bourn - CF
2. Andrus - SS
3. Berkman - 1B
4. Beltre - 3B
5. Kinsler - 2B
6. Cruz - DH
7. Murphy - RF
8. Pierzynski - C
9. Martin - LF

vs. LHP

1. Bourn - CF
2. Andrus - SS
3. Berkman - 1B
4. Beltre - 3B
5. Kinsler - 2B
6. Cruz - DH
7. Murphy - RF
8. Pierzynski - C
9. Gentry - LF

(Also, so we're clear, this is not the lineup I myself would make. This is what I expect would be the case with Ron Washington as our manager. I'm more of a bat-your-4th-best-hitter-3rd type of guy, contrary to popular traditional logic.)

There are numerous problems with these scenarios. To name a couple: (a) I'm not comfortable ostracizing either Moreland or Cruz vs. RHP, and (b) I don't think Murphy does enough vs. LHP to warrant an everyday role. This leads me to believe either Nelson Cruz or David Murphy deserves to get traded, for their own right, and to help the Rangers pay for one year of Bourn.

So, yeah. If Michael Bourn is a 5 WAR player, if Berkman is worth 2-2.5, and if the bats of Leonys Martin and Craig Gentry translate well enough to produce 4.0 WAR at a COF slot (which I'm highly skeptical of), then this could, theoretically, work.

Is it worth it to move either (a) Nelson Cruz [$10.5 million], (b) David Murphy [$5.775 million] or (c) Mitch Moreland [league minimum]? I don't know. There are holes in this logic, but I think it's worth considering.

(And if you just want to tell me "The Rangers already said they were out on Bourn so why are you writing this you fucking idiot," well, I guess that's your prerogative. Don't believe the media hype.)

Out.

Thats' 3 minutes of my life I'll never get back.

If Bourn is only 1 win better than the platoon of Gentry/Martin in your estimate, is that 1 win worth 5 million, 10 million or 12 million? I don't think so. I think I would rather have the platoon of Gentry/Martin and the big bat of Cruz still in the lineup capable of knocking 25 HR's. The Ranger's cannot afford another power bat loss.

Murphy might be the odd man out in this scenario, but he bats lefty. Same for Moreland. Rangers need lefty batters too. I would probably keep Moreland due to his HR promise that hasn't matured. Maybe the new hitting coach can get thru to him.

Martin/gentry--give it a go-probably put up numbers similiar to bourn. this WAR bullshit is outta control.

@Not that Eric

Feel free not to read ass clown. It's obvious you have problems with mr reining so feel free to avoid his thread. I didn't think I'd have to spell that out for someone who attempts to present himself as a semi-intelligent human being, but you have once again proven to be as petty as ever. Congratulations jackass.

Positive:
-------------
1) Premier CF full-time that bats from the left and steals a lot of bases.
2) Ian Kinsler is moved out of the leadoff spot and into a run-producing spot in the lineup.

Negatives:
----------------
1) Either Cruz (power potential) or Murph (leadership and grit + average & good defense) is jettisoned PLUS Leonys Martin is negatively impacted and Crag Gentry becomes a complete non-factor.
2) First Round Draft Pick is lost (mitigated a little by the fact we have a sandwich pick for Hambone's loss).
3) Allocation $$$ that go with the draft pick is lost (meaning the money pool to sign Top 10 Rounds' Picks is compromised).
4) Bourn's sense of entitlement is established by his demands. Will he truly be worth the money or will he think all he has to do is throw his glove on the field and everything is hunky-dorey. We already suffered through that scenario with Josh Hamilton and Michael Young (both of whom felt their participation in games was more important that (a) the Rangers continued excellence and wins; and (b) the expense of our bench that REALLY needed some time on the field to feel their participation was important.

I can see how all the pundits think the Rangers SHOULD be looking outside to replace lost starpower. But, there are stars in waiting that just need to be given a chance to produce. Let the kids bump around for a couple or 3 months -- we'll still be in contention. Then, when we need 'em (ala the Oakland A's 2012 Starting Rotation), they will be ready to go.

And, by then, JD will have identified our next "external acquisition" and we can go on and win the West and have another go at the World Series.

@Eric.... no need... this team is still one of the top 8-10 teams in baseball this year. Why just sign a guy to block younger players off. Eric, that post was a waste of time. What about Mr. Profar? Do you really think he stays in Round Rock till September? I certainly don't think so.

Also if you're looking for Berkman to play more than 80 games at 1st you ignore the reason he was signed. As a DH, occasional field play.

Romro the Homro:
So you speak for Eric now? Do you LUVVV him?

Mooreland played hurt all last year. He was rolling early in the year before he hurt his wrists.

The big issue you did not hit on is not the cost per dollar, but the cost in our 1st round draft pick we would have to give to the braves since he was given a qualifying offer he turned down. (That offer was 13.3 mil 1 year btw)

No way the Rangers would give up a 1st round pick for a 1 year deal. Not worth it.

Leoynes Martin put up a 1.100 OPS in AAA. He earned a shot.

Ever notice how many times Romro uses the word ASS in his posts? Kinda makes you wonder.

Like someone said, I will never get my time back reading this one. I did learn though that Eric has an admirer or whatever.

Joey, cabin fever is causing the inmates to be unsettling. Why don't you just close the sight till ST starts or when you get enough time to contribute. I don't how to say it any better; and I sugar coating it when I say this is boring. Joey!

Eric, what bothers me the most about signing Bourn, even to a 1 or 2 year deal and regain a forfeited draft choice this year only to regain later, is the loss in run/power production. It is putting a lot of unproven realities, but I do not see Bourn on the hitting side as much better the Leury Garcia or Craig Gentry. Martin has such a high upside and such an untested MLB level player, that the Rangers could have a bust or a less power but more contact Cepedes on their hands. I would want to see if Martin can be successful in center field, and to see that, Bourn would be signed by the Mets by then. Also, BERKMAN will not play first base except on rare occasions, too much invested in Berkman in the daily line up to move him off of DH. Cruz and Murphy will not be pushed off their corner outfield positions, with no better reason then we both know, Wash is making at the line up. So if we gain Bourn, we lose Martin in the starting line up. I do see your thinking, and we both can agree in no way preference that someone will eventually sign Bourn and most of the MLB prognosticators still seem to insist it will be with the Rangers, no matter how much the Rangers appear to be saying NO. Also, would like to see what Moreland can do if he could stay on the field and not on the DL for a full season. It does appear for the Rangers that their are a lot of things that must be successful to have a playoff bound season, and it maybe asking too much: and as we know their is cavalry on the way from the Minors, just may prove too late for 2013. And with that, keep posting on the Forum, as for me headed out until next off-season.

if your WAR is greater than my WAR then how much WAR are we talking about and what WAR would you pay for?

Bye bye les

Anything that gets rid of Cruz is good. Cruz has been in a rapid decline for 2 years. His legs, routes, age and depth perception are all bad for fielding.

I favor Murphy and Martin in the corners, and Gentry in CF. To me, Gentry, alone, without a platoon, would produce as many WAR as Bourn, in that Bourn's fielding rating is not as good. Also, I see Martin as a fairly powerful hitter, based on his slugging at AAA, and his speed will make him a much better outfielder than Cruz.

To me, it does little good to make Cruz the DH. First, he does not hit RHP any better than Moreland, and probably worse.
Since RHP pitch 70% of the time, and since Cruz costs 20 times as much as Moreland, and since Moreland can kinda play a position (1st), then keep Moreland and get rid of Cruz. Second, if Cruz' butt is on the team at all, Wash will play Cruz in RF every stinkin day, sure as shootin, which may again cost the Rangers the playoffs, like Cruz and Young and other factors did last year.

Also, I do not favor the loss of a draft pick and $10M or so for Bourn's salary to be a good investment for a sideways move.

In short, get rid of Cruz, then if they get Bourn or not, I dont care as much.

So many of the fans on here, even those who pay lip service to Sabremetrics, continue to ignore defense but instead talk of the need for power. Such talk makes no sense to me. What matters is wins. Defenae matters...a lot!

I've never understood why eric seems to have such a dislike for Mitch Moreland.

Nelly was the ALCS MVP. His bat carried us to the WS in 2011, and I expect big things outta his contract year (32 homers)

Eric, thanks for the post. I thought it was a good thought experiment. If Bourn was going to sign a pillow contract, he would want to be in Texas where he can have the best stats. I might be in the minority, but I would rather have Bourn on my team next year and trade Cruz to a team like the Mets that desperately needs and outfielder. Cruz may have power, but he puts together some ugly at bats, and his defense has become a liability. We could recoup the lost pick with a qualifying offer next year. I would argue that in the case we sign Bourn to play CF, it would be Gentry/Martin that platoon in RF since they have stronger arms than Murphy in LF. The newly signed Jeff Baker could platoon in LF against RH pitching.

@not that Eric

What an example of human intelligence you are. I hope for your sake you're not a day older than 14 because if you're a grown man making childish posts like that then I really pity you.

Romro:
I'm 15-probably too old for you pervert.

I didn't post that but it is funny. But seriously Romro you are the one throwing " ass clown" & "semi-intelligent human being" around not to mention your favorite 'jackass'. The next post you have that lends anything to this site will be your 1st. You don't have to defend Eric Reining. He is more than capable of doing that himself. Now run along and get over yourself.

^^^^^^
Still nothing but petty and childish posts. I'm not surprised you're 15. You act like it. Actually, acting 15 would be an upgrade for you. Your posts have all the substance and intelligence of a 12 yr old. Now back to class little boy. You might want to learn algebra before trying to understand saber metrics.