Some links

by Adam J. Morris on Jan 10, 2007 1:28 PM CST in News Comment 11 comments

Ken Rosenthal defends the HOF balloting...

Michael Young comments on the possibilities of a contract extension:

Young signed a four-year, $10.5 million contract at the start of the 2004 season with the option for 2008, and there's no doubt he has been well underpaid as a three-time All-Star shortstop. Young has made it clear that the next contract must be more in line with current market value.

"There's no doubt about that," Young said. "The first contract was advantageous for the team and that's fine. It was fine at the time. But if they want to talk about an extension, they need to treat it like free agency because that's exactly what it is."

T.R. Sullivan talks about the need for improvement from Hank Blalock and Mark Teixeira in 2007...

And John Barten takes a look at former Longhorn, now Yankee prospect J.B. Cox.

0 recs | Comment 11 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Rosenthal article

Echoes the same sentiments I have about Hall voting being subjective and what not

but how do you defend ladewski. He might be free to do whatever he wants but that doens't make him any less of an idiot. first off, he left off desreving candidates on the ballot that were done long before 93 but doesn't really mention that. Apparently he didn't even vote no, but just sent in a blank ballot which doesn't make sense for bert blyelevyn or goose gossage. but really, he's going to send in blank ballots from now until the rest of eternity and this is somehow defensible? if you really care about the hall (and i don't anymore) then i fail to see how you could support this.

Also, conflicting reports, I thought henderson was eligible next year.

by ab03 on Jan 10, 2007 1:37 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

I hope Young isn't saying

that the team took advantage of him when he signed his initial contract. They put a lot of faith in a guy with one better than average year and gave him enough money that if he'd Ruben Mateo'd himself would still be set for life.

I understand if Young doesn't want to give a hometown discount. I don't like it, but I understand it. But I really hope he's not trying to play the victim when it comes to his current contract.

by jtts on Jan 10, 2007 1:42 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

MY

I don't think he was saying that, he knew at the time he was saving the club money in the long run. He sounds like Pudge when he walked. The Rangers got lucky when Pudge negotiated his last contract and he wanted the team to know that he expected market value, which they couldn't afford because of A-Rod. MY's not expecting more than market value, the problem is the market is really out of whack this offseason.

"My theory of hitting was just to watch the ball as it came in and hit it." --Tommy Lasorda

by BReed on Jan 10, 2007 1:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Pudge wanted 7/105

and its probably a good thing they didnt give it to him. He's been fairly average the last 2 years since he lost the 20 pounds, and he still would have had 3 years left on the contract.

Quick, name the best OC in the NFL.

by DJCahill on Jan 10, 2007 2:27 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

True

which he didn't get. The market for Pudge was for much less but by the time Pudge realized that it was too late for the Rangers to sign him. Still, I don't think MY is going to hold the team hostage, he just wants market value. Maybe the fact that there were no big name infielders on the market this year will help keep that value under control.

"My theory of hitting was just to watch the ball as it came in and hit it." --Tommy Lasorda

by BReed on Jan 10, 2007 2:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I don't think Young is the type ...

... to make remarks that are "open to interpretation" such that you have to guess at his meaning. Since he signed his last contract, he's been a very good player who, in today's market, is significantly underpaid. There's not much debate that the Rangers have come out of that contract smelling like a rose. Young acknowledged that the deal turned out to be really good for the Rangers and said he doesn't have a problem with that, but expects to be paid at or near market value if he re-signs with Texas.

But what I've always liked about Young, his focus is on winning ballgames and making the club better NOW. He's a damned hard worker and is obviously a player that the team and the rest of the league greatly respect. He's the kind of player that is going to make any team he plays for a better team. Barring injury, his market value is only going to go up this season and next, so if he can be extended at his present market value, the Rangers may be able to "win" again with a Mike Young contract.

by Athos on Jan 10, 2007 2:44 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

So the question is...

What is "fair market value" for a Mike Young extension?

Considering, of course, that we are probably talking a 4-5 year deal, for a SS in ages 30-34/5...

Penalty Box? DONT THINK SO!!!!!!! And i wish everyone could stop writing that crap cause its gay...SUPER GAY!!!! NYTXfan!!!

by Brian Thomas on Jan 10, 2007 7:02 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

fair value

considering this winter it has to be in the $10 mil per range. Lugo signed for 4/$36. Young is a good bet to outhit Lugo by about .50 ops points, and then you have the emotional intangibles...If we could sign Young for an AAV of about $10-11 per for 5 years starting with '07, I'd do it. You're going to have to overpay his last years a bit.

by t ball on Jan 10, 2007 7:44 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm thinking he and his agent

are planning alot higher than that. They are sure to trot out the whole 200 hits in consecutive seasons thing.

If 10-11 gets it done, I say we go for it (and I agree w/ the overpaying in the later years).

I bet they are hoping for more like 15/yr. Much tougher decision...

Penalty Box? DONT THINK SO!!!!!!! And i wish everyone could stop writing that crap cause its gay...SUPER GAY!!!! NYTXfan!!!

by Brian Thomas on Jan 11, 2007 3:23 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

extension for Young

I would say offer him 5 years, $55 million, but then realized that's what GMJ got from the Angels. That made my head hurt.

CJ Wilson for Cy Young in 2012.

by trza on Jan 10, 2007 10:56 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

4 years

55 mil. To start out with. It averages out to about 13+ per year. It is more than GMJ got, which I think the Rangers are going to have to top just to not insult MY. It may be a high per year, but you are only committed to 4 years and are going to get more bang for your buck.

What always worries me about these extension negotiations is the team runs the risk of offended the player by underbidding by too much. I think the Rangers need to get a figure from Young and decide if they are willing to go anywhere near it.

1 John 3:11-24 http://www.biiible.com/dispchapt.php?instring=1st%20John%202&ver=NKJV&book=1st%20John&ch apter=3#myverse

by kwellborn on Jan 13, 2007 10:30 AM CST reply actions 0 recs