The Dodgers could look totally different, but I think it makes a lot more sense to just put Judge (or Betts) in LF most of the time. Like, if you're going to play those two and Gavin Lux/Chris Taylor, there's no reason to put the strain of 2B on Mookie.

Dude could probably move to shortstop if he had the whole offseason.

Crazy idea imo but I'd love to see it happen. Just because it is such an unusual move that it'd be fun to watch from afar (not a Dodger fan). Betts has 30 games in the majors at 2B, including 7 this past season. Huh. His DRS at 2B over 228 innings total is -1, not great but not horrid. The innings are too small to tell much, but it does suggest he wouldn't be a disaster at least. Judge must LOVE this - get a 3 way bidding war between the Yankees-Mets-Dodgers and he'll be a VERY rich man. Smart teams will lock up other free agents before Judge makes up his mind as his deal could be like A-Rod's was decades ago - one that sets a new bar for the majors.

I'd love to see it happen.

No sorry, Judge was 5 for 36 for a .139 BA in the playoffs; he is NOT the Dodgers answer to their epic playoff failures. Judge would look much better in a Red Sox uniform.

Should the Dodgers decide to let the likes of Trea Turner, Justin Turner (club option), Craig Kimbrel and Joey Gallo (among others),

Despite the hot start, Gallo hit almost as poorly in LA as he did in NY.

I would think the Dodgers are likely to pursue options that include retaining the services of Trea Turner. I’d certainly want him on my team. Somewhat relatedly, when will the arbitrator decide on their financial obligations to Trevor Bauer? That’s a potential $35.33M 2023 expense. Close to pocket change to the Dodgers, but maybe it affects them a little bit.

I don't get it. They're going to non-tender Bellinger. Just put one in CF.

Or play a Trayce Thompson/Chris Taylor platoon in CF and ask Judge to slide over to LF.

Or play a Trayce Thompson/Chris Taylor platoon in CF and ask Judge to slide over to LF.

Well, I'm assuming that if they sign Judge, they don't sign Trea Turner, and Taylor is playing SS.

Agreed, it is at best an option, depending on what other moves they're able to make. With another big pool of SS available this year, I can't imagine the Dodgers don't sign one of them. That leaves Lux, Muncy, Taylor to cover 2B, 3B and backup SS. I consider "which would you play in CF, Judge or Mookie" a question that's more likel to be relevant. But I'll also agree -- he's Mookie, he surely still has the talent to play at least a decent 2B, give him a few months to work on it, and I'd expect him to turn that talent into skills so if the Dodgers decide that Lux to SS is their best bet ... I just don't see why a team with $100 M to spend would not sign one of the 6 SS available.

Bellinger will be non-tendered but that doesn't mean he won't be back. There's just not much available in CF these days, hasn't been for a while, I think they'll keep Bellinger just at about half of what they'd pay if they tendered him. I assume he'll play much less often if Judge and Mookie are around but his defense is still fine, maybe the shoulder will get better (if that's the problem) or some of Freddie's technique will rub off on him.

By the way, over at MLB.com, the Dodgers have a whopping 7 guys in the top 100, including a 2B/OF and a 3B/OF. One's a C so maybe Will Smith to 3B isn't out of the question. It must be so tough balancing all that talent with all that money.

Well, I'm assuming that if they sign Judge, they don't sign Trea Turner, and Taylor is playing SS.

I'm not sure why you'd assume any of that. As noted, they've got a lot of money coming off the books this year plus the Bauer money no later than 2024. Even if Turner goes and they decide Correa's also too expensive, they can get Xander or Swanson or swing a trade for pending FA Amed Rosario (Cle likes doing those deals) or trade for Rojas if they're that desperate.

But even if stuck, Taylor had 0 starts at SS this year and only 15 last year. I thought Lux had some starts there this year but nope, Turner made 160 ... but Lux had 50 starts there last year. If they're gonna fill it in-house, I'm pretty sure Lux will get the first call. I'd say it's very unlikely the Dodgers will make Taylor the primary SS next year by choice.

A-Rod's was decades ago - one that sets a new bar for the majors.

An interesting aspect of that deal is that it was so far in front that I don't think anybody topped it until ARod 7 years later. I'd imagine MLB will be putting pressure on teams not to do an ARod with Judge ... at least not a big AAV record ... if for no other reason than they know Ohtani might well blow Judge out of the water next year. MLB would probably prefer something crazy like 12/$450 for Judge than 8/$340.

Was Judge hurt at the end of the year? I looked it up last night, after hitting his 60th he went 15 for 77 with 33 strikeouts. Like a lot of sluggers there's a bit of feast or famine to him but given the way he was going up until that point it's hard not to think he was carrying some kind of injury.

If Judge had been injured, it didn't show up in the field or on the basepaths. Being asked to carry your entire team's offense against a gauntlet of some of the best pitchers in baseball isn't exactly a recipe for success. He's had a zillion slumps like this before, including in 2022, and this just happened to be the worst time to have another one.

Being asked to carry your entire team's offense against a gauntlet of some of the best pitchers in baseball isn't exactly a recipe for success. He's had a zillion slumps like this before, including in 2022, and this just happened to be the worst time to have another one.

Yes. Lineup depth doomed the Yankees. They were playing these post-season games with 3 or 4 guys who don't belong in the lineup for a playoff team starting: Donaldson, Kiner-Falefa, Hicks, Trevino, Carpenter

Don't see it happening. The Dodgers tend to go after guys who win the World Series (Betts, Turner, Scherzer, Freeman), not guys who go out meekly in the LCS.

The Dodgers are smart, so if they move Mookie to 2B, I assume it's a good idea. But it sure seems like a terrible one. An outstanding OF turning 30, moving back to the infield, where he hasn't played regularly in almost a decade, is not a great plan. Especially true since you can move him to CF or move Judge to LF, and since Betts is a small guy and 2b seems more hazardous for guys his size.

2b seems more hazardous for guys his size.

Don't think I've heard that one before -- are there studies? And I'd assume that the Utley rule has taken care of most of that risk.

Obvious counter-examples (which prove nothing but start somewhere): Morgan 5-7, Altuve 4-11 (OK 5-6), Collins 5-9, Durham 5-8. (Durham not so obvious but he's top 20 in 2B games, more than Grich.) 5-11 is a very popular height for top 2B.

I had to question that question about size for secondbasemen. I had always assumed that on average, the average shortest player in the league was the second baseman. Second doesn't require the strong arm that is created by an advantage of height/leverage so being flexible with a weak arm = second base.

#18 There's a very old James study that showed second basemen had the second worst aging. To be clear, it was nothing close to catcher, and since the study used James' favorite method (matched pairs) it's not what you'd call a really robust study.

Not aware that anybody else has published a study. I expect Szym has looked at it. At the reason he didn't publish any kind of article if he did look at aging/position patterns is that an article that says in essence, "I looked at this and found nothing of interest" isn't really compelling.

weak arm = second base.

Of course the irony is Mookie has a great arm and it's wasted at 2B. It's probably too late now for him to learn it, but I reckon he would've been a great SS.

There's a very old James study that showed second basemen had the second worst aging. To be clear, it was nothing close to catcher, and since the study used James' favorite method (matched pairs) it's not what you'd call a really robust study.

I seem to remember a lot of people, Walt included, looking at that and figuring out it was a bit biased to long careers or something like that, and ignoring defensive shifts of players like Pete Rose to other positions. I think ultimately the consensus was that there wasn't really much evidence to support that any position has a substantially shorter career other than catcher, and a big part of that even is based upon games played per year, not seasons as a starter.

I know I was one that pushed that there were career gaps, cf, catcher, second and third have shorter careers (and first also) but I've come around and it's not nearly as cut and dried as I thought. And I also think modern usage has changed a bit on some of that data also. Meaning that teams are making a more concentrated effort to maximize the playing time and careers of players (or agents or the player themselves)

Moving a RF to third base at least has some historical precedent (Mel Ott) and would take advantage of Betts' arm. I don't get the 2B option at all, so I hope the Dodgers do it.

I think major 2B are kind of like unicorns. Good ones are very rare to find and if they can hit well they eventually get moved off. If they can field really well but can't hit they get moved to SS or are out of the league.

#24 Just thinking that a pretty fair number of the better 2B happened to come up when their team was settled at short. At which point there's a pretty strong, let's not mess with success vibe.

1. The Dodgers aren’t signing Judge.
2. It has nothing to do with his performance in the LCS.

Of course the irony is Mookie has a great arm and it's wasted at 2B. It's probably too late now for him to learn it, but I reckon he would've been a great SS.

The weird thing is that he didn't always. It was one of the reasons he was fairly quickly moved over from SS to 2B. Then he moved to the outfield and somehow managed to greatly improve his arm--pretty impressive.

Don't think I've heard that one before -- are there studies? And I'd assume that the Utley rule has taken care of most of that risk.

Obvious counter-examples (which prove nothing but start somewhere): Morgan 5-7, Altuve 4-11 (OK 5-6), Collins 5-9, Durham 5-8. (Durham not so obvious but he's top 20 in 2B games, more than Grich.) 5-11 is a very popular height for top 2B.

I'm sure you've heard the idea that 2B tend to not have long careers, and though the data seems a bit shaky on that overall. My thought was that perhaps it's the smaller ones who tend not to last as long, but I'll admit it's not something I've delved deeply into. Your list includes some awesomely fun players, but it is four guys over a 100 year period. And even though Altuve is 3'5", he's only lasted to age 32 to far so the jury is still out. Another point against my idea would be that Mookie is a freak of an athlete, which is not always the case with runty little 2b types.

All that aside, he's a great OF and it seems kind of nuts to move him to another position.

You used to hear more about 2Bs aging poorly. The Utley rule took care of the heightened injury risk concern, but the theory was based more on 2Bs being less athletic than shortstops, which is why you almost never saw 2Bs drafted in the first round. For Betts that would obviously not be an issue.

So, the Dodgers have basically decided to build one of those OOTP teams I make sometimes that win 130 and have almost no chance of losing even in the playoffs, have they?

Look, the Dodgers are in the NL with the Padres, who have Machado, so any LA second baseman is at risk!

So, the Dodgers have basically decided to build one of those OOTP teams I make sometimes that win 130 and have almost no chance of losing even in the playoffs, have they?

They got the first part down, anyway.

The weird thing is that he didn't always. It was one of the reasons he was fairly quickly moved over from SS to 2B. Then he moved to the outfield and somehow managed to greatly improve his arm--pretty impressive.

I saw Mookie play shortstop for Short Season Lowell in 2012 and I can't overstate how bad he was. He had about 4 or 5 chances and I don't think a single throw reached first on the fly and he got charged with a couple of errors.

It was SOSH or Jose who looked in some detail at the aging of 2B and it seemed no different than other positions (good enough to convince me). Those things are always hard to tease out because careers end for all sorts of reasons.

Yes, I know that 4 2B 5-9 or shorter in 100 years is not a lot ... but what proportion of players anywhere have been 5-9 or shorter? And presumably guys that small aren't usually fearsome hitters, don't usually hit for a lot of power ... so when they get to 30 and the legs and bat slow a little, can they still hit well enough to hold a job? That's not, per se, poor aging due to height, it's poor aging due to being a marginal bat who's finally fallen off, no different than a 6-3 LF who can't put up a 100 OPS+ anymore.

Part of the theory around 2B not aging well still seems correct -- as they age, they can't field well enough to move up the defensive spectrum (or they would have been SS to begin with) and very few can hit well enough to move down the spectrum. Perhaps even worse, if they can't top a 85-90 OPS+ and can't handle SS, they don't even have much value as a bench player. The below league-average starting 2B might be the most marginal player in the game.

But, regardless of what the aging profile of 2B actually is, I was curious whether anybody's looked at whether it's worse for small 2B ... or moreso than (relatively) small players at other positions. I have seen claims that "big" 3B don't age well, it was brought up for Bryant ... I don't know if that one was really true either but, sure enough, Bryant's been in the OF most of the last few seasons.

On the positional question, it was long believed that 3B didn't age well. In part, that was probably due to the fact that, for whatever reasons, there were no truly great 3B until Mathews. But now we've seen Brooks, Beltre, Nettles, Gaetti, Boggs, Schmidt, Bell, Mathews, Santo, ARam, Wallach, Rolen, Yost and (nearly) Chipper, Cey and not that ARod at 2000 games (Chipper would easily be there except for his brief sojourn to LF). And of course that ARod was still playing a perfectly capable 3B in his late 30s. Not to mention Brett and some others who shifted elsewhere, playing through their mid-late 30s. But like 2B, there's nowhere for a solid but not great 3B to go if both the bat and glove decline.**

There are always "early collapse" guys who, in retrospect, were maybe just "worn out because they started young and played every day." Santo's final (and quite bad) season was 34. But he was up at 20 and played virtually every day after that and had nearly 9000 PA and over 2100 games by age 33 -- that's a lot of career even if it's not exactly a long career. On the other hand of course, most players who'd made it to 9000ish PA through age 33 would have easily lasted to 10,000 or 11,000 PAs. The obvious 2B equivalent is Alomar -- he collapsed at 34 but he had over 600 PA at 20, nearly 9000 PA and over 2000 games by 33. He was given two seasons to get it back together so made it over 10,000 PAs but wasn't very good. Is that a "short" or a "long" career? A guy who doesn't become full-time until 24 then lasts until he's 38-39 and ends up at about 9000 PAs "aged well" while the guy who was full-time at 20 but only lasted until 34-35 and ends up at about 9000 PAs didn't? That's OK as long as we acknowledge the front end and, say, assess all players/careers/arcs for three(?) phases of development/prime/decline and put Santo/Alomar in the great/great/poor bucket and Jeff Kent in the poor/good/great bucket.

** On average or in the "ideal" this is true at every position except maybe CF and SS (and C of course, those guys are simply different beasties). Schwarber's got nowhere to go but 1B (where he'd be "short") and DH so once the bat slips to a 100 OPS+, he's done. An average CF whose bat starts to slip isn't in a great spot but should still be able to play an average or better defensive LF/RF which will sometimes be enough to be the 26th man. SS are in the best spot because a glove-first backup IF role is quite common.