This triple by Gunnar

[Aristotelian]

25 minutes ago, banks703 said:

If Ortiz is in the organization at the same time as the other three of these guys it would reprehensible to play either of them at SS over Joey. This will NOT happen. Joey is head and shoulders better as a defender at SS than both Holliday and Westburg (and everyone else outside of Mateo and Gunnar). He's considerably better than Gunnar though I will concede that Gunnar has closed that gap. If Gunnar can cut down on the errant throws, he's closer to Joey than Holliday or Westburg are to him. 

 

The question is whether Ortiz has the bat to play every day. I was including him more as a utility guy because he was drafted lower and that appears to be what the organization is signalling.

I agree, just because that was the plan when the players were drafted does not mean they are locked into that path. There are lots of ways it can play out, including Ortiz hitting himself into the top 3 and sticking at SS. 

[eddie83]

17 minutes ago, banks703 said:

Why? Ortiz is a better hitter than Belanger. 

 

Where is this coming from? Have you seen what Ortiz has done in Norfolk the last two years? 

Belanger is considered by some the greatest defensive SS in the history of the game.  

[banks703]

47 minutes ago, Just Regular said:

I think in the early part of his career Mayo will still take some 3B reps.    Even if it is like Rays with Yandy where he isn't very good, but some days its worth the tradeoff getting an extra big bat in the lineup.

Mayo will never see 3B for the Orioles, whether it be because he's traded or because he moves to first. His fielding and throwing are not awesome. 

[eddie83]

1 minute ago, banks703 said:

LOL 

 

You did, good buddy. 

He was drafted a whopping 12 months ago and is the top prospect currently in the sport at 19 years old.
 

Good buddy. 

[Can_of_corn]

6 minutes ago, eddie83 said:

Belanger is considered by some the greatest defensive SS in the history of the game.  

I guess.

I think a lot more folks would agree he's top 5 all time.

[banks703]

21 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

Just curious.  What are you basing your opinions on Hollidays defense?   Sounds like it’s your own scouting/in person observations or from watching him on Mila.tv.

I've seen him in person a few times. I've watched a number of his games so far this year. What I've seen from him defensively at 19 is not in the same neighborhood from what Gunnar was doing at 19. Granted, Gunnar was the hitter that Holliday is right now (I genuinely think he could outhit a number of the guys on the 26 man right now). He's a guy that may not EVER struggle to hit/get on base. I just don't see the same skillset that I saw with Gunnar at the same age. 

 

And this is not a knock on Holliday. Obviously he's the top prospect in baseball right now. He's VERY good. From what I have seen of him so far (which is 7 or 8 full games) he is going to be a he won't hurt you there defender at SS. Can he play there? Sure but defensively he is probably not ever going to be the best option if you have Gunnar and a Mateo or Joey Ortiz in your system. In truth, I think that Westburg is a better defender right now but in fairness, there is a five year age difference between Westburg and Holliday. 

 

He looks to me like he's going to end up at 2B. If that happens then he might end up being the best 2B in all of baseball in a very short amount of time. Time will tell. He's got plenty of time to improve and maybe he does and I'm the idiot for thinking that he was better suited for 2B. If that happens, it's only a good thing for the O's so I'll take it. He's going to be successful wherever he plays on the field, he's just not going to be an elite defender at SS. 

 

[foxfield]

C’mon everyone. There are a thousand decisions that the Orioles will need to make. We are on like number 8.  You guys are bickering over #692. 
 

Paraphrasing Jim Lovell

[eddie83]

6 minutes ago, foxfield said:

C’mon everyone. There are a thousand decisions that the Orioles will need to make. We are on like number 8.  You guys are bickering over #692. 
 

Paraphrasing Jim Lovell

Let’s me bring Frazier into the conversation!!!  

[DrungoHazewood]

33 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I guess.

I think a lot more folks would agree he's top 5 all time.

So Total Zone is just an approximation, we'll never have Statcast-level data for most of history. But... Belanger is two runs ahead of Ozzie in 40% fewer innings. And nobody else is close.

If someone was going to make an argument that a player other than Belanger or Ozzie was in the top two it would have to involve  serious beefs with how Total Zone works and legit arguments that some other player was cheated out of value. Or, argue for the peak of someone with a much shorter career like Andrelton Simmons or Adam Everett.

[Can_of_corn]

2 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

So Total Zone is just an approximation, we'll never have Statcast-level data for most of history. But... Belanger is two runs ahead of Ozzie in 40% fewer innings. And nobody else is close.

If someone was going to make an argument that a player other than Belanger or Ozzie was in the top two it would have to involve  serious beefs with how Total Zone works and legit arguments that some other player was cheated out of value. Or, argue for the peak of someone with a much shorter career like Andrelton Simmons or Adam Everett.

I was thinking of Simmons.

I'm not sure career length should be a consideration.  Top 5 was wiggle room in case there was a name I'd forgotten.

[DrungoHazewood]

8 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I was thinking of Simmons.

I'm not sure career length should be a consideration.  Top 5 was wiggle room in case there was a name I'd forgotten.

Being completely serious I think that it's at least somewhat likely the the best defensive shortstop (or really defender at any position) is someone we've never heard of because they hit .166 in A ball. If you can slug .550 they'll play you no matter how bad your glove is.  But if you can't hit at all, doesn't matter if you're Ozzie, you're not playing.

There was a guy named Harry Sage who played 81 games for Toledo in the American Association in 1890. Mostly as a catcher. That's the sum total of his MLB career, and his photo looks like a vampire. Hit .149 with a .464 OPS. But... total zone thinks he was a +22 fielder. That works out to +44 per 162 games. Maybe he was the greatest defensive catcher in history but we didn't get to find out because he hit like end-stage Chris Davis.

[Can_of_corn]

3 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Being completely serious I think that it's at least somewhat likely the the best defensive shortstop (or really defender at any position) is someone we've never heard of because they hit .166 in A ball. If you can slug .550 they'll play you no matter how bad your glove is.  But if you can't hit at all, doesn't matter if you're Ozzie, you're not playing.

There was a guy named Harry Sage who played 81 games for Toledo in the American Association in 1890. Mostly as a catcher. That's the sum total of his MLB career, and his photo looks like a vampire. Hit .149 with a .464 OPS. But... total zone thinks he was a +22 fielder. That works out to +44 per 162 games. Maybe he was the greatest defensive catcher in history but we didn't get to find out because he hit like end-stage Chris Davis.

Must have been rough for him back when they were all day games. 

 

Looking at the actual stat line.   25 RBI in 275 at bats is pretty good when you are hitting .150.  Makes what Caleb did in 2016 look even more impressive.

Edited July 21, 2023 by Can_of_corn

[Hallas]

11 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Being completely serious I think that it's at least somewhat likely the the best defensive shortstop (or really defender at any position) is someone we've never heard of because they hit .166 in A ball. If you can slug .550 they'll play you no matter how bad your glove is.  But if you can't hit at all, doesn't matter if you're Ozzie, you're not playing.

There was a guy named Harry Sage who played 81 games for Toledo in the American Association in 1890. Mostly as a catcher. That's the sum total of his MLB career, and his photo looks like a vampire. Hit .149 with a .464 OPS. But... total zone thinks he was a +22 fielder. That works out to +44 per 162 games. Maybe he was the greatest defensive catcher in history but we didn't get to find out because he hit like end-stage Chris Davis.

 

If +44 is the best possible performance a fielder can put up, in theory you could put up a top-10 worst offensive performance in the history of baseball and still be a league average player.

 

1933 Jim Lavey was worth -60.3 runs on offense, and is the worst offensive performance by Fangraphs runs created.  A +44 fielder at shortstop or catcher would put up ~51 runs on defense, so said player would still be able to hold a major league job.  I think the only thing that would stop that player is the optics of giving regular playing time to someone that doesn't hit any better than pitchers.

 

You can't really control where the ball is hit, and there are only 27 outs in a game (most of the time) so unless you're out there fielding grounders at second base and shortstop at the same time I think it's going to be tough for you to improve on the top number for defensive value.

Edited July 21, 2023 by Hallas

[DrungoHazewood]

5 minutes ago, Hallas said:

 

If +44 is the best possible performance a fielder can put up, in theory you could put up a top-10 worst offensive performance in the history of baseball and still be a league average player.

 

1933 Jim Lavey was worth -60.3 runs on offense, and is the worst offensive performance by Fangraphs runs created.  A +44 fielder at shortstop or catcher would put up ~51 runs on defense, so said player would still be able to hold a major league job.  I think the only thing that would stop that player is the optics of giving regular playing time to someone that doesn't hit any better than pitchers.

 

You can't really control where the ball is hit, and there are only 27 outs in a game (most of the time) so unless you're out there fielding grounders at second base and shortstop at the same time I think it's going to be tough for you to improve on the top number for defensive value.

The issue is that at least until very recently there was no reliable way to convert defensive value into runs, so if some guy hit .125 in rookie ball he was just done no matter how well he fields. Or they turn him into a pitcher.  Still, today, if you hit like a pitcher at Aberdeen you're not going anywhere fast even if you're the best fielder they've ever seen.