Colby Rasmus

by slash on Dec 5, 2007 10:21 AM CST Comment 36 comments

He's probably untouchable, but just messing around with the idea......I think Eckstein is a FA(not sure if they resigned him).....

would Michael Young, etc. for Rasmus work??

not sure who we'd have to package.......

and just messing around, got bored and started toying around with some ideas......just not sure How much value Young holds, and if we were to trade with St Louis, they'll probably demand we take on Rolen eccspecially if we trade them Young........

Just post how much value you think Young Holds and what we could get for him......and What it would take to get Rasmus

0 recs | Comment 36 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

No-trade clause

Even if, it's a declining player who is weak defensively, with an albatross contract ... I couldn't imagine there'd be a lot of interest in that.

T.R. -- enough is enough.

by Chase Irwin on Dec 5, 2007 10:09 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Poor Michael Young

I know his contract will always leave the door open for criticism, but I still really like the guy, and he did have a remarkable second half last year. I think it is a bit too early to call him a "declining player", although because of the contract, he does have less value than he once had.

by clark on Dec 5, 2007 10:14 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

he had one homerun on the road last year

one.

by DSheppard on Dec 5, 2007 10:17 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

You would

Evaluate a player on his road HR total? Has his "contributor" rating plateau gotten so high that he is resented?

Insanity.

'At Georgia Southern, we don't cheat. That costs money and we don't have any.' Erk Russell / Georgia Southern

by Ed Coffin on Dec 5, 2007 10:23 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

the wookie defense

It just doesn't make any sense why people hate Micheal Young. Because wookies are from the planet Kashyyyk why would they be on Endor?

by bushe on Dec 5, 2007 10:48 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Young

Well, pull the lens back a half rotation and you see .394, his road SLG.

Or, yeah, 320 ABs and 1 HR.

Six of one, half a dozen of the other.

by hightowersmith on Dec 5, 2007 10:51 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

please, thats putting words into my mouth

thats ridiculous.

the fact is his power has dropped from his peak at age 28-29. thats called a decline. no reasonable person would predict michael young to hit 24 homeruns next year, rather he does it or not.

michael young is one of my favorite players, i defend him all the time. but im not going to pretend he isnt in decline because i like him.

by DSheppard on Dec 5, 2007 11:13 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Declining Player

How many players' careers progress in a pefect bell curve format. Over the next five years he will more than likely have two or three really nice years in there with two or three years like 06. I just think that last year was simply a down year for him and 05 was maybe a little high for him.

I think the chances of him having a better year next year are around 80%. It's always cyclical. Also, while he's not an elite defender, I don't think that he's near as bad as people portray him on here.

Is he overpaid? yes. However, look at what people are getting on the open market and it looks as if he's not that much overpaid. And, he's not getting paid for his HR power and it looks as if he's changed his approach to not look to hit HR's.

by badradiorules on Dec 5, 2007 11:45 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

bell curve

funny you should mention it

Look, ive got nothing against michael young. I like him a lot. He is one of my favorite players. I have a digital painting of him I spent a lot of time on signed by him thats about 3 feet from me right now. With the expected returns i dont even want the rangers to trade him, i dont care about hicks's money.

But the guys slugging is more than likely declined permanently, rather it spikes for a year here and there or not. Id love to be wrong.

I havnt said a thing about his defense, dont assume I believe every negative word about MY, I dont. I just think he, like most guys past 30, is on the decline.

Im not calling him a bad player, im not saying he should be moved to third (which ive argued against), im not saying anything like that. Im acknowledging that he has a bad contract and is probably on the decline as an overall player. I still think he will hit well above .300 and produce a lot of runs for a while. I just dont expect a return to a slugging % near 500 that he had in the normal peak years for a player.

by DSheppard on Dec 5, 2007 11:58 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

MY

I think we are kind of arguing the same point, but I think this is more of a case that 05 was an anomaly than he is in decline.

I guess I'm too optimistic about MY to like the term declining. I would say that he's plateaued (sp?) and like I said earlier, you'll see his numbers spike up and down the next five years or so, then start to decline.

I'm probably biased, but semi-objectively that's what I think will happen.

by badradiorules on Dec 5, 2007 2:02 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

i will agree

that with the way he played in 2007, first half vs. second half, the whole year is probably an anomaly. Except maybe the power decline - but it's still not so drastic that he's a liability on offense. 850 OPS ain't too shabby.

by ab03 on Dec 5, 2007 2:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I concur

by badradiorules on Dec 5, 2007 4:49 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I agree witha lot of that

Michael Young is overpaid, but I'm glad he's here. I like rooting for him and it would kill me to see him in another team's uni.

And he did post an .850+ ops after the break, so it's not like there's absolutely no hope for him to ever be good again.

Dwyade once challenged God to a game of 1-on-1, only to realize that not even God can play 1-on-1 against Himself.

by thedirkatron on Dec 5, 2007 12:04 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Brandon Boggs

Irrespective of all the hype, Rasmus's batting numbers in AA last season were only marginally better than that of Brandon Boggs. Boggs supposedly is also a very good defensive centerfielder. So why would you trade Michael Young for Rasmus?

by doolindalton on Dec 5, 2007 10:39 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

not even comparable

Boggs will be 25 in a month Rasmus just turned 21. Imagine what Rasmus would do to AA if he was there again this year at age 22 (much less 24). His OPS would clear 1.000.

by Brandon Wilson on Dec 5, 2007 11:11 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

MYoung

We know Michael is going to get 200 hits in 2008 and however long he plays for the Rangers. Speculation about a kid who hit .270 something in AA is useless.

by doolindalton on Dec 5, 2007 12:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

What about Ankiel

He is allegedly available, would he be worth grabbing? Is he AAAA as OFer or would he be worth a look at the right price in a rebuilding season over 162 games? I am just asking...

Fire Ron Washington

by pblack on Dec 5, 2007 10:54 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

There was a thread that AJM said

That Youngs contract couldn't be traded. MY ASS! A lot of teams would be willing to part with young studs to acquire a league average shortstop that can play second and probably third. They would trade for vertern leadership and a guy with offensive stats such as his. HomeRuns and slugging isn't what everyteam is looking for.

Mike heres 5 mil to waive your no trade clause. Waive it.

"I'd need a picture of Jamey with a shotgun saying "This is my Boomstick!" before I could see that one." DJCahill

by NYTXFAN on Dec 5, 2007 11:09 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

The Orioles are asking for

two or three solid young players for Tejada.

That should say something about the market for declining SS.

by clark on Dec 5, 2007 11:13 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

exactly!

and just the reputation he has around the league, as one of the Best Pure Hitters in the Game, an automatic 200 hits a year, i'd think we could get a couple of top prospects(or just one).......I mean his contract isnt that bad considering what it would cost to get a SS on the FA market........

by slash on Dec 5, 2007 3:07 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

if we could get one

i would be more than happy

kinsler/duran/blalock i can deal with.

hell sign a stopgap at SS.

if we could get ONE top prospect id do it, but as stated before im sure it would have a HUGE impact on attendance.

by knockoutking24 on Dec 5, 2007 3:11 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Rumors are that the Cards have interest

in Millwood, per rotoworld:

The Cardinals have shown interest in Kevin Millwood and Cliff Lee, according to the St. Louis Post Dispatch.
The Indians are clearly shopping Lee, but Millwood's name hasn't popped up a ton prior to this. "There are still some things we're talking about through trade that would help us out in the upper end of our rotation more than the back end," general manager John Mozeliak said.

Not that Millwood would bring back Rasmus, but their farm system has improved quite a bit over the past two years. More interested in Duncan than Ankiel, but, truthfully, neither one of those players gets me excited about trading Millwood.

Colbert/Colbert '08

by rooster on Dec 5, 2007 11:11 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

maybe a package

of Millwood and others (Otsuka, Teagarden, etc.), could bring us back Rasmus, but if we trade millwood I'd want Garcia back, maybe if it's a good enough package we could get Rasmus, Duncan, Garcia......but im a little too excited and I'm dreaming.......

by slash on Dec 5, 2007 3:14 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Padilla and KC.

KC is in on the Kuroda sweepstakes. If they don't land him, I still think they'll inquire about Padilla, since they pushed for him last off-season.

Colbert/Colbert '08

by rooster on Dec 5, 2007 11:18 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Not a chance

by Brett Perryman on Dec 5, 2007 11:23 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

what is this

referring to?

by clark on Dec 5, 2007 11:52 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Rasmus ...

and the Rangers trading for him.

by BHill on Dec 5, 2007 12:08 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah

it's in response to the initial post.

by Brett Perryman on Dec 5, 2007 12:58 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

yeah

he's untouchable, im dreaming........but i can still dream about having the next Sizemore/Granderson with a good OBP......

by slash on Dec 5, 2007 3:19 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I would trade young for

a stud outfielder and a pitcher with great upside. and of course with two or three other minor leaguers. If Tejada can get you at least one true stud and three minor leaguers Young should be able to command at least two studs.

"I'd need a picture of Jamey with a shotgun saying "This is my Boomstick!" before I could see that one." DJCahill

by NYTXFAN on Dec 5, 2007 11:34 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

tejada's expensive contract goes through 09

youngs goes through 2013. that effects his value a lot.

by DSheppard on Dec 5, 2007 11:38 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

true

but the contract doesn't look so bad compared to what you'd have to pay a player his caliber on the FA market.......and Young has a reputation as one of the best pure hitters in baseball and an automatic 200 hit guy......which could help his value

by slash on Dec 5, 2007 3:28 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

mike young

will not be traded

the cards will not trade rasmus - their farm system is already god aweful, why make it worse?

by knockoutking24 on Dec 5, 2007 2:04 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

well

they're a couple of years removed from winning the WS, their key guys aren't getting older and won't be around forever.......and like you said their Farm sucks, so they can't really rebuild.......so maybe they wanna trade for a couple of all star caliber veterans and make a last push while they have their two STARS in Pujols and Carpenter? Young, Millwood?? Young would hit nicely above Pujols and Millwood would be good between Carpenter and Wainwright.........

by slash on Dec 5, 2007 3:26 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

If Rasmus is unavailable how about

Pearce from Pitt. They don't want to trade McCutchen, however Pearce may be better.

http://www.thebaseballcube.com/players/P/Steve-Pearce-1.shtml

Teagarden for Pearce?

by RangerMad on Dec 5, 2007 4:07 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

I wouldn't do that

Pearce may be okay but he provides no defensive value, and I wouldn't be willing to bet on him producing superlative offense, when Teagarden is probably at least as likely to be a quality two-way catcher (veeeeerrrrry rare).

by Brett Perryman on Dec 5, 2007 5:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs