“He didn’t get to hit against Rangers pitching.”
So let’s go to check out the quality of pitchers each faced, and find that Aybar faced pitchers who gave up an OPS of .733. Young faced pitchers who gave up an OPS of .727. Negligible.

“that’s comparing ripe apples and very raw oranges.”
Actually, the argument I’m making isn’t that Aybar will be as good as Young. It’s that in 2008 Aybar was as good as Young. That his value as a no-hit, great-field shortstop was as much as Young’s as a OK-hit, OK-field shortstop. Since you didn’t argue that point, let’s proceed in agreement, and replace the key words in your metaphor: “It’s comparing [fruit near the end of its useful life] to [fruit at the beginning of its useful life.]” Now choose. Seriously, a 24-year-old likely entering his peak or a 32-year-old leaving it? Easy.

“Young had a slight off year. It can happen. Mike Lowell had one, got traded, and wound up World Series MVP.” Ah, the Mike Lowell argument. Naming an outlier isn’t an argument. Or it is, in which case I’ll just say Andruw Jones was a regular All-Star coming off two MVP-type seasons who had an off-year in 2007. Then in 2008 he was the worst hitter in baseball. Yay, I win. But not really because an outlier isn’t an argument. (I’d bet there are a lot more down seasons followed by down seasons than followed by World Series MVPs though.)

“And, even though I’ve never swung a bat on the professional level, I wouldn’t be surprised if broken fingers were an obstacle.”
Well, sure, but let’s read TO THE END of my original sentence: “he’d already begun striking out more and hitting for less power in 2007 and the first half of 2008.” That would be before the broken finger.

Actually, Mark, here’s a bit of fun with logic: It makes exactly as much sense as someone denigrating Pat Burrell and championing Michael Young simultaneously, as you have done. See how that works? :)

It’s also hilarious to hear someone championing Pat Burrell and denigrating Michael Young simultaneously. Ah, the omniscience of OPS-plus. Take one dose and never bother with actually watching a baseball game again!

And, as far as the Aybar/Young comparison goes, that’s comparing ripe apples and very raw oranges. At least we’ve seen Young perform at an All-Star level for several years. We haven’t had a chance to see that from Aybar yet. Young had a slight off year. It can happen. Mike Lowell had one, got traded, and wound up World Series MVP.

And, even though I’ve never swung a bat on the professional level, I wouldn’t be surprised if broken fingers were an obstacle.

But it’s not worth wasting breath on Young coming to the Angels, for several reasons.

Young makes too much money and would improve the Angels. That means it ain’t gonna happen.

And, more seriously, the Rangers would want pitching in any trade and the Angels can’t afford to give any.

And it’s not good when someone gets his nose out of joint because he’s asked to help the team by playing third base, which has its own challenges. I mean, it’s not like the Rangers are asking Josh Hamilton to catch. Young has already moved from 2B.

But I imagine the Angels pitchers would love to see Young move somewhere. Like Pittsburgh.

Please explain. Not sure what you’re getting at, but I’d like to have an answer.

Park effect is a very, very small part of my comparison between Aybar and Young. The big part is that Young is a better hitter by about the same margin as Aybar is a better fielder. I noted (in the comments) that Young reaches base and hits for power at only a moderately higher rate than Aybar; it’s even less so because of their ballparks. That’s all.