Jed Lowrie and Chris Young Not Hesitating to Show Their Value to Oakland A's
The two biggest acquisitions by the Oakland A's this past offseason have not hesitated to show the Oakland A's what they are capable of.
In the first four games of the 2013 season, the A's saw just how important Jed Lowrie (acquired via trade from Houston) and Chris Young (acquired via trade with Arizona) are to the success of the A's as they defend the division title.
After losing the first two games to the Seattle Mariners, Manager Bob Melvin inserted Young into the lineup. The A's are 2-0 when Lowrie and Young start together.
Back in spring, there were questions about whether or not these guys, particularly Young, would be able to squeeze playing time out from the incumbent players.
They have both shown why they should be getting a fair share of at-bats.
Lowrie was assisted by Hiroyuki Nakajima's injury in getting a roster spot. With how Lowrie is playing, though, Nakajima may find himself playing at Triple-A Sacramento when he returns.
As for Young, the A's have a healthy outfield with Coco Crisp, Yoenis Cespedes, Josh Reddick and Seth Smith. Young has had to compete with that foursome, and he has done well. Young played so well in his first game that he managed to push Cespedes to the DH spot for Young to get more playing time in the field.
This is exactly how the A's had to be hoping this would play out. With Young in the starting lineup playing the way he is, you would never know he was the fifth man of the group. The A's will have a great rotation in the outfield to keep everybody involved fresh and avoid fatigue.
Lowrie has been the Young version of the infield. Lowrie has come from behind everybody else to earn his playing time. The A's do have two infielders on the DL in Nakajima and Adam Rosales, but when the two return, they will likely be benched in favor of Lowrie.
Young and Lowrie came into Oakland in search of a role on the team. I think they have both found one.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?