Skip to content

Welcome to the Michael Young-hater club, Joe Posnanski!

Oct 24, 2011, 12:59 PM EDT

Michael Young Getty Images

I’ve gotten a lot of crap over the past week or so for daring to suggest that Michael Young may be less than Hall-of-Fame-worthy and may be less of the leader that his fan club down in the Metroplex make him out to be.  Saying you want to work someplace else every time someone asks you to change your workflow kind of keeps you out the leadership conversation.

So it was great to see Joe Posnanski hit ‘em up in his blog post this morning.  The post itself is about Tim McCarver and Joe Buck — good to see Posnanski hitting them up too — but Young gets a four-paragraph Postersisk up front in the article wondering why on Earth, despite all of his flaws as a player and less-than-leaderly traits, he’s described as the be-all, end-all in those categories by a pliant press.

I’m sure Posnanski will not get a stern talking-to by Evan Grant and others.  Something tells me it will bother him even less than it bothered me.

  1. jamie54 - Oct 24, 2011 at 1:06 PM

    Well if Posnanski says its so, then I guess we all have to follow his lead since he’s infallible.

    • jtorrey13 - Oct 24, 2011 at 1:20 PM

      Not infallible, just thoughtful.

      He takes thousands of words to explain his position and why he believes what he does whereas your snark takes less than 20 words. Well trolled.

      • jamie54 - Oct 24, 2011 at 2:55 PM

        Didn’t say his thousands upon thousands of words was wrong, just like your three. Don’t like it, then don’t read it. But to follow someone, like Posnanski, or Calcaterra, blindly as if whatever they say or write is correct, that’s mindless. And sorry, to say someone needs thousands of words to explain themself, well, if you can’t get the point across using less words, why? Stupid position.

      • cktai - Oct 24, 2011 at 3:29 PM

        Where does it state you are to follow Posnanski blindly? Craig offered Joe’s posts as a suggestion because he believes Joe wrote an insightful column. How you read into that that we are to think Joe is infallible is beyond me.

    • Pierre Cruzatte - Oct 24, 2011 at 1:35 PM

      Like Craig, Poz’s shtick is eminent reasonableness. And yeah, I eat it right up.

  2. The Baseball Idiot - Oct 24, 2011 at 1:14 PM

    Maybe because the media tends to go overboard in their criticism of players, and remind all of us what evil people the players really are, they’ve decided to make Young their own particular poster boy. That way they can pretend, by showing unreserved and unconditional love for one guy, that they don’t really hate the players for actually being able to play, when all they can do is write.

  3. sjs1959 - Oct 24, 2011 at 1:16 PM

    If not, Joe Pos is closer to it than anyone else I know!

  4. cur68 - Oct 24, 2011 at 1:38 PM

    Ha! If anyone really want to complain about Buck & McCarver they should first listen too Gary Thorne and Rick Sutcliffe on Rogers Sportsnet. Those 2 eggheads spend so much time bathing Young in their saliva you’d swear he was their love child. Buck & McCarver are amateurs.

    • The Baseball Idiot - Oct 24, 2011 at 1:42 PM

      That’s the feed I get. I had to turn off the sound last night.

      • cur68 - Oct 24, 2011 at 2:15 PM

        I actually switched to Fox in game 3. That’s right; I CHOSE Tim & Joe over Gary & Rick. Mind you i had to listen to “sprockets” being explained, a Glee reference, some chick from some show being vetted for her interests in the proceedings and sundry other inanities but at least the “Mike Young for baseball god” crusade died down a bit.

      • dlevalley - Oct 24, 2011 at 2:44 PM

        I’ve taken to listening to the games this postseason on ESPN radio. The crew they’ve got now makes for pretty great radio, even if Bobby valentine is rather annoying.

      • cur68 - Oct 24, 2011 at 3:46 PM

        Do you know, IMO the best play by play far, by a margin too high to calculate by even Steven Hawking, the best play by play goes on during the live chats. More live chats, please.

  5. theadam - Oct 24, 2011 at 1:38 PM

    …yet I’m sure Young is completely bothered by the criticism leveled by both of you.

    I do like the new editorial direction of the site to point out any and all links with a negative slant on Young, complete with the addition of a snide remark directed at Evan Grant.

    May I direct your attention to bleacherreport.com. They too excel at sniping from afar and interjecting pointless cheap-shots irrelevant to the topic and calling it valid. You can find several slide shows there from which to base further Young/Grant insults.

    I’m going to stop frequenting your site now, as the hit totals you rack up for this drivel only encourages a further spiraling into the depths of internet trolling.

    I’m sure you do not live in a basement, and suspect that NBC compensates you quite well to work from home. For that, I congratulate you. However, I’d suggest a greater editorial process. The staff on the site is greater than one person and you are all paid. Therefore, before pushing the publish button, it is not unreasonable to ask each other the question “Does the site look better or worse with this post on it?”

    Had you done that, I think some of your cohorts would say that you look petty for your last paragraph. Of course, that same paragraph essentially said that you believe yourself to be beyond reproach. Since you are unable to discuss such matters as an adult with a respected writer as Evan Grant without insults, I would doubt people you feel are your subordinates.

    And I also realize that you consider me even lower than Evan or Gleeman or anyone else, and therefore will likely not even make it to this sentence, much less give my thoughts any credence.

    I shall take the bait no longer.

    • Craig Calcaterra - Oct 24, 2011 at 1:41 PM

      Well, considering my “conversation” with Evan Grant consisted of him — before I ever once mentioned his name or linked to any of his writing — calling me “boneheaded,” I don’t think he or you can claim the high ground on his behalf.

      But oh well. Have fun wherever you go!

    • Craig Calcaterra - Oct 24, 2011 at 1:47 PM

      Also, as someone on Twitter just mentioned, I think you’re bluffing. You’ve basically done what Michael Young did when he voiced his desire — twice — to leave the Rangers. You’ll be back here at HBT in a week and we’ll all be calling you our leader!

      • El Bravo - Oct 24, 2011 at 1:51 PM

        Hate ‘em, love ‘em, I’m here to stay regadless and bother everyone else. Booyah!

        – signed El Bravo

    • burnsy - Oct 24, 2011 at 1:51 PM

      “May I direct your attention to bleacherreport.com.”

      I’d really rather you didn’t.

      • 18thstreet - Oct 24, 2011 at 3:15 PM

        http://www.theonion.com/articles/new-decoy-website-launched-to-lure-away-all-moroni,26393/

      • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Oct 24, 2011 at 3:15 PM

        If Bleacher Report is your appeal to authority, we’ve all lost

    • drmonkeyarmy - Oct 24, 2011 at 2:19 PM

      Nobody is saying Michael Young sucks, just that he isn’t the player or leader that some make him out to be. The “hate” is just a reactionary process to the streams of love spouting in his direction. Michael Young is a good hitter, but not as good as people believe. Hell, his career OPS is .801. Not bad, but certainly not the super awesomeness that some believe. Furthermore, he is one of the worst defensive players of his generation and moaned about switching positions on a few occasions. Yet, he is made out to be some type of martyr for changing to what the Rangers needed. That is bullshit reasoning in my opinion. Also, people were babbling on about Michael Young for MVP and nonsense like that. The thought it laughable for a variety of reasons and should be pointed out as such. Doing so doesn’t make one a hater….in fact, it makes them perfectly reasonable.

    • paperlions - Oct 24, 2011 at 2:46 PM

      Plus the criticism isn’t directed at Young, it is directed at the media coverage of him…..unfortunately, a critical evaluation of Young’s career and public behavior are required to illuminate the giant chasm between reality and the narrative.

      • cur68 - Oct 24, 2011 at 3:56 PM

        And that’s just it, isn’t it? The narrative is great. Chock-full of hyperbole, metaphor and lavishness. People I think want to believe that he is what he’s billed to be. Too bad the truth about him is so boring.

  6. Kyle - Oct 24, 2011 at 1:40 PM

    Excited to get reading on this. There are few things in baseball reading more satisfying than a well-reasoned Joe Pos take down.

  7. miketreedy - Oct 24, 2011 at 1:52 PM

    He had a very good year. He is a Ranger Hall of Famer but agree at this point not a real Hall of Famer. I am also in the camp that he shouldn’t be batting cleanup. He doesn’t offer Hamilton much projection and hits into too many double plays. On the defensive side we are so lucky we picked up Beltre. What a huge improvement he has been on Young this year especially in the post season.

  8. Chris Fiorentino - Oct 24, 2011 at 2:05 PM

    The thing that really gets to me is the media on media violence that occurs when it comes to topics like Michael Young. Why what one guy says really offends Craig and Joe Pos is beyond me. You guys aren’t supposed to be idiot fans like us…when someone bashes Ryan Howard, I come at them full force because I am a fan and Ryan Howard is my favorite player. For NO OTHER REASON…right or wrong, I am going down with the Big Piece.

    Seems like every time somebody says something positive about Michael Young…no wait…somebody says something that Craig or Joe Pos take as being a little too positive about Michael Young, we get a post about it. Why? It really is beneath you…both of you.

    • thinman61 - Oct 24, 2011 at 2:11 PM

      I’m thinking Craig is even more of an idiot fan than us. He does root for the Braves, after all. :p

      • Francisco (FC) - Oct 24, 2011 at 3:08 PM

        Torpedoed at the Water Line! Ouch!

    • paperlions - Oct 24, 2011 at 2:49 PM

      Again, it isn’t Young that offends anyone…it is the coverage. He simply isn’t the player or the person that much of the media says he is…and pretty much all of them know better because they covered his whining and trade requests…so they are essentially lying because it suits their narrative…which should bother all of their colleagues.

    • clydeserra - Oct 24, 2011 at 3:13 PM

      If they ever stop being idiot fans, I will stop reading. that is what “blogs” are about.

      I am happy to lend my eyes to the NBC borg and look at their ads as long as the commentary from Craig, Drew, DJ, Aaron et al remains the way it is, dudes looking at the internet and pulling interesting things for me to think about.

      • Chris Fiorentino - Oct 24, 2011 at 3:59 PM

        Not true though, clyde. Craig prides himself on being impartial and I give him props on that aspect of his writing all the time. He is not a Braves fan as much as he is a baseball fan. He should be above stupid and petty things like whether one writer thinks too highly of Michael Young. Who really cares? It’s not like his name is Derek Jeter or anything :D

      • clydeserra - Oct 24, 2011 at 5:10 PM

        I don’t think that is the same thing. He frequently pushes buttons of NL east rival fans and makes more of Brave comings and goings than he would otherwise.

        He and the others, do a great job of presenting in a objective, or reasonably objective, narrative on a story, but they don’t, to my mind, try to be the classic print media j-school jack webb.

  9. Jonny 5 - Oct 24, 2011 at 3:19 PM

    Leave Michael Young ALONE!!!!!

    Seriously though, I’m not sure exactly why the guy is treated as if he’s some sort of Demigod who is also a baseball player, just as much as I’m not exactly sure of why it bothers anyone either. The “media” has had their heads up their own asses stroking their own egos for as long as I can remember and I’m never upset with the BS they spew. I expect it. It’s equal to being mad at a baby for pooping their diaper.

    • Alex K - Oct 24, 2011 at 3:37 PM

      I’m mad everytime my baby poops in his diaper (at least when I have to do the changing).

      • Jonny 5 - Oct 24, 2011 at 3:43 PM

        Ok, that may have been a bad example…. Hmmm? Mmmkay..

        Being mad at your dog for begging? I mean it is a dog…

      • Alex K - Oct 24, 2011 at 5:07 PM

        Your example was fine. I’m not mad at the baby, I’m mad that I have to smell poop at such a close range.

  10. ezwriter69 - Oct 24, 2011 at 3:33 PM

    You don’t take crap for hating on Young, you take crap because every time you hate on Young, you insist you’re not hating on Young.
    And guess what, you just did it again…

    • Alex K - Oct 24, 2011 at 3:39 PM

      No one is hating on Young. I promise.

  11. ezwriter69 - Oct 24, 2011 at 3:35 PM

    Funny, too, you insist the criticism doesn’t bother you, but you can’t stop yapping about it… you don’t have a lot of credibility to start with, but you lose more of it every time you open your mouth on this subject.

  12. cerowb - Oct 24, 2011 at 4:22 PM

    Craig, agree with you most of the time, as far as I’m concerned you and Posnanski are the epitome of level-headed thinkers when it comes baseball. But I think you may be misrepresenting the point of your opposition here, or at least me (I can’t pretend to speak for everyone). You say you’ve caught flack for suggesting that Michael Young is not Hall-of-Fame worthy and suggesting that he’s not the leader he’s made out to be. I wouldn’t disagree with you on that. He’s certainly NOT EVEN CLOSE to being in any type of Hall-of-Fame discussion, and he’s probably not as great a leader as people seem to think. What I disagree with is the campaign that seems to take every single opportunity to discredit the guy. I mean, how often have we had an article on this site to lessen the accomplishments of Michael Young in the past month, five?? I understand your point, but let it go. Let’s end this crusade against Michael Young and quit beating a dead horse.

    • cur68 - Oct 24, 2011 at 6:02 PM

      Beating dead horses is what we do around here. Craig keeps the carcass handy for us to gather round and let it have it whenever someone gets on live national TV and proceeds to tell us something that we know isn’t true. If they persist in telling us the untruth we will persist is saying “nu-uh, t’aint so” as often as necessary. Mike Young is a pretty good hitter. That’s about it. There is no harm in referring to him as such. Can you please tell Gary Thorne, Rick Sutcliff, Joe Buck & Tim McCarver that? They seem to think he’s dog’s gift to baseball; a selfless teammate with HOF skills and class leadership-balls. And that just ‘taint so, nu-uh.

  13. nhuskerjj - Oct 24, 2011 at 5:59 PM

    I’ve been reading this crap for two weeks about MY. I want to start by saying I’m a huge ranger fan and have forgotten more about baseball than some people know. As much as I hate to say it but Craig your article on MY is right on the money. I couldn’t agree more with your opinions on MY. All of his loved ones have rose colored glasses and want to hear what they want to hear about MY. Believe me I get slammed all of the time by friends that hear me talk bad about the ranger god and his twin brother Josh Hamilton. Unfortunately now you’re just beating a dead horse to make people agree with you when you keep writing about it. The irony here is that NBC anything has nothing but sheep that listen or read their stuff. So this is the same situation when I talk about how bad anything NBC is I get those same people defending NBC with their rise glasses on! Lol!!

  14. nhuskerjj - Oct 24, 2011 at 6:11 PM

    Funny thing to add for me is I,and I’m not alone I promise you, think Joe buck has been the least objective announcer there has been in doing the post season, against Texas. It was obvious they were promoting Detroit so they could get the “feel good ratings” and do economic pieces about its city. Listen to him do a cowboy game it’s obvious he has a problem with dfw. As for his love for everything STL, well do we really have to explain that reasoning? I may be looking at it from a bias standpoint but it seems like the guy does backflips in the booth when something negative happens with ntx teams so far.

  15. purnellmeagrejr - Oct 24, 2011 at 6:12 PM

    Folks should understand that the role of “scrappy ballplayer” is kind of like the James Bond franchise – some are better James Bonds (Sean Connery representing the Pete Rose of the “scrappy ballplayer who does the little things and always hustles …etc) and some aren’t good at all (George Lazenby?) Michael Young is like Roger Moore.
    BTW I nurture hope that Bryce Harper might evolve into an Albert Belle type “arrogant slugger”

    • cur68 - Oct 24, 2011 at 7:24 PM

      So…who’s Moneypenny? Youkalis?

      • purnellmeagrejr - Oct 25, 2011 at 8:22 AM

        the Angels are going to hire her for GM?

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Featured video

Do Royals or A's have the edge tonight?
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. D. Jeter (3299)
  2. C. Kershaw (2417)
  3. R. Martin (2359)
  4. A. Rodriguez (2022)
  5. J. Altuve (1905)
  1. D. Gordon (1830)
  2. J. Hamilton (1776)
  3. I. Suzuki (1676)
  4. D. Ortiz (1664)
  5. E. Volquez (1593)