I have heard many great things about this man. The Devil Rays (no jokes about the Devil Rays sucking please- I know they suck but I still am a fan) commentators state that he is underrated and could be the best pure hitter in baseball right now. From what I have seen when the Rangers come to town I agree. He has a great eye. he can hit for contact and power. He has a textbook swing. Even the commentators mentioned to all of the kids out there learning baseball that Young's swing is the way to go. Ichiro is probably the best contact hitter I have ever seen (George Brett, Wade Boggs, and Tony Gwynn are certainly up there) but his swing is unorthodox. Probably wouldn't make the best hitting coach. Haha. Oh yeah, Pujols is great but I am not a big fan of his style of hitting. But I don't question his consistency and power. Certainly deserves national league MVP.
2006-07-21 07:45:40 · 9 answers · asked by bootstrap 1 in Sports ➔ Baseball
While Michael Young is a good hitter and above-average player, there are at least 20 hitters better than him. Without making a big list, let's compare him to just a couple of other guys - I'll look at runs, average, on-base, and slugging, since they're some of the more telling stats:
Young 53 .311 .354 .442
Beltran 72 .277 .384 .610
Pujols 69 .328 .442 .715
Now, which of those players would you rather have 9 or in your lineup - the guy who has a pretty swing like Young, or a guy like Pujols who somehow manages to get by pretty nicely with what his swing? Of if you want nice swings, then why wouldn't Beltran be the better choice? He has a great stroke, and he's much more productive than Young.
One problem with Young is that his eye just isn't as good as some of the league's premier hitters. He's never cracked the 60-walk mark, and he just doesn't get on base as much as you'd like from an elite player.
Being a great hitter has little to do with the beauty of your stroke. Having good form helps, but the great hitters have their own styles and do what works for them. It's annoying to see so much acclaim given to guys like Young, guys who pile up the hits but don't know how to draw a walk.
Don't get me wrong - Young is a good hitter. But to say that he's the best "pure hitter" makes no sense. A "pure hitter" is a guy who does more than just make contact with a pretty swing - that's what makes guys like Beltran, ARod, or Pujols the elite, while Young is on the second tier.
2006-07-21 08:28:59 · answer #1 · answered by Craig S 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He's not the best player in baseball but he is the best "all around" shortstop...Not bad for a guy that his best position is second..
I'm not going to break down every shortstop but just to compare him to "the one and only" Derek Jeter
Michael Young BA-311 OB%-354 SLG%-442 RF-4.99 FLD%-983
Derek Jeter BA-337 OB%-417 SLG%-462 RF-3.92 FLD%-973
Michael Young R-53 RBI-58 Hits-126 BB-30 HBP-0 TB-179
Derek Jeter R-61-RBI-57 Hits-119 BB-43 HBP-7 TB-163
Defense -
Michael Young RF-4.99 FLD%-983 Total chances-454
Derek Jeter RF-3.92 FLD%-973 Total chances-325
Offensively Jeter has "created" 8 more runs..RC=R+RBI-HR(61+57-6=112) * (53+58-7=104)...and been on base 13 more times...Young has 16 more total bases...
Defense - Young has made 129 more plays, or "saved" 129 hits.
Over 650AB and 730TPA Jeter would have an advantage of 17 hits and reach base 46 more times via (Hit+BB+HBP) . Young would make 173 more plays on defense(162 games)...Young wins by 127...
When you figure that in 600AB the difference between a .300 hitter(180) and a .270 hitter(162) is 18 hits....127 is a pretty big difference...
Sometimes that "average" hitter with a great glove can be far the better "over all player" ...Just as an example - From 2003-2005 Toronto 2B Orlando Hudson might have only hit .270 and wasn't a big power guy but his RF was over 5.8 all three years...Taking a hit away from the other team is just as important as getting one..
2006-07-21 11:00:49 · answer #2 · answered by jack 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Young is about #8-10 on the "best overall player in baseball" list. Pujols is at the top, and doesn't have anyone contending with him. The closest is probably A-Rod or Beltran. There's even another Cardinal in Scott Rolen that is above Young. You may think Pujols isn't much of a fielder and doesn't deserve the classification of best "overall" play but just look at his stats, his fielding percentage is .996 he's only had 3 errors all season, thats gold glove worthy, and his bat speaks for itself. Don't get me wrong but I think Young is a very good player and good overall player but he's definitely not the best overall player.
2006-07-21 08:36:12 · answer #3 · answered by el 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You are a dumbass. No way Michael YOung is better than Pujols or anybody in the AL West. He has no power and YOU SUCK BALLS not the Devil Rays
2006-07-21 08:23:23 · answer #4 · answered by Kyle K 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Pujols is better than Young overall, though Young, with his good average, power, speed, and defense, could end up leading the Rangers to a division title.
2006-07-21 08:11:56 · answer #5 · answered by littleindian039 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He's not even close. Derek Jeter or Albert Pujols are definitely the best overall.
2006-07-21 07:49:19 · answer #6 · answered by Ronnoc 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He's good, but definitely not the best player in baseball.
2006-07-21 09:04:16 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No....he is really good but not the best.
2006-07-21 13:08:25 · answer #8 · answered by royalsgirl 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No! far from it.
2006-07-21 13:15:53 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋