In this video, Jayson Stark makes it very clear he does not follow the Texas Rangers. At around the 20 second mark, he says the Rangers don't have "any other options" at DH.
If anyone reading this thinks the same thing, let me correct you the same way I'm about to correct Mr. Stark: not only do the Texas Rangers have options at DH beside Michael Young, he is not necessarily their best option.
For his career, Mike Napoli has been a better hitter than Young (in a smaller sample size), is younger, and is much better against left handed pitching. The ZiPS projection system expects that to continue.
For his career, David Murphy has also been a better hitter than Young (in a smaller sample size), is younger, and is much better against right handed pitching. The ZiPS projection system expects that to continue. In fact, ZiPS expects Murphy and Napoli to put up park-neutral weighted On Base Averages of about .349 (which is exactly Murphy's career rate) compared to .339 from Young. A platoon of Murphy and Napoli would likely destroy that number, as you would be keeping Murphy away from lefties and Napoli away from righties.
In short, Napoli/Murphy would likely be more productive at DH than Young. Further, you could do something like DH Josh Hamilton and play Murphy in the field, giving you the same offensive advantage plus a better shot at keeping Hamilton healthy.
Young is nice, but expensive, insurance in case of injury or a failure by Mitch Moreland to handle the first base job. He could potentially platoon with Moreland to make first base even better. But it is unlikely (though not impossible) that Young would be the best DH option.
But whether or not he is the best is also not even relevant to Stark's point, which I've also read from multiple other outlets (such as T.R. Sullivan). Beyond whether or not he's the best option, Young is, quite simply, far from the only option for the Rangers at DH. Stop it. Dealing Michael Young hurts the Rangers' depth, it does not create an unfillable hole in the starting lineup.