I live in Amarillo and don't get Dallas radio but I picked up the 'I heart radio" ap and can listen to the Ticket now. I was listening to Norm just now and he had Wash on and asked him the big question, "What would it take to see Mike Young's playing time diminished?"

Wash said (paraphrase), "He would have to hit about .218 or .214 for me to sit him. I know Mike Young hasn't had a year like we are used to, but he's a guy who can turn it around in a second. He's helped to get us to where we are today and I'm gonna keep playing him. If Ron Washington's boat is going down, it is gonna go down with Mike Young on it."

After the interview, Norm said it best, "You get the feeling we won't see Young playing any less?"

/sigh

I like Ron Washington, I hope his managerial career can sustain itself until April 2014, with good results. After that he will be liberated.

this makes me sad on the inside...

Could this get any worse? MY is making $16 mil this year and next. He's had a fine career. Let him be satisfied with that. Don't let him take down this team. The Rangers will have a much better chance of winning the WS this year if they don't keep sending out one of the worst hitters in baseball as their DH. I just do not understand this. Earlier in the season, you could blame the uninformed fan base and the media. But now, even the media has turned against MY and Wash still refuses to cut his playing time.

If the Rangers don't win the WS this year, we will forever have to wonder whether it was the stubborn refusal to bench MY that was the cause. JD's extension of MY and his failure to trade him could completely undo any chance we have at a WS ring.

The nightmare scenario: MY on 1B in the NL park during the WS against a RHP. 0 for 4, with a GIDP and 2 PADMYs.

So, Wash would sit Adam Dunn then? I mean that guy is hitting .206 on the season. If .214 is the magic threshold of decision making, then Adam Dunn and his 31 HRs and 75 RBI would be on the bench. Sounds about right.

I want to punch something. I no longer support Ron Washington(not that it matters). I will be happy when he is gone.

What would you have Wash say? I mean, "I'm benching Young effective now" would be an option. But if he has any intention of cutting Young's ABs later in the year, he has to fully back Young now. Has to.

Take note everyone. Its all about batting average.

Man, for an MLB manager who appears in the book "moneyball", he sure is dumb.

JDs saber guy needs to let JD understand the case against MY--he's hurting the team badly--and the case for MY--tradition, loyalty, and the wish he turns on a dime and plays much better than the last 400 PAs. Factor in the probability MY in the lineup will cost the Rangers a playoff series, apply this probability to loss of revenue attributable thereto, and see if it is really worth it in hard dollars and permanent glory to maintain MYs status.

JD needs to explain to Simpson these costs and benefits and get Simpson's support to direct Washington to change strategies. If wash refuses, release MY and let JD take the heat.

This is a pathetic excuse to keep favoring the teacher's pet. It makes me ill.

What a bunch of whiners of a fan base for a team that is the best in the AL! Seriously guys!!!! If we don't win the WS you cannot specifically blame any individual player as this is a TEAM sport! Every team has a MY type person who doesn't contribute as much as the rest. The non benching of MY is not going to be our downfall...if anything it would be our pitching.

I don't have the inclination to sit down and figure out how long he'd have to go 0-fer or close to it in order to get his batting average down that low, so I'll just assume it's unlikely to happen before the end of the season.

I wish Olt would get a little more playing time, and that he would start looking something like Trout. Then there would be no excuse not to play him, and at some point it would essentially force his hand, because no one would be dumb enough to let a guy like Trout ride the pine every day while an aging contact hitter with little power continues to have trouble making contact.

Gentry fits your scenario perfectly and could not have played much better. Gentry currently is a pinch running specialist.

"What would you have Wash say? I mean, 'I'm benching Young effective now'"

Well, I'd prefer the benching be retroactive to at least the AS break. But "I'm benching him now" would also be nice.

Interesting stat: Over the last 30 days, MY has 100 PAs and 2 walks. Mike Olt has 14 PAs and 3 walks.

Young has accumulated -0.5 WAR over the last 30 days, so he's got that going for him.

Unmitigated disaster.

PowerRangers, what evidence do you have that our pitching will be our downfall?

Rangers pitching SIERA 2012: 3.77 (9th among MLB teams)

MY's wRC+ in 2012: 66 (dead last among DHs)
MY's WAR in 2012: -1.4 (dead last among ALL PLAYERS IN BASEBALL)

Wash said that he would play the hot bats. I sure I don't have any facts to back this up, but I'm 99% sure Gentry is a much hotter bat than MY. Just doesn't make any sense. I guess we know what the Angels fans feel like having to trot out Vernon Wells everyday just because he is making a hefty paycheck.

I'm in no way saying that Young should not be benched. I'm saying that this statement should not be taken at face value. Sometimes you have to say what you have to say.

@oWAR: 2 things here: first, Gentry is an OFer, so he would only compete with MY for DH duties. And if you have Gentry at DH, you're doing it wrong. Second, Gentry doesn't hit for power the way Trout does. That's a notable difference. If Gentry had 20 HRs instead of 1, he'd be playing every day, and Murphy or somebody else would be sitting and competing with MY for DH. Olt's primary positions are 1B and 3B, 2 other places Wash can try to squirrel MY into the lineup. If Olt were to show he's better than MY in every way, for, oh, say, a month, the pressure to play him instead of Young would probably force his hand.

Unfortunately, that's basically a pipe dream, because even at their ceilings, about 99.99% of players never get to the territory Trout occupies right now. Oh well, we can dream, can't we?

@Scooby, what would I want him to say? Instead of saying until MY hits below .214, he should say something along the same lines as playing Murphy. He could have said something like: "Well Michael is on a 9 game hitting streak, why would I bench a guy who is doing that?"

See, as putrid as Face is, Wash could hang his hat on that. MY would have to go hitless in his next 116 ABs to get below .214. If he plays every game and gets 4 AB's per game, he would have to go 29 straight games without a hit. Since that is unlikely, Wash knows he never has to worry about benching Face. MY only has to collect 21 hits the rest of the season to stay above .214, Wash's line in the sand. He will never have to bench Face.

Gentry should be in center and the outfielders/Napoli/Olt should be taking the DH spot. It has been repeated and repeated on this and every forum on every baseball site. Wash gets to make the decisions and we get to second guess the decision. Wash is a great manager of players but a below average in-game manager. Wash is human and is attached to the players that brought him his success as a Ranger manager.

Gentry may not be Trout, but he has played well enough to deserve to see his name written in at cf on 9 out of every 10 lineups.

FRICK!

@Scooby Dude - I think Wash should either back MY fully or not. We know he's going to back him fully, so why draw an (essentially) imaginary line in the sand based on batting average. That's really strange to me.

He should've just said, MY is not getting benched. He's a leader of this team and he will be on the lineup card as often as I can put him on it. Period.

Why even put an arbitrary number out there that would get MY benched? I think that shows little loyalty to MY and MY supporters (because he's saying despite leadership ability/loyalty there is a point where MY would be benched) while simultaneously shooting the bird to MY detractors (by setting said line at which he would be benched at an unattainably bad level.)

It's about the worst way to answer that question regardless of what side of the fence you are on.

Scooby is right. I wouldn't expect Wash to say anything less than what he said in the interview. Put another way, the last place I'd expect Wash to break news about a lineup change is in an interview with Norm Hitzges. I also think he pulled those numbers out of his ass, so I wouldn't put any stock in any of that, either. Bottom line, this will eventually be handled by the GM with ownership backing. There is no other way.

And if anybody thinks that JD isn't fully aware of what Young is costing the club, he's crazy. He knows, and I'll bet it's driving him nuts. The balance between the FO and the field manager is a delicate one, and I can fully understand why JD would be reluctant to make a move that would be interpreted by the players as running the team on the field from upstairs. You undermine your own manager at your peril, particularly a manager that -- despite his in-game and lineup foibles -- has produced. At the same time, however, Wash's intractability on this issue will ultimately give JD no choice. He'll have to get involved.

Whoever blames Wash for all this MY stuff needs to be punched in the face for a wakeup call.

Well, Rusty, I certainly respect your support for Wash, but there's this: he's the one that fills out the lineup card every night. Who else should shoulder the blame for failing to put the nine best players on the field any given night? I get that JD is responsible for the albatross contract, but I don't think he's the one writing Young's name in every night.