http://twitter.com/#...903755862966272Francona on whether Adrian Gonzalez will play some OF in NL ballparks: "We'll see." That would allow Ortiz to make few starts at 1B
Edited by Corsi, 20 June 2011 - 03:21 PM.
Yo! You're not logged in. Why am I seeing this ad?
Posted 20 June 2011 - 03:20 PM
http://twitter.com/#...903755862966272Francona on whether Adrian Gonzalez will play some OF in NL ballparks: "We'll see." That would allow Ortiz to make few starts at 1B
Edited by Corsi, 20 June 2011 - 03:21 PM.
Posted 20 June 2011 - 03:29 PM
Posted 20 June 2011 - 03:31 PM
Posted 20 June 2011 - 03:33 PM
Posted 20 June 2011 - 03:34 PM
Francona on whether Adrian Gonzalez will play some OF in NL ballparks: "We'll see."
Posted 20 June 2011 - 03:34 PM
Posted 20 June 2011 - 03:37 PM
Posted 20 June 2011 - 03:39 PM
He played one game (8.0 innings) for the Ranger in RF in 2005. That is his only professional experience as an outfielder.
Posted 20 June 2011 - 03:41 PM
Posted 20 June 2011 - 03:41 PM
It is hard to see enough value after significantly degrading at two defensive positions (LF, 1b) to justify this.
But:
Defensive downgrade + Injury risk to the best hitter in baseball > Offensive upgrade
Edited by BucketOBalls, 20 June 2011 - 03:43 PM.
Posted 20 June 2011 - 03:43 PM
Yes, they are.The organization that gave Crawford $142m is really considering sticking Gonzo out in LF? I think Tito is just having fun with whatever daft reporter asked him this.
GordonEdes
Tito on Adrian Gonzalez playing OF: "We've already talked to him a little bit. We'll see. I'm glad he's willing to do it. I don't want (Ortz) to sit 9
GordonEdes
Gonzalez said he played OF 1 game in Texas and in winter ball. "I'm not an OF,'' he said, ''but if it's a matter of getting Papi in...''
Posted 20 June 2011 - 03:46 PM
Posted 20 June 2011 - 03:47 PM
| RC / G | UZR / G | |
| Ortiz | 0.76 | -0.024 |
| Gonzalez 1B | 0.90 | 0.014 |
| Gonzalez LF | 0.90 | -0.033 |
| Kalish | 0.39 | 0.053 |
Posted 20 June 2011 - 03:48 PM
Wow, this is really dumb.Yes, they are.
And Adrian Gonzalez on the potential situation:
Posted 20 June 2011 - 03:51 PM
It is hard to see enough value after significantly degrading at two defensive positions (LF, 1b) to justify this.
Posted 20 June 2011 - 03:54 PM
Why would you assume the Gonzalez can play a close to average left field? I'd think something in the range of -20 UZR/150 would be a more reasonable estimate, and even that could easily be too optimistic, although I really have no idea. -5 UZR/150 seems unrealistically high as an estimate. That would make him better than a reasonable number of people who are actually outfielders.Well, my rudimentary math skills suggest it's an easy call just on the numbers. If you assume a -5 UZR/150 for Gonzalez in left, Kalish's 7.9 UZR/150 in left (SSS but it seems approximately what you'd expect), and Ortiz' -4.3 UZR career at 1B, you get this:
Defensive and offensive value
RC / G UZR / G Ortiz 0.76 -0.024 Gonzalez 1B 0.90 0.014 Gonzalez LF 0.90 -0.033 Kalish 0.39 0.053
That adds up to 0.46 R/G in added offensive value for the Ortiz / Gonzalez lineup compared to a loss of 0.13 R/G in defensive value.
The question IMO is whether putting a guy in a new position - or playing Ortiz defensively at all - risks an injury to either Adrian Gonzalez or Ortiz.
Posted 20 June 2011 - 03:58 PM
Posted 20 June 2011 - 03:58 PM
Posted 20 June 2011 - 04:01 PM
Why would you assume the Gonzalez can play a close to average left field? I'd think something in the range of -20 UZR/150 would be a more reasonable estimate, and even that could easily be too optimistic, although I really have no idea. -5 UZR/150 seems unrealistically high as an estimate. That would make him better than a reasonable number of people who are actually outfielders.
Posted 20 June 2011 - 04:02 PM
Posted 17 June 2011 - 04:34 PM
There's always this:
http://www.baseball-...200509300.shtml
Adrian Gonzalez RF-1B
Edited by joe dokes, 20 June 2011 - 04:04 PM.
Posted 20 June 2011 - 04:03 PM
Edited by Al Zarilla, 20 June 2011 - 04:04 PM.
Posted 20 June 2011 - 04:03 PM
The numbers I would have used would be something like -35 in LF (what Adam Dunn and Adam Lind have done out there in 500+ innings, 2009-2011) for Gonzalez and -10 at 1B for Papi.Well, my rudimentary math skills suggest it's an easy call just on the numbers. If you assume a -5 UZR/150 for Gonzalez in left, Kalish's 7.9 UZR/150 in left (SSS but it seems approximately what you'd expect), and Ortiz' -4.3 UZR career at 1B, you get this:
Edited by Eric Van, 20 June 2011 - 04:05 PM.
Posted 20 June 2011 - 04:10 PM
Posted 20 June 2011 - 04:11 PM
[snip]
The rationale for this is not to make the team better that day, but get Papi some PA in the middle of the 9 game stretch. But it almost certainly makes much more sense to simply give Adrian his semi-annual day off.
Posted 20 June 2011 - 04:14 PM
Hmm. My mom used to say exactly the same thing when I would ask if we could go to Disney World.
(She never took us to Disney World.)
Posted 20 June 2011 - 04:20 PM
Posted 20 June 2011 - 04:22 PM
Posted 20 June 2011 - 04:30 PM
They might as well add Carlton Fisk to the roster and put *him* in LF. After all, he's played there before.
Posted 20 June 2011 - 04:47 PM
"I wouldn't say it's willingness, but the fact that I've done it before," he said. "If I was approached on it, and Tito wanted to do it for a couple games, I'd be OK with it. I'm not an outfielder, and I wasn't an outfielder, but if it meant getting Papi in the game and get him a few more games, it's definitely something I would do."
Posted 20 June 2011 - 05:05 PM
Edes needs a better editor.Teams cannot use a designated hitter in interleague play.
Posted 20 June 2011 - 05:11 PM
Posted 20 June 2011 - 05:13 PM
So, when?I'd rather see Gonzalez get a day off. He and Ortiz can still get 1 at-bat as a pinch-hitter for each game they are sitting out.
| Date | Team | P | Adrian Gonzalez | Papi |
| 24-Jun | @ Pit | Maholm (L) | 1/9, BB, 3K | -- |
| 25-Jun | @ Pit | Kartsens | 2/7, BB, 2K | 2/3, 3B, HR |
| 26-Jun | @ Pit | Morton | 0/4, BB | -- |
| 27-Jun | x | |||
| 28-Jun | @ Phi | Lee (L) | 2000 | 629 |
| 29-Jun | @ Phi | Oswalt | 975 | -- |
| 30-Jun | @ Phi | Hamels (L) | 1098 | 0/3, K |
| 1-Jul | @ Htn | Norris | 0/3, 2K | -- |
| 2-Jul | @ Htn | Happ (L) | 0/3 BB | -- |
| 3-Jul | @ Htn | Lyles | --- | -- |
| Myers | 1/4, HR, 2 BB | 1406 |
Edited by Eric Van, 20 June 2011 - 05:14 PM.
Posted 20 June 2011 - 05:56 PM
Wouldn't it make just as much sense to just stick Ortiz in LF? I imagine their range is about the same(0), and that way, you would only be downgrading 1 position defensively.
Well, my rudimentary math skills suggest it's an easy call just on the numbers. If you assume a -5 UZR/150 for Gonzalez in left, Kalish's 7.9 UZR/150 in left (SSS but it seems approximately what you'd expect), and Ortiz' -4.3 UZR career at 1B, you get this:
Defensive and offensive value
RC / G UZR / G Ortiz 0.76 -0.024 Gonzalez 1B 0.90 0.014 Gonzalez LF 0.90 -0.033 Kalish 0.39 0.053
That adds up to 0.46 R/G in added offensive value for the Ortiz / Gonzalez lineup compared to a loss of 0.13 R/G in defensive value.
The question IMO is whether putting a guy in a new position - or playing Ortiz defensively at all - risks an injury to either Adrian Gonzalez or Ortiz.
Posted 20 June 2011 - 06:06 PM
Posted 20 June 2011 - 06:11 PM
Posted 20 June 2011 - 06:13 PM
And Gonzie I know has done it in winter ball. And there are a few right fields on this trip that aren't huge, so we'll see. That's the best way I can say it. It's gotta work though, you know, where I don't want to outsmart myself. We'll see."
Posted 20 June 2011 - 07:41 PM
Edited by CSteinhardt, 20 June 2011 - 07:45 PM.
Posted 20 June 2011 - 08:33 PM
I'd rather see Gonzalez get a day off. He and Ortiz can still get 1 at-bat as a pinch-hitter for each game they are sitting out.
Edited by HriniakPosterChild, 20 June 2011 - 08:36 PM.
Posted 20 June 2011 - 09:10 PM
Posted 20 June 2011 - 10:11 PM
Posted 20 June 2011 - 10:16 PM
These projections are dumb. Sure, it might be a differential of .14 runs a game when projected out over a season... But one horrible defensive play in one game could be a 1, 2, 3' or 4 run difference. It could be the difference between winning and losing each game they attempted this shit. And as hot as the Sox are, the MFYs are right behind us keeping pace so let's not go risking losses all willy nilly, ok?
And that's not even considering injury risk to our best hitter.
Dumb.
Posted 20 June 2011 - 11:12 PM
It looks like Youks is hurt, would hate to risk doing anything to hurt Adrian. With a 100% healthy lineup maybe a game or two (OF, not third,) but we can't afford to have our three and four hitters both playing hurt or not playing at all.True. Two major defensive downgrades: Gonzalez is a great defensive 1st baseman. Papi doesn't even remember what a decent 1st baseman is. Gonzalez won't catch up to anything 10 steps away. Adrian could be drilled into reasonable shape as a (left-handed) 3rd baseman, but outfield is best reserved as a place for him to hit line drives.
Posted 21 June 2011 - 08:40 AM
Posted 21 June 2011 - 09:52 AM
FTR, I agree, because of the injury risk first and foremost.These projections are dumb. Sure, it might be a differential of .14 runs a game when projected out over a season... But one horrible defensive play in one game could be a 1, 2, 3' or 4 run difference. It could be the difference between winning and losing each game they attempted this shit. And as hot as the Sox are, the MFYs are right behind us keeping pace so let's not go risking losses all willy nilly, ok?
And that's not even considering injury risk to our best hitter.
Dumb.
Posted 21 June 2011 - 10:33 AM
I think this is overly harsh. He's certainly not a guy you would want there long-term, but (granted SSS issues) his career defensive numbers aren't horrible, and he doesn't look horrible to me when he plays, just like a typical big guy with poor mobility and mediocre skills. I think he's probably a better defensive 1B than, for instance, Richie Sexson. I realize that's damning with faint praise, but I guess my point is that Ortiz is a 1B, just not a good one. Putting him there isn't something you want to do more often than you can help, but it isn't a strategic monstrosity either. Putting Adrian in the outfield, with his non-existent speed and near-total lack of experience, might qualify as a strategic monstrosity.True. Two major defensive downgrades: Gonzalez is a great defensive 1st baseman. Papi doesn't even remember what a decent 1st baseman is. Gonzalez won't catch up to anything 10 steps away. Adrian could be drilled into reasonable shape as a (left-handed) 3rd baseman, but outfield is best reserved as a place for him to hit line drives.
Posted 21 June 2011 - 10:57 AM
Posted 21 June 2011 - 11:30 AM
I think this is overly harsh. He's certainly not a guy you would want there long-term, but (granted SSS issues) his career defensive numbers aren't horrible, and he doesn't look horrible to me when he plays, just like a typical big guy with poor mobility and mediocre skills. I think he's probably a better defensive 1B than, for instance, Richie Sexson. I realize that's damning with faint praise, but I guess my point is that Ortiz is a 1B, just not a good one. Putting him there isn't something you want to do more often than you can help, but it isn't a strategic monstrosity either.
Posted 21 June 2011 - 12:31 PM
Posted 21 June 2011 - 12:40 PM
Edited by mabrowndog, 21 June 2011 - 12:44 PM.
Posted 21 June 2011 - 02:18 PM
These projections are dumb. Sure, it might be a differential of .14 runs a game when projected out over a season... But one horrible defensive play in one game could be a 1, 2, 3' or 4 run difference. It could be the difference between winning and losing each game they attempted this shit. And as hot as the Sox are, the MFYs are right behind us keeping pace so let's not go risking losses all willy nilly, ok?
You guys clearly don't understand how projections work. These cases are considered in projections. Yes, one horrible defensive play could be the difference in winning or losing. So could Gonzalez or Ortiz having a great day at the plate.Gonzo playing left like was said above could lead to him making some monumental mistakes in the outfield and costing the team several runs in maybe as little as a single game.
I don't buy the injury risk argument, really. How much additional risk is there? I doubt there will be any running into walls; they are likely too slow to even get to a ball that is hit to the wall. I don't think it's much riskier than chasing foul balls toward the stands or dugout from 1B. I'm not talking about putting my grandmother in the outfield. I'm talking about a guy who despite being really slow, is actually quite athletic.FTR, I agree, because of the injury risk first and foremost.
Edited by aron7awol, 21 June 2011 - 02:19 PM.
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users