What to do at SS?

[bobmc]

9 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Sure.  But from 2015-2019 he was mostly the same player, with OPS+s in the 74-99 range, with the 99 being five years ago.  In 2020 his BABIP was .407, 100 points higher than his career mark.  So either he was performing at a wildly unsustainable level or he gained like 15 mph in exit velocity.  I'm not even going to look up the exit velocity, it's not worth the 30 seconds.

Let's use my (admittedly ancient) eye test - "He did!"    (One eye closed)

[Sports Guy]

30 minutes ago, wildcard said:

He is not my favorite player.

My point is he has not been given the opportunity to be a everyday player but for a short period in 2017 and in 202O.   Starting 10 of 32 games  to begin the 2017 season is not being an everyday player.

Your counter point is missing leading because it is not as an everyday starter.

The Rockies played 32 games from the begin of the 2018 season to May 2.   Valaika played 7 complete games during that period.  He started 12.   That is not being an everyday player.  And, of course, he did not hit.  Just like any other year he was a part time player.  

And as far as being fair.   The point remains.  When he as gotten to be an everyday player he as hit.

https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/gl.fcgi?id=valaipa01&t=b&year=2018

There is a reason he hasn’t gotten a chance to be an everyday player.

[Frobby]

56 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

And I have to post this somewhere, even if it's both vain and nerdy. But Tango has been on James' site's messageboard the last few days in a big discussion on WAR and Win Shares and related things.  If you don't know he's kind of on the Mount Rushmore of sabermetrics, currently a lead statistical/database guy for MLB.  Co-author of The Book.  Anyway, he complimented 3-4 of my recent posts, so it's like being a kid on Christmas, or having Neil deGrasse Tyson compliment your science skills.

Well, that is very cool, and no doubt well deserved.   I assume you are referring to your posts on that site, not here (Tango has been known to do the occasional drive-by here).   In any event, that’s a nice compliment.    

[Moose Milligan]

1 hour ago, DrungoHazewood said:

By bb-ref his defensive numbers in Baltimore were +14 and +7, so really good, and above average.

Also, I had some interactions with Tom Tango on Bill James' site, and he pointed out that oWAR (which I have regularly disparaged) has some utility. You can look at it as "how valuable is this guy if he was an average defender at his position?"  For Izturis he would have been below replacement, instead of +6 wins for his career.  For Brooks, he would have been a 48-win player instead of a 78-win player if his glove had just been average.  If you think about it that way oWAR has some use, instead of just confusing most folks.

And I have to post this somewhere, even if it's both vain and nerdy. But Tango has been on James' site's messageboard the last few days in a big discussion on WAR and Win Shares and related things.  If you don't know he's kind of on the Mount Rushmore of sabermetrics, currently a lead statistical/database guy for MLB.  Co-author of The Book.  Anyway, he complimented 3-4 of my recent posts, so it's like being a kid on Christmas, or having Neil deGrasse Tyson compliment your science skills.

Link or it didn't happen!

[Just Regular]

1 hour ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Also, I had some interactions with Tom Tango on Bill James' site, and he pointed out that oWAR (which I have regularly disparaged) has some utility. You can look at it as "how valuable is this guy if he was an average defender at his position?"  For Izturis he would have been below replacement, instead of +6 wins for his career.  For Brooks, he would have been a 48-win player instead of a 78-win player if his glove had just been average.  If you think about it that way oWAR has some use, instead of just confusing most folks.

And I have to post this somewhere, even if it's both vain and nerdy. But Tango has been on James' site's messageboard the last few days in a big discussion on WAR and Win Shares and related things.  If you don't know he's kind of on the Mount Rushmore of sabermetrics, currently a lead statistical/database guy for MLB.  Co-author of The Book.  Anyway, he complimented 3-4 of my recent posts, so it's like being a kid on Christmas, or having Neil deGrasse Tyson compliment your science skills.

Kudos!    Can we hear Cal on the Izturis/Brooks thing please?  The baseball card (I lived this mis-comprehension of baseball value as a kid) is ooooh, HR and RBI from a shortstop, but the essence of Cal's greatness is more Ozzie Smith than Hank Aaron.

On the machinations of the 30 MLB SS for '21 by the way, I hope Perry Minasian got his in-person (or FaceTime at least) How Do You Do's with Trout done before this - I imagine this wouldn't be his favorite Supporting Cast for my Age 29 season opening move.

[LookinUp]

2 hours ago, Sports Guy said:

I like that Armstrong deal.  Hope he can stay healthy in 2021.  I think he could be a very good 4th/5th option out of the pen.

 Reminds me of the time I was listening to sports talk in south Jersey and they were going on and on about the 3rd string full back. That's what you do in the offseason.

1 hour ago, MCO'sFan said:

Since we need placeholders at in the MIF I want them to be plus defenders above all else. 

Not that I think you're wrong, but the reason people want plus defense is that worse defense creates higher leverage situations for pitchers. It's true, but I also think it's true that always scoring 0 runs creates those higher leverage innings. I'm just saying, while I agree with your point, I think there's a counter point that mitigates just how important that nice defense is.

[Tony-OH]

5 hours ago, owknows said:

I'd still say Sanchez at SS, Valaika 2B, Bannon 3B (barring an acquisition)

The Orioles play that infield only if they are planning on tanking in 2021.

[Tony-OH]

4 hours ago, Sports Guy said:

 

I didn’t suggest him at second.

I said, I prefer him there but not over the defense of Sanchez.

And it’s not very hard for him to beat out Valaika.  That’s laughable.

You really don't like Valaika, do you

While I'm not a huge Valaika guy, I'm still open that he could be a late bloomer and provide some value. 

I don't see Bannon as an an everyday option either though. He'll need to prove to me he won't get his lunch handed to him up in the zone by big league pitchers. 
 

[LookinUp]

4 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

The Orioles play that infield only if they are planning on tanking in 2021.

I'm not with you on the Iglesias deal, but I do agree with this point. Based on Elias' comments yesterday, I expect them to bring in a replacement.

[Sports Guy]

Just now, Tony-OH said:

You really don't like Valaika, do you

While I'm not a huge Valaika guy, I'm still open that he could be a late bloomer and provide some value. 

I don't see Bannon as an an everyday option either though. He'll need to prove to me he won't get his lunch handed to him up in the zone by big league pitchers. 
 

I just don’t see any reason to think Valaika is a late bloomer.  He wasn’t that good in the minors over 2100 at bats.  He has a sub 700 ML OPS (despite playing in Coors and OPACY) and has been a below replacement level player for his ML career.

He has some pop in his bat..that’s about it. 
 

He also isn’t that good defensively, so he doesn’t carry much value there either.

[Tony-OH]

3 hours ago, Sports Guy said:

I didn’t say anyone said that.  What I am saying is that SS is arguably the most important position on the field and if he was really good over there, you would think a team would put him there and move the mediocre defender over to second.

Now, maybe the WS are just dumb.  That’s always possible.  Or maybe they saw a GGer at second and a guy that can maybe handle SS but not good enough to put him there.  I think that’s the more likely outcome.

I just see no reason to take away a strength.  The guy is a GGer at a position we need.  Put him at that position and let him thrive.

Part of Sanchez's value in my mind is that he's going to bring GG caliber defense to second base. It's certainly not his bat that keeps him in the big leagues. Now maybe Sanchez can be effective there, I can't say for sure he won't, but I doubt he'll be gold glove caliber and if you are going to bring a below average bat, you better bring above average defense.

[Roll Tide]

2 hours ago, eddie83 said:

If Valaika was as good as Iglesias and making $3.5M he would have been the one dealt.  
 

Why didn’t the Angels deal for Valaika? 

Valaika is not an established player yet! He will be a trade chip if he produces a .800 OPS and plays solid defense over this coming season. Right now he's a former prospect who produced well in a shortened season over 140 at bats. They obviously don't have comparable value. Could he be as good as Iglesias' career numbers? We will have to wait and see! I am sure the Angels arent expecting Iglesias to be the player he was this season.

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, Tony-OH said:

Part of Sanchez's value in my mind is that he's going to bring GG caliber defense to second base. It's certainly not his bat that keeps him in the big leagues. Now maybe Sanchez can be effective there, I can't say for sure he won't, but I doubt he'll be gold glove caliber and if you are going to bring a below average bat, you better bring above average defense.

Nothing has been keeping him in the big leagues. 

[Tony-OH]

6 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

I just don’t see any reason to think Valaika is a late bloomer.  He wasn’t that good in the minors over 2100 at bats.  He has a sub 700 ML OPS (despite playing in Coors and OPACY) and has been a below replacement level player for his ML career.

He has some pop in his bat..that’s about it. 
 

He also isn’t that good defensively, so he doesn’t carry much value there either.

His defensive value has fluctuated and personally I think he's solid at second base. He doesn't have a ton of experience at 3B so it's to say. If this was a contending team, I'd be semi-happy with him as a utility job, but I'm ok with seeing what he can do next year with everyday at bats unless better options show up. Alberto, Ruiz and Bannon are not better options in my opinion. 

I don't know whether he could keep up the pace he was on last year over a whole season, but if he fails, you dump him with no foul. better than running out guys we know don't have value for the future or a guy who has things to prove before he gets a MLB chance (Bannon).

[Tony-OH]

3 hours ago, Aristotelian said:

Going out of the box here... Move Mountcastle back to SS where he played in the minors! They said Cal was too big to play SS. What do we have to lose? 

Probably about 30 outs at a minimum. Mountcastle should have never have been shortstop in the minors. They wasted development time at a position he was no equipped to ever play at the professional level due to a lack of arm strength.