A Tale From Two Perspectives
Baseball, like so many other forms of entertainment with passionate followings, has long had a dichotomy between its rabid fans and the more casual ones. It follows logically that the media that covers these forms of entertainment must find a way to cater to both types of fans. Realistically, the type of in-depth analysis that is done here at BBTiA, or mirrored in advanced cooking books, wine magazines or insider music blogs, is not generally ideal for people who are not truly interested in the subject and only want quick synopses of what’s happening every month (or more rarely). Baseball throws in the added complexity of a new statistics vs. traditional statistics approach, but I think that interesting points can be made using both.
Michael Young has been a bit of a Rorshach test for most baseball analysts over the past few years. He is a player who has measured well in traditional statistics like batting average, has played multiple defensive positions with decent fielding percentages, and is an overall clean-cut, genial guy who took on a leadership role and became a fan favorite. However, as our methods of analyzing baseball became more advanced, we began to see that Michael Young was a perfect example of a player who is easily overrated and subsequently overpaid. It doesn’t mean that we hate them; it just means that they will likely draw our ire as players who are not pulling their weight relative to their pay.
Tension naturally develops between the traditional and new statistics fans as the data that each of them value show a larger and larger discrepancy. Sequential All-Star nominations hit six, while WAR only points to three All-Star-worthy seasons (4.0 WAR and up); UZR consistently ranks him as one of the poorer defenders over a significant sample size right around the time that he is awarded a Gold Glove at shortstop; a .300 lifetime hitter with double-digit home run totals in all but two seasons measures out as a merely above-average hitter in all but two seasons in advanced, park-adjusted statistics. Young’s positive portrayal in the press and good interactions with fans results in him becoming a fan favorite and one of the faces of the franchise -- all while advanced statistics are telling us that he’s not quite as good as a cursory look would have you believe, and he’s almost certainly not going to be worth the money that his large contract extension will be paying him.
The reaction to this argument from the quarters of both the traditional statistics-inclined fans and the more traditional, larger media sources who write articles directed at them was to diminish these statsand point out the importance of Michael Young as a selfless leader on this team who has changed positions multiple times, putting the team first.
While I don’t believe that leadership is valueless, I also don’t think Young’s leadership skills were enough to make up for the difference in performance and his contract, especially in the future. However, every spring and then throughout the year, we were fed narratives about the importance of Michael Young’s intangibles, because narratives are as much a part of baseball as box scores.
This off-season, when the team looked for ways to upgrade itself, it was inevitable that they would look at the expensive, older, defensively-challenged Young as a place to upgrade. Every other position outside of catcher and DH had either an established star or a cheap young player providing adequate, if below-average, performance. More importantly, there was a chance to upgrade with a premier defensivethird baseman who could hit just as well (if not better), was younger, and provided the sort of talent at the position that would not be available through free agency for the next two years or so. The Rangers had one shot for a prospect-free improvement to the team at third base, and they made the right moveby taking it.
And so began the complaining by Michael Young ...
It was so brief at first. A bit of disgruntlement before the signing actually happened that was so quickly reversed that most of us forgot about it. The Rangers looked into the possibility of trading Young, but most assumed that the dollars involved would be too limiting. It seemed that Young was going to handle this position change with more grace than the last time he was asked to change positions. The traditional media raced to write the easy narrative:
The Adrian Beltre signing will work for the Texas Rangers, not only because of Beltre's significant talent, but because Michael Young's attitude will allow it to work...
The willingness to put the needs of the team first is not a new development for Young. He came up as a second baseman, was moved to short, and more recently, moved to third to make way for Elvis Andrus.
For Young, the desire to remain with the Rangers is a larger factor than the desire to have things his own way.
"This is where I want to play," he said Wednesday in a teleconference. "I'm willing to make a pretty big sacrifice to do that."
Then a trade for Napoli and, all of a sudden, whispers started about Young being disgruntled and Texas once again looking to trade. Things escalated last week, and finally Young decided to take matters into his own hands, giving quotes to multiple sources that ripped the front office and specifically Jon Daniels in an outright attempt to make sure that some trade happens before spring training, even if the trade was overly costly to the Rangers:
“I want to be traded because I’ve been misled and manipulated and I’m sick of it,” Young added.
However, he declined to reveal details of how he was misled or manipulated.
“That would be unproductive for everybody, particularly my teammates and coaches,” he said. “I know the truth and Jon Daniels knows the truth and I will sleep well.”
How can this be? How can a player who is openly quoted as being accepting of a position switch so that the team can get better so radically change his stance? Why wouldn’t somebody who had become one of the public leaders of the team, who is well-compensated and will be for the next three years, and who is finally getting to play on a team that is truly contending for championships, suddenly want a trade to a location that will give him more playing time? A tweet from the FWST's Anthony Andro:
Rangers president Nolan Ryan: Young's mindset is best interest of career, better to move on and play position on daily basis.
Furthermore, it looks like the basis of this decision revolves around the type of contract Young could get after this current one (yes, the one that pays him $48 million over the next threeyears). Though I do not begrudge any player’s attempt to make as much money as possible, I can not help but point out the strong disconnect between his current actions (and the likely motivations for them) and the many articles written about Young’s selfless leadership of this team.
It will be interesting to now watch the fan reaction to Michael Young’s comments and likely trade. He has been a fan favorite for a long time and the Rangers will almost certainly have some fans lose interest with the team as Young leaves town, though not as many as if this had happened in 2008.
Pieces like this, written solely in defense of Young and attacking everyone else involved, become further examples of the traditional media putting the easy, incendiary narratives above a more measured look at the situation:
In the curiously sad and bloody case of the Texas Rangers and Michael Young, however, we'd also know it was "death by committee." It was a conspiracy to commit "murder" on the local career of a player whose only crime was in giving his heart and soul to an organization he loved with every fiber of his being.
So here's my list of those culpable in this heinous crime:
John Hart did it. And Jon Daniels. And Nolan Ryan. Tom Hicks did it, and so did Chuck Greenberg. An aggressive prosecutor probably would also indict Buck Showalter as an accessory to the crime.
Each and every one of them is guilty of bringing the Rangers' de facto team captain to this sorry juncture in his stellar career.
It is frustrating to read such a hyperbolic piece that so strongly defends Young without spending as much time looking at reasons why the Rangers would trade him (and why so few teams would take him on). I can see how it approximates the feelings of many in the fan base who love Michael Young, avoiding what the advanced statistics said about him and lacking understanding of why the Rangers would trade a good player. However, though this article is directed at casual fans and those who eschew advanced statistics, it does not mean that it needs to ignore the fact that there are multiple sides in any trade request of this magnitude. I wish the piece were more balanced to help inform some of the casual fans about the value of players, even if from the perspective of other front-office types like Richard Durrett’s piece here, and the potential benefits of such a trade.
Fortunately, other voices have started weighing in and we are starting to see some balance on the issue from traditional outlets like NBC:
Wow. Young declined to provide any details of how he was misled or manipulated, but JaysonStark of ESPN.com reported earlier tonight that the Rangers were shopping him earlier this winter, but telling him otherwise.
There’s probably a certain segment of Rangers fans who will defend Young in this instance. That’s understandable. After all, he is the club’s all-time hit leader. But it’s still awfully difficult to feel sorry for someone who is going to get paid $48 million over the next three seasons, whether he plays third base or sits on the bench a couple days a week.
It is simply astounding to me how quickly the narrative of Young as Selfless Leader has been turned on its head. And for those looking for reaction from sources with a more advanced statistical bent, well, let’s turn to Twitter:
The Rangers should respond to Young’s request for a trade with their own formal request for him to be a better player. (via @DSzymborski)
Number of teams to which Michael Young would accept a trade > Number of teams that would accept Michael Young’s contract (via @keithlaw)
"We moved you around the diamond in the hopes you would improve, but we ran out of positions." (via @Marc_Normandin)
It should be noted that just reading the opinions of those who place weight in advanced statistics will not give the complete picture. I’m not advocating only picking one side; there are biases on both sides and being informed of the strengths and weaknesses of both will help discern between the two.
The issue, then, is this: Baseball fans can be roughly broken down into these two disparate groups and there is media available that caters to both; however, if we don’t do a good job of having dialogue between the two sides, we do ourselves a disservice and make it harder to see the full picture.
I’m not sure how Michael Young thought his comments from the evening of Monday, February 7th, 2011 would be received, but in the end I can’t help but wonder if it’s going to serve as an excellent way to bring together casual Ranger fans and the more statistically-interested fans as we read quotes like the following:
"This has been a long time coming based on things that occurred off the field. I’m sick of it. It hit a point where I felt it was unfair to me and my family.”
Full of logical gaps and shots at Jon Daniels specifically, Michael Young’s quotes today did his best to kill his future with the Texas Rangers. It seems that it's all because he won’t get enough time in the field in the new configuration to put himself in line for another multi-year contract at the age of 37, three years and almost fifty million guaranteed dollars away from now. For the player who is loved by fans in part for being a selfless leader, this has to come as a shock. For those who have been aware that he would be unlikely to be worth his contract, these comments only serve to further enrage -- especially when considering that the team has seemingly done all it can to cater to a player with diminishing skills.
Though I’m sure that once the trade is finalized, we will eventually look back and try to carry positive memories of Young forward after the initial anger fades, but I would be lying if I said I am not looking forward to the death of the easy narrative of Young as the tragic, selfless leader. He was a very good player while he was here in Texas, a good guy off the field and one of the team’s leaders on it -- but, in the end, he’s still just a baseball player who wants to be treated, paid and played as his pride says he deserves, and not in a way that’s best for the team.
Analysis, The Off-Season
Reader Comments (68)
Your last paragraph says what I would want to say. Young does embody the new saying, "There's no 'I' in team, but there is a 'm' and a 'e'." I, and I'm sure many others, want this over cleanly and quickly. It's time to hit the desert and see how things play out with the team we have.
You know, Michael Young has always been a mystery to me. He had a few good years and was one of the Rangers' best trades. But he has always been treated like a superstar, largely because after ARod left he was the best player we had (and that's not saying much.) I think MY began to believe that he was a superstar. This nonsense about him "taking one for the team" to move to shortstop is ridiculous. Every player from pee-wee to old-timers games wants to be the shortstop. It is THE premium position. But there was a reason he didn't come up as a shortstop - no range. So he was asked to move to third - where THE TEAM had a need. He sulked a bit, but relented. I thought that was strange. When George Brett was asked to move from third to first, he thought about it for a couple hours and then called a friend to start working on his technique at first. (And he really was a superstar!)
MY has proven what we all thought two years ago. He's hardly a team player. He has been and will be all about MY. He is a team fresh off the World Series that greatly improved itself offensively over the off-season. He fits right into that by allowing the team to not miss a beat when one of the regulars goes down or needs a little rest. But he isn't about winning championships. He's about MY. He's a loser and has always been a loser. Evidenced by the fact that he is finally on a good team with players that are better than he is... and he wants out. He would rather be the best player on a bad team that a role player on a good team! That about sums up Michael Young. Good riddance-
(Oh and if he happens to stay around here, mark my words... he will destroy the team from the inside out. He's a cancer now. He needs to be gone. Go lose somewhere else where everyone will love you even though the team sucks.)
Young went to SS once without being forced. He was forced to third base by a better defensive player. He was forced to DH by a better offensive and defensive player. I do wish he would want to stay here, but I doubt he does unless he gets his way. Young I have a hard time buying as a team player because a team player should be willing to do what is best for the team, not just for himself. If he is really worrying about his NEXT contract then he is probably close to delusional anyway. If Young gets a next contract it will be a low money deal likely as a 1b or DH or a part time player.
OF course him coming out in the media like this makes it more likely that he is still here. He just bounced pretty much any leverage the Rangers did have, and I believe them when they say they will only trade if it was to improve the team for next year.
So much of Young's value is tied to his perceived leadership qualities and team-first attitude. He has hurt his next contract value this week by lashing out at his team and being ready to "move on" from a team that just went to the WS.
the ONLY move that Young made "for the good of the team" and without complaining was the move from 2nd to short. What is also true about that move?? Shortstops make more money than 2nd basemen -- in other words, he was moving to a position that was likely going to be better for HIM. Every thing since then has been bitching and moaning. And all this for a player that simply isn't great. He's good. He's been consistently good for quite some time. Not great. The fans that think he's going to make the HoF make me laugh. I'll be happy when his whining ass if out of here and when it frees up some money for improvements in the future.
Good article. Which would you rather have as your full-time DH based on these traditional 2009 stats?
Avg. OBP. HR
Young .284 .330 21
Murphy vs. Righties .298 .368 11
Napoli vs. Lefties .305 .399 10
Combined Total .302 .384 21
Smoke to Fire... to Fog. A Clouded Ending
ALL well said Guys. The Clothes of the Emperor ... are off.
I'm not looking forward to the last few chapters of this book.
It's a continuum of much more to come. I've got 10 years vested
in Mike Youngs Team Face & character. I do empathise, but it could
have been handled with more aplomb. Sure, 20/20 vision, but Mikey's
going to not only start with another club, but take the finishing years of
a remaining career, to get back to 'square one' on his integrity level.
I'm betting he's already sincerely unhappy whith his choice of words.
Modus operandi..."1000 mile journey starts with the first step".
Prashanth,
This is the best/most balanced article I have read since the beginning of the MY debacle. It's a shame, like everything else in life, that all writers, especially in mainstream media, write according to their own personal agenda or that of their employer. Well done.
What a truly sad ending to a great Rangers career.
@Amigo de Andrus
I couldn't have said it better myself. That platoon is killer and MY's home/ away stats are extremely tilted towards home. I say good riddance. The money we save, will help us with resigning Wilson, Hamilton and Cruz in the near future. Good riddance MY. I understand you're pissed, but you're making 16 MIL A YEAR! GTFOut of here you damn Sprewell!!
I'll assume everyone read that Reeves article from the other day since it was mentioned here a few times. But wow. Could he be any more biased? What is the rule in journalism about being unbiased?
Is Reeves a good writer after reading that?
No, and hell no.
Is that strong enough for you?
The Reeves article is ridiculous. The guy is borderline delusional in how he picks and chooses when to focus on certain aspects of his argument. He doesn't even attempt objectivity.
Great article and I agree with others that this sums it up and is the best article written on this whole MY debacle. If he feels this way then I have lost some respect for him because of this "I'm not getting my way" attitude. He is getting paid very well to play wherever he is needed on a contending team. For so long he wanted to be on a contender, now he is and what does he want... OUT!!! Well MY, thanks for the years and memories but don't let the door hit you on the way.
Great piece, Pras.
One additional point: if I remember correctly, when the Rangers announced Young's contract extension, at least part of their justification for it was his leadership and other personal qualities. (I should go back and look up the exact comments.) If those "intangibles" were really part of the club's calculation, then Young's story certainly strikes me as a cautionary tale.
Philly, I responded to the Reeves thing elsewhere, but big props to Prashanth for putting it into much better words than I did and for really just identifying it for the casual fan Kool Aid that it is. I don't know if Reeves is now or ever was a good writer, but it didn't occur to me until reading Prashanth that Reeves isn't blind to the truth, just using his talents to evoke certain emotions in certain types of people. Casual fans pull out their #10 jerseys and use it to wipe the tears from their eyes as they are worrying about how the Rangers mistreated poor Mikey and forward the link to the article to their friends. And stat nerds are going to grab their calculators and keyboards to find where ever they can be heard and talk about what an idiot Reeves is and VORP, WAR and UZR theirselves into a tizzy and then forward the link to the article to their mothers, even though they are of course all just living in her basement anyway. Either way, ESPN Dallas gets a bunch of clicks on their website.
To them, that makes Reeves a downright great writer.
"it just means that they will likely draw our ire as players who are not pulling their weight relative to their pay. "
WTH would anyone get upset at the player instead of the Front Office that overvalued and overpaid them?
Twins, Tigers, and M's already out on MY.
What I don't understand is how his family is affected by the move from 3B to DH/UIF. This undermines all those who have families out there and really have to make changes in their lives that affect them. It's an appeal to pull them to his side, but it is ridiculous. Collect your Prima Donna $16 mil while the rest of the world lives off meat and potatoes. Egos are very unbecoming, get over yourself Michael Young. You're still getting paid, do your job or find another one. You signed the contract, fulfill it just like... Oh, I don't know... a military person. They do lots of stuff they don't want to, but they signed a contract, fulfill it, and get paid much less than you.
Always a pleasure to read. Write more long stuff. I like the long stuff.
I been arguing on behalf of MY, but what he did last night was not a smart move.
I have no way to explain it , I have to assume that:
1) He forgot how much money the Rangers going to pay him.
2) He forgot how old he is.
3) He forgot that injuries are part of the game and he probably would have played on the field a lot more than us fans would have been comfortable with.
4) He forgot that baseball is a business and it is going to stay that way no matter where he goes.
To them, that makes Reeves a downright great writer.
Bingo. I only read the Revo article because it's been a subject of some discussion.
There's a very good reason I read BBTIA, and SBNation, and a few others and NEVER look at ESPN/FOXSPORTS/CBS/etc -- they aren't overpaid gasbags, they generally haven't gotten lazy and they care enough to do this correctly. And I'm only a Level 1 Stats Nerd...math makes my head hurt.
I guess I should hit the tip jar.
"He was a very good player while he was here in Texas, a good guy off the field and one of the team’s leaders on it -- but, in the end, he’s still just a baseball player who wants to be treated, paid and played as his pride says he deserves, and not in a way that’s best for the team." - this sums it up PERFECTLY!
MY has always struck me as a very proud, if not arrogant, player. His ego is seemingly greater than his talent level and if he TRULY thinks that this trade demand, and desire for extended playing time (in the infield), is going to enhance his age 37 free agency, he's grossly miscalculated things.
If he stays on pace, he's looking at a Craig Counsell type contract in 2014 and beyond. He will become a rent-a-journeyman IFer and nothing more. THAT will be a sad narrative.
I've not read/heard anyone sing JD's praises, saying he's 100% in the right here. He's not. He knows it. He realized that this would get messy and it has... and he now has to manage the mess not only with the fans but also with his players/coaches. I think the reaction from the players/coaches will speak volumes to MY's true character. If they are all super pissed, MY was probably a good guy, even when the cameras were off... but if we don't hear a peep, then we know the fan perception of MY is/was skewed.
JD is doing what he feels is the right thing for the Texas Rangers. He has absolutely NO motivation to make this personal. If he were older, and in the later stages of his career, maybe it would be personal... but he has a huge future ahead of him... and he doesn't strike me as the type to make decisions based on emotion...
To add to Steve's line of thought.....I wish my employer had told me that I was going to get paid the same amount of money for doing half the work I do today for the next three years.
I'd never just say "good riddance" to a guy who's been here ten years and for most of that time has done his best. That's a little callous for my tastes. But if this is more than a February baseball story and bridges have burnt here, then I'm sorry this didn't happen when Vlad was still on the market, as I believe he will still have an excellent year in 2011.
To know how the other half lives, one only need to go to any of the "traditional" Rangers websites (the newspapers and ESPN and read the laughable comments there. Those writers and fans live in a dream world where MY is God and Ron Washington is Santa Claus.
Those writers and fans live in a dream world
Those writers are writing to their audience.
But Ron Washington gave me so much fun last year, I'm pretty sure he is Santa Claus.
My MY baseball card collection will hit EBAY this p.m.
But Ron Washington gave me so much fun last year, I'm pretty sure he is Santa Claus.
He sure had the snow for it.
Is it just me, or does this sound like the Rangers version of what happened between Greg Ellis and the Cowboys a few years ago? A good to real good player, but not a superstar that was a decsribed as a team leader and started bitching when his playing time got cut by better (Ware) and younger, cheaper (Spencer) players. And what he found out was that his wish my truly become a nightmare (Oakland, and now dont even think he's in the league). Young is a player on the down side of his career, and just like Ellis he believes that this will hurt his NEXT contract. My advise, look at others past history MY, for those who fail to study history are doomed to repeate it
As a Texas Tech grad this reminds me a lot of the situation with Mike Leach last year.
One thing reiterated by the administrators at Tech was they felt Leach was starting to feel like he was Texas Tech; and no one person is bigger than the university.
The Texas Rangers are an organization that Michael Young is/(was) a part of, not the other way around. As a fan I just want my teams to win.
It's really hard to feel sorry for someone who will make 80 million dollars playing games for 5 years. In the long run, everything will work itself out. I appreciate Mike for all the good times and wish him well, but ultimately I'm a Rangers fan (not just a Mike Young fan) and I understand that all life is flux, and we have to embrace the concept of change or be miserable.
Great article Pras - very good. My thoughts exactly.
As I cheer for laundry ahead of players, MY's departure will be felt I am afraid on this team perhaps mightily - from the abstract leadership perspective as well as from a depth perspective, as MY's presence would allow an injury to any of our four IFs without feeling the effects nearly as much from an offensive standpoint - now, with MY's departure, we are back to relying on fringe major leaguers like Blanco in case injuries arise to 2B, SS and 3B, and we really hurt our depth at DH if Napoli has to play 1B for an extended period of time (i.e., you will have Murph trying to hit lefties) in case Moreland gets hurt. Alas, I loved the way this roster was shaping up - now, MY has blown a hole in our depth with his own depth charge. Time for Wash to re-earn that extension to have the leadership effect dilluted and to juggle the PT with care (esp. if injury arises). I am afraid that 2011 or 2012 could be one of those special years with MY on our team - without him, it could be the difference between a good year and a special year. And for this reason, let's hope he reconsiders and is productive.
This team is still special. JD will get us one more starting Arm and one more Boppin' Bat by the Deadline. This team is better with Hamilton DHing 100 games and Murph in LF, and with Napoli DHing against LHP. Also, Napoli is a better hitter against RHP than people think (and, statistically, better than Young). I also think there's a reasonable chance that Murphy breaks out as more than a platoon-split player this season with extended ABs. No worries. This thing is fine. Craig Gentry takes the final roster spot and platoons with Borbon. All good. No worries.
I'm torn with this whole thing. I really liked Young and sure wanted him to remain a Ranger, but after he spoke his mind yesterday the club really has no choice but to trade him....probably for nothing but a bat and some hot dogs. No one is going to want to pick up his salary AND give up players. However, I have some problems with some of the posts here. How is Beltre an offensive improvement over Young (or more accurately here, Vlad G.)? Beltre has shown that in 13 seasons he can do well in two of them. No thanks. I'll take Young's yearly 200 hits and his leadership any day...if I had my choice.
Excellent article, BTW.
Trey,
My thoughts exactly. This is exactly how I felt about the whole Leach fiasco.
Re-posted from the Forum section (thread titled I Nailed It). I thought everyone should see it:
Forum > I Nailed It
[stretching thoroughly to prevent a pulled muscle while patting myself on the back]
This is what I posted on this site a month ago. January 11th, in the comments thread attached to the column entitled "Jim Thome-To-Texas Redux" by Joey Matches. (And man, do I wish we'd gotten Thome! A straight platoon of Thome vsRHP and Napoli vsLHP would be Josh Hamilton-esque in total productrivity).
"I have a little conspiracy theory percolating around in my head. Let's lok a some recent events
Rangers rumored to be interested in dealing Young to Rockies
Rangers in on Beltre.
Questions about Young's playing time
Word comes out in one of the papers that Young expects to play the field everyday
Young talks to a local columnist saying he would move to DH if it would help the team
Rangers sign Beltre, annouce Young as DH/Utility
Rangers in hot pursuit of a DH-only player
What I wonder is if there isn't a major rift between Young and JD stemming from the public blow-up between the 2 when Young was moved to 3B. wonder whether JD didn't ask Young about moving to DH with the idea tha Young would say no, clearing the way for Young to be traded. I wonder whether the FO didn't plant that rumor that Young refused to move, only to be countered by Young publicly accepting the move. And I wonder whether the Thome pursuit, in addition to being about making the team better (which t assuredly would) isn't partly about pissing MY off enough to get him to demand a trade. I could be totally wrong about all of this and can't support any of it with evidence. But it seems like a possible explaination for what is going on here. After all, Young is just about the last guy left on the team who isn't a product of JD either breinging him in or developing him up. And JD is a smart, head-over-heart guy who probably knows this team would be better with Young gone and a cost savings of $8m/yr over the next 3 years"
I. Nailed. It. [pause for applause]
AGAIN... so you're saying: JD would wollow happily in trade dreams
of Mike Young? You know, the player with 3y/$48mm contract that goes
into the 5y/10y monster block in May 2011. Really, I absolutely can not tell
if this is sadistic or masochistic behavior thoughts for John Daniels. IF your
theory is even close to the cutting edge of conspiracy, we have more of a
problen than just Michael Young needing to leave.
I don't understand what you're saying (as usualy, HubZ). Yes. JD has wanted Young gone, and is grinning like a Chesshire Cat today.
Honestly, sometimes I think you speak in Fortune Cookie.
Lol! Speak in fortune cookie! That cracks me up! Only this tweet has made me laugh harder all day:
"The Rangers should respond to Young’s request for a trade with their own formal request for him to be a better player. (via @DSzymborski)"
If there's a book and movie to be made of the Texas Rangers' 2010 season, then the sequel is off to a blazing start. I do get the feeling after the fireworks of yesterday and today, we'll start to see a cooling-off period here of a few days. Maybe Young, Daniels, Wash and Nolan can all sit in one room and really hash this thing out. Because if there's no worthy trade out there, they have to find a way to make this work for 2011.
Speaking of making this into a movie, here are some casting suggestions for grins (since we all need a laugh or two):
Michael Young, played by Shia LaBeouf
Jon Daniels, played by Joseph Gordon-Levitt
Nolan Ryan, played by Fred D. Thompson
Ian Kinsler, played by James Franco
Josh Hamilton, played by Jesse Eisenberg
Ron Washington, played by Chris Rock
Chuck Greenberg, played by Billy Crystal
Tom Hicks, played by John Malkovich
Mark Cuban, played by Matt Damon
Alex Rodriguez, played by Benicio del Toro
Cameron Diaz, played by Cameron Diaz
Mark Teixeira, played by Ben Affleck
Directed by Oliver Stone
@Scoob~ Your Conspiracy~
sorry to be so cryptic. What I am saying is why would Daniels
wish to put himself through so much torture. Trading Mike is going to be hell.
His board would question his intent and the loss of money & service of Young.
This is next to impossible... you think he actually planned this DEBACLE?
Daniels is up for contract negotiations. Why would he put himself under the
magnifiing glass with a pre-planned trade for Michael Young... that's crazy Scoob.
I write like a fortune cookie? Hey I like that. I guess you were too young
to ever read Blackie Sherrod? Yeah, I am a visual writer. Metaphors etc.
Cryptic of sort. It's just the way I'm wired... comes naturally.
Why, HubZ? 4 reasons:
1) His job is to make the club better, and he will do what it takes to make that happen. He believes (as I do) that the club is better with Michael Young gone than with Michael Young starting and eating up ABs that should be going to the superior Napoli, Murphy, and whoever else JD adds at the Deadline (not to mention next offseason and the offseason after that). Now, if Young would be fine as a 250 AB backup, that would be the best of both worlds for JD and the team, but that was never going to happen. It was either engineer a trade for Young or give Young his ABs.
2) Even if Young was okay having to "earn" his ABs over Napoli, Murphy, and whoever else JD adds, the decission on who to play is up to Ron Washington. Maybe JD has the same feeling that I do that Wash would playh Young every day and stuff him into the #2 hole even though he's something like the 9th best hitter on the current roster, because Wash, for all the good things he does with chemistry, is way too much of a player's coach, and a veteran's guy, and is indebted to Young personally for getting the troops to rally around Wash during the cocaine fiasco. So the choice had to be taken out of Wash's hands.
3) JD has a longer time-frame than you and I do. He's almost as concerned with positioning his team for a 2012 WS run as he is positioning it for a 2011 WS run. That's a good thing. That's how dynasties like the Patriots and Steelers find themselves at the upper echelons of their sport year after year. We're lucky he thinks that way. Michael Young's performance decline combined with his contract combined with his 10/5 protection would have made all of this twice as difficult next offseason.
4) There's bad blood between JD and Young over the 2008 incident with the move to 3B. I myself wonder whether Young didn't say "I'm not moving. Play me at SS or trade me" with the expectation that JD would just cave in and play him at SS. I wonder whether JD didnt say "Fine. We'll trade you." At which point Young (who had a full no-trade for the 2008 season) said "Nevermind, I'll move to 3B." And I suspect JD has been waiting for the 2010 offseason (when Young's no trade clause switched from full to partial, with the 8-team list he can be traded to) for 2 years so he could engineer this deal.
So, in summation, JD views the team as better without Young on it right now, MUCH better without Young on it in 2012 and 2013, has a narrow window in which to make a trade, and dislikes Young personally (A feeling which is obviously mutual, and which I'm guessing from the nasty tone of Young's comments has been brewing in BOTH directions for several years).
That's why he would deal with this Crapstorm just to engineer this trade.
And, by the way, why he's probably grinning like a Chesshire Cat that Young has gone so far over the top as to make JD look like the victem getting unfairly slammed in all of this, while at the same time essentially forcing Nolan and Greenberg to accept any deal JD can find, even if they get next to nothing back except for ~$20m in salary relief. Which, by the way, I have every confidence JD will use in a manner that produces more WAR for us than Michael Young at DH ever could have.
It's just too bad we didn't land Thome.
I can see all your points. I've thought many the same. Where I stop
and you continue: The Act of Trade. For someone to be so meticulous
in forming this team for now and the future, Daniels would RISK the total
unability of trading Young. Knowing he has ONLY 8 teams to work with.
Daniels horror would to have this linger on through ST, for obvious reasons.
To compound this scenario, go into the season with Young in the clubhouse
answering moot questions from guys like me or you. The Atom Bomb, would
be passing the May deadline and Mike getting his 5/10 bear trap on a NO TRADE,
without his full consent. I do understand your point(s). Hope you understand mine.
Ah so Grasshopper~ Sir Fortune Cookie
Prashanth,
Bravo. Balanced, truthful, and insightful.
"The Face,"
Good riddance. Screw you and your "team loyalty." I hope you get traded to the Angels so we can boo you multiple times a year and then keep you out of the playoffs for years to come.
There's an offer on the table from Colorado (Young and $20m for Lopez who you then cut). I think JD would take that if he can't get better than that. So I'm not at all worried that no trade will be available.
@Scooby~
Yep, I liked the Thome input too, but not unhappy with Napoli.
You have to understand that RW runs the team & clubhouse.
If he said that Mike is "the straw..." then he would have played him.
Wash goes to JD and says I need a bat, speed or a big arm. They
sit down and find talent together. Don't discount RW's approach
or his big input in running the team on the field. That's his job. JD
dose not just throw him talent on a whim. RW knew JD was going
after Cliff Lee and Napoli has been coveted by him for ages. Thome
was THE whim that was there, because all were gone, with any real fit.
Since it's going to be another slow & snow night, I'm going to put on my
"Subdude" CD's. Not worry about "Supper Sub". Not at all of Scooby Dude.
Thatz a lot of "S's" , huh? Itz been interesting... anytime S-Dude.
Why would JD take Lopez & cut him... to pay him $660m to release him?
I would lose respect for Daniels, if he took that deal AND paid $18-20mm
on top of that BS trade.
Hub, you forgot to add "in bed" at the end of you last post.
Seriously, though, how much salary we have to pay to trade him is irrelevant. How much we SAVE is the real question. If that answer is $8-9m/yr for 3 years, that cash in JD's hands will be worth more to the team than Young is worth to the team.
Jedi JD will probably get a high ceiling/high bust-probability/low minors prospect (in the Ramon Mendez mould) to make it look like he got "something" for Young besides Lopez.
Why would you trade for Lopez and cut him? Essentially it's like sending the Rockies an additional $660k, except that you get to have a "free" look at Lopez in Spring Training, and maybe he earns a roster spot over Blanco or something.
Not sure about defense, but if Lopez is healthy and hitting like he can, he is perhaps BETTER offensively than Young, and definitely better than Blanco.