There is a buffet of news items to write about, and we'll start with a dollop of the Hall of Fame.
Dish:
Rickey Henderson received votes from 511 voters. His name was left off 28 ballots, leaving his 94.8 vote percentage well short of Tom Seaver's record percentage of 98.8 percent.
| Olney's news and notes |
• Another controversial Hall vote
• Glavine's rehab delayed
• Astros sign their closer
• Cameron-Swisher deal a no-go
• Will Pettitte send Clemens to jail?
Around the majors with Buster Olney 
|
Digestion: It's a reasonable assumption that Henderson's vote total might've been diminished by a steroid-era protest, with some writers choosing to submit blank ballots. Because those writers aren't sure who did and who didn't take steroids, they'd rather not vote for anybody. It's a stand based on principle. Although I don't vote that way, I understand and respect that point of view.
But some probably chose not to vote for Henderson based on some self-imposed I-never-vote-for-the-guy-in-his-first-year-on-the-ballot principle. Others forgot to vote. Others saw some small pimple on his playing record or didn't like his unusual personality. Sadly, individual ballots like those make all writers look silly.
Dish:
Mark McGwire's vote percentage in the Hall of Fame balloting went down from a high of 23.6 percent to 21.9 percent this year.
Digestion: So much for the theory that McGwire's vote total would climb after his first year of eligibility. I've voted for McGwire in each of his three years of eligibility. But whether you think McGwire should be in or out, it is evident that a large core of Hall of Fame voters will never cast ballots for the slugger because of his prominent connection to the issue of performance-enhancing drugs.
This is why I don't think either
Barry Bonds or
Roger Clemens will ever be elected to the Hall of Fame once their names begin to appear on the ballot.
Dish:
Michael Young wants to be traded after being told the Rangers want to move him from shortstop to third base to facilitate the ascension of
Elvis Andrus, Richard Durrett writes.
Digestion: Many rival executives and even some agents have little sympathy for Young, and some are flat-out appalled by his response. "The guy is well-compensated by the Rangers, and the Rangers are asking him to make a change that they think is good for the team," one executive said. "They should tell him, 'You're unhappy? OK, would you like to void your contract?' And of course the answer would be no."
Said another official: "What a joke. It's all about him, and not about the Rangers."
There is unanimity among executives I spoke with Monday on this point: It will be very, very difficult for Texas Rangers general manager
Jon Daniels to arrange a suitable trade of Young because of his enormous contract. But Young's deal is loaded with deferred money, which diminishes the real value of the contract. Here is his pay schedule:
• 2009 salary: $11 million, with $870,000 deferred
• 2010: $11 million, with $870,000 deferred
• 2011: $12 million, with $2,500,000 deferred
• 2012: $12 million, $2,500,000 deferred
• 2013: $13 million, $2,500,000 deferred
Young's average annual salary is $11.8 million, and the total amount of deferred money in his deal will turn out to be $13.648 million, with payments beginning in 2016.
To put this contract in perspective in the current market:
Orlando Hudson is a free agent. He is not in Young's class as a hitter but is an excellent defensive player and at 31 is a year younger than Young. So if Young is a Grade A player, Hudson is a B-plus/A-minus type of guy -- and there is a perception among some executives that Hudson would be fortunate to get two years and $20 million this winter. But the real value of Young's deal is $62 million.
To trade Young, the Rangers likely would have to eat a huge chunk of his contract and accept a deal that probably would not yield topflight prospects.
Put it this way," one GM said. "If the Rangers offered up Michael Young for
free -- with that contract, I don't think there would be any takers."
Said another GM: "Good luck moving that contract."
There is some question among rival executives about how much production Young would generate outside the bandbox in Arlington, where his OPS in the past three seasons
has been 100 points higher than it has been on the road.
And, fair or not, the idea that Young -- who has had a pristine reputation in the game -- is balking at a position change raises doubts about what kind of employee he will be in the last years of his career. "I'm curious to see whether
Nolan Ryan (the Rangers' president) comes out and says something about this," an AL GM said. "He's all old-school, and this can't be sitting well with him."
Young spoke with Ryan on Monday and
was in a much better frame of mind afterward, Tim Cowlishaw writes. Ryan thinks Young's
feelings were hurt, Jim Reeves writes. Jeff Wilson considers
a possible market for Young.
Dish: The Braves are preparing an offer to
Derek Lowe.
Digestion: It's been a tough winter for the Braves, and you understand their push to add a starting pitcher. But Lowe never was their first or even their second choice, and you wonder whether they would be well-served to take the same approach to the bidding that other teams have taken this winter: Just wait for the prices to drop.
The Mets are doing just that. They have talked about giving Lowe a deal for three years and $36 million but have not been bidding upward because they decided that no matter what happens, they'll get somebody good, whether it'll be Lowe,
Oliver Perez or
Randy Wolf. There just aren't many teams making eight-figure offers to pitchers, and if the Braves don't add Lowe, they'll probably sign Perez or Wolf for less money. Waiting around might be a route preferred to paying big money to Lowe, a pitcher the Braves never seemed to target seriously until they lost
John Smoltz to the Red Sox.
Update: The Mets will not end up with Lowe, who agreed in principle to a
four-year, $60 million deal with the Braves on Tuesday.
Around the majors with Buster Olney
Buster Olney
