Tuesday, 4 January 2011

The Michael Young conundrum

But can he sell peanuts?
With the unfortunate signing of Adrian Beltre seemingly imminent, another change is going to come for Michael Young.

Since 2004 and Alfonso Soriano's acquisition, Young's almost been around the horn. From second to shortstop to third base after Elvis Andrus landed on the scene.

With Beltre's more-than-capable glove possibly coming to Arlington to man the hot corner, Young will move again.

He's taking it much better than he did the move to third base when he demanded a trade. In hindsight, he probably realizes how silly it was to pitch a fit over the development of Andrus, who has a much higher ceiling than the gritty Young.

The new role, if there is one, will include Young being the designated hitter and serving as a "super-utility" guy playing probably every infield position at some point or another. This is a role Young has publicly stated he'll accept.

Good for him because his play at both shortstop and third base eroded quickly, although I still contend that his move to third base rejuvenated his wilting bat as he was able to exert less energy on the field and save it for the plate. I suspect this new move would do the same even more so.

I would guess that this eliminates the need for Vlad Guerrero as the designated hitter and it allows the Rangers a ton more flexibility in giving guys days off without taking out a premier bat. And as bad as Young got at shortstop and third base, he was not the worst in the league. From game to game, he was more than capable. Over a whole season, however, you saw the detriment his play posed on the team.

I think this third move also possibly exemplifies the way we'll view Young's career. Despite probably holding every hitting record in Rangers history, we do not ever seem to push him above, say, Ivan Rodriguez as the greatest Ranger ever. He doesn't have the same mystique as Mike Modano or Dirk Nowitzki.

This is partially because Young wasn't nearly as good compared to those guys or even in terms of baseball players. As we've learned, he's not that good of a fielder. His hissy fit over the move from shortstop puts into question his role as a good teammate (although he's clearly very well liked and respected). And he's considered a consistent and solid bat, but nothing you couldn't find elsewhere. Also, despite his number remaining steady overall, he is no longer synonymous with being "clutch" as his numbers with runners on have waned over the years.

No doubt that Michael Young is an all timer with the Texas Rangers. He'll one day be retired and be exhausted with accolades and honors with the organization that will fight to keep him involved. But I think it's not a stretch to denote that although he was the face of the franchise, he was never the heart or soul.