Is Michael Young a Future H.O.F'er?

[Ennder]

 

 

At age 33, Molitor had made 3 All Star teams. 3. He had some of his best seasons (strictly as a DH) after turning 34. Let's see what Young does. At the age Young is at now, Molitor had fewer HR (148 vs. 169), and fewer doubles (369 to 388) than Young.

 

Young is really, really good at hitting too.

 

Molitor still had a 121 OPS+ at the same age as Young. He just had less playing time because of injuries so his counting stats weren't as high. Young is not anywhere close to as good a hitter as Molitor was at the same age, especially when you add the hitting environment to the mix. Young's only shot at the HOF is to just get a lot of counting stats and hoping that incompetent voters vote on him.

[topper09er]

Through age 34:

Young

7369 PA, 2061 H, 388 2B, 169 HR, 87 SB, 499/1052 BB/K, .304/.350/.451, 106 OPS+, 34.8 oWAR

 

Molitor

7742 PA, 2086 H, 369 2B, 148 HR, 381 SB, 682/816 BB/K, .302/.365/.442, 124 OPS+, 53.5 oWAR

 

They have similar counting stats but that is only because of the different eras they played in. Molitor was a much better hitter, not even close. Using bb-ref neutralizer tool, here are Young's stats if he played for the 1989 Brewers his entire career:

 

1930 H, 161 HR, .290/.335/.432

 

And here is Molitor through age 34 playing for the 2007 Rangers:

2359 H, 165 HR, .324/.389/.472

 

And another reason they are bad comps is because Molitor had one of the best late careers of all-time so its not a good idea to expect an average player to live up to Molitors post 34 standards.

 

Hit leaders from age 35 on

 
Rk Player H Age PA
1 Pete Rose 1709 35-45 6648
2 Sam Rice 1574 35-44 5341
3 Honus Wagner 1288 35-43 4866
4 Paul Molitor 1233 35-41 4425
5 Carl Yastrzemski 1152 35-43 4876
6 Ty Cobb 1136 35-41 3720
7 Craig Biggio 1091 35-41 4602
8 Omar Vizquel 1080 35-44 4552
9 Carlton Fisk 1043 35-45 4570
10 Edgar Martinez 1037 35-41 4085
11 Stan Musial 1033 35-42 3905

 

So Michael Young will need to get the 4th most hits ever after the age of 34 so stay on pace with Molitor's counting stats, but he has never done anything ever good enough to be 4th all-time

[bobbledude25]

Ok, now this has turned into a Young and Molitor comparison apparently. Topper - did you just call Young "an average player"? Whoa. Young might not be a HOF'er but he sure as he double hockey sticks isn't "average". Why couldn't Young get the 4th most hits ever after the age of 34? Sure it's not likely but not impossible either. Like I said before he was the 3rd fastest right handed hitter ALL TIME to 2,000 hits.

[topper09er]

I am saying this should NOT be a Young vs Molitor comparison since they aren't close. If the argument for Young is that all he has to do is match Molitor's numbers post age 34 then that is unlikely to happen.

 

Also, how is Michael Young the 3rd fastest to reach 2000 hits? What does that mean, 3rd least PA to reach 2000 Hs? No. 3rd least ABs? No. 3rd youngest? No.

 

Michael Young has a 106 OPS+, so hes a little above average on offense, and way below average on D so overall he is an average player. 11 full seasons with 26.9 WAR = 2.4 WAR/season = slightly above average player.

[Outlander]

Why couldn't Young get the 4th most hits ever after the age of 34? Sure it's not likely but not impossible either. Like I said before he was the 3rd fastest ALL TIME to 2,000 hits.

 

The odds are on my side he won't get the 4th most hits ever after age 34, so yes it is nearly impossible. He is the 3rd fastest right handed hitter, however that is based on games played. If he started playing at 19 or something he would have a better chance at the HOF and 3,000 hits but he is 35 right now. At the end of the day your ultimate question of is he a hall of famer is very difficult to answer because we don't have complete information. I agree with you that if he continues to get 200 hits a year for the next five years he would be a hall of famer but nobody knows that and we are at the point now of debating what ifs.

[Tedaldtada]

He deserves his name on the ballot if he continues to be productive, but in no way should he get in. The Molitor comp is insulting to Molitor.

[gregmag]

Through age 34:

Young

7369 PA, 2061 H, 388 2B, 169 HR, 87 SB, 499/1052 BB/K, .304/.350/.451, 106 OPS+, 34.8 oWAR

 

Molitor

7742 PA, 2086 H, 369 2B, 148 HR, 381 SB, 682/816 BB/K, .302/.365/.442, 124 OPS+, 53.5 oWAR

 

They have similar counting stats but that is only because of the different eras they played in. Molitor was a much better hitter, not even close. Using bb-ref neutralizer tool, here are Young's stats if he played for the 1989 Brewers his entire career:

 

1930 H, 161 HR, .290/.335/.432

 

And here is Molitor through age 34 playing for the 2007 Rangers:

2359 H, 165 HR, .324/.389/.472

 

And another reason they are bad comps is because Molitor had one of the best late careers of all-time so its not a good idea to expect an average player to live up to Molitors post 34 standards.

 

Hit leaders from age 35 on

 
Rk Player H Age PA
1 Pete Rose 1709 35-45 6648
2 Sam Rice 1574 35-44 5341
3 Honus Wagner 1288 35-43 4866
4 Paul Molitor 1233 35-41 4425
5 Carl Yastrzemski 1152 35-43 4876
6 Ty Cobb 1136 35-41 3720
7 Craig Biggio 1091 35-41 4602
8 Omar Vizquel 1080 35-44 4552
9 Carlton Fisk 1043 35-45 4570
10 Edgar Martinez 1037 35-41 4085
11 Stan Musial 1033 35-42 3905

 

So Michael Young will need to get the 4th most hits ever after the age of 34 so stay on pace with Molitor's counting stats, but he has never done anything ever good enough to be 4th all-time

 

This is a fantastic post. The whole discussion has been really informative. The Molitor-Young comparison provides a great example of why you can't just compare counting stats across eras without adjusting for context. To say that Young compares well to Molitor is to say that MLB in the 2000s has the same offense-defense balance it did in the 1980s. That just isn't accurate.

 

I like the Garvey comparison; another comp from that era who comes to mind is Buddy Bell. Also Harold Baines, Vada Pinson, and Al Oliver, who were better hitters (much better in Baines' case) but didn't play a premium defensive position. All of those guys played well and stuck around forever, but they simply weren't great. Michael Young, pretty clearly to me, has never been great. Valuable? Yes. Above average? Sure. But great? Show me where Michael Young has dominated the league, or carried his team on his back. He gets a lot of hits because he piles up ABs, partially because he doesn't walk. He plays ss, which is nice, but he doesn't play it well. Nothing special here.

[berniebrewer4life]

I am saying this should NOT be a Young vs Molitor comparison since they aren't close. If the argument for Young is that all he has to do is match Molitor's numbers post age 34 then that is unlikely to happen.

 

Also, how is Michael Young the 3rd fastest to reach 2000 hits? What does that mean, 3rd least PA to reach 2000 Hs? No. 3rd least ABs? No. 3rd youngest? No.

 

Michael Young has a 106 OPS+, so hes a little above average on offense, and way below average on D so overall he is an average player. 11 full seasons with 26.9 WAR = 2.4 WAR/season = slightly above average player.

 

Yep, that's pretty much all that needs to be said. If the guy gets to 3000, he will get in. Chances are he won't, so he won't get in. He'd make the Hall of Very Good, but not the Hall of Fame, IMO.

[topper09er]

Least games to reach 2000 hits for a RH hitter: (pretty weak argument to begin with, conveniently throw out many of the best players all-time, not to mention that by using games you are rewarding Young for not walking very much)

 

1393 Al Simmons (from Milwaukee)

~1414 Nap Lajoie (exact game not known but likely would fall here)

1462 Rogers Hornsby

1495 Ducky Medwick

~1515 Honus Wagner (exact game not known but likely would fall here)

1537 Joe DiMaggio

1542 Kirby Puckett

1571 Derek Jeter

1586 Pie Traynor

1593 Hank Aaron

1609 Harry Heilmann

1615 Billy Herman

1621 Michael Young

 

So Young is not 3rd on this list

[bobbledude25]

Yes Topper - A huge apology owed to you. He's 11th and 3rd all-time by a right handed hitter. My mistake, it won't happen again. friends?

[topper09er]

Yes Topper - A huge apology owed to you. He's 11th and 3rd all-time by a right handed hitter. My mistake, it won't happen again. friends?

 

What? I made that manually and missed Wagner, Lajoie and Aaron originally, but I think I got them all now. He is the 13th fastest RH hitter to reach 2000 hits by games played, and he did that with a .304 BA because he never walks. Not very impressive, and given he is a DH with little power who cant contribute on D makes it unlikely he will continue. If he reaches 3000 hits he will get in the HOF and be in the same boat as Lou Brock (3000 hits but not HOF worthy)

[bobbledude25]

Umm ok, on behalf of Michael Young and him not walking, I'd like to apologize for him making consistent contact.

 

Anyways, I'm surprised nobody has brought into account World Series wins. What if he gets 3 rings before he retires? It seems more and more to be a swing vote for the Hall of Fame. Especially in a sport like basketball.

[thebruce44]

It would be really funny if Michael Young became a first ballot HOF'er. At no point in his career have I ever watched him and thought, "Wow, this is one of the greatest players in the 130 year history of baseball."

 

A lot of people said the same thing about Yount and Molitor too. It was only later in their careers did people start really appreciating them fully.

 

Then those people are idiots. Pretty sure Yount was recognized for his 1982 season when he won an MVP award at age 26. He posted an 11.5 WAR and an OPS+ of 166 as a SS. He led the league in hitting. That may have been one of the top 5 seasons ever by any MLB player. Young doesn't belong in the same sentence as Yount, barring a Bonds-like steroidal rise to greatness in his late 30s.

[thebruce44]

Umm ok, on behalf of Michael Young and him not walking, I'd like to apologize for him making consistent contact.

 

You know who actually has an even better contact percentage than Young? Yuniesky Betancourt.

 

This isn't a reason someone is considered a good hitter, let alone HOF worthy.

[jerichoholicninja]

Anyways, I'm surprised nobody has brought into account World Series wins. What if he gets 3 rings before he retires? It seems more and more to be a swing vote for the Hall of Fame. Especially in a sport like basketball.

 

He won't win 3 rings in the few years he has left and if he does anyone that would vote for him because of that needs to have their voting privileges taken away. Winning championships is completely irrelevant to a players value in baseball.

[RockCoCougars]

I started the Molitor/Young comparison solely based on counting stats at the age of 35. No doubt that Molitor was the better player. Imagine the numbers that he'd have put up had he not spent a good chunk of the 80's sporting some type of cast or sling. Regarding Young, his HOF chances are pretty much 100 percent correlated to 3,000 hits. I'd say the odds that he gets there are pretty long- maybe 10-20%. Most guys regress big time after they hit 35. Then again, most guys don't come out of nowhere with a career year at 34 like Young did last season after being on the trade block all winter, so I guess that there's a chance. To me, it's tough to find a good comparison to Young considering that he's been mostly a shortstop with a bad glove (which has killed his WAR, and as a result his standing among the all time greats with those who put a ton of stock in it). Before the 80's, with notable exceptions, most shortstops were good glove/no hit guys, and Young is basically all hit/no glove. As pointed out, the relatively low OPS+ will kill him as well.

[TooLiveBrew]

Young's a singles & doubles hitter who has never been a plus defender. He's been a good player.

 

Why am I not surprised that there are instantly people claiming that, if you say Young isn't HOF-caliber, you're "hating"? Yuni wasn't really that terrible, he was just misunderstood, just like Young -- he's a HOF caliber player! Think of it, Mantle, Aaron, Mays... Michael Young. I mean, who hasn't thought of that at some point while marveling at the durable above-average-ness that is Young's game?

[RockCoCougars]

Just thought of probably the best comparison that I can come up with for Young, and that'd be Julio Franco. Plus bat, bad glove. Looking at his stats, he had less power but more speed, and he was moved off shortstop relatively early in his career (for Jay Bell, I believe) to due a bad glove. Though I will say that if Young has half the longevity that Julio did, he's a lock for 3,000.

[endaround]

Larkin's wRC is 122. That's HoF.

[bobbledude25]

Umm ok, on behalf of Michael Young and him not walking, I'd like to apologize for him making consistent contact.

 

You know who actually has an even better contact percentage than Young? Yuniesky Betancourt.

 

This isn't a reason someone is considered a good hitter, let alone HOF worthy.

 

 

 

I thought it would go w/o saying that he's a player who makes consistent contact that also happens to be a lifetime .304 hitter but I guess not

[topper09er]

I thought it would go w/o saying that he's a player who makes consistent contact that also happens to be a lifetime .304 hitter but I guess not

 

Except he does not make consistent contact, he just has a lot of hits because he rarely walks. He does strikeout a lot at 14.6% (near league average over his career) but does not have the power numbers to show for the Ks. A .304 average is not good enough to justify the low number of walks. This is reflected in his pedestrian 106 OPS+ or 107 wRC+

 

Also the BA is not as good as it looks because of the high offensive era and park Young has spent his entire career in.

[gregmag]

I thought it would go w/o saying that he's a player who makes consistent contact that also happens to be a lifetime .304 hitter but I guess not

 

Except he does not make consistent contact, he just has a lot of hits because he rarely walks. He does strikeout a lot at 14.6% (near league average over his career) but does not have the power numbers to show for the Ks. A .304 average is not good enough to justify the low number of walks. This is reflected in his pedestrian 106 OPS+ or 107 wRC+

 

Also the BA is not as good as it looks because of the high offensive era and park Young has spent his entire career in.

 

To put the point another way, or maybe this is a complementary point: something like 65% of Young's contact results in outs. (I'm not sure of his exact BABIP.) Making outs hurts your team. Zero percent of walks result in outs. So by lacking the ability to turn some of those contact PAs into walks, Young is hurting his team at the margin.

 

The guy uses up an unbelievable number of outs, which is to say opportunities -- 460 per 162 games. He has a career secondary average of .229. He's a bad shortstop. He basically has to hit .320 to be useful.

[bobbledude25]

Just a quick note here since it seems like some people have missed this... Elvis Andrus plays shortstop currently for the Texas Rangers

[topper09er]

Just a quick note here since it seems like some people have missed this... Elvis Andrus plays shortstop currently for the Texas Rangers

 

Who cares, we are talking about Michael Young who was a bad fielding SS/3B and a weak hitting DH.

[bobbledude25]

Yes, thank you again Topper. I remember who my post is about.

 

Were also debating whether Michael Young a 'bad fielding SS/3B and a weak hitting DH" that's a lifetime .304 hitter, 2,061 hits, 6 time all-star, 1 Gold Glove (must have been a fluke), All-Star game MVP is worthy of Hall of Fame consideration.