User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
Vivid Seats is a sports ticket broker, concert ticket broker and theater ticket broker offering the best baseball tickets like Yankees tickets, Cubs tickets, and Red Sox tickets, as well as Police reunion tour tickets and Jersey Boys tickets. |
We have baseball tickets, the NFL schedule, college football tickets and Cowboys tickets. We have NBA tickets like Celtics tickets and Lakers tickets. Plus, buy Giants tickets, Patriots tickets and Colts tickets. Also check out our MLB baseball schedule |
Concerts Theatre NFL Angels Dodgers MLB Celtics Theater NBA Tickets Venues NHL Lakers Tickets NFL Yankees NHL Phillies NBA Wicked Marlins MLB Concerts Cubs Mets Red Sox Wicked WWE Red Sox Mets Yankees Dodgers |
Page rendered in 0.8923 seconds
81 querie(s) executed
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
I'd much sooner take my chances with an A-Rod upgrade offensively and Wright, an athletic player with plus range, at second base. Cabrera would cost the Mets the package they should be using to get a pitcher, and I have no confidence he will be able to play anywhere but first base- indeed, he has no business doing so now, and it's not like more eating makes you thinner.
I dunno. I hear tell Sam might have an opinion about that...
What would be so bad? Everything.
A) You can't "assume he can handle it." You have to make plans for second base that assume he can't, or your season is down the toilet if it turns out he can't and you've acquired a big-money third baseman (A-Rod, Cabrera) and have no place to play the parts you have and no adequate answer at second base.
B) You are risking the guy who is simply going to return more value to the team over the course of his career than any player they have ever developed, by far, at the position where he is more likely to get hurt than any other besides catcher. But hey, if we really want to ruin David Wright's career, why not just pull a reverse Craig Biggio on him, and move him there? I mean, the Mets need a catcher at least as much as they need a second baseman, right?
C) You don't take a perennial all-star who can play the position he already has and move him for a guy (Cabrera OR A-Rod) who is actually worse at that position, and/or is going to need to be moved off that position sooner rather than later. It is folly. The odds are you will end up creating a problem at third base (when Cabrera or A-Rod needs to be moved), without having solved one at second base (if Wright can't handle it). There's a good chance you have 3B taken care of for the next dozen years. Can't you just leave it the heck alone??? Why is this hard?
D) You don't subject a player like David Wright to mid-career OJT at a very difficult defensive position. It is too likely to ruin his season, and that in turn would ruin the team's season, in a year where the intent, at least, is to contend. He is the best player on the team. Treat him as such.
This is, with all due respect to Howard, simply the single worst move that has been proposed by anyone who cares about the Mets since someone thought up the bright idea of trading Scott Kazmir. It's not AS bad as that, but it's the worst idea since then.
Now, moving Reyes to 2B is a different story. It's an easier position, and he's played it before... completely different story. However, he would have to want to to do it... and not just be willing to go along with it if he has to... actually want to do it. I'm concerned enough about his head as it is.
As for Cabrera, if you can move Delgado, fine; give up the farm, it makes sense. But I absolutely would not play him anywhere other than 1B.
This is a statement that has been thrown around- problem is it isn't true. Carlos Baerga was moved from third to second. Ryne Sandberg was moved from third to second. Edgardo Alfonzo was moved by the Mets from third to second entering his age-25 season for Robin Ventura. Chase Utley was moved from third to second prior to his age-24 season.
Sam, the upside is by far the finest lineup in the National League for the forseeable future, and the downside is if Wright doesn't play great defense at 2B, you move him to first for 2009. But what makes you think his defense, which allows for tremendous range at third, is going to be SO bad at second that it won't make up for the 300 points of OPS you gain in the Castillo-to-A-Rod exchange in the lineup?
Every one of those is a total BS comparison, Howard. Sandberg had been a shortstop throughout his minor league career. Baerga had been a second baseman in the minors. Alfonzo had played second previously. Chase Utley played much more second base in the minors than he did 3B.
David Wright has never played the position. Nobody has moved a player like David Wright, who has always been a third baseman, to second base mid-career, and you can't find one. Your stance on this is just indefensible, which is why you are throwing out non-comparable players to defend it.
You still sidestep the question about whether, if there is any risk involved, it's not a better idea to move to 1B or OF instead, given that the thing being placed at risk is the career of David Wright, which is literally the most important thing (other than the franchise rights and intellectual property, I suppose) that the Mets possess.
Maybe look at it this way. He came up as a poor fielder. He worked on it and now it's generally agreed he's a good fielder. His hitting didn't tank during that effort.
SS to 2B is still a position switch. Baerga had played second in the Sally League, but it had been three years since he'd done so. Alfonzo had played fewer than 80 professional games, majors and minors, at second, and had played three games at the position in the previous three years.
And your Utley point avoids the question completely- he was ONLY a 3B in the minors until age 24, when he was moved to 2B, one year younger than when Wright would be doing it.
The point on all of this, as I have said every other time it has come up, isn't that these examples are EXACTLY THE SAME as David Wright. However, with a relative unfamiliarity at the position, and arguably less athleticism than David Wright, these guys moved to second and not just survived, but excelled.
I know you ultimately think the risk at 2B is so huge- I simply disagree. The change is, given Wright's abilities, likely to work fine defensively, while the upgrade to A-Rod defensively is immense.
And as for injuries, I have no reason to believe 2B contributes to a shorter career, particularly for durable players. 13 3B have played 2000 games, 10 2B have. Make it 1000, and 58 2B have turned the trick, 54 3B have.
I would trust Omar, but I don't trust Jeff Wilpon as far as I can throw Mo Vaughn standing on Tony Gwynn's shoulders. Jeffy gets these bright ideas and stars in his eyes and thinks he can just move the guys actually in his clubhouse like they are fantasy players. David Wright was decidedly cool to this idea when asked about it on The Daily Show, because he knows deep down it's just batshit crazy but doesn't want to seem like he's the guy standing in the way of something that might help the team in someone's fantasy world.
If you can clear first base -- which I strongly doubt -- then things are very different. If they hadn't picked up Alou's option, then you can talk. But trying to move David Wright to second base would, IMHO, be the move that we would look back on in five years or so as the single move that ruined the Mets of this era. I remain shocked that Howard thinks it has even an iota of merit, much less that he affirmatively supports it.
Is this true? I am just going off the baseball cube, but they say he started at second, moved to third for a year, and then went back to second, which would indicate he was originally a second basemen and not really comparable to Wright. But the baseball cube could be wrong, where did you see he didn't play second until age 24?
Not true. He played second base throughout the minor leagues -- at Batavia in 2000, and at Clearwater in 2001. He didn't get moved to 3B until he reached AAA Scranton in 2002, where he played it for all of one season before getting shifted back to second base in 2003. LINK His B-Ref page fails to show defensive stats for Utley's first two minor league years -- but he played second base both those years.
I think moving him to catcher makes more sense than moving him to second.
If the Mets really want to go for ARod, they should sign him, move him to first and eat Delgado's contract. It'd cost a hell of a lot of money, but it would give them Howard's dream infield, almost, and probably involve the least amount of defensive shuffling. ALso, if you're planning to sign ARod, you're probably planning to spend a lot of money. Better to spend 35 million effectively than 25 million ineffectively for a team like the Mets.
However, I too am shocked that we are so far apart on this one, Sam. Normally, we stand as one on Mets moves.
FWIW, I understand your reticence, and think you make reasonable points. Ultimately, I disagree, but I certainly see where you are coming from.
Of course I have to defer to you as a devoted
KremlinFlushing-watcher. Does he actually insist on his ideas being implemented, or has he so far accepted it when someone on the baseball side tosses a bucket of ice water on his flights of fancy?Maybe he's too muscular to turn the pivot with alacrity?
He has been on his best behavior since Omar came on board. Whether that will continue after the way last season ended, we shall see.
I think -- if left to his own devices -- he could be an honorary Steinbrother...
However, if there ever was a time to move a franchise player to another position, this is it. Unlike moving Reyes for Matsui, we're moving a known quantity for another known quantity. The reason that the Matsui-Reyes switch failed was because Matsui sucked at shortstop, not because Reyes couldn't handle it.
I feel like Wright could make the move. I think Alfonzo is a great comp. Fonzie made the switch with flying colors and he was much less athletic than Wright. If we were able to move Wright to second, we'd be able to utilize his quick hands and feet and minimize the effect of his bad throwing from third.
We're not talking about Matsui here. This is Alex Rodriguez. I'd love to improve the pitching instead, but if we can't, and if we can afford the contract... getting A-Rod and moving Wright to second would create a formidable lineup for years to come. Take a look at this: Reyes/Milledge/Wright/Beltran/Rodriguez/Delgado/Alou/LoDuca/Pitcher.
Also, Lo Duca sucks
Reyes is a gold glove calibre SS. A downgrade from Reyes to A-Rod at SS would likely be at least a 20 run decline, and could possibly end up being as much as 30-40 runs.
Honestly, I don't know why Wright or Reyes should move if they signed A-Rod. He should be the one that moves as he is already older and will be playing a less demanding position be the end of the contract anyway.
Yes, shortstop is harder than second base. But for a shortstop with average range, and a 3B with arguably the best range in baseball have similar skills getting to balls. It certainly doesn't mean Alfonzo was a lock to become a great 2B (which he did) and Wright certainly can't play the position at all.
When did we decide David was this?
Anyway, I agree with Sam. David is perfect at thirdbase. No reason to move him. It's just making things needlessly complicated. ARod can play first if he comes here. Or left. Or hell, he can play second. If Jeff Kent has been playing second for the last 20 years, ARod can do it too. I think Wright would be able to play it adequately, but I don't care to see him try.
I think Howard is being disingenuous because Alfonzo played half of his first two seasons in the majors at second base. He also played some second base in the minors. To sum up, Alfonzo came up as a second/third baseman, started playing third exclusively in his third year, and moved back to second in his fifth. How in the world is this relevant to Wright, who has never played the position?
To repeat some of what has already been said, how many players have moved to a middle infield position in the middle of their careers, after never having played either position professionally, and then been succesful? Other than Craig Biggio, of course.
Re-sign the old catcher, re-sign the old second baseman. Keep the young stud right-fielder in the # 8 hole.
Sigh. What I find interesting about this is how little Marchman evidently believes the Mets feel they need to make any sort of change to move past the collapse and get the fans feeling good about 2008. Omar taking a stand-pat approach would, in its own way, be one of the biggest gambles any GM could take for the upcoming season.
Sigh. What I find interesting about this is how little Marchman evidently believes the Mets feel they need to make any sort of change to move past the collapse and get the fans feeling good about 2008. Omar taking a stand-pat approach would, in its own way, be one of the biggest gambles any GM could take for the upcoming season.
This is more or less what I'd like to see them do unless something good pops up. I'd would mind tossing around the idea of Humber or Pelfrey for Orlando Hudson +. And, I'd like to see them bring in a set-up guy who can be more dominating like a Kerry Wood. And I'd like to see them shop around Aaron Heilman perhaps with the idea of getting a possible 2nd baseman or catcher of the future in the deal. But, really, I don't want them to do something drastic just to do something drastic. If they could make Mota and Sosa disappear that would be pretty good too.
If you replace the adequate part with best range of any 3B in baseball, the answer becomes clearer.
I'm tired of this conversation, because it seems to go in the same direction.
Me: There's no direct example proving that David Wright can play third base, but here are some examples, WHICH ARE NOT 1-to-1 comparisons, that indicate it may well be possible.
Others: What you're pointing out is not exactly the same as Wright to 2B! Here's why!
I don't know if it is that, as much as looking at the world realistically.
Would we like to replace Lo Duca with Posada? Yes, but it isn't the most likely result, and it's not clear Ramon Castro, with his back, can give you 120 games/year. Lo Duca is probably available, and probably as good as what is actually available on the market.
Aside from A-Rod, this is a thin market, and you can't count on a pie-in-the-sky trade. I do think that Milledge will migrate up the line-up before long; the good thing is that he is in there.
The real issue for the Mets is the pitching. And if Martinez is your Opening Day starter, that is a heck of an upgrade to build on. The relief corps is another matter they need to work on.
I must be missing something. $35million for an aging player at first base? Could this be even in the top 100 of ways the Mets might effectively spend money?
Third basemen historically get beat up a lot for a career, so I'm not sure which position has the higher attrition rate off the top of my head.
With that said, I'd rather see if Reyes would move to second before I even think of moving Wright to the keystone sack. I'm with Sam in regard to the latter proposal's riskiness.
Of course, that is a big "apparently," and thus represents Heyman's take on what was said. But it still makes me very unhappy.
Why should we care about the money? The Mets should at least be able to spend as much as the Red Sox who outspent the Mets by 30 million last year.
I want him to go somewhere that needs a SS so desperately, he gets enough at bats to break the SS HR record (he only needs 2).
But I don't want him doing it for the Mets.
I don't want him in NY. I don't particularly care for him, but the guy really does need to get out of town.
And I think he is accursed. I believe the Baseball Gods granted him great talent, and then decreed that he would never be permitted to deploy that talent in the October Classic. I don't want that kind of karmic baggage on the Mets.
If Reyes moves to 2nd this will make me unhappy but while I think there are some serious concerns about moving Wright to, say, 2b I certainly don't think it's idiocy. In fact, it could work out brilliantly.
Sam's "Nobody has moved a player like David Wright" argument isn't especially compelling comign off of his recent "this is no player comparable to David Wright" argument of a few days ago. We should probably remember that there is no player like A-Rod either. The fact that something hasn't been done before isn't a reason to think that it shouldn't be done. The only quality reason is:
This is why I said before that I'd look very closely at how great the addition injury risk at 2nd base is. Is this really shortening careers or do 2nd basemen have shorter careers b/c their generally a poor man's shortstop? If I were the Mets I'd want to study this and try to quantify this effect before I do anything? If it turns out that there's no real evidence that playing 2nd base shortens your career I might not worry about it. If the evidence turns out be compelling, however, this would certainly stop me from moving Wright.
It's funny that this is your perception of the arguments. I think that Howard's job is going to his head. The Wright to secondbase idea isn't worthy of an ignorant fan blogging from his basement. It doesn't even rise to the level of wishcasting. It's doesn't merit refutation. It's completely ridiculous. You might as well suggest that the Phillies replace Aaron Rowand with Ryan Howard in CF.
There's no tension or inconsistency. What I said earlier was that there was almost no third baseman comparable to Wright in his consistency and quality of performance from that young an age (the only two who do match up are Eddie Mathews, who was even better than Wright, and George Brett, who is very similar to Wright). But saying Wright is nearly unique in that respect is hardly a basis for saying he is uniquely suited . . . . to be moved to second base. One doesn't follow from the other at all. Indeed, I would argue to the contrary: when you have a player who has done so well, and been so consistent, where he is that is a pretty good reason to leave well enough alone and avoid risking screwing up one of the best starts to a career that any team has ever had at the position in the history of the game.
You say only my reason (B) is a "quality" reason to leave Wright where he is. But I reiterate: if he flops in this move in spring training, you are left with Wright, Alou, Milledge, A-Rod (or Cabrera) and Delgado . . . and no place to play one of them. You are also left without a second base solution, because presumably you will have committed to this idea after signing A-Rod and . . . well, hope for the best. 2008 becomes a disaster at second base and David Wright all of a sudden becomes a man without a position? No, I guess Milledge does -- or Delgado. That'll make for an interesting clubhouse situation for Willie Randolph to manage. The downside of this for 2008 is the ruination of a season, and ultimately perhaps the ruination of David Wright's relationship with the franchise. If that's not a quality reason, I don't know what is.
Chipper moved to LF, just so that Braves could sign Vinny Castilla and his awesome Technicolor glove.
Almost wrecked his career...
What do you mean flops? He's probably going to struggle some initially and you have to anticipate that and stick with it. "2008 becomes a disaster" seems awfully unlikely. I think that there's almost no chance that he's as bad at 2nd as say a Hanley Ramirez or Derek Jeter is at short and they continue to play them there happily. He can learn to play 2nd base. If he has trouble, he just needs to work out.
You right, if this alienates David Wright, you don't do it. But, he's said he'd happily move for A-Rod. Now, maybe he has to say that and you ask him in private and he says somethign different. Fair enough. But you have no reason to think that this has happenned.
But saying Wright is nearly unique in that respect is hardly a basis for saying he is uniquely suited . . . . to be moved to second base.
That's not my argument. You said a) there's no one like wright and b) no one like wright has been moved. If there are few players as great/young as wright at 3b in mlb history, the fact that no one of them has been moved isn't much evidence of anything is it?
Well, if your moving them to a harder defensive position (3b --> 2b) you might well pick the better defender. I agree that if you're moving them to LF you have to pick the older guy and the weaker defender.
Come on, J. Cross. There's nothing in the WAY in which Wright is unique (a) that makes him NOT comparable to all those others who have NOT been moved (b). There's (almost) no one like Wright in terms of third basemen who have been as good and consistent from that young an age. The point of saying that "no one like Wright has been moved" is that no one who hasn't played a middle infield position earlier in his career -- in the minors, typically -- has been moved. No matter how good and consistent he's been, it doesn't change the way he is the same as all the others: he never played SS or 2B in the minors. Not for a day. To ask him to make that transition is asking for something that nobody has ever done, and that nobody should be asked to do, especially not as great a player as Wright.
What do you mean flops? He's probably going to struggle some initially and you have to anticipate that and stick with it. "2008 becomes a disaster" seems awfully unlikely. I think that there's almost no chance that he's as bad at 2nd as say a Hanley Ramirez or Derek Jeter is at short and they continue to play them there happily. He can learn to play 2nd base. If he has trouble, he just needs to work out.
Wow. Just . . . wow. If he has trouble, "he just need to work out." And when he takes that "trouble" to the plate with him, and the offense suffers, I guess he just needs to "take more BP." And when the tabloids go nuts blaming A-Rod, and pitting him against Wright, and asking when A-Rod will volunteer to move to first so Wright can have his position back, that won't cause any problems at all, nosiree, because A-Rod has always gotten along just fine with his high profile New York teammates.
I think 2008 becomes a disaster is in fact quite possible. David Wright will be starting from scratch, learning the nuances of a position that requires knowing hitters and signs and communication with a double play partner. It requires grace and learning to avoid baserunners and totally different throws than he is used to. He is supposed to learn this while not missing a beat on offense. He is supposed to learn all the things a quality second baseman knows from having played thousands of games . . . when Wright hasn't played a game there in his entire life. He's supposed to be a major league quality second baseman next April.
Will the Mets and their fans never, ever learn? Perhaps not.
Somehow, I thought it wouldn't take blowing apart David Wright's career to finally learn the lesson. Guess for some folks, I was wrong.
That's crazy, batshit, crazy, stuff. There is no estimating how many runs Wright will cost the Mets at second. What is certain is that he immediately becomes the worst defensive player in the majors.
Yes, Hundley. 1998. After the Piazza trade, he played 30+ utterly appalling games in LF, the worst display of outfield play that has ever been seen in a Mets' uniform. It was an embarrassment to Hundley (totally unfair to him), and to the franchise.
Yes it was. But NOT to switch Todd Hundley to a position he'd never played, and make him look like a fool, as they did. And that's something they should never, ever risk doing to David Wright. Because in the long run, you can trade away Hundley and never regret it. Maybe you even learn something from the mistake you made trying him in LF. But you can't run away from the mistake you'd be making with David Wright.
okay, if you're simply saying that no dedicated non-MIF has been moved to MIF without a background there I'll take you point and agree that it has nothing to do with Wright's uniqueness. I thought the argument was "no one as great as Wright has been moved."
Wright played some SS in high school but strangely after the Mets drafted him there was some thought that he might have to move from 3b to OF if he couldn't handle the IF. I think that Wright never got credit for being as athletic as he is in his early days. No one expected him to steal bases. If you take a player who moves as well as Wright does at third base, you'd probably expect that they played the MIF before.
At the point that you're wondering after how Wright's offense will be effective by the possible pschological consequences of possible defensive struggles I think you're really reaching.
I think the struggles associated with the position switch are quite likely to affect Wright's offense. Remember the stories about how he struggled at St. Lucie in part because they realized he had tired himself out from working too hard? They had to cut back his routines to help him find the right balance. That told you something about his dedication and work ethic, but it also told you that if you give David Wright a major task he is going to wear himself out trying to accomplish it. Well, I am pretty convinced that switching to one of the most demanding positions on the field is pretty darned likely to be the kind of large goal that David Wright will throw himself at. He'll take a bazillion grounders. He'll get on himself for every screw-up. He will wear himself down & out trying to get it right. And the odds are substantial that effort WILL affect him, physically and emotionally, and it will take a toll on his offense.
Reaching? You want to move David Wright to second base and you're accusing me of reaching? Pot, meet kettle.
You've just stated the reason why it might just work.
No. I've stated the reason why it would be folly to try, and why the 2008 season and David Wright's career and relationship with the organization shouldn't be put "all in" in the attempt.
Well, I don't want to do this I'm just saying it's not idiotic. Idiotic would be moving Wright to 3b to make way for Mike Lowell. A-Rod is at least special and the possibility of acquiring him deserves special considerations.
What I'd like to do is move A-Rod to left field. I would play Alou and Milledge each 3 days a week in the other corner. Sure, you might lose a few mil in value by having both Alou and Milledge sharing a position but I think that's a drop in the bucket compared to A-Rod's value. I'd also consider trying hard to move Delgado so you can put A-Rod at first for a year (or more). Granted, A-Rod loses a bit more of his value at 1b.
he's not a problem or a riddle or a what if
pencil him in and let him go.........at 3rd
they need arms,help in the pen and a league ave innings eater
and the belief that the collapse doesn't morph to disbelief in Coach Randolph
in the clubhouse
(caught the Werth/Phillies game by chance and watched the Sept. games as the most compelling stuff
couldn't understand any of it
If Alex switches positions (and I doubt he would), it will be to either 1B or 2B. He is very bad at tracking flyballs.
I really don't think there is one. The closest cases I can think of would be Biggio and Dale Murphy, but since both were catchers, they really doesn't make for a good comparison. Bill Madlock was primarily a second baseman in the minors, and also played a lot of shortstop.
Maybe there has been one, but I honestly can't think of it. If it has happened, it is extremely, extremely rare.
Moving from 3B to 2B, for a player with no prior professional experience at 2B (and especially a player of Wright's size), is a vastly difficult thing to do. The risks vastly outweigh the benefits.
I would assess an attempt by the Mets to do this as somewhere south of appallingly naive and foolish.
This is the biggest question for me- if there is evidence to that effect it could certainly alter my thinking. I have yet to see any, however. 2000 games? Third basemen lead, 13-10. Second basemen lead 58-54, however, at 1,000 career games.
It is because of Mazzilli and Jefferies and Hundley and Piazza and Reyes. How many times will this franchise have to learn that you can't just move real-life players around like they are Strat-O-Matic cards and expect them to respond as if they aren't flesh and blood human beings?
Sam, when it comes to Maz, it was before my time. But Jefferies was a poor defensive player at every position. Hundley was thrust into left without more than a couple of shag sessions. Piazza was sent to first base without even a warning from his manager. And Reyes was far from a disaster at second- we simply don't know how he would have developed there, because Matsui was the disaster. Would Reyes have been injured? Hard to think it was 2B- he got hurt the year before at SS. And as for the 52 point dip in BA, it is worth noting that it corresponded to a 46 point dip in BABIP.
Wright is much further along in his development as a hitter. He'd have the chance to work out all winter, and come to spring training to learn the position (something Piazza and Hundley certainly didn't have). He's a better athlete than all of them save Reyes, who was all of 21 when he tried to make the transition, and for all we know, would have. Had Kaz been remotely like the player he was supposed to be, we'd know the answer to that question.
But we don't. We do know that everything that was stacked against these examples is more favorable to David Wright, and we also know that Alex Rodriguez is a bigger upside than virtually all the other upgrades put together.
I'd certainly think Hank Greenberg from first base to left field counts. And the MVP and pennant Detroit had to show for it in 1940 argues in its favor.
The downside? Just one year later, it directly led to World War II. So perhaps Sam is right that it would be catastrophic.
It's an interesting thought, but I don't think it's particularly comparable to a 3B-to-2B shift. The defensive spectrum is obviously not a completely precise standard, but it is the case that 1B-to-LF is a one-level shift, while 3B-to-2B is two levels.
Moreover, the cost of being a bad LF isn't nearly as great as the cost of being a bad 2B. Lots of teams have won with lousy defensive LFers; look no further than this year's world champs. Almost no one wins with a truly bad fielder at 2B; the cost of struggles from Wright would be much greater than they were for Greenberg. And Greenberg was, by all accounts, a ghastly defensive LFer, though for a big guy he wasn't too slow.
I think this fails the "demonstrably" test.
I'd certainly think Hank Greenberg from first base to left field counts.
Oh, sure. Maz was before your time, but you can cite chapter and verse on Hank Greenberg???
You want to see downside, pal? WW II was a walk in the park compared to what happens when I get a hold of you after David Wright tears his ACL being taken out by Jimmy Rollins on a botched DP in spring training. Because after I blame Omar and Randolph and Jeff F'ing Wilpon, I blame you. And this would be way, way worse than Kazmir.
Hey, plenty of people were apparently involved in that discussion, but I was not one of those responsible for trading Scott Kazmir.
I'm hopeful we get to see this now, just so the people who called me silly and worse can watch it work, and also because if it does happen and go well, even you have to admit the upside is unprecedented in Met lineup history. This is why I was so glad that Oliver Perez pitched a full season.
And as for the time issue, if Mazzilli were Jewish, I'd have researched him for my book as well!
I think this fails the "demonstrably" test.
How exactly would you want to argue that first base is harder? I'm not saying this to dismiss the argument- genuinely curious.
Last year's 3 worst 2b by UZR:
Kent -15
F. Sanchez -9
BJ Upton -7
Last year's 3 worst LF by UZR:
Manny -13
Burell -9
Ibanez -7
So, at least by this metric the cost of a bad LF was pretty nearly the same as the cost of a bad 2b.
I meant that my reaction to Wright getting hurt would be worse than my reaction to the Kazmir deal (and you know how bad my reaction was to that). And this time . . . I'd blame you.
How exactly would you want to argue that first base is harder?
Actually, the point is not whether first base is harder or easier. The question is whether the transition to left field is easier or harder than the transition to second base. And the fact is that left field is easy to learn, not risky to play, and not all that harmful to the team even if the guy plays it badly. Second base, OTOH, is very difficult, takes a long time to learn to play well, takes a particular kind of player with a specific skill set, is very physically demanding and risky, and will KILL the team if Wright can't play it.
That is why the comparison is inapt at best.
Moreover, if Greenberg had been Hundleyesque out there, you can go to a Plan B with a spare outfielder much more easily than you can adjust to a flop by Wright after they sign A-Rod to play third base. There would be no good Plan B -- they would have boxed themselves into a disaster with no turning back. No real second baseman, no place to play their best line-up. A slow-motion disaster.
I'm not arguing first base is harder. I'm suggesting the first base-leftfield shift is a minor shift along the spectrum at best, while third to second is a clear-cut move along the spectrum.
Relative to the Wright discussion, a more relevant question is whether the transition from first to left is easier or harder than the transition from third base to second base. No one is arguing that it is harder to move to left than to second- Greenberg would have had a hard time playing third base a small fraction as well as Wright did. It is his talent at third that makes me confident he will be passable or better at second.
But I was responding to the point about whether a player of Wright's stature had shifted to a harder defensive position- a tangential question.
I'm not arguing first base is harder. I'm suggesting the first base-leftfield shift is a minor shift along the spectrum at best, while third to second is a clear-cut move along the spectrum.
I respectfully disagree. First to left is one shift, with right field, two links away, a similar move. Third to second is two moves. This isn't comparing first-to-left and DH-to-Shortstop.
If David Wright were 34, we wouldn't be having this conversation.
Actually I think the point is that if Wright were 34, the idea of moving him to 2B, goofy as it would be, might even be less goofy than it is now. Because with the Santo shift, with all of its Chuck Tanner-y disengagement from reality, didn't run the risk of ruining a franchise player just entering his peak. The worst case with Santo was what they got: he was humiliated and frustrated, the fielding embarrassment totally messed up his hitting, and he just said the hell with it and retired. The worst case with Wright would be even worse than that: taking a career that looked for all the world to be in the fast lane on the highway to Cooperstown, and steering it straight into a culvert.
We'll have to agree to disagree. The point is that Wright, at this point in his career, has the athleticism and range to make him a good bet to play passable or better defense at 2B. To add arguably the best player in baseball to your lineup, while moving Wright to a position that plays to his defensive strengths, is a high-upside move. Again, should he fail to settle in at 2B, the idea that his career and psyche would be ruined by a subsequent move to first in 2009, for instance, seems more than a little far-fetched.
Howard are you being intentionally dense? You might as well be saying "jklsdjfkl;asdjfkl;asdjfksdlajfkasdjfklsdajklfsdjfasdkl;f8xcznklxcfeuop" for all of the sense you are making.
Ah, the luxury of ad-hominem attacks in lieu of rational discourse. Hope you are well, Gaelan.
Fair enough. I would just conclude that your position blithely and severely underrates how difficult such a shift would be for Wright, as strongly indicated by the fact that it seems that something quite like it has simply never been accomplished in the history of major league baseball.
I can certainly appreciate what you're saying. But that seems very self-selecting. How many 25-year-old third basemen were close to the offensive force Wright already is? Among them, how many were as good as Wright is defensively? And how many of those players had a shortstop also entering his prime, not to mention the impetus to move due to an even better offensive third baseman becoming available?
In other words, there are ample reasons having nothing to do with the difficulty of the move that account for it not happening prior to this.
My gut feeling is that David could and would make the switch to second. I think that the spectrum and references to other failed positional switches is a red herring.
As was mentioned earlier, this is misleading. Hundley and Jeffries couldn't make their switches because they sucked defensively. Piazza too. Reyes may well have worked out - and I think anyone who watched would probably agree.
Listen, I don't think anyone is saying that positional changes like this are easy or not to be considered. As has been pointed out, there is very little precedent for a switch like this one. However, it is not often that the best player of his generation becomes a free agent. And that's what we're dealing with. Alex Rodriguez is a force. Little fan-boy crushes and fantasies on David Wright manning the hot corner for the next fifteen years, and specious worries about his ability to make the switch (without even considering it) are no reason not to acquire one of the best baseball players alive.
I haven't limited my (admittedly casual and haphazard) historical scan to players precisely equal to Wright, in any of these regards (including simply being third basemen). I still can't come up with a useful precedent. Meanwhile I can come up with lots of precedents of young established stars being moved to less demanding defensive positions.
The fact that something has never been done before isn't proof that it can't be done successfully, of course. But the fact that something has never been done before should also stand as a distinctly clear message about just how difficult it must be.
Well, you should. Within a couple of decades after the adoption of the live-ball manner of play, it became pretty much universally understood that second base is intrinsically harder than third.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main