Feb 9, 2011, 12:54 AM EDT
We’ve heard the Rockies mentioned as a potential destination for Michael Young dating back to the winter meetings, so many have considered them an obvious fit now that the 34-year-old infielder has formally requested a trade. They are even one of the eight places where Young said he would approve a trade.
If only it was that easy.
A major league source tells Troy Renck of the Denver Post that the Rockies are out on Young.
Young’s remaining salary and the Rangers’ demands are two significant reasons why talks have broken down. According to Renck, the Rangers’ demands changed once Vladimir Guerrero agreed to sign with the Orioles. The Rangers are reluctant to simply give Young away, because they feel they don’t have an adequate replacement for him in the lineup. At least that’s what they are saying. It’s still possible that talks could be revived, but a deal between the two teams appears doubtful right now.
The Dodgers have interest in the Southern California native, but Mike DiGiovanna and Steve Dilbeck of the Los Angeles Times are reporting that the club has questions about Young’s defense and how his power will translate to Dodger Stadium. And if you read Aaron’s thorough takedown of Young yesterday, those concerns are completely valid.
The Rangers would love to get something of value in return for Young, but it’s unlikely they’ll be able to do so unless they eat a significant portion of the $48 million he is owed over the next three seasons. It’s a tough spot.
- No, Ned Yost didn’t “out-manage” Bruce Bochy. His players played better 21
- At least Hunter Strickland entertained us last night 17
- Royals even up World Series with 7-2 Game 2 victory 26
- Craig Kimbrel wins Trevor Hoffman Award; Greg Holland gets Mariano Rivera Award 5
- World Series, Game 2: Giants vs. Royals lineups 10
- HBT Daily: Are the Royals doomed, doomed, doomed? 11
- Giants inhaling the air of superiority after Game 1 7
- What’s in a name? “Big Game” James did not come up big for Kansas City 23
- So, if you’re not a fan of the Royals or Giants, who ya got? (129)
- Erroneous Narrative Alert: no, the Giants are not a “gritty,” anti-stats organization (121)
- Pedro Martinez has some opinions about who the new “face of baseball” is (112)
- PANTY RAID! Homeland Security agents confiscate unlicensed Kansas City Royals underwear (103)
- “The Kansas City Royals Are the Future of Baseball” — someone actually said that. (93)