As you've probably seen elsewhere already, Jim Bowden's latest ESPN.com post suggests a Martin Perez for Denard Span trade as one of five moves that could boost currently contending teams. I'm obviously not on board with that, considering that Span would likely provide only a marginal boost in center field in 2012, wouldn't be a good leadoff option as Bowden suggests he might be (his aggregate .265/.330/.355 line over the last two years doesn't inspire me with confidence, and shouldn't do much for you either unless you think he's a prime candidate to bounce back towards his 2008-09 numbers for some reason), and would lose much of his utility as a starting center fielder if/when Leonys Martin is ready.
Ultimately, though, the problem with that proposal is the cost as anything. Moving the best pitching prospect in one of the 3-4 best systems in the game for Span would be tantamount to moving a huge chunk of the system's present value and/or a great deal of future major league value for a small boost in the present. If you have to move Perez, you move him for a legitimate difference-maker ... which Span is not.
Anyway, what really caught my eye was Richard Durrett's post on Bowden's post (confused yet?):
One other thing: Bowden wants to make Span the Rangers' leadoff hitter. I know I'm in the minority if my email inbox is any indicator, but I like Ian Kinsler's versatility at that spot. I know the average wasn't what you'd expect, but he gets on base, is smart and fast around the bases and has the power to change a game early. The Rangers don't need to go with a prototypical leadoff hitter.
I didn't realize that there were still opponents to the notion of Kinsler batting leadoff. I thought we had killed and buried all of that. And I wonder how many of these said opponents also believe that Kinsler is a poor choice to bat leadoff because his batting average is too low and he pops out too much and BODY LANGUAGE