Does Brett Lawrie make sense?

[Moondoggie]

18 minutes ago, Superbee83 said:

   Frobby, I'll take your point, it makes sense that the A's would have made this move to add offense to their lineup. However, much like Flaherty's lack of offense is exposed when He plays regularly, I think the fact that Lawrie was not a real good MLB third baseman made this move make even more sense. I think the reality is that being a super sub may be a good role for Lawrie in the future. I believe that He played for the Canadian National Team as a catcher and was converted to the infield after He was drafted. He is young enough to play winter or instructional ball as a catcher. He could possibly reinvent himself as a catcher/corner guy. Plus, I remember when Cervelli played for the Yankees he played some second in addition to catching.

 

 

I don't put much stock in defensive metrics, but I just looked up Lawrie's numbers on Fangraphs and they're actually pretty good at third base. He has seasons of 20 and 11 defensive runs saved under his belt. His UZR ratings were positive too. He wasn't having a very good year in the field with the A's, but he hadn't been bad at all during his years with the Jays. It's at second base where he's been just a bit below average.

[Superbee83]

Just now, Moondoggie said:

I don't put much stock in defensive metrics, but I just looked up Lawrie's numbers on Fangraphs and they're actually pretty good at third base. He has seasons of 20 and 11 defensive runs saved under his belt. His UZR ratings were positive too. He wasn't having a very good year in the field with the A's, but he hadn't been bad at all during his years with the Jays. It's at second base where he's been just a bit below average.

   I don't put that much stock in the defensive metrics either. ( Although maybe I should.) Overall, I have not been that impressed with him defensively at either position when I have seen him play. He is most likely a serviceable defensive player at best. While I get Frobby's point about the A's moving him to second to boost offensive production, I think at least a secondary motive was to move him off of third where He was most likely a disappointment defensively and otherwise.  

 

 

 

[Moondoggie]

23 minutes ago, Superbee83 said:

   I don't put that much stock in the defensive metrics either. ( Although maybe I should.) Overall, I have not been that impressed with him defensively at either position when I have seen him play. He is most likely a serviceable defensive player at best. While I get Frobby's point about the A's moving him to second to boost offensive production, I think at least a secondary motive was to move him off of third where He was most likely a disappointment defensively and otherwise.  

 

 

 

He was never Manny, but he was never a defensive liability at third either. He was immediately worse at second base. Interestingly, the Bill James guys found Lawrie to be the best defensive third baseman in baseball at midseason 2012 (big grain of salt: Pedro Alvarez was third).

Brett Lawrie -- Best Defensive Third Baseman in Baseball?

[Can_of_corn]

2 minutes ago, Moondoggie said:

He was never Manny, but he was never a defensive liability at third either. He was immediately worse at second base. Interestingly, the Bill James guys found Lawrie to be the best defensive third baseman in baseball at midseason 2012 (big grain of salt: Pedro Alvarez was third).

Brett Lawrie -- Best Defensive Third Baseman in Baseball?

Alvarez is a victim of the yips.

[Superbee83]

43 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

 

  Ok, so it makes sense for a team to weaken two positions (defensively) by moving Lawrie to another position and replacing him with an inferior defender? Wow, Thanks for clearing that up for me. 

 

  

[FlipTheBird]

On March 3, 2017 at 7:38 PM, backwardsk said:

According to some, Donaldson is better than Machado.  He also had more years under control than Manny has now.  So why should we expect a much better return?  

As others have noted, that package was viewed as lacking by a lot of folks.

At the same time, though, you can't look at it in hindsight and say "See, the O's wouldn't get a good return for Machado." All of those young players were well thought of when acquired. That's the risk with trading for prospects. A lot of the time, they don't turn out.

[OriolesMagic83]

Lawrie being a little better than Andino highlights how bad the Donaldson trade was for the A's.  Whenever the O's trade Manny, which seems inevitable, they had better get a much better package.  Riot police might be needed to police the the board. 

[Larry18]

7 hours ago, Moondoggie said:

He was never Manny, but he was never a defensive liability at third either. He was immediately worse at second base. Interestingly, the Bill James guys found Lawrie to be the best defensive third baseman in baseball at midseason 2012 (big grain of salt: Pedro Alvarez was third).

Brett Lawrie -- Best Defensive Third Baseman in Baseball?

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=17183

 

Bill James has/had a business relationship with BIS, the developer of DRS

[backwardsk]

Royals, Rays, Jays, and Mets are showing interest.

[BohKnowsBmore]

On 3/5/2017 at 11:56 AM, Moondoggie said:

He was never Manny, but he was never a defensive liability at third either. He was immediately worse at second base. Interestingly, the Bill James guys found Lawrie to be the best defensive third baseman in baseball at midseason 2012 (big grain of salt: Pedro Alvarez was third).

Brett Lawrie -- Best Defensive Third Baseman in Baseball?

Didn't that end up being the result of shifts not being properly accounted for?

 

EDIT - Read the link and see that it is the subject of discussion

[WEAVERMAN]

God help us, no Lawrie.  He was kicked out of CHI because he will not play unless he's 100%.  And when he's 100% and playing, he's not good.  No thanks.

[sportsfan8703]

Seems like kind of a jerk.  He's better than Flaherty and could see some AB's with Hardy banged up, but I don't know if he's a Buck kind of guy.