Lone Star Ball: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:

Around SBN: Read our new Phoenix Coyotes blog! Bar-right-arrows

Roundtable on the 2009 CIF slots

Th_buckykatt_tiny by Adam J. Morris on

Over at the DMN blog, Mike Hindman solicits the opinions of various folks (including me) as to what the best solution for the Rangers at the CIF slots for next season are.

Almost everyone goes with Chris Davis at first base next season, but there are a variety of opinions as to third base...I'm the only one who suggests moving Michael Young over to third base in 2009, but several people suggest looking for a short-term solution with an eye at moving Young to third base in 2010...

Mike is in favor of keeping Davis at third base and planning on Justin Smoak taking over at first base by 2010, which is also when Elvis Andrus is scheduled to be ready...but the one issue I would have with that (other than questioning whether Davis will be a viable third baseman long-term, particularly as he gets older and bigger) is you don't really have anywhere to put Michael Young in that scenario, unless you just bite the bullet and make him a very weak-hitting DH.

0 recs | Comment 298 comments

Read Related

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

If there were to be a trade partner

that offered to take MY for virtually nothing in return, would you make the trade? More importantly, would the Rangers’ FO make the move? I think most people here would, but I’m not sure the FO has the cajones to put up with the general fans’ reaction.

Which is a shame in a way because and infield of Kinsler, Davis, Smoak and Andrus would be cheap and beastly….in 3 years.

by GhettoBear04 on Sep 1, 2008 10:41 AM CDT   0 recs

Young

If a team were dumb enough to take Young off our hands for nothing (and he would waive his no-trade protection), I would make that deal in about two seconds. If it wasn’t clear before, this season has made it abundantly clear that the right move with Young was to let him play out his contract this season and then thank him for his efforts and let him walk. Instead, we gave him a deal that can best be described as the Rusty Greer contract on steroids.

His defense is bad at SS, and his bat doesn’t even play okay at 3B, much less a more premium offensive position. I guess I would leave him at SS for one more season, primarily because Andrus needs at least another year, and then move him to 3B, primarily because we don’t have any better options at 3B for 2010. That said, I wouldn’t have a problem with signing a good-fielding SS for 2009 and going ahead and moving Young over to 3B next season. It’s not a though we have any better options there for 2009 either.

Although I doubt the organization feels the same way, I think it’s pretty clear that we are stuck with a $16 million/year problem for 5 years, with no real way of escaping it.

by Darrell McKown on Sep 1, 2008 1:30 PM CDT to parent up   1 recs

you've got to be assuming

that the 15 mil a year we’d be paying Mike would end up adding to the 90 plus million payroll Hicks is churning out…or you’ve got to be thinking that Hicks wouldn’t pay a dime past 90 mil if we were still paying Young that 15 mil, and that we would outbid everybody on Sabathia, no matter the cost. and that won’t happen. I think Hicks will pay for a top notch starter or he won’t, I don’t think it depends on whether or not he’s paying Young. and I would rather have Young on this team than not, simply put.

"So you have no frame of reference here, Donny. You're like a child who wanders into the middle of a movie and wants to know... "

by Walter Sobchak on Sep 1, 2008 1:36 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Budget

I absolutely believe this team has a budget, and I absolutely believe that Young’s $16 million salary will count towards it. Over the life of his contract, Young is likely to be a below-average 3B taking up 15-20% of this team’s total payroll.

When you eliminate the emotion and the all the “face of the franchise” crap, I don’t see how anyone can conclude that Mike Young is worth anything close to $16 million a season, which makes him a significant liability. In fact, his contract is probably closer to the Chan Ho Park neighborhood than the Rusty Greer neighborhood.

by Darrell McKown on Sep 1, 2008 1:45 PM CDT to parent up   1 recs

I know i am in the minority

but i love the way travis metcalf plays 3B. still, the much more likely solution will be to pick up blalock’s option and let him play 1B while keeping Davis at 3B because, as you said, we have Smoak coming up to play 1B, and the org would love to see Davis play the field and not be relegated to DH (where we most likely have Max Ramirez, unless he is dealt).

Oh Michael Young. He is about to experience what Biggio did in his last years as an Astro. The fans love him, but there is just no optimal place for him on the field.

by clark on Sep 1, 2008 10:42 AM CDT   0 recs

Blalock

I wouldn’t pick up his option. Six million sounds like a lot, but the guy is broken down and never plays. That’s a waste.

I think they should come up with a plan for Opening Day going forward.

I’m totally in favor of Young going to 3B, but it may be a little soon. He’s not a butcher at short yet so they might as well wait until they have a SS who’s ready.

by Black Francis on Sep 1, 2008 12:24 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

who plays 3rd?

I don’t think it makes 2 cents who is playing 3rd if we don’t have pitching to keep us in the game. Obviously someone has to be traded for pitching that is much better than what we have now. Whom would that be?

¡yo soy Horsedooty!

I soloed in the Mile High Club!

by horsedooty on Sep 1, 2008 10:48 AM CDT   0 recs

agreed.

i just can’t get worked up over this decision since there’s no indication the pitching will have us competing next year. i don’t see any reason to rush to move MY from short.

by SteveP on Sep 1, 2008 11:17 AM CDT to parent up   0 recs

You could just as well say...

…that there’s no use getting worked up about the pitching next year, because there’s no indication the defense will have us competing.

by Adam J. Morris on Sep 1, 2008 12:09 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

But the rest of the defense is fine.

how many runs do you really think MY is costing? I havnt noticed him standing out for a lot of poor plays lately. Im sure hes costing a run here and there but its nowhere near the factor that straight up bad pitching is.

the preceding post is not nearly as negative or insulting as you think it is

by DSheppard on Sep 1, 2008 12:17 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

certainly not a run per game

which is probably what we’d have to do to seriously compete.

by SteveP on Sep 1, 2008 12:22 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

I agree

but we aren’t going to bring in enough pitchers to shave a run off the team ERA, but possibly (prayerfully), the staff can be improved to make up some of that difference, the defense can be improved to make up some of that difference, and after a couple years of incremental improvements in pitching and defense – we might be close to where we need to be.

I don’t understand the idea that just because there is a big problem to be fixed, and it can’t be fixed suddenly, that we just throw up our hands and punt. Replacing MY with a competent defensive SS isn’t going to make this team a contender overnight, but it will get us closer, which is a worthwhile goal.

Warner Madrigal makes Ezequiel Astacio look downright handsome.

by tricer on Sep 1, 2008 1:02 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Maybe its not just runs,

maybe he costs extra pitches/game. This could be said of poor defense in general.

As an example, that little bouncer that Wood hit in the 7th inning yesterday. That is a routine play that should have been made, either getting the force out at second or the easy out a first. He gets neither, which necessitates a move to the bullpen…an overworked bullpen.

The team has made tremendous strides this season upgrading the outfield defense. Now it is time to work on the infield.

by T Coleman on Sep 1, 2008 12:23 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Not the same

The argument has been made, with supporting data, by those smarter than I, that minor league error total is not a predictor of major league error total.

His manager has also stated that he is trying things now that he would not necessarily try in the big leagues. The same is probably true of the high number of caught stealings.

by T Coleman on Sep 1, 2008 2:09 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

groundballs arent any different in the major leagues?

i agree with the caught stealing but not necessarily with the errors

I give up

by Steal Home on Sep 1, 2008 2:56 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

I think we are discussing two different things

The complaint with MY is lack of range. The complaint with Andrus is errors.

IMO, lack of range is either the lack of skill (mobility) or the lack of an intangible (the ability to anticipate where a ball will be hit). The majority of errors are from a lack of concentration or fatigue.

I would anticipate as a 20-yr old matures, his ability to concentrate will improve. I would anticipate as a 30-yr old gets older, his lack of range will decrease even more.

I have no idea how good of a major league SS Andrus will be. The experts seem to think he will be pretty good. And I’d like to find that out with a “T” on his hat, not some other logo.

by T Coleman on Sep 1, 2008 4:42 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Grounders and the minors and increased errors?

we discussed this topic a while back and it was brought up that some amount of these errors happen in minor league parks where the infield dirt and the infield as a whole arent in very good condition and the result was more weird bounces in the minors, more inconsistent quality of fields than if you are playing on a major league quality infield with less inconsistencies comparatively.

its something worth considering when discussing errors in the minors with IFers

"I’m sure you’ve seen Kiker before but I’ll just reiterate that the kid is mean on the mound. He is only 5’10’’ but he is an intimidator. He looks like he hates hitters. He has the juice for pressure situations."
-Jason Parks on Jul 22, 2008 10:08 PM

by Jayslick on Sep 1, 2008 7:47 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Not really

Third base has been a disaster defensively this year. CF has been well below average. So has 2B, albeit because of too many errors, which I think is correctable.

by Adam J. Morris on Sep 1, 2008 12:33 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

why wouldn't

you just take have a 1B/DH rotation between Smoak and Davis with MY at third, Andrus at short for the 2010 scenario?

by SteveP on Sep 1, 2008 12:38 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Max at DH?

Go Strangers.

by hightowersmith on Sep 1, 2008 12:59 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

CF below average

Who is CF has been below average on defense?

by peachygbc_1 on Sep 1, 2008 2:22 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Hamilton

Boggs has been about average.

Hamilton’s improved, though. For a while he was borderline bad.

by philkid3 on Sep 1, 2008 2:27 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Don't you think

that Boggs could handle CF just as well as Byrd, if not better?

"The question of how we came to be is a philosophical one." - 4HIM

by Chase Irwin on Sep 1, 2008 2:28 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Yes, absolutely I do.

Boggs = Byrd was just correcting myself because I accidently said Boggs when I meant Byrd.

by philkid3 on Sep 1, 2008 2:30 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Yeah, I understood

Boggs would seem to have more value if he was used in CF more often.

"The question of how we came to be is a philosophical one." - 4HIM

by Chase Irwin on Sep 1, 2008 2:34 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Does it hurt

to be so stupid?

"...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
"If you ain't got no money, ain't nobody calls you honey," Bo Diddley

by Rodney on Sep 1, 2008 1:04 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

the white sox and twins are 12th and 13th in the AL fielding percentage

but they are totally out of the race right?

and texas’s struggles also has nothing to do with the pitching right and the horrible era right?

I give up

by Steal Home on Sep 1, 2008 3:00 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Fielding percentage?

Not a good way to evaluate fielding.

They are 15th and 22nd in DER. Texas is 28th, ahead of just Pittsburgh and Cincy.

by Adam J. Morris on Sep 1, 2008 3:06 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

The 2001 Mariners

they were the best team ever in large part because of their awesome defense. Having a guy like Mike Cameron out there really saved quite a few runs.

by FirebatM3 on Sep 1, 2008 3:08 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

How many runs...

…difference do you think there is between a great defensive CF’er, and a poor one?

Or a great defensive shortstop, and Michael Young?

by Adam J. Morris on Sep 1, 2008 3:17 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

no im not.

a centerfiedlers range doesnt come in to play too often and when it does it doesnt have to cost the team a run

I give up

by Steal Home on Sep 1, 2008 4:13 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Yes you are

How many plays per year do you think a great defensive CFer makes, that a bad defensive CF’er doesn’t?

Same with shortstops.

by Adam J. Morris on Sep 1, 2008 4:16 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Which is why a team like the Twins can be succesful

They have a great defensive OF (Delmon/Gomez/Span, L-to-R most nights) and good defenders in the IF. Their offense is only okay, with a bunch of meh hitters mixed in around a couple of really good hitters in Morn-o and Mauer.

It’s a big reason why their pitcher “over perform”, imo.

The 40 Trumps All!!!

by thedirkatron on Sep 1, 2008 4:20 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

I think that's right

Problem is, the Rangers aren’t likely to have a great defensive OF in the near future, although I think an alignment of Hamilton-Borbon-Davis, right to left, would be okay.

by Darrell McKown on Sep 1, 2008 4:25 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Yeah

It is. I just think that Davis probably ends up out there at some point, unless Smoak is a bust.

by Darrell McKown on Sep 1, 2008 4:36 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

To the Twins D...

I think playing on Astroturf makes their fielding much more consistent using the opposite argument used to explain more errors in the minors. If a player has more “range,” the player will have a better chance of making of play due to the consistent bounce from the turf (or lack thereof of the inconsistent bounce).

by Parman on Sep 2, 2008 10:46 AM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Bingo!!!

"California is the most liberal state in the union. No joke that place is probably going to slide into the ocean one of these days. California is a wasteland run by liberals"

-Sharky- what a nice guy huh? I guess he doesn't watch any TV shows or movies.. If California goes so goes the entertainment industry. What a nut job!!

by LAMuscleFag on Sep 1, 2008 11:59 AM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Metcalf

Do people object to Rhyner’s idea? All that bothers me is it delays the inevitable move for Young.

Anyway this will happen in 2009:

1B: Davis
2B Kinsler
SS: Elvis
3B: Young

Might not be opening day is all.

Go Strangers.

by hightowersmith on Sep 1, 2008 10:50 AM CDT   0 recs

Metcalf

I don’t think he’ll hit well enough to justify a regular spot in the lineup.

by Adam J. Morris on Sep 1, 2008 11:00 AM CDT to parent up   0 recs

I don't know that he's any worse than young

Pretty clearly the first time he has ever looked at a web site. "And there are readers' comments at the bottom! And advertisements for products! And best of all, I won a free iPod!"
-Ken Tremendous on Mike Downey.

by BudLight on Sep 1, 2008 12:56 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

I think you mean 2010

Although, I guess you could make the argument that Elvis might be ready by next September and your stopgap SS could sit then. I don’t want to count on Elvis before opening day 2010, though, and even then I think we need to be prepared for him to struggle for a while. He’s a baby.

O Freunde, nicht diese Töne!
Sondern laßt uns angenehmere anstimmen,
und freudenvollere.

by t ball on Sep 1, 2008 12:00 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Elvis

I’m wondering what decision is reflected in assigning him to OKC. He needs refinement? How much, though? The FO would accept his 2008 performance at the ML level, I think…start slow, get better. Are they sure he wouldn’t?

Plus his D is game-ready for the bigs, so the story goes.

Plus whatever stock should be put in makeup, his is anecdotally off the charts. He wants the challenge.

No surprise if he’s assigned AAA out of the gate — that’s where the young pitching’s eventually going next year anyway (Holland, Feliz, Hunter, the 2008 boys).

It’s actually the need for FOTF’s defensive replacement that creates upward pressure on Elvis. Let him start getting used to the job.

Plus, again, what marginal instruction is he getting from spending 2009 in AAA?

Go Strangers.

by hightowersmith on Sep 1, 2008 12:14 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

D is ready maybe, but

he’d surely make a lot of mistakes. I don’t think the big league team has anything to lose by keeping in AA/AAA all of next year. He is not ready enough to help the big league team win in 2009, but could be in 2010. You can get a stopgap SS who will hit as well as Andrus will be able to, and probably one who will make fewer mistakes as well.

Plus, sure he’d like the challenge, but I think the organization has already challenged him quite a bit, and being in AA/AAA andnot turning 21 until August is still a fair challenge. There is challenging, and then there is rushing. TX has been quite aggressive with many of its prospects. It does not need to start pushing that over the line into rushing everyone.

O Freunde, nicht diese Töne!
Sondern laßt uns angenehmere anstimmen,
und freudenvollere.

by t ball on Sep 1, 2008 12:30 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Rhyner's dead

I'm undefeated in fights. Have I been in any? No. Thats because people know my f'ing status. Don't mess with the elite. - Miles

by Dirk Diggler on Sep 1, 2008 1:18 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Andrus

Is it really a given that he will be ready for the majors by 2010?

If so, I might as well see MY in LF rather than DH.

by chrisR on Sep 1, 2008 10:58 AM CDT   0 recs

Not LF

He doesn’t hit enough for that spot, and I’d rather have a real OFer in the RBIA’s big LF.

O Freunde, nicht diese Töne!
Sondern laßt uns angenehmere anstimmen,
und freudenvollere.

by t ball on Sep 1, 2008 12:01 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Not LF… He doesn’t hit enough for that spot…

this argument is getting very old.

…you don’t have to have Grady Sizemore at every position to win a championship.

no, money down!

by oc on Sep 1, 2008 2:11 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

No, you don't

However, you’d rather not have a 750 OPS $15 million per year defensive liability in LF, either.

by Adam J. Morris on Sep 1, 2008 2:29 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Or

Or at 3B, either.

--Brian

by BCanfield on Sep 1, 2008 2:39 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Yes

I think he’d be less of a defensively liability, though, and more of an offensive asset, at 3B than at LF.

by Adam J. Morris on Sep 1, 2008 2:47 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Young at 3B

He’s not “more of an offensive asset” at 3B. He’s less of a liability.

by Darrell McKown on Sep 1, 2008 4:09 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

well

when it comes to “MY, the DH” vs “MY, the LF”, I think I’d prefer the latter, all things considered.

The RBIA left field isn’t the most spacious in baseball. Also, the benefit of having a legitimate DH (Max Ramirez perhaps? – if he pans out) over a singles-hitter should make up for Michael’s defensive shortcomings.

And if Julio Borbon ever learns to take walk every now an then, his range in center also could be helpful.

by chrisR on Sep 1, 2008 8:05 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Left field

Our left field is probably one of the bigger left fields in all of baseball actually. The OF position where you need the least speed is RF at our ballpark

Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.

by bigsteve on Sep 1, 2008 9:16 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Old argument

still valid and always will be. The team is likely to have a light hitting SS and/or 3B for the next couple of years, and catcher doesn’t look to be a big plus either. How many positions are you willing to sacrifice offense at with the difficulty the Rangers have had assembling a competitive pitching staff?

Get all the offense you can. Young is much less likely to be a burden offensively at 3B than in LF.

O Freunde, nicht diese Töne!
Sondern laßt uns angenehmere anstimmen,
und freudenvollere.

by t ball on Sep 1, 2008 2:42 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

if the trade-off is better defense, i'm all for it.

the Rangers are approaching (if they haven’t already) over 100 unearned runs allowed this season.

…i’ve about had it with this team’s offensive concerns superceding defense and pitching.

no, money down!

by oc on Sep 1, 2008 2:47 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Why do you think...

…Young at LF, rather than 3B, would improve the Ranger defense?

by Adam J. Morris on Sep 1, 2008 2:48 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

... Julio Lugo ...

… has won a ring …

"The question of how we came to be is a philosophical one." - 4HIM

by Chase Irwin on Sep 1, 2008 3:04 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs