An article defending Michael Young's defense
by Adam J. Morris on Sep 28, 2008 6:05 PM CDT
58 comments
T.R. Sullivan has an article up, defending Michael Young against criticisms of his defense, that includes some quotes from management-types, and from Young himself, making it clear he doesn't want to change positions:
A quicker first step will help with Young's range. That's been the one part of his defense that has come under the most scrutiny, and he is not oblivious to the debate.
"I think it's funny because everybody wants Ozzie Smith range," Young said. "I want people to show me a guy that has turbo range like that. I'm happy with that part of my game. I don't have anything to prove to anybody except me and my teammates. I get to balls. I think it's funny people tend to nitpick over small things."
* * *
Young also knows there is debate about his future at shortstop. There has been speculation that he may have to switch positions at some point, especially when Double-A Frisco shortstop Elvus Andrus is ready. But Young is quite clear with his feelings about a possible position switch.
"Not anytime soon I'm not," Young said, who admits to strong feelings and stubbornness about the subject. "Because I've had to defend my defense so much, I feel I've had to develop a certain amount of stubbornness. But I don't see that change taking place anytime soon."
Washington said switching Young to another position has not been discussed. Washington said he sees Andrus at Triple-A Oklahoma next year.
General manager Jon Daniels said: "Michael Young is our shortstop. His track record speaks for itself."
Washington said Young's range could improve with better positioning. Right now, Young plays what Washington calls a "straight-up shortstop." When he learns to shade hitters in the right situations, Washington said his range will get better.
There's also this interesting tidbit:
it must also be pointed out that the infield at Rangers Ballpark in Arlington, Texas, is possibly the fastest in the game.
The grass is kept extremely short, and the heat and wind bake the infield dirt into a rock-hard surface. Ground balls zip through that infield, which doesn't hurt an explosive offense, but doesn't help defensive players.
"It's very fast," Washington said.
One has to wonder why, if you have a pitch to contact, groundball staff, you wouldn't do everything in your power to make the infield as slow as possible, to reduce the hard grounders that make it through, since you (one would figure) will give up more of those balls than you would hit, given the makeup of your staff.
0 recs |
58 comments
Email
Print
Comments
“I think it’s funny because everybody wants Ozzie Smith range,” Young said. “I want people to show me a guy that has turbo range like that.”
Mike, I know you’re busy and all, but there’s this guy in Frisco…
by Keynes on Sep 28, 2008 6:11 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
and a guy in mil who is pretty good too
"I don’t know of a single thing Obama’s done except talk and write." - Newt Gingrich
by knockoutking on Sep 28, 2008 7:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Huh
Washington said Young’s range could improve with better positioning. Right now, Young plays what Washington calls a “straight-up shortstop.” When he learns to shade hitters in the right situations, Washington said his range will get better.
So if MY’s been playing shortstop now for 4 years and he still apparently hasn’t learned how to shade hitters… what makes Ron think he’s gonna start now?
"M’s fans are such weenies." - Zywica
by lonestarJon on Sep 28, 2008 6:17 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Ron will fix it!
Just like he came in and fixed the defense!
by Melmart1 on Sep 28, 2008 6:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The same thing
that makes Ron think he’s going to learn to “prepare better” this off-season – Nolan’s gonna hire Yoda and Yoda’s gonna go all Jedi mind trick on the Rangers organization, top to bottom. Know just where to stand you will. Know just when to pinch-hit you will. Noogie not and monitor JD for bad trades you will. Strong with the farce we are.
by shroomer on Sep 28, 2008 6:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yoda and Wash
syntax nightmare.
In essentials, unity. In non-essentials, liberty. In all things, love.
by t ball on Sep 28, 2008 9:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Pickin' mah-chine, you must become.
The 40 Trumps All!!!
by thedirkatron on Sep 29, 2008 5:53 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Young: I am not a 3B
Wash: Oh, you will be. (scary Yoda whisper)
In essentials, unity. In non-essentials, liberty. In all things, love.
by t ball on Sep 29, 2008 9:48 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, since Wash is responsible for positioning the infielders ...
is it really Young that needs to learn more, or does Wash need to get better at positioning his infielders?
by Athos on Sep 28, 2008 7:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Off putting
Let’s say a move off of SS in inevitable. Let’s say MY isn’t eager to do so. I’d just as soon it not be a dissatisfaction fountain, either in the press or the clubhouse. When the time comes to move, he’ll move. Just my opinion, I see no merit in continuously bringing it up, unless there is a long term disaffection for him or a strong bias for someone else.
Getting more range IS important given how this staff pitches. But it’s only a sliver of the problem pie, given overall pitching ineffectiveness.
"He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lamp-posts... for support rather than illumination." - Andrew Lang (1844-1912)
by Ed Coffin on Sep 28, 2008 6:24 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Excellent point that a lot of people sort of overlook in this debate.
Something to consider: how much would Young’s “bad” defense hurt a team that actually has good pitching? Fewer walks leads to fewer run scoring opportunities. More strikeouts keeps balls out of play. Weaker contact leads to lower batting average and lower slugging percentages
It's filed under 'D'... for donut.
by NoNameOnCard on Sep 28, 2008 6:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yep, two way street
better pitching will likely help the fielding a bit. Best bet, of course, is to improve both.
In essentials, unity. In non-essentials, liberty. In all things, love.
by t ball on Sep 28, 2008 9:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah I don't get the point of
bringing it up all the time until it’s actually an issue that the franchise addresses, even when you say you’re supporting Young. I agree that he’ll probably do the right thing when the time comes, so just let him do his job until then.
by Brett Perryman on Sep 28, 2008 7:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree.
Unless he is injured, MY is going to play SS for the next year or two at least…. and should. I think the reaction toward him by many is more than disaffection and borders on a vendetta.
by Jea103 on Sep 28, 2008 7:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Also
If you think the next year or two at least, are you saying that Andrus won’t be ready by then, or that he will be but should be left in AAA, moved to another position, or traded?
by Adam J. Morris on Sep 28, 2008 8:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
question:
if we somehow acquire a front-of-the-rotation starter in the offseason via trade/free agency, our young starters start to put something together and we fill the bullpen with healthy, consistent arms, and end up with the Wild Card next year, and Elvis grows in AAA but continues to commit errors, would you push for Elvis to start 2010 as the opening day SS if Young continues to say he doesn’t want to move?
I don’t know what I’d do personally, but until Andrus plays flawless defense in the minors, I’m not ready to concede SS and force Young to move.
"Calmer than you are... "
by Walter Sobchak on Sep 29, 2008 11:04 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well,
I think the pitching is still below average (maybe a 4.9 ERA?) with an average defense. With a top notch defense, our pitching is probably average.
So, yeah, our pitching needs work, but we need to stop ignoring our defense. We really can’t afford to bring in more guys who have no obvious defensive position. Also, there isn’t any question that our up the middle defense (Hamilton, Young, and especially Kinsler) needs a ton of work.
"Oh well, McCain is pretty communist anyway,... we can be 70% communist with McCain,"-Sharky
by DJCahill on Sep 29, 2008 7:53 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
This made me lol.
“Michael Young is our shortstop. His track record speaks for itself.”
I completely agree, it does speak for itself. I’m thinking JD meant that differently than I do, though.
Not that I don’t get it. I understand the GM has to say that sort of stuff. I don’t think JD is clueless.
by philkid3 on Sep 28, 2008 7:10 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
maybe we can get him so upset
that he wants out of his contract or waves his no trade clause?
hmmm
"I don’t know of a single thing Obama’s done except talk and write." - Newt Gingrich
by knockoutking on Sep 28, 2008 7:10 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
It would be interesting to go through the exercise
of him trying to find someone who would take his contract on, even for no return.
by Brett Perryman on Sep 28, 2008 7:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
White Sox?
Both Ozzie and Kenny have mancrushes on MY, Cabrera’s all but gone, and any team that puts Griffey in CF probably doesn’t give two shits about any statistical analysis of defense.
by LiamP on Sep 28, 2008 7:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah good one
Maybe we need to be sure that Ozzie sticks around over there.
by Brett Perryman on Sep 28, 2008 7:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's probably also the best thing for all teams in the AL Central, too.
Indians, Twins, and Tigers fans would be all over that. I think we could get a coalition started to make sure the Ozzie stays in Chicago.
It's filed under 'D'... for donut.
by NoNameOnCard on Sep 28, 2008 10:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Something that I think should be more discussed...
Is having the fasted infield in baseball, which isn’t groundbreaking news, but I’m with Adam on this one. If they want a groundball staff, surely they would try and slow those groundballs down, especially considering most of the Ranger hitters don’t seem to be groundball hitters as many have good power.
by groundingout on Sep 28, 2008 7:41 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Yes yes, a thousand times yes
I just can’t understand this. It seems like the easiest part of the equation to fix. When changing the coaches this week consider changing the grounds crew as well.
In essentials, unity. In non-essentials, liberty. In all things, love.
by t ball on Sep 28, 2008 9:06 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
would have been a great question for Daniels
This would have been a perfect question to pose to Daniels at Newberg Night. I’ve never heard this, but if this is truly the case…what are they thinking!!!
A couple years ago…a MUCH weaker Notre Dame team almost beat USC by tailoring their field to give them the advantage (grass long enough to reach the ankle). When you play at home…you’ve got to have the competitive advantage…groom your field to your strengths and away from your weaknesses.
by Doc Mabee on Sep 28, 2008 9:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It vexes me.
Yeah, “vexes.”
If the Rangers were aware of this “problem,” there’s no excuse for not changing the grounds crew’s approach to handling the infield. I find it hard to believe that they didn’t know about it, and I find it even harder to believe they knew about it and chose to do nothing.
So, yeah, it vexes me.
It's filed under 'D'... for donut.
by NoNameOnCard on Sep 28, 2008 10:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
heard about the quick infield
when the white sox were in town. their announcers went on and on about it. we need to get a bioengineer on the payroll and develop grass with velcro blades.
by SteveP on Sep 28, 2008 9:39 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
MY is so busy defending his defense that he can't defend.
Who’s he been defending himself against? Is he a dedicated LSB reader? I don’t think the media has been all that hard on his defense.
Go Rangers!
by rooster on Sep 28, 2008 11:34 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I agree on MY's defense not really getting brought up in the media
The average Ranger fan (like my dad) acts like you’ve spit at The Pope when you make a comment about his poor defense. “What? Michael Young is the best shortstop in baseball. If his defense were bad, Randy Galloway would have said so already! I don’t know where you get your facts from…”
"Does this effectively hide my thunder?"
by Bob Loblaw on Sep 29, 2008 12:02 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
+1
My pops is the same way. He compares MY’s D to Derek Jeter’s D. And he means that as the highest of high praise.
The 40 Trumps All!!!
by thedirkatron on Sep 29, 2008 5:57 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Its the same at school
they say Michael is really good at defense, a great hitter, one of the best in baseball.
by cashman on Sep 29, 2008 5:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I've always thought
keeping the IF fast seems very silly to me. You can probably find articles from half a decade ago or so, when they commented on how long and wet the grass was in the IF. Not coincidentally, that was back in the day where our IF defense was viewed as a plus, rather than a minus (Blalock, ARod, Young, Teixeira).
"Oh well, McCain is pretty communist anyway,... we can be 70% communist with McCain,"-Sharky
by DJCahill on Sep 29, 2008 7:48 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I am as amazed as anyone
about the straight up comment and why they dont slow down the infield. Having said that I expect a huge year out of MY next year. First of all he’s been hurt this year and that will be gone and also he’s is a player with a lot of pride, so I think he will work harder than ever this offseason
I am very confident in my prediction unless I’m wrong in which case I will pull a Josey and just refuse to acknowledge I said it
by BEW on Sep 29, 2008 7:49 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
You know
folks have been predicting huge years since his career year at age 28. I don’t think he will ever get close to that again. We normally at least get a prediction from Athos where he picks up 50-100 OPS from the previous year.
I think if we are lucky he will be a 750-800 OPS SS with limited range. Your $16 million at work, Ranger Fans.
As far as not being as good because he was hurt, well, one of the reasons you predict decline for folks over 28 is that they tend to get hurt more, and spend longer to recover.
"Oh well, McCain is pretty communist anyway,... we can be 70% communist with McCain,"-Sharky
by DJCahill on Sep 29, 2008 8:17 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Broken fingers
are not an indication of aging in a player. And playing the next day isn’t a long time to recover by anyone’s standards. If you’re convinced his numbers suck, well fine, but don’t start acting like he’s being plagued with injuries like a Carlos Lee would have to further your argument about him. Thats really an unwarranted knock on him.
by mcgee48c on Sep 29, 2008 10:51 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
fingers
no, but the recovery time might be, and the decline in his offense fits the aging profile.
In essentials, unity. In non-essentials, liberty. In all things, love.
by t ball on Sep 29, 2008 11:24 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
His decline in offense
this year fits the profile of someone with injured hands, if you consider what his numbers were before he had his first injury. Well, really, it was the second injury where his performance plummeted.
As I said, if you think MY’s numbers suck (I do, but less than you), then fine, but he really doesn’t seem to be declining offensively due to age.
If he turned an out into a walk every 8 games, would he then be hunky-dorey? That would be about 20+ more walks a year.
by mcgee48c on Sep 29, 2008 4:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Young
We don’t really know if MY is a mediocre or terrible defensive shortstop. The defensive metrics (at least the ones that are public) haven’t demonstrated themselves to be reliable and aren’t in agreement. Yet, off of these metrics of debatable reliability and observed poor range, numerous people are declaring that Young must move from the only position for which his bat makes him an asset to a position for which his bat would clearly be a liability.
What we know:
1. MY’s bat is above average for his position
2. MY’s bat would be average or below average at any other position
What we don’t know:
1. How good/bad of a defensive SS MY is
2. How good/bad of a defensive 3B/OF MY would be
Why does it make sense to construct a plan of action with numerous cascading effects off of what we don’t know?
--Brian
by BCanfield on Sep 29, 2008 10:52 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I think folks who have watched him play SS a bit
know how good of a defensive SS he is or isn’t.
"Oh well, McCain is pretty communist anyway,... we can be 70% communist with McCain,"-Sharky
by DJCahill on Sep 29, 2008 10:54 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
To what extent?
How bad is he? How many runs a year is that worth? Is it offset by his offensive numbers? I don’t think we can reliably quantify his defensive contribution to make a determination.
--Brian
by BCanfield on Sep 29, 2008 11:06 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If you go down that line of thinking
you always take a good bat-Craptastic defense player over a Goldglover-mediocre bat player.
Then you end up with the Rangers, pissing away 100 runs or thereabouts defensively as a team.
"Oh well, McCain is pretty communist anyway,... we can be 70% communist with McCain,"-Sharky
by DJCahill on Sep 29, 2008 12:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If you don't.....
you have no idea what you’re getting for your money.
--Brian
by BCanfield on Sep 29, 2008 1:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
There are a lot of times
in real life you can’t exactly quantify something, and you just make your best educated guess on the value.
Because you have an exact number on something, and don’t have an exact number on another thing, doesn’t mean you can’t come up with a reasonable estimate to trade things off.
Do I absolutely know that our defense is costing us 90-100 runs? No, I couldn’t come up with an exact number to 3 place decimal precision. Am I reasonably confident that’s the scale of runs our defense is costing us? Yep.
Can you estimate how many runs Young is costing the team with a glove? Sure. Is it going to be exact? No. Is it going to be good enough where you can make decisions on the team? Yep.
In the real world, decision makers deal with imperfect and missing information all the time.
"Oh well, McCain is pretty communist anyway,... we can be 70% communist with McCain,"-Sharky
by DJCahill on Sep 29, 2008 1:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The problem is
not that we can’t determine an exact number; we can’t even approximate it. Does his glove cost us 3 runs a year? 30?
--Brian
by BCanfield on Sep 30, 2008 5:58 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sure you can.
His glove will cost us around 11 runs next year.
That is every bit as accurate as your estimation of how he will hit next year.
"Oh well, McCain is pretty communist anyway,... we can be 70% communist with McCain,"-Sharky
by DJCahill on Sep 30, 2008 6:53 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Next season
I didn’t estimate how he will hit next season. I said how he hit this season and how that would have rated at another position (this season). That can be quantified.
You can’t accurately do that for his defense this season (either at SS or how it would have translated to a new position). Given his age, both this offense and his defense will likely continue to deteriorate in the future.
--Brian
by BCanfield on Sep 30, 2008 12:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
However, it really doesn't matter
for next year what he did next year.
All that matters is what you estimate them to do with both the glove and bat. GMs have to go with their best guess of both a players offense, defense, and number of games played due to injuries. None of those 3 things are known.
"Oh well, McCain is pretty communist anyway,... we can be 70% communist with McCain,"-Sharky
by DJCahill on Sep 30, 2008 12:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Is anyone else less than thrilled with this "pitch-to-contact" philosophy?
The more balls that are put in to play, the more errors are going to be made. This team gives up a lot of walks too, sure… but, we’ve also given up 17 runs in a game three times this season. Unacceptable.
I think the belief that the pitchers need to “throw more strikes” is somewhat deceiving. The Rangers ARE throwing strikes… how else do you explain being third to last in home-runs allowed, last in the league in hits allowed and last in the league in runs allowed?
No surprise… this team is also next to last in strikeouts recorded. The truth is this team doesn’t have an overpowering pitcher.
by oc on Sep 29, 2008 3:51 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I have a problem
with “pitch to contact” and a bad defense, and a fast playing surface.
It seems like a really, really dumb combination. Unfortunately I think they are using “pitch to contact” to cover up the fact that our pitchers just aren’t very good.
"Oh well, McCain is pretty communist anyway,... we can be 70% communist with McCain,"-Sharky
by DJCahill on Sep 29, 2008 4:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
Related FanPosts on Lone Star Ball
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 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.
