Despite the club's denial that they are interested in a deal for Rangers infielder Michael Young, the Cardinals keep popping up in relation to his name on the rumor mill.
Texas would certainly have to pay a huge chunk of Young's $48 million paycheck over the next three years to move him. But I still think the Cardinals would have financial problems making a deal happen. Their payroll is at a club record $108 million after the addition of Lance Berkman and the retention of Jake Westbrook. So it's hard to imagine the club taking on any additional payroll. Especially with its hands tied by the Albert Pujols standoff.
If Pujols isn't signed in the next week, we may not have a clear picture of the Redbirds' financial flexibility to close to this time next year. i would view a deal for Young as a sign that the team was raising the white flag in its effort to bring Albert back.
The latest reports out of Arlington say that the Rockies, considered for the last couple of weeks to be the favorite to land the versatile slugging infielder, are no longer interested in making a deal. Supposedly the Rangers scared off Colorado with demands for a "big name player" in return for a guy they continuously displaced around the infield to make room for other players -- from short to second to third.
Never miss a local story.
Who would fit that bill on the Cardinals roster?
Ten bucks says the first words out of the Rangers GM would be Colby and Rasmus. That ain't happening. Who in their right mind would trade a cheap power hitting outfielder for a long in the tooth, extremely costly infielder? I don't know who else Texas would consider a "name" player besides Adam Wainwright and Chris Carpenter. And they'd also be on my untouchable list if I was John Mozeliak.
In short, even if the Redbirds wanted Young, I can't imagine a trade match.