Michael Young to the Cubs why not?

by Grace17 on Feb 5, 2011 12:08 PM CST

I've been reading about the trade rumors between the Rockies and Rangers for Michael Young. I am wonderng why in the world haven't we heard any chatter about the Cubs pursuing him?

He would be an excellent 2nd basemand as he has proven with the Rangers and considering he has played gold glove or near gold glove at 2nd, SS and 3rd why not? Open up the wallet Ricketts and get it done! I'm assuming payroll would be the obstacle. There are no excellent options IMHO at 3rd base in next years free agent class and if we decide to part ways with Aramis and we could slide Young over there. We could have an excellent offensive and defensive team with Young at 2nd at all positions except the black hole in LF. My only concern would be that he is 33 years old right now.

Here is his contract status-

2011	34	Texas Rangers	$16,000,000
2012	35	Texas Rangers	$16,000,000
2013	36	Texas Rangers	$16,000,000
		Earliest Free Agent: 2014

Here are his offensive stats.

Year	Age	Tm	Lg	G	PA	AB	R	H	2B	3B	HR	RBI	SB	CS	BB	SO	BA	OBP	SLG	OPS	OPS+	TB	GDP	HBP	SH	SF	IBB	Pos	Awards
2000	23	TEX	AL	2	2	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	.000	.000	.000	.000	-100	0	0	0	0	0	0	/4
2001	24	TEX	AL	106	429	386	57	96	18	4	11	49	3	1	26	91	.249	.298	.402	.699	80	155	9	3	9	5	0	4
2002	25	TEX	AL	156	633	573	77	150	26	8	9	62	6	7	41	112	.262	.308	.382	.690	78	219	14	0	13	6	1	*46/5
2003	26	TEX	AL	160	713	666	106	204	33	9	14	72	13	2	36	103	.306	.339	.446	.785	97	297	14	1	3	7	1	*4/6
2004	27	TEX	AL	160	739	690	114	216	33	9	22	99	12	3	44	89	.313	.353	.483	.836	109	333	11	1	0	4	1	*6/D	AS,MVP-8
2005	28	TEX	AL	159	732	668	114	*221*	40	5	24	91	5	2	58	91	.331	.385	.513	.899	131	343	20	3	0	3	0	*6/D	AS,MVP-11
2006	29	TEX	AL	*162*	748	691	93	217	52	3	14	103	7	3	48	96	.314	.356	.459	.814	108	317	27	1	0	8	0	*6/D	AS,MVP-30
2007	30	TEX	AL	156	692	639	80	201	37	1	9	94	13	3	47	107	.315	.366	.418	.783	106	267	21	5	0	1	5	*6/D	AS
2008	31	TEX	AL	155	708	645	102	183	36	2	12	82	10	0	55	109	.284	.339	.402	.741	95	259	19	2	0	6	0	*6/D	AS,GG
2009	32	TEX	AL	135	593	541	76	174	36	2	22	68	8	3	47	90	.322	.374	.518	.892	128	280	16	1	0	4	2	*5/D	AS,MVP-16
2010	33	TEX	AL	157	718	656	99	186	36	3	21	91	4	2	50	115	.284	.330	.444	.774	105	291	21	1	0	11	4	*5/D

Forgive any grammar or spelling mistakes as I am not an English major. I just thought this is something that should be considered and discussed.

Jim

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of SB Nation or Al Yellon, managing editor (unless it's a FanPost posted by Al). FanPost opinions are valued expressions of opinion by passionate and knowledgeable baseball fans.

Tweet Comment 68 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

There were rumors that Kinsler was coming to the north side

I’d love to have either one of them. Maybe Chris Davis could be a throw in? The question becomes what do you give up in return? The initial thought for Kinsler was at least Cashner. This is something I wouldn’t be willing to do. We’ve traded away too much this off season. The system needs to be replenished a little bit before we throw prospects away. Given that there is going to be so much turnover next off season it doesn’t make sense to get rid of prospects unless we want to be throwing out more contracts like the ones that are starting to come off the books. These prospects might be able to help us out in the future.

Looking at what the Rangers need, they could use starting pitching. They have a surplus of middle infielders, which doesn’t help us because that’s where our strength is from the minors. Would someone like Casey Coleman or Jay Jackson appeal to the Rangers? I kind of doubt it.

One other thing to consider is the money Michael Young is making and how the “Plan” was to reduce payroll this off season.

"Baseball is almost the only orderly thing in a very unorderly world. If you get three strikes, even the best lawyer in the world can't get you off." ~ Bill Veeck

by Musicdude10 on Feb 5, 2011 12:32 PM CST reply actions

Did I miss the speculation about Kinsler?

I hadn’t heard anything regarding him being dealt to the Cubs.

by Dcr18 on Feb 5, 2011 1:52 PM CST via mobile up reply actions

I haven't heard anything about that either.

Check out Chicago sports coverage at SB Nation Chicago

by Al Yellon on Feb 5, 2011 2:03 PM CST up reply actions

Phil Rogers

Here’s a quote from an article by Phil Rogers from last weekend. It was taken from an article about Albert Pujols.

Young said last weekend he doesn’t plan to be a DH forever, and the Napoli addition would make it easy to trade him or Ian Kinsler as scouts believe second base is Young’s best fit. The Rockies are interested in Young and at one point this winter the Rangers were offering to pay half of the $48 million left on his contract. Dealing Kinsler, guaranteed only $13.5 million over the next two years, might be more palatable and bring a higher return.

Either Young or Kinsler would upgrade two spots for the Cubs — second base and leadoff. The Rangers’ need is a starting pitcher to replace Cliff Lee. Nolan Ryan loves Andrew Cashner, but it’s hard to imagine the Cubs trading a second pitching prospect after putting Chris Archer in the Matt Garza trade.

by FloridaCubsFan on Feb 5, 2011 2:38 PM CST up reply actions

linky

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/sc-spt-0130-notes-rogers-baseball—20110129,0,5063305.column

by FloridaCubsFan on Feb 5, 2011 2:40 PM CST up reply actions

Well.

First, it’s Phil Rogers, which calls it into question right away.

Second, nowhere in there does it say that there was any talk about Kinsler to the Cubs, other than the speculation of Rogers himself.

Check out Chicago sports coverage at SB Nation Chicago

by Al Yellon on Feb 5, 2011 2:49 PM CST up reply actions

Right

This may be the “rumor” Musicdude might be speaking of.

Kinsler would definitely be awesome but it’s not gonna happen.

by FloridaCubsFan on Feb 5, 2011 2:53 PM CST up reply actions

Calling it a rumor

is giving it too much credit…

"All I want is food and creative love" - Rusted Root

by TheRiot Police on Feb 5, 2011 3:25 PM CST up reply actions

well we could list a lot of names that would upgrade spots on the team

that does not mean there are any talks about it happening

Chronologically inept since 2060
Q: Why did Chuck Norris cross the road?
A: Ditka
Ditka's mustache can block a Chuck Norris round house

by Cubbie-Tim on Feb 6, 2011 1:03 PM CST up reply actions

Kinsner for Cashner?

Hold on, I’ll help him pack.

"I think part of a best friend's job should be to immediately clear your computer history if you die." - Anonymous

by Easy Ed on Feb 5, 2011 3:09 PM CST up reply actions

*Kinsler

"I think part of a best friend's job should be to immediately clear your computer history if you die." - Anonymous

by Easy Ed on Feb 5, 2011 3:19 PM CST up reply actions

Why not?

Because at this stage of his career, Michael Young is not a very good ballplayer and he has a huge contract. This is why Texas is trying to get rid of him.

First off, look at his career stats outside of Arlington. They aren’t that impressive. His career slash line is .279/.322/ .411. And last season he hit .260/.299/.380 outside of Texas.

Secondly, he hasn’t played second base since 2003. And his defensive reputation has always exceeded what the stats say, and pretty much everyone thinks he’s lost a couple of steps lately. He’d be a bad defensive second baseman at this stage of his career.

Michael Young stopped being a good ballplayer about three years ago, but the Ballpark at Arlington has masked that.

by Josh Timmers on Feb 5, 2011 12:48 PM CST reply actions 11 recs

i rest my case

Chronologically inept since 2060
Q: Why did Chuck Norris cross the road?
A: Ditka

by Cubbie-Tim on Feb 5, 2011 12:52 PM CST up reply actions

Yep,

always have liked the guy, but now a little long in the tooth as they say, and unless they take Silva in the deal there is no way Young is a Cub.
Kinsler I would be shocked if he gets moved.

by Grockcubs on Feb 5, 2011 1:25 PM CST up reply actions

I was going to post a lot of this.

Thanks, Josh, you beat me to it. Rec’d.

Check out Chicago sports coverage at SB Nation Chicago

by Al Yellon on Feb 5, 2011 1:32 PM CST up reply actions

Thanks. This is exactly right

In fact, I was just listening to a podcast about Young and how he can’t play middle infield anymore. And he can’t play first or third for the Cubs.

by subtle on Feb 5, 2011 2:14 PM CST up reply actions

well how does Wrigley rank on hitting its probably up there with arlington

At 9 games at Wrigley hes hit 2hr 5rbi with a .924 ops

so i dont see how he cant hit here but and right hes an upgrade over Barney/dewitt

He played SS and 3rd base well. He could move Castro to 2nd and help out when Ramirez goes down.

If they want to pay half his salary it might make sense if we dont give up to much value.

by Mitchener on Feb 5, 2011 3:17 PM CST up reply actions

The Cubs need more D to protect their pitchers

They can’t outscore everyone all the time.

by subtle on Feb 5, 2011 3:51 PM CST up reply actions

I will continue the greening of this.

"The riches of the game are in the thrills, not the money." --Ernie Banks

by dtpollitt on Feb 5, 2011 3:38 PM CST up reply actions

I can't green it enough.

John Grabow: $4.8 million in 2011.

by rlpete on Feb 5, 2011 9:29 PM CST up reply actions

Agree - just don't see the point in giving up anything for Young

By the time the Cubs are primed to win (hint: not 2011), he will be shot. The team already has one aging, overpaid ex-second baseman. Why get a second?

by ClarkFan on Feb 5, 2011 10:36 PM CST up reply actions

+1

if they want an upgrade over Jose Lopez, the Rockies would be wise to get him, stick him at 3rd and leave Stewart at 2nd. Coors would be the next best place for his bat, next to the Ballpark.

by PrincetonCubs on Feb 6, 2011 11:02 AM CST up reply actions

Barney

I don’t understand the urge some people around here are feeling to get rid of Barney. The dude hasn’t even had a real chance to prove his worth yet. He is no world beater, or starter for that matter…but I think he has a great chance to be a solid and serviceable utility guy. He swings a tolerable stick and plays a clean clean defense. Having seen this guy play at Oregon State as well as throughout the minors, I will say that he is the anti-theriot with the glove/baserunning and still brings a high scrappy factor to the table. With that being said, I would trade him and cashner for kinsler in a heartbeat.

by renocubfan on Feb 5, 2011 4:14 PM CST via mobile reply actions

I hope that between

Barney, DJLM, Flaherty, Lake, and some of our other MI/UTIL candidates, we have a proper competition. While one or more may spend a signinficant amount of time playing in Wrigley, I hope there is a commitment to get quality low-priced years out of a number of them. And the ones we won’t be keeping longterm, I hope we trade them for quality prospects.

Not aging veterans that will throw us into the problem we’re trying to get out of now.

OTOH, if Prince Fielder becomes available in trade, I wouldn’t mind if one of the four were included with a pitcher or two to Milwaukee if Prince wanted to sign a five year extension with the Cubs.

by timh815 on Feb 5, 2011 5:06 PM CST up reply actions

Why?

because as you said, he projects to a utility guy. It’s not like people want to get rid of him but rather no one is excited by him.

John Grabow: $4.8 million in 2011.

by rlpete on Feb 5, 2011 9:32 PM CST up reply actions

better to keep Barney and see if he can be a solid backup middle infielder

than overpay for a fading guy like Young

I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren

by lookingdeadred on Feb 6, 2011 11:15 AM CST up reply actions

I don't know about Kinsler being available

But if he was, maybe we could get them to take Fukudome in the deal. Give them the young, cheap pitching they want, but ask them to take on one year of Fukudome’s contract to balance out Kinsler’s contract.

Cashner, Dolis, Fukudome, DeWitt for Kinsler, Davis, and a prospect?

No one should be untouchable on this roster unless his name is Eliot Ness...or Starlin Castro.

by cubzfan on Feb 5, 2011 4:42 PM CST reply actions

Young - Yes

While I do agree with those who say that Michael Young’s best years’s are behind him, he is still a productive player and capable of 180 hits with doubles power.

One thing that has not been mentioned so far is his leadership skills and his unselfishness. These are traits, well let’s just say the Cubs have been sorely lacking in this area for a few years now. We do need a clubhouse guy and it would be nice to solidify second base.

Kinsler, that would be sweet. But our farm system can’t take that hit right now.

by PalatineRol on Feb 5, 2011 5:20 PM CST reply actions

One thing that has not been mentioned so far is his leadership skills and his unselfishness. These are traits, well let’s just say the Cubs have been sorely lacking in this area for a few years now. We do need a clubhouse guy

Already got two of those in Pena and Wood. Young is way too expensive for his level of production.

Check out Chicago sports coverage at SB Nation Chicago

by Al Yellon on Feb 5, 2011 5:31 PM CST up reply actions

yes and no

Young is expensive. I’ll give you that.

Wood may be a leader and a good clubhouse guy, but I think there is a difference there between pitchers and position players. We still need a leader on the field and Young would provide that. Pena seems like a nice guy by all accounts but is he a leader? Never heard that before.

by PalatineRol on Feb 5, 2011 5:37 PM CST up reply actions

I've heard Pena is known as a team leader and mentor.

Not to mention Byrd. Between those two, Wood, and Dempster, I’d say this team has more than it’s share of leaders, and really nobody known for being a bad teammate. At the very least it should be a good clubhouse this year.

by Dcr18 on Feb 5, 2011 7:43 PM CST via mobile up reply actions

agree

I had forgotten about Byrd.

by PalatineRol on Feb 5, 2011 8:20 PM CST up reply actions

If the reports are true that

Rangers are willing to pay half his contract that means hed get 8million a year. I dont think that would be that expensive. At about 3 WAR hes worth more than 8 million.

by Mitchener on Feb 5, 2011 6:04 PM CST up reply actions

what an upgrade that would be for the infield

And what a good mentor for Castro.

by PalatineRol on Feb 5, 2011 6:09 PM CST up reply actions

The Cubs don't have an extra 8 million.

They had to get Wood to take a big hometown discount, defer half of Pena’s salary to next year, and trade Gorzelanny to cut 2 million of the payroll. Where would this extra eight million come from?

by Dcr18 on Feb 5, 2011 7:47 PM CST via mobile up reply actions

They have the money..but they are holding back

I think if we look at the Payroll analysis they should be under there budget. I think it was 3-4 million.

If you get him at allstart break wouldnt you be able to afford him?

by Mitchener on Feb 5, 2011 8:32 PM CST up reply actions

They have the money, but not in the budget

That’s the reality. And per Josh above . . . no. I wouldn’t.

by Shanghai Badger on Feb 5, 2011 8:51 PM CST up reply actions

I'd rather have the guy the Rangers almost traded Young for earlier

Eric Young, Jr.

by Bradsbeard on Feb 5, 2011 6:28 PM CST reply actions

that

would be nice but i think the cubs are done.they upgraded where they felt they needed it. youngs bat sure would be nice. maybe rudy should speak up.

by NOMAR on Feb 6, 2011 8:34 AM CST reply actions

and

the stories about pena are true. the man is not afraid to step up and be a leader. both pena and garza will bring a winning attitude to this team. 2 guys who wont let the 103 year talk bother them unlike a lot of our former players.

by NOMAR on Feb 6, 2011 8:38 AM CST reply actions

Big Update Michael Young ticked of and wants to be traded...

It seems as though Michael Young has had enough with his role switching and doesnt want to be known as a DH.

Could this be the wild card for the Cubs to get a good deal on Young.

http://sports.espn.go.com/dallas/mlb/news/story?id=6098059

by Mitchener on Feb 7, 2011 8:55 PM CST reply actions

young is a horrible defensive 3b

and even worse defensive 2b

He's my Hossa
HO-HO-HO-HO-HOSSA

by jesus christos on Feb 7, 2011 10:28 PM CST reply actions

Woo-Hoo

Michael Young has listed the eight teams he would accept a trade to and the Cubs are NOT one of them!

Cardinals, Yankees, Twins, Astros, Rockies, Dodgers, Angels and Padres.

by Josh Timmers on Feb 7, 2011 10:41 PM CST reply actions

Those are the 8 team on his NTC, i've read.

Jason Stark tweet "Spoke w/ Michael Young tonight. Asked if he’d be willing to expand his list beyond 8 teams, said he’d consider it on “case-to-case basis.”

"A dream you dream alone is only a dream. A dream you dream together is reality." John Lennon
"My favorite food is Macaroni and Cheese, from the blue box." Geovany Soto
"They played like son of a guns......lord have mercy." Mike Quade

by Cubbiegoon on Feb 8, 2011 12:11 AM CST up reply actions

Yeah

He wants out of Texas. He’d probably go almost everywhere. But the point is the Cubs are not on his list of teams he wants to go to, probably because of Ramirez.

The list is mostly Southern California (Young is from Covina), teams that need third basemen or both. Then there are the Yankess, which I guess he’d be willing to go to just because they’re the Yankees.

by Josh Timmers on Feb 8, 2011 12:38 AM CST up reply actions

Is it just me, or...

… is Young coming across like a real jerk in this whole process?

Check out Chicago sports coverage at SB Nation Chicago

by Al Yellon on Feb 8, 2011 7:49 AM CST up reply actions

In a way he is

and in a way he might not be. This depends on whether the Rangers would have or were going to trade him anyway. Why should Young think they wanted a $16 million per year DH? Have they ever stayed pat with a $16 million DH before? He thinks they are lying to him.

On the other hand, Young probably shouldn’t think that he gets whatever role he wants until his contract is up. And if he does warrant more, than he has pretty much three years to prove it. He should be willing to prove it with any team on his list.

by AboutTheCubs on Feb 8, 2011 8:37 AM CST up reply actions

My point is...

… if he’s a team player, he is under contract and should be willing to listen to changes of position, even if that’s to DH. The complaints and whining he’s made since this whole thing started lead me to believe he’s not a guy I’d want on my team.

Check out Chicago sports coverage at SB Nation Chicago

by Al Yellon on Feb 8, 2011 9:42 AM CST up reply actions

Yeah, Young is turning this whole thing...

…into a very messy situation by speaking so publicly about his frustration. At the end of the day, his contract is a trade killer.

Contributing Editor, SB Nation Chicago. Please follow us on Twitter!

by daver on Feb 8, 2011 10:03 AM CST up reply actions

The problem is

that the Rangers went out and got Mike Napoli, who will mostly play at DH. In his mind, he’s already moved from second base to short to accommodate Soriano, short to third to accommodate Andrus and third to DH to accommodate Beltre. Now he’s supposed to be a Mark DeRosa supersub type player. Of course, one of the reasons they moved him all these times was he wasn’t hacking it defensively and they were getting better players. (Except for the Soriano thing. That really was an accommodation.) The Rangers weren’t honest with him and told him “It’s not you, it’s me.” The last owner also paid him a ton of money and the new owner isn’t happy about it.

Yeah, he is coming across as whiny, but the Rangers don’t look so great either.

by Josh Timmers on Feb 8, 2011 10:14 AM CST up reply actions

Speaking of Soriano

and I know you don’t much care for Young, but any chance that could be a workable platform? I think the Cubs would have to give some money Texas’ way, but TX does need less infielders and, perhaps, a bit more DH/outfield help.

by jerry morales rules on Feb 8, 2011 12:35 PM CST up reply actions

Soriano's not getting platooned

He’s not getting $18 million a year to just hit lefties. It’s not happening.

I know all about sunk costs. It’s still not happening.

by Josh Timmers on Feb 8, 2011 1:01 PM CST up reply actions

But he is going to be platooned in Chicago

Soriano hasn’t had 500 ABs since 2007. Granted a lot of that was due to injuries, but last year’s wasn’t. Assuming Colvin is healthy, one would think that the Cubs will try to get him more rather than less ABs. Though I am not suggesting he only hit against lefties, I am suggesting that he’d be the main DH for TX with spells in the OF.

I hear what you’re saying, but Soriano in a NL uniform can only be a platoon player. Moving him to an AL team with a DH will increase his ability to see ABs. If I was in Soriano’s shoes, I would do whatever I could to get to an AL ballclub. Last I heard, his relationship with TX was pretty good.

by jerry morales rules on Feb 8, 2011 1:26 PM CST up reply actions

There's a difference

in being platooned and getting a day off once a week. As you said, the reason he hasn’t had 500 ABs (and that’s a little deceiving as he has had 500 PA in every year in Chicago) is injuries. That’s not platooning.

Second, you can’t “platoon” Soriano and Young since they’re both right-handed, unless you’re going with some goofy Earl Weaver platoon where one plays against power pitchers and the other plays against breaking ball throwers. I don’t know if that would work (not knowing those esoteric splits) and honestly, no manager other than Earl Weaver has ever done stuff like that.

Michael Young is not going to accept a trade to Chicago so he can have the same role he’d have in Texas: A supersub bat off the bench, filling in four days a week at four different positions, if that’s what you are suggesting.

by Josh Timmers on Feb 8, 2011 2:01 PM CST up reply actions

No, I'm suggesting Young be the everyday 2bman

I don’t think that Young is a great ballplayer, but I do think he’s a better option at 2b than DeWitt/Baker. Even if the Cubs would have to add a starting pitcher to the mix (Wells/Coleman/Samardzijia), I’d do it.

I think that we can get off on a tangent regarding “platoon” and that may be confusing my argument. Suffice it to say, whether Soriano gets days off or is pulled because of defensive liabilities, he is no longer a guy that is going to get 4/5 PAs a game 6 days a week – not in the NL. If he stays in the NL, he is, at least, not a full-time player. If that’s a platoon player, then so be it. But last year’s lack of full-time PAs for Soriano was not caused by injuries. This is the new fact of life for him in the NL.

Just giving a cursory look at the Rangers roster, Napoli is going to get a lot of ABs and the only thing stopping him from getting them at 1b is Chris Davis, a guy who, as you know, has been given the chance a few times and has not been able to hold it. David Murphy in left? He hasn’t given any warm fuzzy there either and Murphy, like Davis, bats lefty.

I can see how Soriano for Young as the platform for a trade could make a lot of sense for the Cubs, the Rangers, and the players involved.

by jerry morales rules on Feb 8, 2011 2:16 PM CST up reply actions

you think they'll

let us give them Shark?

Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.

by drewishdrewid on Feb 8, 2011 2:24 PM CST up reply actions

As much of a punch line as Samardzija has become ...

I do think there’s an argument to be made that he hasn’t been well-handled by the Cubs. He has been moved between starter and reliever a few times. As I’m sure you know, he was a highly regarded prospect.

Is it really that much of a stretch to assume that he’d have some value to another organization (especially one with Mike Maddux as pitching coach) as a high ceiling type of guy? I don’t think so, especially since he has shown brief glimpses of success at times, though it has not been sustained.

by jerry morales rules on Feb 8, 2011 2:36 PM CST up reply actions

Moreland is at first base

and Hamilton is slated for LF with Borbon in CF. Texas wants to unload Young amd save some cash, swapping for Soriano does nothing for them.

John Grabow: $4.8 million in 2011.

by rlpete on Feb 8, 2011 8:39 PM CST up reply actions

I think it's you

He’s a good guy, great teammate and is highly thought of in the community. So say my Ranger friends down in Dallas and a lot of their friends. They’re all mad as hell at the club for yanking Young’s chain with all the trade talk, then keep him talk, then trade talk again.

The only thing I don’t like about the situation is he went halfway in his comments. Better to have said nothing at all or go all out and speak the whole truth. But to just say he was lied to and manipulated without any details leaves a lot of room for interpretation.

Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."

by ballhawk on Feb 8, 2011 7:32 PM CST up reply actions

That's what I think too.

Young has been a good guy but he probably hasn’t handled this very well by going to the press.

John Grabow: $4.8 million in 2011.

by rlpete on Feb 8, 2011 8:42 PM CST up reply actions

According to Fangraphs he was an average 2b baseman

He averaged a .5 uzr rating from 2002-2003. While blake dewitt is -9.3 at 2b.

So how would he be worse defensively than dewitt?

And hes no where as bad as Aramis at 3rd. So i dont see why he wouldnt fit at the right price for 2nd base and the occasional 3rd base.

by Mitchener on Feb 8, 2011 5:52 PM CST reply actions

Because that was eight years ago.

Not saying DeWitt is a good option. Just don’t see the point in pissing away money that could be spent on a better player next season on Michael Young.

by Josh Timmers on Feb 8, 2011 6:27 PM CST up reply actions

You also neglected to mention

that Young has had a -7.5 UZR over the past three years at Third base. So he’s supposed to be better than that now at the much tougher second base?

Those stats were right in front of you. I don’t know whether this argument is ignorant or blatantly dishonest.

by Josh Timmers on Feb 8, 2011 6:31 PM CST up reply actions

I neglected to talk about his 3rd base numbers

because he wouldnt project to being playing at 3rd on the Cubs. ya it was 7 seasons ago when he last played 2nd but that was natural position.

Also i only presented it because a poster above said he was even worse at 2nd base than at 3rd base and i wanted show their wasnt any evidence of that.

And last wanted to show that hed be a better 2nd baseman than our current guy Dewitt.

So why was that dishonest?

by Mitchener on Feb 8, 2011 9:30 PM CST up reply actions

I'm sorry, it's not dishonest

You’re just misguided. You honestly believe that a 34 year old Michael Young, now eight years away from playing second base, can pick it up and play at the same level that he could when he was 26. I can assure you that’s not true.

Third base is an easier position to play than second base. The reason he’s worse at third base than he was at second base isn’t that it’s not it’s natural position, it’s that he’s getting older and he’s not quick enough any more to play the position. If he’s not quick enough to play third base, he’s certainly not quick enough to play second.

What everyone seems to be missing is that if Michael Young was still a good ballplayer, the Rangers never would have signed Adrian Beltre. You don’t spend that kind of money to just have a marginal upgrade at third base, especially since you owe Michael Young 48 million dollars over the next three years. You spend it because Michael Young is no longer able to play third base at a major league level.

by Josh Timmers on Feb 8, 2011 10:24 PM CST up reply actions

i should have phrased it as

“young is a horrible defensive 3b

and will be even worse defensive 2b"

He's my Hossa
HO-HO-HO-HO-HOSSA

by jesus christos on Feb 9, 2011 5:04 PM CST up reply actions

well its debatable whether 3rd is easier

But im just gonna say that its possible he had trouble with the distance throwing to first and the reduced time to get a batter out. Also that was his 2nd season playing Third and he improved the 2nd season.

Hes a good not great player hes not worth 48 million dollars which we agree on. The Rangers assumed hed be fine being a utility/DH guy.

Theres no doubt Beltre is better all around he had a 7 war season. They needed the big free agent to contend with Lee gone.

Anyways it seems as though the Rangers arent willing to pay any of his salary so I dont see any reason to mulling this over.I think we can agree hell have some value on another team. Even if we disagree on his defense.

by Mitchener on Feb 9, 2011 2:59 PM CST reply actions