Michael Young Trade Rumors

HornHuskerDad

HornHuskerDad

5,000+ Posts
From the Fort Worth Startelegram this morning - The Link.

The acquisition of Napoli could be taken as an indicator of a decreased role for MY. IMO, the real value of MY is not so much as the DH - it's his ability to play 2B when Kinsler goes on the DL, as well as spelling Beltre and Andrus so they can rest a bit. The throw-in infielder from Colorado, if this rumored trade happens, doesn't bring the same versatility and veteran presence to the table.

Guess we'll see how this plays out pretty quickly. Spring training starts on the 20th for the full squad, and I assume if MY is going, they would trade him before then.

HHD
hookem.gif
texasflag.gif
coolnana.gif
ousucksnana.gif
 
The plot thickens - The Link. This was posted in the FWST this morning. First full-squad workout in Surprise on the 20th (13 days) - can/will the Rangers trade MY before then?

Hornfans Ranger zealots, what say you?

HHD
hookem.gif
texasflag.gif
coolnana.gif
ousucksnana.gif
 
I think that Greenberg/Ryan have to do the best thing they can for the betterment of the franchise. If it means letting Michael Young go, so be it. It would make me sad, to be sure, but if it has to be done, then it has to be done.

MY's done everything the franchise has asked him to do. But the growth and prosperity of the franchise has to come first.
 
I don't like it. Clubhouse chemistry is not something to take for granted. It's also not something that can be manufactured. Chemistry is affected by the coaching staff, but it's ultimately defined by the leaders among the players.

Among the position players, Young is the guy in the room who sets the tone, the guy to whom everyone else looks when things are going well (to keep them level) and when they're not (to keep their heads up). He earned that position by being a consummate professional, by being one of the most reliable offensive players in the past decade, by being an unselfish and versatile defensive player, and by leading this team (by actions and words) from the suckage of the early and mid 2000s to the glory of '10.

My rant isn't about what Young has "earned." It's about what he meant to the '10 AL championship team and what he would mean to the '11 team. Beltre is an excellent player. Napoli is a nice player. But neither is Mike Young to this team. There are some things that VoRP and the other metrics can't measure.
 
^Good observation, PFD - and clubhouse chemistry and leadership is vital to a contending team. I'm sure the Rangers are keeping this in mind regarding Michael.

However, if you look at the infield as it ended the year - Moreland at 1B, Kinsler at 2B, Andrus at SS, and Michael at 3B - Michael is clearly the weak link in the defense. There is no question that the infield defense will be better with Beltre - and with a bunch of pitchers who get groundballs, infield defense is key.

If Michael stays, he will play a bunch of defense - spelling regulars here and there, as well as playing a lot at 2B when Kinsler makes his annual trip to the DL.

Question - does Michael Young, who can play a lot of infield positions as a "super utility" player, who would be a decent DH, and who brings clubhouse leadership, justify $16M a year? Tough decision for JD.

HHD
hookem.gif
texasflag.gif
coolnana.gif
ousucksnana.gif
 
I guess you have to decide whether you want a smoother locker room with bigger payroll and a decining player or a few rough spots in the locker room with better financials and possibly a more productive player price-wise.
 
If the dude thinks he's capable of playing any IF position at a high level (sans 1B, and even that might be a stretch for him), then he's deluding himself and hurting the team. I think the Rangers still have enough of their core players left to thrive, especially if some of them are healthier this year.

Young had the opportunity for a wonderful gift: playing 110 games a year, very little field work, and $16 million in the bank. Looking a gift horse in the mouth isn't exactly the pinnacle of leadership. I'm kind of surprised how this came about. It's very un-Young-like.
 
The talk radio stations are crucifying Young these last two days. He must have had some sort of unfulfilled promise from either Daniels or Ryan or Washington, and decided that he'd harm the Rangers not only by badmouthing them to the press, but also in their pocketbooks and ability to make a team.

This is probably the worst thing the Rangers could have gone through following a World Series. I guess outside of death or career-ending injury.

Young wants to be a middle IF for a National League team... so be it. God knows it's a ****-ton easier to play a regular season in the NL. But he went about this the wrong way. A 34-year-old guy beginning the downswing of his career shouldn't command this type of authority. And instead of having the best utility player in baseball, the Rangers are going to get stuck with some meaningless bat off the bench. F that.
 
Don't get me wrong. I wish that Young would simply shut his mouth, collect his sizable paycheck, and play wherever the team needs him to play in order to get back to the World Series. And, in light of how unlikely it seems that the Rangers will be able to move him (and his sizable contract) for anything of real value, I hope that he'll do just that if he's still a Ranger when the team reports to Surprise a few weeks from now.

I mentioned the leadership issue because it's something that the average fan--and certainly the average fantasy baseball geek or sabermetrician--seems to take for granted. For example, I know from credible inside sources how the departures of Bagwell and Biggio affected the Astros clubhouse. I also know from similar baseball sources how the departure of Giambi and a couple other veteran leaders affected the As clubhouse. You can't just acquire or promote good leaders, just like you can't manufacture good leadership.

P.S. Young can't "take a pay cut." That works in the NFL, where the CBA permits teams to cut players and dump their contracts, such that highly paid veterans can and often do take pay cuts in order to remain with the team and afford the team some salary cap relief. However, in MLB, the contracts are guaranteed and non-renegotiable. See, e.g., when the MLBPA blocked A-Rod from taking a pay cut when the Rangers tried to trade him to Boston.
 
re: clubhouse leadership

MY could still be that guy. His troubles are with management, the players understand that and many share the feeling (every workplace has that in common)

But I think his distaste for this place is pretty large. I hate to see him go b/c there's no one that can take his place in that regard. This yr might be yet another "talented, underperforming Rangers team". Been there, done that
 
I'm so conflicted about this whole situation.

MY has been one of my favorite R's for almost a decade, so it pains me to see the player/organization relationship degrade to the point that it has.

Stepping back, though, it's easy to see that I'm guilty of overrating his abilities. I almost find myself laughing at such a statement. The guy has won a batting title and 2 Gold Gloves. Is he the kind of guy you build an organization around, though? Looking at it objectively, I would have to say no. Yet, the club paid him a salary commensurate with such a belief. Honestly, not many balked at the time that deal was signed. Who could blame them? We'd had malcontents like Mark Teixiera, Alex Rodriguez and Alfonso Soriano as recent franchise players. After all of those 'me first' guys, it was like fish in a barrel to root for this quiet, no-nonsense, hard-working guy. I believe the media is partly to blame for such a position. I'm also to blame for not looking at his career with a more critical eye. I believe all of this has resulted in MY having an inflated sense of worth to the organization. Having stated that, isn't it likely MY's rise to become the F.O.T.F was borne out of simply 'outlasting' all the others? Fair or unfair, I think there is some merit to this belief. This has been a hot topic around the blogosphere, including BBTIA.

I like that MY was willing to switch positions multiple times to accommodate younger players. His selfless 'team first' attitude is precisely what has led the media and fanbase to place him on a pedestal. What the local media, as well as the nouveaux contingent of our fanbase, has failed to acknowledge is that MY isn't exactly unique in his actions. Guys like George Brett, Paul Molitor and Pete Rose all made multiple switches as their careers progressed and their abilities diminished. Different era? Sure, but I don't see how that is relevant. You're either always a team leader, willing to sacrifice for the betterment of the club, or you aren't. Real cornerstones of a franchise don't pick-n-choose when to apply the standard. And using the term 'sacrifice' here seems a bit silly. Dude was given a contract far exceeding his production by almost every statistical measure. The club paid him, so that's on them, but he doesn't come across well playing the victim, here.

It should be noted that his current displeasure seems to stem not from another position change, but the club's continued pursuit of Jim Thome, as well as their landing Mike Napoli. I can see why he'd be a little upset, since both of them are viewed as DH-types with little value in any other capacity. MY probably wants to know where all these at-bats are going to come from. Having said that, I saw Napoli more as 'Mitch Moreland insurance.' He can be a back-up at 1B with an occasional game at DH. People seem to forget the only reason Napoli became an everyday player for the Angels was because of the season-ending injury to their other 1B, Kendry Morales. Napoli isn't a threat to MY at-bats. Why he feels this way, now having had time to digest the move, makes little sense to me.

They can't trade him, that's for sure. At least, they can't trade him and receive anything of equal value in return. They'll end up picking up a giant portion of his $48M contract, in addition to getting nothing but spare parts to fill out the roster.

Hopefully, this will all simmer down when camp opens. I have a feeling that's what'll happen.
 
Newberg said it best in a recent Report.

The only teams who might have an interest in a player like Michael Young are contenders. No one else can justify paying that much money to a 34-year-old contact hitter whose a jack-of-all-trades-master-of-none in the field.

However, contenders aren't going to deal to the Rangers what the Rangers need, i.e., someone who can help the big league club win now. If the team falters badly before the Break, then maybe there's a deal out there to a contender for prospects. A deal before Opening Day seems awfully unlikely now.
 
Rangers will try their hand once the season starts and teams show their mettle. If the San Diego Padres, for example, are leading the division at the end of April, the Rangers might dangle MY out there in hopes of several prospects. Texas will only have leverage if they avoid dealing him now.

But if no one takes the bait, Young will probably just be shipped off to a second-place team during the week of the trade deadline in any of the 5 other divisions. And they'll be stuck with half of his contract and get maybe a benchwarmer in return. Timing will be crucial for Daniels/Ryan if they want to make the best of this situation.
 
Hey I love the guy but the problem here is that he doesnt have a realistic appraisal of his true value in the field today.

He is overpaid by a solid $10 million a year. Takes a ton of leadership to overcome that.

Plus as a hitter he is having trouble turning on the fastball. That doesnt get better with age.
 
God knows it's a ****-ton easier to play a regular season in the NL.
-------------------------------------------
11, why would this be?
 
Games are shorter because of the 3-to-4 "easy outs" per game.

That and the fact that the NL isn't as good as the AL. The All Star Game and World Series champs might not show this, but people don't fear the NL East like they do the AL East.

The postseason is all about pitching and timely contributions from role players, and the Giants mastered this in the 2010 edition. But the regular season is a beating in the AL. 6 of the top 7 teams in baseball were in the AL according to the SOS and expected winning percentages. It's just a lot harder to get through a season knowing that you're facing the tougher teams.

And while the AL has its share of losers like Seattle and KC, people still have to get through their aces, while you can't really say that about Pittsburgh, the Cubs, Washington, etc.
 
At his prime Young was worth 16 mil a year but not any more, his huge salary makes it difficult for Rangers to trade him. Not sure Rangers will be able to trade him?
 
Young was given his deal when the Rangers franchise was searching for an identity. He was solid and they needed solid guys. He just happened to be followed by Hamilton, Kinsler, Cruz, etc., all guys that are as solid as he is and that produce more gaudy numbers than he does.

Any deal involving Young will require the Rangers to pay up to 1/2 (if not more) of his remaining salary. I think the Rangers are fine with that, but they are not getting any offers of any serviceable players. Why would they pay $8 mil per season for a player not on their roster AND not get anything in return? For example, the Phillies wanted Young and wanted the Rangers to pay 1/2 of his salary and the Rangers wanted Joe Blanton in return. The Phillies would not do that. I would think, at the very least, the Rangers should expect a 4th/5th starter type guy and they could not even get that.

It is a bad situation because everyone knows Young wants out and they are trying to get a .300 hitter for nothing. If the Rangers hang on to him, I think Young will really excel in his new role and as the ultimate professional he will accept his role and move forward with the team. Or maybe I hope...
 
At the same time, some teams who are second or third in their respective divisions will get desperate for a bat by mid-May. The Rangers will have a little bit more leverage once teams start asking if they're still dangling Young out there. They might still get stuck with half of his salary, but actually get some prospects in return, and not a 32-year-old utility guy.
 
Good point, Horns. But I just can't see the Rangers trading Young to a contender (unless it is to a contender in the NL). And if the Rangers are in contention, then that will be hard to justify to fans unless they get someone who can play now. It is best for Young and the Rangers if they put all this behind them and move forward. If this is hanging over their heads all season, I just cannot see them having the same success they did last season.

For the record, unfortunately I see the Rangers third in the AL West behind OAK and LAA. I think all 3 will be fighting it out all year and it will come down to the last couple weeks of the season with the OAK pitching coming out ahead.
 
I agree... out of Wilson, Lewis, and Hunter, there's no way they all keep sub-1.25 WHIPs again this year. Teams know they're coming now. Games against the Rangers are going to turn into "AL East" type games where batters take tons of pitches.

And now with the Borbon stuff I don't know if he can be an everyday CF. This season could be remarkably similar to the year before last.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top