Dodgers Inquire On Michael Young

Yes, if it involves shipping Andruw Jones out as part of the deal. That might be worth it for the Rangers, though, as Jones' contract goes only one more year, and that Young extension's already looking awful before it even kicks in. The contracts match up almost evenly for next year (Jones $15M, Young $16M).

Obviously the Rangers would need more than that to make the deal worthwhile and sellable to their fan base. That said, it's worth looking into for them.

Rangersfan: $16million underrated? Because that's what he will make for the next few years. He is NOT worth that much, regardless of how much "heart" he may have or how "clutch" he may seem.

Besides, Texas has a top shortstop prospect, Elvis Andrus, holding his own in AA at age 20, showing lightning speed, tremendous defensive ability, and signs of being a viable hitter in the majors. Andrus is the future at SS in Texas, not Young.

Ian Kinsler (a far superior hitter to Young) isn't moving anywhere, so Young's looking at moving to 3B by 2010 at the latest if he stays in Texas. Young's bat is simply average offensively at 3B. That's not worth $16M a year, not by a longshot.

Michael Young just fractured his finger.

How about Farnsworth, Rasner and Gonzales for Lowe?

I'm a Rangers fan and I would be willing to listen. Young is getting on and there has been talk about moving him to third base partly because there is a lot of young SS talent in the Rangers system getting ready to push Young. No way do the Rangers want Jones for any deal including Young. You have to start with Clayton Kershaw and go from there.

And nobody needs to mention Elvis Andrus yet. Joaquin Arias is ready to step up from AAA.

Wow, ok. The Yankees arent dealing Farnesworth. They wont have a replacement. If they get a starter, which is now highly unlikely, it will be Washburn. The only concievable trade to do would be a mid level prospect with some upside for Gonzales.

I don't think the question is "Could they," but, "Should they?"

Another huge contract for a veteran? I like Young, but I don't like many veterans that crosses paths with Colletti.

The Rangers have had Arias (hitting .285/.316/.389 in his second full year of AAA, at age 23) splitting time between 2B and SS, flip-flopping with non-prospects Ryan Roberts and Drew Meyer. He's being groomed as a utility infielder at this point - a good one, mind you, but not a long-term starter.

Michael Young is one of only 3 people in MLB history to have 5 straight 200 hit seasons. How can u expect Josh Hamilton to continue to drive in runs without Young on base. Andrus is doing well in AA but he is nowhere near major league ready.

"You have to start with Clayton Kershaw and go from there. "

The Dodgers would hang the phone up before you could finish Clayton's first name...

The Rangers would obviously have to eat some of the contract if they wanted anything in return, but you'd think if JD is trading Young, LaRoche would be part of the deal and you'd work from there... Daniels would probably require some type of pitcher in return as well.

I'd be all for trading Mike if you could get a couple of good prospects in return. With Hamilton and Kinsler breaking out in huge ways this year, it's not like they'll be scrambling to find a new face to market to the fan base...

"The Yankees can keep Gonzales if they want something more than a marginal player for him."

What incentive would the Yankees have to deal Gonzales if they didn't get something more than a marginal player?

The onus is on the inquiring team to make the deal worthwile. You can't offer crap to fill your needs and expect a trade to happen. No team is trying to help any other team when it makes a trade.

"There is no way in God's green Earth the Dodgers would trade Kershaw for Young."

Absolutely correct. They wouldn't even discuss Kershaw for Miguel Cabrera, let alone Michael Young.

"The Rangers would obviously have to eat some of the contract if they wanted anything in return, but you'd think if JD is trading Young, LaRoche would be part of the deal and you'd work from there... Daniels would probably require some type of pitcher in return as well."

Having Meloan would be useful here. Still, I think Young and cash is worth LaRoche straight up at this point. Maybe a throw in prospect.

"How can u expect Josh Hamilton to continue to drive in runs without Young on base."

Easy. Hamilton has been driving in Ian Kinsler, not Michael Young.

OK, as a Rangers fan, I am ok with the idea of dealing Young but a major league ready pitcher must be included in the deal. Also, it would be much easier to deal Young in the offseason to get a better package. Nothing will happen now.

oops meant to put qoutes so most of the writing above is a copy and paste.

"Just because the Rangers have sucked for years doesn't mean the GM is a gullible sucker. And just because the Dodgers want a player doesn't mean they get to just have him at whatever price they choose.

The only way the Rangers would even consider parting with Young, the heart and soul of the team, would be for Kershaw and probably Broxton, too. Yup, his price would be that high.

Considering that, and considering how all you Dodgers homers insist that Kershaw is unavailable, then this is officially a stupid, pointless thread.

Posted by: J the Dizzolla | July 29, 2008 at 12:21 PM"

"Easy. Hamilton has been driving in Ian Kinsler, not Michael Young."

Who Josh Hamilton has driven in , 2008:

Ian Kinsler - 32
Michael Young - 26
Josh Hamilton - 24
Other - 21

Yep...he sure isn't ever driving in Michael Young.

no way the rangers trade mike young. no way on earth. at least not this year. and if they somehow did - it would have to include at 3 top prospects, including kershaw. NO WAY THAT HAPPENS.

Oooops, LoDouca. How dare I forget how to spell our long since departed heart and soul's name =)
(Another cry for edit button)

Seriously, enough with the Clayton Kershaw suggestions. Not gonna happen. Sure, it would be great to get that arm back home, but it's not happening.

If the Dodgers were to take on Young, the Rangers would have to take on Jones. That's how that works. LaRoche would also be coming to Texas in a deal like that. The key piece for Texas would be a pitcher, and that is where Scott Elbert comes into play. And finally, the trick in JD's recent deals has been grabbing the teenager. So, the Dodgers would likely have to throw in some young pitcher.

So, the deal would look like this:

Young + throw in for Andruw Jones + LaRoche + Elbert + Low level prospect

Ivdown,

There are plenty of dumb Dodgers fans too, and plenty of smart Rangers fans. It's just how it works.

And on a side, I don't see either team doing what would be necessary to get this deal done.

Did anyone even notice who broke this story? Dan Graziano, a beat writer for the New York Mets. Secondly, just because the Dodgers inquire about a player doesn't mean that there are any trade talks actually happening. As a Dodgers fan I wouldn't mind seeing a trade happen, but I hardly put any credibility to this story considering who is reporting it.

"If we were offered Kershaw, JD would make the trade faster than you can blink."

JD would make a Kinsler-Kershaw deal faster than you can blink.

"Tried that once. Unfortunately for Fred Claire, that appears to be his legacy (For ya'll east of New Mexico, that was Pedro for Delino)."

Really bad deal, but like the Pierzinski deal, it made sense for the Dodgers at the time.