Other teams have interest in Michael "FOTF" Young
by dustinvandeman on Dec 9, 2008 12:47 PM CST
42 comments
Mets, Angels, Dodgers, and Royals among teams asking about Young
Found this on Sports Illustrated Fannation and thought it may be of some interest to people.
LAS VEGAS -- The Mets, Angels, Dodgers and Royals are among several teams to inquire here about the availability of shortstop extraordinaire Michael Young of the Texas Rangers.
Presumably, the Mets' interest would be for a second baseman, a position Young played beautifully when he first came to the majors in 2000 before moving to short in 2004. But the Mets say they won't acquire a second baseman unless they can first deal Luis Castillo -- a very difficult task, since Castillo is coming off an absolutely brutal, injury-plagued, out-of-shae season.
The Rangers are not shopping Young, but they are willing to listen to overtures on just about anyone, and that includes the five-time All-Star who won a Gold Glove in 2008 and has spent his entire career with Texas. There are quite a few teams in need of a shortstop, so it's not surprising that a number of them have asked about Young, a terrific all-around player who has $60 million and five years remaining on his contract.
In my opinion the Rangers need to take advantage of this oppurtunity of interest and attempt to unload Young. He is a very good player and a great clubhouse leader but his contract will hinder more than help this team in the next several years. Let's hear your trade proposals for each given team and stir up some trade talk.
Jon Daniels has to explore this opportunity to see if there would be any value in trading Young. I would be willing to take on a bad contract with one or two years left to get out from under Young's contract. He would be sorely missed though.
0 recs |
42 comments
Email
Print
Comments
lighten up francis!!!
hey niedermeyer!
mormons stole me and held me against my will with Oklahoma beer and 12+ hour work days.
by Jayslick on Dec 9, 2008 12:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
actually
the other thread is getting a little full, and Rosenthal’s recent report that Young has already been paid $20M of that deal, making him a 12M/yr player instead of a 16M/yr player might be worth starting the conversation over, as it changes the entire complexion of the trade and, I think, gives Young quite a bit more positive trade value.
by clark on Dec 9, 2008 12:54 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
can some1 explain to me why the rangers already have paid him 1/3 of his contract before it ever takes effect?
and while we are at it explain why we gave him 3 years of no trade in the contract right before his 5-10 takes effect (i seem to remember a “we’re never giving another no trade clause” article at some point in the last couple years btw)
mormons stole me and held me against my will with Oklahoma beer and 12+ hour work days.
by Jayslick on Dec 9, 2008 12:59 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I know
he is paid over what he is worth however his leadership is very valuable as is his work ethic. With Young i dont necessarily think this is an analysis of skills (he is what he is, an avg SS now) but more so an exercise in seeing what this would to the team’s chemistry and psyche. Losing 3 veteran leaders (Guardado, Young, and Bradley) certainly wouldnt help what is going to be an increasingly younger team. That being said for the betterment of the team on paper trading Young is something that probably should be discussed. Personally, I would hate to see a guy like that go but I can see the financial and even perhaps performance based side.
by Michael Cave on Dec 9, 2008 1:01 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
true.
we’d lose a LOT of leadership. I still opine that we gave the right guy the extension in Young vs. Tex…even though he declined in the end anyways. But if we gave up Young and got something very significant in return, I’d have to be excited. I would NOT dump Young for pure salary relief.
"Hang-Dai, Wu...Hang-Fu$&ing-Dai"
by Walter Sobchak on Dec 9, 2008 1:20 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm Confused
about what makes MY a "leader" Where exactly has he lead this franchise? He seems to get a lot of credit for staying with the club(it only took an albatross contract for him to buy into to the Rangers.)
He’s a below average defender and seems to be a part of what drags this club down to me. His attitude always seems depressive and he certainly never hides his dissapointment with management and their trades(or lack there of). He reminds me more of a Texeira than a Jeter(flame away……..)
I could be wrong. He could be the glue that holds this perpetual last place club together. If only a club could have a bunch of "locker room guys" like MY, DeRo, and David Dellucci.
Wait a minute….the post clearly states you need a math guy and a big guy. I just find MY to be neither.
Please, MY fanclub, provide examples of his endearing leadership. Yes, he played with a broken finger/hand. He loves to play ball no doubt, I just am unclear on this being MY’s team. Hicks say’s so(FOTF). Other teams’ players vote him to the all-star team, so they seem to think so, but I’m looking for in-house examples.
I personally believe him to be a voice from the past(losing, last place teams). I think the more of those guys you get out of here the better(see Teix and hopefully Blalock). A new era is soon upon us and MY will NOT be the FOTF.
"You’re the worst poster here I think."--- brettgardner
by red shoe ranger on Dec 9, 2008 3:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
+ another MM
"Somewhere out there, between 14-32 BBWAA NL MVP voters are trying to get cheaper winter heating by drilling a hole in the microwave." - Jeff at LoL
by lonestarJon on Dec 9, 2008 10:28 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
woops
math guy big guy line referred to another fanpost.
"You’re the worst poster here I think."--- brettgardner
by red shoe ranger on Dec 9, 2008 3:47 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
is that you, Elvis?
listen, I love Mike Young for what he is – a VERY hard working veteran that goes about his business and plays through any situation – winning (he’s seen little of), losing (lots of), good health and bad, and he’s always produced. maybe not at an Alex Rodriguez level offensively or as the hands-down best defensive SS in the league defensively, but he’s always come out and given it his all and produced. he’s the consummate professional, and one that earned every bit of his contract. he has surpassed his original ceiling and been riding high as a 5 time All Star. Do you really think he hasn’t earned or deserved that? A lot of people on this board and in the national media bashed Young’s Gold Glove award. But I have something else to add to his defense: if this business and fan base are so obviously biased towards Red Sox and Yankees, plus winners, why did he receive the award instead of Jeter or whatever name the Sox want to trot out there? Eric Aybar? Why didn’t any of those guys win it?
At the end of the day, any executive, coach or teammate would rather have Mike Young on their roster than not. Hands down. And let me turn the tables on you…give me a very good explanation on how exactly Mike Young is NOT a leader? Don’t give me the results of the team…Michael Young has absolutely no impact on a pitching staff beyond the errors he commits or the balls shot past him out of his range that some other SS would normally have a chance at. Focus on Mike Young the individual…how is he not a leader? Give me in house examples of how he fails to lead.
"Hang-Dai, Wu...Hang-Fu$&ing-Dai"
by Walter Sobchak on Dec 9, 2008 4:31 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
The burden of proof is on the person who claims MY should be kept around becaus he's a leader.
by philkid3 on Dec 9, 2008 5:15 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I take your burden and place it back on you now.
go ahead. prove me wrong.
"Hang-Dai, Wu...Hang-Fu$&ing-Dai"
by Walter Sobchak on Dec 9, 2008 5:29 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
i don't think you understand what a burden of proof is
for instance, it’s not something you can place back on someone. that kind of defeats the point.
for example
give me proof that kinsler isn’t the real leader of the clubhouse.
give me proof that hamilton isn’t the real leader of the clubhouse.
give me proof that millwood isn’t the real leader of the clubhouse.
see how easy that is?
Mandatory reading before suggesting a trade
by ab03 on Dec 9, 2008 6:00 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't see why you have to be a jackass
unless you’re “anti-Young being a leader on this team”
"Hang-Dai, Wu...Hang-Fu$&ing-Dai"
by Walter Sobchak on Dec 9, 2008 6:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't see how he was being a jackass.
by philkid3 on Dec 9, 2008 9:40 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
making it seem like I'm ignorant?
like I don’t know what a burden of proof is? first of all, I was most certainly jesting with placing my burden of proof back on you. second, I think the burden or proof in this situation would be on Michael Cave, since it was his original point. third, when I simply made a statement, “true, we’d lose a LOT of leadership,” I don’t think a burden of proof is upon my shoulders in that situation. when red shoe ranger made the statement that he’s confused about what makes Mike Young a leader, I suppose I could take that burden. and I suppose I sort of did, in explaining that Mike Young is indeed a leader on this team…just because he hasn’t led us to the playoffs or world series championship doesn’t mean he’s not a leader. It just means he hasn’t led us to the playoffs or a world series championship. that’s pretty simple logic to me. however, I’ll take it a step further…the burden of proof you speak of in this case is actually regarding a claim that MY should be kept around because he’s a leader. and I never said that. I did say we would lose leadership if he left. which I am not sure anybody in their right mind could argue against?
"Hang-Dai, Wu...Hang-Fu$&ing-Dai"
by Walter Sobchak on Dec 10, 2008 1:26 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I do, thank you.
do you know what burden of proof is?
"Hang-Dai, Wu...Hang-Fu$&ing-Dai"
by Walter Sobchak on Dec 10, 2008 1:18 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
word
there needs to be a “winter meetings” thread. Maybe ajm or z will create one…
Stability is key, and JD is a Beast.
Jindal - 2012
by Longhorn on Dec 9, 2008 1:07 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
If the opportunity is out there
Make the deal, no matter how big the outcry will be from Grandpa Urine and his cronies. Young is going to be an absolute albatross in the coming years, if we have an opportunity to scrap his deal we should not blink.
Kanye, you want to be the voice of this generation? Get in line! It goes me, Obamagirl, the Freecreditreport.com guys, then It's a tie between you-and Crocs.
-Stephen Colbert
by Conjunction on Dec 9, 2008 1:04 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I agree
but would Hicks sign off on the deal, even if everything works out and Young approves? That’ll leave him with very little to market the team with, other than hope.
by Taylor on Dec 9, 2008 1:08 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
marketing replacements for Young...
use that money to sign Sheets and Kerry Wood, and you’ve got two “hometown” heroes (I know Wood is from Duncanville and Sheets owns a home in Highland Park, right? not sure if he lived in Dallas before his Louisiana days though…) that bring a very big need to the team next year in above average pitching.
in addition, Josh Hamilton has to be considered the new FOTF, with Kinsler right behind him, so there are two more possibilities for marketing.
In other news, I still think we need to sign or trade for another impact bat – I know we’ll have a strong offense, but I think when you take Milton Bradley’s production out of that lineup, the lineup suffers top to bottom.
"Hang-Dai, Wu...Hang-Fu$&ing-Dai"
by Walter Sobchak on Dec 9, 2008 1:26 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Hamilton, Kinsler, Davis
All have more marketing potential than Young does.
by venturafearsnolan on Dec 9, 2008 2:45 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
wood is apparently close to signing with the indians
Wait 'til the year after next
by NothinG on Dec 9, 2008 8:28 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I just hope
Hicks learned his lesson on what to ask in return from the last shortstop he traded that had an albatross contract.
by Taylor on Dec 9, 2008 1:11 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
except that arod was probably the best player in the game
very young
played very well when with texas
is still one of the best players in the game
could win an MVP in any year
is a shoo-in HOF player probably
may set the all time HR record
isnt too shabby on defense
smart base runner (much better runner than young)
and if you remember the orig deal was manny + lester + something i think (i know the first 2 parts)
to even compare michael young and alex rodriguez is foolish.
arod’s most simliar batters through age 32:
Hank Aaron (775) *
Mel Ott (773) *
Jimmie Foxx (744) *
Ken Griffey (740)
Mickey Mantle (720) *
Frank Robinson (719) *
Eddie Mathews (679) *
Vladimir Guerrero (664)
Willie Mays (654) *
Rogers Hornsby (638) *
michael young most simliar players through age 31
Carlos Baerga (937)
Thurman Munson (936)
Barry Larkin (929)
Jose Vidro (923)
Red Kress (921)
Craig Biggio (920)
Julio Franco (910)
Tony Cuccinello (910)
Ray Durham (908)
Travis Jackson (908) *
Scout: He was a first-round pick right? Got a huge bonus?
KG: Oh yeah.
Scout: Well, he spent a lot of it on milkshakes.
by knockoutking on Dec 9, 2008 1:24 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
he's a shoe-in HOFer - probably?
aren’t shoe-ins sure things?
but I agree with everything else you say. and at the end of the day, we did get a pretty damn good player in return for A-Rod in Soriano (and supposedly in Arias)…just nothing in return from the Soriano trade.
"Hang-Dai, Wu...Hang-Fu$&ing-Dai"
by Walter Sobchak on Dec 9, 2008 1:35 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
and are we still kicking ourselves
for not taking Manny, Lester, etc.?
"Hang-Dai, Wu...Hang-Fu$&ing-Dai"
by Walter Sobchak on Dec 9, 2008 1:36 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
That's the MLBPA's fault
Hicks, Boston, and ARod agreed on the deal, but it required him restructuring his contract in a way the MLBPA didn’t approve of. I guess Hicks could have paid even more of his salary, but that probably wouldn’t have been too smart either.
by JBImaknee on Dec 9, 2008 1:53 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
to be fair
on that MY list, Barry Larkin and Craig Biggio will likely be HOFers, and Munson would have as well had he not died.
Baerga, Vidro, and Durham – not so much.
by JBImaknee on Dec 9, 2008 1:54 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
No trading Young...
Young has full no-trade protection thru ‘09. Limited thru 2010, and can submit a list of eight teams he would approve a trade in 2011. The only place he’s moving is to another position!!!!
by Pitching or bust on Dec 9, 2008 2:29 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
how do you know he wouldn't want to leave
Mandatory reading before suggesting a trade
by ab03 on Dec 9, 2008 2:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
+1
From several of his comments about being frustrated about the team not competing, I think he’d waive his NTC for any of the teams mentioned as having interest except the Royals.
by venturafearsnolan on Dec 9, 2008 3:04 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Seth?
steal home?
save us?
Musta forgot your password to that user ID, huh?
"...my balls are really like a veiny flesh color" blueballlefty on Jun 4, 2008 7:44 PM EDT
"you gonna lose your horse. seriously." FX2
Yes we can! November 04, 2008
by Rodney on Dec 9, 2008 3:09 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
To be fair
this post has actual ‘facts’ in it.
Savehomestealsethus really only posts theoretical conjecture.
Maybe a new trick on a new ID?
by Keynes on Dec 9, 2008 3:11 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
no that is probably someone's alter ego
im stevooosteal home
by Stevoo on Dec 9, 2008 10:56 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think his no-trade clause has kicked in yet
due to the fact that his extension won’t hit until this season. so this off-season you can trade him to anybody. then you’re tied to him
Wait 'til the year after next
by NothinG on Dec 9, 2008 8:31 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Poll question
Is completely nonsensical. “Who do you see as the best potential trade partner for Michael Young to land?”
Really? Michael Young is going to land a whole team?
I give up. Over and out.
"He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lamp-posts... for support rather than illumination." - Andrew Lang (1844-1912)
by Ed Coffin on Dec 9, 2008 5:10 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
it needed to be said
Mandatory reading before suggesting a trade
by ab03 on Dec 9, 2008 6:01 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
heh
"The Gerald Laird trade is a GREAT SUCCESS! Who'd we get for him again?"
Tom Hicks
by LAMuscleFag on Dec 9, 2008 8:04 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- D12: Whee! The Y! fantasy baseball operation is armed and ready
- Create-a-Caption: Albert wants to become one with the gun
- Be like Lincecum: Little Leaguer copies Timmy's windup
- Stewards Debate! Does Bud Selig deserve a Miller Park statue?
- Ask Alex: Will Ben Zobrist replicate his outstanding '09 season?
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
