Yesterday afternoon, Michael Young got some vindication when he won the 2008 AL Gold Glove award for shortstop. This has been a bone of contention between Rangers fans and the uh “National media”, who always seemed to slag Young on defense. There were always these really strange sabre-metric things which showed Young at the bottom of the barrel defensively, that other guys are better shortstops if you apply these strange numbers and conditions (like what compass direction a digested twinkie is moving in your digestive system). But you just had to watch Young to know he was a good shortstop. If you’re one of these people who rely on strange numbers to prove anything, I think you’re missing the point. Use your eyes, not your head – Young is a great defensive shortstop. Now I don’t make a case that he’s the best ever, but he’s certainly up near the top of the game. I think by the time his career is over, he’ll have amassed a huge number of individual awards beyond the ones he already has. Will he have a ring to go with it? Hopefully. :)
His 2008 numbers were quite good. He had a .984 fielding percentage, which was second in the majors (behind only Jimmy Rollins of the Phillies). He lead all shortstops by being involved in 113 double plays (which is more of a team stat than an individual stat, really), and ranked second in assists and total chances. I think he’s pretty deserving, and yeah, I’m a Rangers fan, so I’m bound to say that. But show me someone in the AL who is better this past year. Unless you’re going to play the homer vote for your own team, you can’t, really.
The other thing I wanted to talk about is Hank Blalock. As I type this sentence at 12:46PM on Friday, the Rangers have not yet picked up Blalock’s option. Several local media outlets have said that it’s a foregone conclusion he will, so I’m writing this as if they already have. If for some reason they do not, I’ll have to re-edit this story later today. :) Anyway, with Blalock’s option picked up for 2009, he’s on the books for $6.2 Million. Apparently, the reason it hasn’t been picked up so far is the Rangers wanted to talk to him face to face, and tell him what they have planned. Which, according to several published reports is to trade him for pitching. If we kept him, it wouldn’t be awful, but would create a logjam. Blalock probably can’t effectively play third anymore, so he’d be either at first or at DH. Being at first puts a block on Chris Davis. Now Davis can go play third, but he’s better at first. I also personally have never liked the concept of a dedicated DH. I always felt that the DH should be an open position that someone who is hurt, or needs a day off can go bat, and not strain themselves too much on the field. I think Blalock will be moved somewhere in the offseason, Chris Davis will open at first.
That leaves a regular third base job open. The immediate thought would be Ramon Vazquez (they’d have to sign him for more than one year, and hand him third base to keep him), or Travis Metcalf. He can play third, but his long term bat is still a bit suspect, I think. We’ve been hearing the Rangers kick the tires of a few free agent third baseman, none of which really excites me. I’d rather take my chances with Metcalf, or resign Vazquez to play 3B.
As for Blalock, though, I always felt he’d be here for a long time, it’s a shame it appears he’s on his way out. Guess there will be no more Hank’s Homies. They’ve been gone as a regular game sight for awhile, but this would finish them off, I’m sure. That was quite fun when it was new.
Anyway, congratulations to Michael Young on his Gold Glove. Hopefully he wins some more hardware to go with that. Like one all of us can celebrate.
UPDATE @ 5PM Friday: Just noticed that Blalock’s option was officially picked up. No surprise there – I think the shock would have been if they did not. Of course, now the fun begins as to see what we do with him. I did find it funny that the Rangers official site used this headline on the site for this story. “Rangers bring back Blalock for 2009 campaign”. That’s not quite what they did. They picked up his option. Misleading headline there. :)

I meant to write about this the day it happened, but I was having a bit of a pain flareup, and was not in the mood to creatively write. Now I’m laying in my bed with my leg raised up on a pillow, and leaning to my site to write on my laptop after about seven hours of watching election returns. A quick note about that. I really enjoyed the returns on my HDTV with NBC’s coverage. The space on the side that you wouldn’t see on an old style TV was filled up with other info (recent state wins, electoral tally, etc) which was really cool to have while the main talking was going on. I enjoyed that.
Anyway, the other day the Rangers hired Mike Maddux to be their pitching coach. By all accounts, this is a great hire. There are a lot of numbers you can point at during his tenure in Milwaukee. Their ERA was great, several pitchers who left there tanked elsewhere. As a fan of the team, all the local fan website writers are all behind the move – and I am, too. This move should really help our team with one if its biggest problems – pitching. If you’re reading this site, you are no stranger to the numbers that comprise the Rangers pitching staff stats. 5.97 ERA last season, and while I don’t have them in front of me, they weren’t much better in any of the other recent years. Maddux’ pedigree says he should help improve our staff. You know it, I know it, Jamey Newberg knows it, and team management expects it.
Thats’ where my excitement about a pitching coach hire ends – because I think this is not the kind of hire that will excite the fanbase, really. Why? If you are reading this site, or any of the other Ranger fan sites (Baseball Time in Arlington, Lone Star Ball, Jamey’s site, etc, etc, etc..) then you know the value. But your average Joe Six Pack (yeah, had to work in another presidential thing) doesn’t really care about that. I’m talking about the doofuses who call in to post game shows and go “When are we going to get some pitching in here?” These are the guys who will look at the 2009 rotation of Millwood, Padilla, Feldman, Harrison, & ? and go “These are the same guys – they’re not doing aything!” Your average fan who is interested only in things like the all you can eat seats won’t give a rats spit about the coaches. They want wins. Obviously, we all want that, but unless you’re a fan who reads a site like mine, you probably don’t care whether the pitching coach is Dick Bosman, Orel Hershisher, Oscar Ocosta, Mark Connor, or Mike Maddux.
Having said that, I think the move is a good one, it should help us. I’d be surprised if it helps us in 2009, though. I’m sure we’ll see an improvement, but probably not an immediate dramatic one. It’s probably a good idea that we kept on Andy Hawkins on the staff. His familiarity will certainly help, I’m sure.
I still think we should have John Wetteland as a bullpen coach, however. Would LOVE to see that.