"Does Michael Young have a chance at the Hall of Fame?"
Well, technically, lots of players have a chance at the Hall of Fame. But if we're being down-to-earth serious...the correct answer to this question is, "No, Dan, he does not."
Terry Francona and Orel Hershiser, in near-unision: "I sure hope so."
Why? Why do you hope so? Michael Young's career batting line: .304/.350/.451. His OPS+ is 106, meaning he's been 6% better-than-average offensively. In basically 11 full seasons, he's accumulated 2,088 hits, 171 HRs, and 89 steals. He has never finished in the top seven in an MVP vote. A comparable player:
Mystery Player: .305/.365/.442, 122 OPS+, 2008 hits, 163 HRs, 174 steals
This guy was basically a less-durable version of Michael Young: similarly high batting averages with a little power, but Young will finish his career with more counting stats because he stayed freakishly healthy.
The Mystery Player is Bill Madlock, who made one appearance on the Hall of Fame ballot and earned 4.5% of the vote.
Hershiser: "He's a Hall of Fame teammate."
If you ignore that one time last offseason when Michael Young very publicly
Francona: "If he gets to 3,000 hits, doesn't he have to be [in the Hall of Fame]?"
If Johnny Damon reaches 3,000 hits, does HE have to be in the Hall of Fame? I don't think so. Not simply because he reaches an arbitrary statistical plateau. Same goes for Young.
Anyway, this is way too premature. Yes, he has a much better chance of making the Hall if (IFFF) he reaches 3,000. But Young is only two-thirds of the way there, and he's 35. Thirty-five.
He remains, however, an excellent candidate for the Hall of Very Good.
No comments:
Post a Comment