Wednesday Morning Rangers Notes: Midnight Marauders
Michael Young - Anthony Amobi/MVN.comYes, I fully realize that it's actually after 3:30 a.m. CST as of this writing. Truth be told, I just wanted to work in a reference to A Tribe Called Quest at some point before spring training, and this seemed like just as good an opportunity to do it as any.
I think this early-morning delirium is beginning to get to me.
WHAT THEY'RE SAYING
"The guy [Young] is well-compensated by the Rangers, and the Rangers are asking him to make a change that they think is good for the team. They should tell him, 'You're unhappy? OK, would you like to void your contract?' And of course the answer would be no."
—One anonymous major league executive (Buster Olney, ESPN.com)
"I think that's unfortunate. I think the guy is allowed to have his reaction to something like this. Anybody who's been around Michael knows he's a tremendous person, a big member of the community. I do think that's unfortunate and that's certainly not coming from us and won't. I've talked to our sales group and our guys and you won't hear a negative word about Michael Young from the Rangers."
—Texas Rangers general manager Jon Daniels, speaking of the aforementioned anonymous criticism being imposed against Young (Richard Durrett, Dallas Morning News)
"We asked Michael -- it's a matter of semantics: asked, requested, told, begged -- to move to third base. We feel the club is best suited having Michael move to third in the short-term and long-term. We love Michael. We have nothing negative to say or will say about him. He's a tremendous player and teammate. We're not looking to trade him and have no plans to. We plan on him being a big part of our ballclub going forward."
—Daniels (T.R. Sullivan, MLB.com)
MEDIA-ELICITED CONFUSION
Presuming that Jim Reeves's assertion in the Tuesday morning edition of the Fort Worth Star-Telegram is factually accurate (with the assertion itself being that club president Nolan Ryan allegedly offered Young the option of displacing Ian Kinsler at second base, but was summarily rebuffed because that, in turn, would constitute an act of unfairness towards Kinsler), I'm more than a little confused -- and here's why:
The Rangers, meanwhile, are not interested in one possible compromise — a move of Young to second and Ian Kinsler to left field.
Young's only problem at short — his limited range — also would be an issue at second. Kinsler, the Rangers believe, is making progress at second and would not be as good as Young at third. Young has a stronger arm than Kinsler and better hands.
The above snippet comes courtesy of FOXSports.com's Ken Rosenthal, whose assessment of the Rangers' thought process with regard to potentially implicating Kinsler -- a neutral third party, by all accounts -- in this conflict dovetails with Richard Durrett's commentary on the matter; in his Tuesday afternoon chat session, Durrett emphasized that the Rangers want to retain Kinsler at second base.
[Editor's note: There was previously a typographical error in the above paragraph suggesting that the Rangers want to move Kinsler to third base, a blatant inaccuracy which has since been corrected. Apologies for any confusion that might have caused.]
Something's obviously not adding up.
Moreover, Rosenthal's abbreviated critique of the Kinsler-to-third proposal is apt; his range at second base is not inherently deficient, and the bulk of his issues with the leather in 2008 (15 plays below average according to John Dewan's plus/minus defensive rating system and 3.9 runs below average according to Mitchel Lichtman's Ultimate Zone Rating) appeared to be the product of ill-timed lapses in his focus and concentration on plays that he was capable of making far more often than an explicit lack of raw defensive talent.
Squandering Young's strong arm -- which my esteemed writing colleague, (Professor) Jason Parks, believes is a solid 70 on the 20-to-80 scouting scale -- by moving him back to second base and perhaps exposing Kinsler's weaker arm by moving him to the hot corner sure does sound like an exercise in futility, which makes it all the more comforting that the organization is evidently no longer considering that option.
The idea of moving Kinsler to left field -- proposed by Tim Cowlishaw of the Dallas Morning News on Tuesday -- might be even less well-grounded in logic than the previous proposition, however; doing so would severely marginalize David Murphy and Marlon Byrd (and, to a lesser extent, Nelson Cruz as well), and would solve absolutely nothing unless the Rangers somehow acquired an adequate third baseman via trade or free agency. Otherwise, the left side of the Opening Day 2009 infield would comprise Travis Metcalf and Elvis Andrus -- a toxic offensive one-two punch that would probably represent the worst everyday third base/shortstop combination in baseball by a wide margin, in spite of each infielder's defensive accolades.
And as for Kevin Sherrington's bizarre intimation that Texas should be prepared to give Young his job back at shortstop if Andrus should struggle early on (which he assuredly will) ... well, if the Rangers are actually intent on adhering to such an indecisive and wishy-washy player development philosophy (which would consequently indicate a lack of organizational commitment to Andrus), they might as well go ahead and trade him now, since that would all reflect a lack of willingness and preparation to endure the inevitable growing pains that the maturation process will entail.
Lucky for all of us that isn't going to happen. Andrus is a keeper.
NEWS AND RUMORS
● One unnamed Rangers official said the chances of Young being the team's third baseman on Opening Day are at least 90 percent; furthermore, his only real recourse at this juncture is to refuse to report to spring training, which would have serious ramifications for his reputation across the game (Ken Rosenthal, FOXSports.com)
● Texas still covets a right-handed slugger to insert in the lineup between Josh Hamilton and Chris Davis, but a deal for the White Sox' Jermaine Dye isn't going to happen, and the Rangers would rather roll with Hank Blalock as their Opening Day designated hitter than a veteran retread such as Frank Thomas or Nomar Garciaparra (Rosenthal)
● Although Texas has purportedly been attempting to trade Young "for weeks" and have fielded some interest from the Dodgers, Mets and Twins, it's unlikely he'll be dealt (Jon Heyman, SI.com)
[Well, duh. Daniels dismissed the notion that Texas has been shopping Young for more than a month on Tuesday, stating that no conversations at the winter meetings in Las Vegas last month progress beyond the "tire-kicking stage."]
● Free-agent right-hander Ben Sheets remains a "player of interest" to the Rangers, but while Jon Daniels has remained in touch with his agent, Casey Close, no formal offer has yet materialized (T.R. Sullivan, MLB.com)
● Free-agent right-hander Jason Jennings regards Texas as his "No. 1 destination," but is drawing interest from other clubs; there is mutual interest between free-agent southpaw Eddie Guardado and the Rangers on a possible 2009 reunion, though that would be contingent on whether Texas can afford to bring him back; the Rangers will stay in touch with free-agent right-hander Chad Cordero (Jeff Wilson, Fort Worth Star-Telegram)
● The Braves have reached a preliminary agreement with free-agent sinkerballer Derek Lowe on a four-year, $60 million deal, pending the results of his physical exam (Jerry Crasnick, ESPN.com)
[Jeff Wilson speculates Lowe's signing could escalate Sheets's price tag, while Richard Durrett suggests he could still be forced to sign a one-year deal in the vicinity of $10 million. I'm leaning towards the former as being more plausible, myself.]
● Elvis Andrus, one of six non-roster players invited to big league spring training on Tuesday (along with first baseman Justin Smoak, left-hander Derek Holland, right-hander Neftali Feliz, and catchers Manuel Pina and Kevin Richardson), has not been guaranteed the starting shortstop job and will have to win it outright (Sullivan)
[Given that Andrus's primary competition is Joaquin Arias, I don't imagine he'll have a terribly difficult time ascending the throne.]
● Direct quotes from one unnamed scout on catcher Max Ramirez, who nabbed Venezuelan Winter League Rookie of the Year honors on Tuesday: "Ramirez is more of a pull-oriented hitter—not a dead pull hitter—but his swing is longer. He could hit 25-30 homers in the majors, but he’s more vulnerable against changeups and curveballs [...] That guy is going to be a major league everyday catcher. He still needs to improve his catching and throwing, but he’s still young. He can catch, he can block—you can see him getting better. But this kid can hit in the major leagues" (Ben Badler, Baseball America)
[Awesome.]




Joey Matschulat
Reader Comments (14)
So resigning Guardado "would be contingent on whether Texas can afford to bring him back"? This sounds quite pathetic given what he should get on a one-year deal.
I wish that JD would have brought Young back into his office the day after he demanded to be traded, and explained to Young, "EVERY other GM indicated that we would have to eat at least half of your contract because you are so severely overpaid."
MY needs a shock back to reality.
Please clear something up for me. How can Kinsler have by far the highest range factor yet be so far behind in UZR and +/-? Do UZR and +/- consider fielding percentage in some form or fashion? Kinsler's range factor would seem to show that he gets to more balls than anyone else. Obviously, pitching staff has some bearing on his total chances, but that can't account for the huge difference between Kinsler and second place much less over the average range factor.
In other words, if Kinsler gets to 100 more balls per season than the second place 2B (which he would have if he had played 162 games), what difference does it make if he botches 15 of those? Wouldn't he still make about 85 more plays than the next best fielding 2B?
Arias, hah. I think it's more likely that he never plays another major league game than he wins a starting job. Perhaps they let him keep the position warm while Andrus does a bit of AAA time to keep his service time down, nothing more.
t ball:
Really? I'm not a stats guy, and I just go by what I see, but I watched every game last fall that Arias played in, and he really impressed me. He doesn't walk enough to be a leadoff guy, but he hits pretty well, has good speed, and except for his arm trouble, he showed decent D (good range). He may not ever be more than a backup player, but at least offensively speaking, he's not a bad UT.
So I'm just curious - what are you basing your critique of him on? I'm not asking to be an arse - I really would like to hear your thoughts. Maybe I just have an unrealistic conception of his talent.
At age 20 at AA Frisco, Arias actually hit better than Andrus did last year at AA Frisco at age 19. Arias' OPS was 758 compared to Andrus' OPS of 717. Andrus actually gets on base more and steals more, but Arias hits for more power. Regardless, neither one of them is going to be confused with A-Rod, Jeter, and Nomar in their primes.
Compare that with MY's off year last year when he had a 741 OPS in the majors. What are Rangers fans going to say when Andrus and Arias combine next season for an OPS in the 650 range? The two players might have better defense than MY, but will their fielding overcome their atrocious hitting? Hopefully, Andrus will improve especially considering he is young. My guess is that he will end up hitting about the same as Arias, perhaps a little better. An OPS of 750 may well be the ceiling for Andrus in the majors.
I would rather see the Rangers roll Andrus/Arias at SS then Metcalf/Crede at 3b. With Andrus' increased range I would be willing to bet that he will save more runs on defense then he will cost on offence.
It does seem apparent that Michael Young will not get moved for one reason... his contract. Some post on other web sites have really ripped Young, and said he has no value, that is lunacy, Young has tons of value. On these sites I also had the privilege of viewing some of the wackiest trade proposals I've ever seen. Yes he's slipped numbers wise, but those are still good, and who's to say he doesn't have a fine season this year, or even next. It's not like Michael Young is a "failed bit." I thought his range had diminished long before last year, so I agree with his defensive rips. I think he would be better served as a third baseman, especially with that "cannon arm." I guess the only thing I don't like about Young is that contract, and apparently that seems to be the majority of gripes.
The reason I don't like it is cause we need that money for pitching, it's not because I don't like Michael Young, it's because Tom Hick's isn't shelling out the money, or will he ever and that is another story.
JDolla$
I'm probably overstating my point. Arias is a good defender, but his arm wasn't sound enough to play SS after his mysterious shoulder injury, and I don't see him as a serious option there. 2B, maybe, utility in a pinch, but you can't be a starting SS without any arm whatsoever. That would be as crazy to me as putting Blalock at 3B right now.
t ball,
in regards to arias, it seems to be the consensus that his arm strength will return and he'll be just fine.
at this point i think every ranger fan is ready to devalue arias because we have andrus. if andrus wasn't here, fans would be begging to give arias a shot at the job. I don't think it's going to be nearly as easy for Andrus to beat out Arias as people assume it will. If we can somehow convince Young to move to 3B, might not be the worst of ideas to give Arias a quick shot at the SS position (trade bait for later), which would allow us togive Andrus a couple AAA at bats, and would help delay his arbitration by a another year. Small market teams do that all the time, and if Arias shows something, anything he's still a young enough to get good value if we decide to get involved with the Grienke sweepstakes (watch for this one around the trade deadline as the Royals will almost certainly be steamrolling towards 100 losses yet again).
I'll believe Arias is healthy when I see it. I'd love for him to have some kind of value, either on the team or in trade.
To answer your question on UZR and +/-, Longhorn, here's an explanation of the inputs into UZR, and since they're both play-by-play based systems and both operate off data mined by BIS, they both take into account range and errors committed. I will say that I don't place much stock into range factor -- for one, it's not a play-by-play based system, and there are far better statistical indicators of defensive effectiveness readily available now, although it's not a useless stat.
Phil: If Andrus provides production above and beyond replacement level next season, it'll be gravy. He's going to struggle a lot, and even if his defense is worth, say, 10 runs above average (which I don't see happening, since +10 from shortstop is fairly rare to begin with), he's going to be well below average with the bat. The organization and the fan base need to brace for this.
With regard to Arias's arm strength, color me skeptical. I asked JP just the other day about his shoulder and while the last media update we received on that front (November?) was optimistic, I didn't get the sense from the conversation that he was physically capable of playing shortstop ... yet.
If he were capable, but serviceable, and therefore showing greater range but less arm strength than MY, then you'd think he'd be an overall wash compared with MY at SS-- not just in the field, but at the plate if his numbers (.796 ops in 121 AB's between '06 &'08. But his numbers in '08 were extremely split (in a way that suggests he'd make a good UIF/pinch hitter against lefties): although his overall OPS and average were higher than MY's (again, but in a small sample size),ie.754 OPS, he had only a .664 against righties, 1.054 against lefties!
As long as he can throw from SS but not from 3B, then pushing MY's move to 3B up to this year still makes sense, even with Arias instead of Andrus. But it's probably best if both stick, saving Arias for lefties if Andrus can hit righties better than Arias.
Does anyone know?
To be our UIF he wouldn't need to play 3B, because Davis could move off 1b and play 3rd on days
of rest (or DH/rest) for MY.
Alright, I don't mean to converse with myself, or always be the last on each thread, but check out ANDRUS' reverse splits:
---------- AB ------- H ---- AVG----- OBP ----- SLG ----- OPS
vs. LH -- 93 ------ 24 ---- .258 ---- .307 ---- .323 ---- .630
vs. RH -390 ------119 ---- .305 ---- .361 ---- .379 ---- .740
That bodes very well to have ARIAS as our UIF, breaking in Andrus slowly vs. lefties, by beginning with a straight PLATOON (Roughly 2/3 pitchers are righties, no?)
A .740 from Andrus in the Minors would not amount to (MY's '08) .741 in the Majors, but, combined with Arias' outrageous numbers vs. lefties, should at least keep us (temporarily-AT-and-eventually-way-) ABOVE .700 OPS from our temporarily-EQUIVALENT-and-eventually-far-SUPERIOR shortstop platoon, PLUS predictably stronger defense from MY at 3B than at SS, ...
That all boils down to much more promise from our left side than from the combo of MY at SS and a platoon of Metcalf and Duran at 3B...
It offers the added bonus of avoiding stop-gaps, i.e. developing for the future this year, rather than in the year we're supposed to start contending. Everyone involved in that solution could stick with that role for the next 4 years (while we develop a more typically powerful 3rd baseman to finally transition MY to player-coach in '13).