How about this guy for SS?

[Mackus]

What manager was it that said, "pitching, defense, and the three run HR"? Was it the same guy who played Mark Belanger at SS? Say LH gets to two balls that Tejada doesn't per game. That's 324 extra hits a year. How many runs does that translate into. How many extra pitches does the SP have to throw ? How many game situations would we be out of if the play had been made. How much more effective would a GB pitcher like Bradford be? How many of those 31 1 run losses might we have won last year? How do you find a number to answer these questions?

But it goes both ways. How many of those 1-run losses would we have won if we had 2 more runs on the board?

And there is no chance in hell Hernandez would get to 2 balls a game that Tejada wouldn't. I know some scout said something like that earlier about Tejada, but think about how ridiculous of a statement that is. Two balls a game is an enormous difference, it would probably be much larger than the gap between the best and worst defensive SS in the league. We're talking more along the lines of tenths of a ball per game, if that.

[Mackus]

And that is dependent on how you value his defense, which you don't even seem to take into consideration.

I clearly said I haven't seen any of these guys play D, so I don't know who can be an average defender and who can't.

But I can guarantee that Luis Hernandez' defense isn't good enough to make him better than a guy with league average defense and a 100 point higher OPS. Find a guy who can put up a .650-.700 OPS and play league average defense and you've got a guy who is much better than Hernandez.

[El Gordo]

I clearly said I haven't seen any of these guys play D, so I don't know who can be an average defender and who can't.

But I can guarantee that Luis Hernandez' defense isn't good enough to make him better than a guy with league average defense and a 100 point higher OPS. Find a guy who can put up a .650-.700 OPS and play league average defense and you've got a guy who is much better than Hernandez.

Exactly. Would you be happy with Tejada if he was putting up .650 OPS? Is Tejada a better fielder than Freddie Bynum? None of the guys you recommended except for Rouse have played more than 70 games at SS in the past 3 years.Would they be any good at SS, if they were playing more games at 1B, 2B, 3B and OF? Of course I would rather have Hu at SS next year, but I'm not sure I would rather have Freddie Bynum or his equivalent and neither apparantly is DT.

[RShack]

I'll stand by my (crude) assessment that LH's glove doesn't make enough of a difference to offset what will in all likelihood be a very inferior bat.

When it comes to runs, I'll concede the point. Regardless of the stats themselves, I think you're being fair about it. But that says zip about the non-stats part of the total-equation. So, we're left with the question about how many runs are they willing to spend in 2008 in order to get the pitcher-development environment they want. I can imagine that AM is willing to give up some 2008 runs (which aren't gonna make much difference anyway) to purchase a better development environment that he thinks will pay dividends later, in seasons where wins will count for more than a couple '08-wins matter.

My two favorite managers were Earl Weaver and Davey Johnson. I'd bet money that neither would hesitate to use a lesser defensive SS if there was a potential 100 point difference in OPS.

How modifiable is your belief system? I ask because that appears to be a statement-of-faith despite the available evidence:

• Earl played Belanger's .580 OPS for almost his entire career. You don't think Earl could have yelled for more bat at SS if he really wanted to? When he finally did play somebody else, it was Kiko Garcia!
• In Davey's first year, he got .800+ out of both his SS and his 3B. He did this despite his wish that Cal would move, simply because Cal didn't want to. The next year, he replaced Cal with a good-D SS whose OPS was .601 and was quite happy with what he had. No matter how you look at it, he pushed for a big net reduction in SS OPS to get better D. No way around it.

I have no idea why you would bet that both Earl and Davey would do the exact opposite of what they actually chose to do.

[El Gordo]

The same manager who moved Cal Ripken to SS (even though he didn't really know how good he would be) because he loved the idea of having the extra offense from a defensive position.

The same manager who began a season with Eddie Murray at 3B and Doug Decinces at 2B so that he could get more offense.

The same manager who wanted Earl Williams and his bat even though he didn't have a great reputation defensively.

The same manager who first wanted Bobby Grich to be his SS because he was so much better offensively than Belanger.

The same manager who chose to give more playing time at SS to Kicko Garcia over Belanger.

You seemed to miss what I was really saying about Weaver valuing offense. Belanger was so much better than the average SS defensively that Weaver probably felt he needed, I don't know, a 150 point difference OPS (just to throw a number out there) to justify replacing him.

By the way, Weaver's statement was actually "Pitching, Fundamentals, and the 3-run homer."

You need a team with a good collective OBP to hit a lot of 3-run HRs. Weaver woudln't go into next season with a SS projected to finish with a sub-.290 OBP on that team.

Keep in mind that the teams Belanger played on were so much better offensively at other positions than this team figures to be next year. Weaver could afford to carry a lesser bat - especially since that lesser bat was so much better defensively.

Also, was Belanger really so much worse than the average SS during his time?

Year - MB / AL Avg SS - Diff

1969 - .696 / .681 - +15

1970 - .562 / .658 - -96

1971 - .685 / .612 - +73

1972 - .482 / .584 - -102 (only 285 ABs)

1973 - .564 / .589 - -25

1974 - .598 / .633 - -35

1975 - .562 / .610 - -48

1976 - .662 / .615 - +47

1977 - .561 / .629 - -68

1978 - .549 / .640 - -91 (only 348 ABs)

Average difference - -26

Take out the two seasons in which he had fewer than 400 ABs, and the average difference falls to (-)8. The only "full" season in which Belanger was close to 100 OPS points worse than the average AL SS was 1970 - and that team was loaded offensively at the other positions.

Now compare the LH projection I provided earlier (.607 OPS) to the 2007 AL average SS (.713). He's projected to post an OPS 106 points lower than a league average SS while playing on a bad offensive team. There is no doubt in my mind at all that Weaver would play a lesser defensive SS ahead of LH in 2008.

Why? Weaver wasn't managing a rebuilding team that was hoping to develop around it's SP. If he was I bet he would value the defense at SS. We aren't trying to contend next year. To get something better than Freddie Bynum at SS for next year we will have to trade a prospect. Why do that? For a few extra runs in a rebuilding year? Nobody is suggesting that LH is the guy we want at SS in the WS. We are really talking about weither we should play Bynum over LH next year.

[RShack]

Ultimately, they replaced Jeffrey (.684 1996 OPS) Hammonds with Mike (.625 1996 OPS) Bordick. Knowing DJ's fondness for stats I'd bet he compared the 59 point drop in OPS to the improved defense and felt the tradeoff was well worth it.

Well, shouldn't you be adjusting for Luke Scott's upgrade over Payton in LF, and subtracting that gain from the SS loss? Same thing. Dunno what answer you get, especially when you do the back-of-the-envelope D-vs-O calc. But whatever it is, that's how many 2008-runs they'd be spending for the better environment they want, right?

[RShack]

Absolutely.

The problem is that unlike the 1996 team, this one lacks offense at more than just one position. The 1996 team had an overall OPS of at least .775 at 7 of 9 positions. Fast forward to 2007, and they had an overall OPS of at least .775 at 4 of 9 positions.

This team can't afford to take a step back offensively at any position.

Well, it's not really about 2008-runs, is it? It's really about all the runs that the if-fy kid pitchers are not gonna give up in '09 and '10, assuming they get confident and competent and aren't if-fy anymore. You know that's how AM is thinking about things. So, IMO, if you're looking at just '08 runs, then you're looking in the wrong place. Not that '08 doesn't matter, but rather that '08 matters in more ways than just-'08. So part of this is spending '08-runs to get more of them back in the years after '08. (Which prolly makes DT a little bit nervous ;-)

[El Gordo]

I disagree that we're talking about a choice of LH or Bynum at SS.

In fact, if they were my only two choices, I'd pick LH as well. Using the method I used earlier (even though you disagree with it), Bynum is projected to create 52 runs next year over 450 ABs while LH is projected to create 41. There's no doubt in my mind that LH would be 11 runs better defensively than Bynum.

We're talking about replacing LH with a league average SS offensively and defensively. Bynum certainly isn't a league average SS defensively - in fact, he isn't even projected to be a league average SS offensively next season.

League average defensively is Tejada, offensively is around .740 OPS.

Check out the MiL FA available and see how many guys you find that you think will fit these requirements. Most of them are playing more 2B, 3B, and OF, which should tell you something about their defense at SS. Most of them look like Bynum.

[El Gordo]

I'm looking at '08 runs scored and allowed.

Yes, it's easier to pitch if you have a good to great D behind you, but it's also easier to pitch when you know your offense is going to consistently give you a decent amount of runs to work with. So no, I don't think I'm looking in the wrong place by looking at run scoring potential.

The difference of 50-100 points OPS at one position is not going to change the SP's perception of the offense that much. Not as much as knowing they have a guy who can go get the ball up the middle.

[El Gordo]

I'm not talking just one position. Are you really that dense?

As for your other post, the average AL SS posted a .713 OPS last year. You'll also notice that I have not said anything about signing one of those scrub minor leaguers. The only time I mentioned Bynum is after you brought him up.

I'm talking generalities here. You wrote something to the effect that LH's defense would make up for a loss of 100 points of OPS, and then some. I showed one model which proved that to be wrong, and you have done nothing to refute that.

Want something not so general? The Orioles should make a trade for someone who figures to be at least a league average SS. The "great defense" that LH will supposedly provide (which I've yet to see any proof of other than an opinion) will not make up for his lack of offense. Period.

I'm saying that you can't quntify the value of defense so glibly as you seem to do. There is no statistical consensus on how to measure it accurately and equate it with offensive numbers. I'm not saying that LH's defense would make up for x number of OPS, I'm saying we can't tell how much value it adds. I'm all for getting a good young SS in trade this year. Bynum is a good example of the kind of MiL FA SS we are likely to get as a stop gap, that everyone seems to feel grow on trees and will be better than LH as a stop gap. My league average numbers come from from this article which I think is pretty good as a ball park estimate for what to expect from each position. http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=6516&mode=print&nocache=1185737407

[Sports Guy]

I can't believe how good some of you think LH is defensively and it is amazing you don't think players like him are out there.

Its almost as if you have never read a scouting report, been to a baseball game or read about how SS is such an important position in foreign countries...There are tons of these guys out there.

Goes back to the bottom line...Starting LH at SS, for any reason other than injury, is absolutely stupid.

Just because DT thinks it is a good idea doesn't mean it is.

[Sports Guy]

I'm saying that you can't quntify the value of defense so glibly as you seem to do. There is no statistical consensus on how to measure it accurately and equate it with offensive numbers. I'm not saying that LH's defense would make up for x number of OPS, I'm saying we can't tell how much value it adds. I'm all for getting a good young SS in trade this year. Bynum is a good example of the kind of MiL FA SS we are likely to get as a stop gap, that everyone seems to feel grow on trees and will be better than LH as a stop gap. My league average numbers come from from this article which I think is pretty good as a ball park estimate for what to expect from each position. http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=6516&mode=print&nocache=1185737407

So, if you can't tell "for real", why on earth would you pin your hopes on that and ONLY that?

Why not just get the better all around player???(which wouldn't be hard to do)

[OsEatAlEast]

I can't believe how good some of you think LH is defensively and it is amazing you don't think players like him are out there.

Its almost as if you have never read a scouting report, been to a baseball game or read about how SS is such an important position in foreign countries...There are tons of these guys out there.

Goes back to the bottom line...Starting LH at SS, for any reason other than injury, is absolutely stupid.

Just because DT thinks it is a good idea doesn't mean it is.

I think what is happening here is alot of us got spoiled by Mike Bordick. When a ball got hit up the middle you would inevitably see Bordick at least try to make a play on it. Tejada on the other hand would position himself so that he could almost shake hands with Mora, and would most times not even be in the picture on a ball up the middle. Let alone try to make a play on it.

I think people see a little bit of Bordick in Hernandez. Which is okay if he can hit as well as Bordick.

That being said I really hope Mike Bordick comes back in some kind of coaching or advisory position for the O's. I kind of miss him being around the O's.

[Sports Guy]

I think what is happening here is alot of us got spoiled by Mike Bordick. When a ball got hit up the middle you would inevitably see Bordick at least try to make a play on it. Tejada on the other hand would position himself so that he could almost shake hands with Mora, and would most times not even be in the picture on a ball up the middle. Let alone try to make a play on it.

I think people see a little bit of Bordick in Hernandez. Which is okay if he can hit as well as Bordick.

That being said I really hope Mike Bordick comes back in some kind of coaching or advisory position for the O's. I kind of miss him being around the O's.

I disagree...This is why people think he is OK option:

1) The team played well when he started and Miggy was on the DL.

2) His BA was(a very lucky and empty) 290.

3) His OPS was(a very lucky and empty) 660ish.

4) And that the Orioles have won in the past with no hit SS(like you are kind of saying here)...Of course, that has nothing to do with anything and it is poor reasoning but whatever.

Those are your reasons...Had his BABIP been normal and his OPS was under 600 and his BA was 240ish and had the Orioles been under 500 with him on the team, I doubt people would be saying he is any kind of an option.

Instead, some people(funny how it is basically 2 HOers compared to several hundred)think he would be ok because:

1) He is a great defensive player(of course, they have almost no basis for this right now)

2) AM and DT say it is ok..."How dare anyone attempt to question someone who has that job?"

[Mackus]

2) AM and DT say it is ok..."How dare anyone attempt to question someone who has that job?"

I'm not even sure these guys think he'd be an ok option. They are just saying that in the case that he remains the best option. He is most likely the best option within the organization. Mora or Bynum would possibly be better, but its also possible that Hernandez would be better than them at SS.

What is unquestionable, is that Hernandez is a terrible major league starting shortstop. He'd be easy to improve upon without giving up much or anything. I'm also of the opinion that he has little potential for improvement, and therefore his age isn't a benefit to me. So I'd rather start a 28 y/o guy who would perform better this season than Hernandez.