Are they joking? ESPN ranks Xander Bogaerts above JJ Hardy

[Frobby]

I'm pretty sure this article isn't solely based on defense. You can be a below average defender and still be a damn good shortstop. I'm pretty Derek Jeter can attest to that. Hanley Ramirez is very good, saying otherwise is simply incorrect.

Ramirez at his best is easily the best hitting SS in baseball, and even if his defense is below average, he'd be considered a top flight SS overall. The guy really slacked off in 2010-12, but got his act together last year. It's not unreasonable to rank him near the top IMO.

[gpolee]

It's not nuts; Bogaerts is statistically very impressive. He's only about a half-season behind Manny Machado's age-level curve, and he's hit better than Manny did in the minors.

Ranking Bogaerts ahead of Hardy for this season is pretty aggressive, even so. Manny wasn't a better hitter than Hardy last season (they were about the same), and even though Bogaerts has every chance to turn into a spectacular player, it's not guaranteed that he'll succeed right away.

...in the minors. Ask Justin Smoak if that's a guarantee of MLB success...or 10,000 other guys.

Maybe ESPN was doing their 2016 rankings.

[El Gordo]

I'm pretty sure this article isn't solely based on defense. You can be a below average defender and still be a damn good shortstop. I'm pretty Derek Jeter can attest to that. Hanley Ramirez is very good, saying otherwise is simply incorrect.

Neither Jeter or Hanley have a history of being even average. If you are talking about the best player at the most important defensive position on the team, then to be even considered IMO, they have to be at least a plus defender at the position. Other wise you could stick CD at SS and say he is the best.

[El Gordo]

Ramirez at his best is easily the best hitting SS in baseball, and even if his defense is below average, he'd be considered a top flight SS overall. The guy really slacked off in 2010-12, but got his act together last year. It's not unreasonable to rank him near the top IMO.

This is my problem, for years Ramirez was the worst fielding SS. At what point does that become bogus. If you can't play the position adequately, why should you be credited for being among the best. Especially at SS.

[Stotle]

Neither Jeter or Hanley have a history of being even average. If you are talking about the best player at the most important defensive position on the team, then to be even considered IMO, they have to be at least a plus defender at the position. Other wise you could stick CD at SS and say he is the best.

That doesn't pass the smell test. It's a simple equation of OFFENSE + DEFENSE [+ BASERUNNING] = VALUE. There's no minimum threshold for any of those categories. If the argument is that Ramirez's defense is so bad that it negates his offensive value, we have some basic estimations that can speak to that (dWAR and oWAR). The drop-off from Hanley's defense to Davis' defense at the six spot would be cataclysmic, as Davis would have trouble covering even half of the defensive zone.

[Babypowder]

Ramirez at his best is easily the best hitting SS in baseball, and even if his defense is below average, he'd be considered a top flight SS overall. The guy really slacked off in 2010-12, but got his act together last year. It's not unreasonable to rank him near the top IMO.

He was at 2.9 fWAR in 2012. That isn't exactly chopped liver. He was 9th among shortstops (Hardy was 11th). He was worth over 4 in 2010. He was really only bad in 2011.

[Stotle]

This is my problem, for years Ramirez was the worst fielding SS. At what point does that become bogus. If you can't play the position adequately, why should you be credited for being among the best. Especially at SS.

If he couldn't play it adequately he wouldn't have played it. His "poor" play was still good enough so as not to torpedo his overall value. I think that's the measuring stick. 2010-2012 his offense dipped and the poor defense was no longer being covered. Last year, he was back to an offensive-skewed, but overall very valuable profile.

[Frobby]

He was at 2.9 fWAR in 2012. That isn't exactly chopped liver. He was 9th among shortstops (Hardy was 11th). He was worth over 4 in 2010. He was really only bad in 2011.

I was looking at rWAR: 2.7 in 2010, 0.2 in 2011, 1.3 in 2012. 2.7 is above average, but nowhere near the standards Ramirez had set for himself. That's why I said he slacked off. He's a free agent after this season, so I have little doubt he's coming into 2014 highly motivated to have a great year.

[El Gordo]

If he couldn't play it adequately he wouldn't have played it. His "poor" play was still good enough so as not to torpedo his overall value. I think that's the measuring stick. 2010-2012 his offense dipped and the poor defense was no longer being covered. Last year, he was back to an offensive-skewed, but overall very valuable profile.

Do you really think Jeter plays SS adequately? I can see this maybe holding true for a COF or IF, bit not a MIF. Hanley played SS on the Marlins because his bat was sexy. On another team he would have been a 3B. This list is about hype more than performance.

[Stotle]

I think we are talking defense. You know there have been players who didn't play a position adequately but still played it. Sure, they were probably there for their offense. Even then, some players offense doesn't compensate for how bad they are defensively. That's not a comment specifically to Hanley Ramirez.

I probably didn't make my point clearly. "Adequate" shouldn't be synonymous with "average". You can be a below-average defender and still be adequate. Adequate should be measured in the context of your overall contributions.

[Stotle]

Do you really think Jeter plays SS adequately? I can see this maybe holding true for a COF or IF, bit not a MIF. Hanley played SS on the Marlins because his bat was sexy. On another team he would have been a 3B. This list is about hype more than performance.

Mostly. Maybe not in his late 30s. But generally he was "adequate".

[Stotle]

So everyone is at least adequate until they are moved from the position or sent to the bench, under your definition? If they are playing the position they must be adequate.

I don't know how you got that from the quoted post. Players are "adequate" at a position if their defense doesn't materially negate their overall contribution. You can go into further detail and hypothesize whether the overall contribution would be better at another position, taking into account alternative options at the player's current position.

[Babypowder]

So everyone is at least adequate until they are moved from the position or sent to the bench, under your definition? If they are playing the position they must be adequate.

If they are demonstrating good value while playing the position they are playing it adequately. If their defense is so bad they exhibit negative value, then they aren't.

[BohKnowsBmore]

Do you really think Jeter plays SS adequately? I can see this maybe holding true for a COF or IF, bit not a MIF. Hanley played SS on the Marlins because his bat was sexy. On another team he would have been a 3B. This list is about hype more than performance.

On this note, I'm excited to see grounders up the middle against a Jeter/brob combo.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Frobby]

If they are demonstrating good value while playing the position they are playing it adequately. If their defense is so bad they exhibit negative value, then they aren't.

Right. "Negative value" from a dWAR perspective means you could pick up a AAAA shortstop who is a better defender. That's fine, but your AAAA shortstop also isn't going to post an .880 OPS. It's all a matter of how much offense can you trade off for defense, and WAR purports to measure that. Obviously, the Yankees felt Jeter's offensive value justified leaving him at SS, and the Marlins and the Dodgers have felt the same way about Ramirez (though the Marlins moved him to 3B when they acquired Reyes). So in that sense, their defense is "adequate" to play them at SS due to the advantages they bring with the bat. It wouldn't be adequate if they were mediocre hitters.