Baseball Primer Newsblog— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand
Sunday, February 19, 2023
Elvis Andrus is returning to the South Side.
The veteran infielder has reached an agreement with the Chicago White Sox on a one-year contract, sources told ESPN’s Jeff Passan. Financial terms are not yet known, and the deal is pending a physical.
Andrus is expected to play second base for the White Sox, according to Passan. When he does line up at the keystone, it will be the 34-year-old’s first time playing a position other than shortstop in 15 big-league seasons. His only experience playing second as a professional came in 2005, when he made one appearance there as a 16-year-old prospect in the Gulf Coast League.
|
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.
1. JoeC Posted: February 19, 2023 at 07:59 PM (#6117922)His ZIPS projection is 1.8 WAR, which is 64th among guys who are listed at SS (players listed there, not necessarily expected to actually play there). That number would be 28th at 1B, 41st at 2B, 38th at 3B, 30th in LF, 34th in CF, 32nd in RF.
Glad to see him back on the South Side, where he shouldn't have too much trouble with playing time (I guess there's some chance that Romy Gonzalez's 2021 wasn't 100% fluke, but not enough of one to clear the decks for him). The Sox would of course be better off with Elvis at SS and Anderson at 2B, but not by enough to complain too loudly about. When they finish 82-80 and fall a game short of the Guardians for the division title, maybe I'll eat my words.
If you'd asked me offhand the most similar career, I would have said Royce Clayton. By BRef metrics Clayton was not quite as good a hitter, somewhat better as a defender – but they are similar: long-career glove men at SS.
Clayton was also never really a very good hitter at any point. Most of the guys on this list were, briefly; Templeton when young, White when old, Speier in his mid-20s, Andrus at ages 27-28. Then in April 2018, a pitch broke Andrus' elbow and he never really recovered as a hitter. But he may not have stayed an above-average hitter for long anyway; it's of course very common for guys to peak at 27-28.
Player dWAR PA OPS+ Rbaser HR RBI BA Rfield Pos
Bob Boone 25.8 8148 82 -33 105 826 .254 105 *2H/357D
Roger Peckinpaugh 25.0 8396 87 6 48 740 .259 100 *6H/3
Bill Mazeroski 24.0 8379 84 -6 138 853 .260 148 *4H5
Frank White 22.0 8468 85 1 160 886 .255 122 *46H5D/9
Bill Russell 19.5 8021 83 23 46 627 .263 73 69H874/5
Chris Speier 17.7 8155 88 -24 112 720 .246 33 65H4/3
Dick Groat 17.3 8180 89 5 39 707 .286 48 *6H5/34
Garry Templeton 16.7 8208 87 6 70 728 .271 29 *6H35/9
Maury Wills 12.2 8306 88 55 20 458 .281 0 *65H/4
Orlando Cabrera 10.3 8255 84 28 123 854 .272 1 *64H/5D
Elvis Andrus 10.0 8197 87 53 96 731 .270 -15 *6HD
Tony Taylor 1.8 8501 88 14 75 598 .261 -39 45H37/6D
Juan Pierre -1.9 8280 84 57 18 517 .295 -14 *87HD
Provided by Stathead.com: View Stathead Tool Used
Generated 2/20/2023.
I don't think there's anything in the rules against swapping your SS and 2B depending on the batter.
Mid-inning swaps are explicitly outlawed in the new rules.
Change is the "feet on the dirt rule". Geometry logic means that the range is cut down ALOT especially on the second base side but also at SS. If you played 2-3 ft onto the grass you've lost a lot of range no matter where you set up. There will be a lot more Texas leaguers now OR teams will have to move their OF in from the warning track which has become the OF set up du jour. That set up eliminated many double and triples. Teams will now have to make a decision on trade offs between outs that now become Texas leaguers and preventing extra base hits. I'm guessing they will bring the OF in. For pitchers, it's quite deflating to allow lots of cheap singles.
Yea, there are no restrictions on OF shifts, I wonder how often, if ever, teams will use radical OF shifts, and if hitters try to take advantage of huge spaces in the OF due to those shifts.
Without quantifying for the type of player, and instead just similar position, value and hits, I would go with Renteria. Get rid of Renteria's 2009 year and they are pretty much tied in value. Had nearly concurrent seasonal war (with Renteria leading most of the time) Renteria was a guy who had an outside chance of being hof conversation, if he could have played well enough in his late 30's.
top 10 war for each
Renteria Andrus
5.6----------5.4
4.3----------4.2
4.2----------4.0
4.1----------3.6
3.2----------3.4
2.2----------3.1 (approximate Andrus 2022 season)
2.1----------2.9
1.5----------1.8
1.4----------1.7
1.1----------1.5
1.1----------1.2
0.9----------0.8
0.9----------0.6
0.8/0.6----------(none for Andrus yet, and this isn't included in my final tally's)
32.6--------33.5(career---not including Renteria's 2009)
6.9(4.7)-----5.8 waa (not including Renteria's 2009)(parentheses includes 2009)
Renteria does better at the better years, Andrus picks it up in the middle in the end, neither of them by war look to be a hofer.
Renteria career ended his age 34 season, Andrus is going into his age 33 season, but just put up a 3 war season so probably has 3 seasons in him if he wants (where he'll at least get a minor league invite if he wants) Renteria 2327 hits to 1997 for Andrus(who has averaged 127 the last two seasons) so it's unlikely Andrus gets 2500 or more hits, it's unlikely he breaks 40 war, etc so he's in the hall of good, but with zero gold gloves and those offensive numbers he just doesn't have anything anyone could champion him for.
Andrus could hang on for a while, as you say, but this "move to second base" thing sounds ominous. It is usually the slide into utility status. Renteria (and Clayton too) were similar in that they hit OK for shortstops but not well enough to play other positions regularly, and so very rarely moved off SS. Andrus may not have much mileage left, especially in this era where, as JoeC notes, everybody seems to have a good shortstop.
I had messed up on my original table and listed Andrus 2022 as two separate years(which would have meant the 2.2 was against the 2.9, the 2.1 and 1.5 against back to back 1.8 etc.)
I just wanted to clarify that my original beginning was based upon an incorrect table.
Sure ... unless they're so far away from you there's no hope. SSs weren't moved to reduce the range requirements, they were moved to put them where balls were being hit that they weren't previously getting to.
But the data's out there somewhere. How many plays did the "3B" make when the shift was on? How many plays did the SS make against LHB when the shift wasn't on? What proportion of RHB PAs were shifted?
I will say I keep forgetting about the "must be on the dirt" part.
Hello Walt. I dont disagree but I thought you were going to add that the problem with nasty nate's contention is that because there are less balls hit to SS by LHB then there is less oppurtunities to gain any sort of fielding advantage over the rest of the league's SSs. So if say 5% of LHB ABs results in GB to SS, and say a modern day Ozzie gets to perhaps 7% more than an average SS, we're talking .35% out of perhaps 100 GBs hit to SS by LHB.
So he's getting to less than one GB a season vs an average SS playing in the now mandated SS spot. Its a de minimis issue he's not going to lead the league in DRS by saving 0.3 OAAs. As you say the only reason they were shifted to the right side of the diamond is cause more GBs are hit there.
By definition, given positioning, greater range means greater defensive value. Also pretty much by definition, that "return on range" in a total hits/runs/outs perspective is maximized when the player is positioned where lots of balls are hit.
But of course part of the shift strategy was to "overload" the area where the most balls were hit. But I don't know that it's possible to genuinely "overload" in baseball. We see discretionary plays in the OF all the time where two OFs could have pretty easily have made the play. Even with the shift, we really never see that on the IF (pop-ups aside) -- there are of course balls that sometimes the 3B can cut-off from the SS where maybe the SS would have gotten the guy out too; similarly we see the 1B sometimes cut off plays from the 2B; you never really see the SS take a ball the 2B would have made the out on, shifted or not.
Now the 2B shifting to short RF was a pretty radical change in positioning and I can see how that might have substantial impact on the return on different defensive skills (i.e. maybe less range, more arm, less often required to turn the DP). But the SS in the shift was just playing SS with a different starting point. If it was useful for him to cover X feet in either direction in his traditional spot in the pre-shift days, then it should have been as or more useful (more opportunities) for him to cover X feet in either direction in his shifted spot.
The thinking appears to be that teams decided that they could now use SSs that covered only (X - y) feet in either direction because, in their shifted positions, they'd still get to the same number of GBs because they'd get more opportunities. This allowed SS to bulk up. But that only holds if teams decided that the outs lost to (-y) were worth less than the runs generated by the bulk ... and given the impact of (-y) on the number of outs lost should be lower with no shift (due to less opportunity), I don't see why they wouldn't continue to make the same tradeoff.
Mixed in with all of that is decreasing contact rates and decreasing G/F ratios -- IF defense (in an absolute sense) must be less important than it used to be. So why not keep your Dave Winfield at SS?
EDIT: Does "overload" need clarification? Obviously the idea of the shift was to put 3 IFs where you used to have 2 because that's where more balls were hit so you'd convert more outs than you used to. But that's not "overload" per se. What I mean is that you put Ozzie in the shifted SS spot and Pokey Reese in the shifted 2B spot then the edge of Ozzie's range to his left and Pokey's range to his right don't overlap (on a standard GB at least). So if you tell Ozzie to bulk up and he loses some range, you give up more hits because the Ozzie-Pokey blind spot is bigger. It's theoretically possible that such a small percentage of GBs are hit into the Ozzie-Pokey blind spot that reduced range for Ozzie really doesn't matter ... but that would probably also be true now that Ozzie has to start on the other side of 2B.
do we have any sort of working guesstimate on how much the radical shift may have impacted perceived defensive factors? are there any infielders we think are prime candidates to have been overrated by range factors?
As for outfielders, I dont think we see discretionary fly balls "all the time." Looking at Ashburn's and A.Jones numbers they seem to be the ones most likely to have benefitted. If we assume max. range +20 or so OAAs, then they probably made about 20 more catches that weren't hard ie. discretionary. So less than one a week, maybe one every ten days? does that stack up with our perceptions?
HELL, even better question: How much do we think batting average will improve now that the shift is gone? Walt, you did an excellent study a few years back and my recollection is that it wasnt really impacting ba but rather slug. for good LHB was impacted some. But then later you seemed to go away from that. Isnt that the million dollar question as we enter 2023? I mean they all hated the shift, it was hurting batters especially line drive hitters and now...how much will it help?
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main