Drew Back Poll
- Thread starter Jnai
- Start date
Moving him to short and Bogaerts to third is the best use of resources. This gets Holt back down in Pawtucket (or maybe Herrera off the roster) and improves both the offense and defense at both positions. If Middlebrooks gets back and is healthy, you can worry about platooning him into the left side a bit, but at this point he might be trade bait.
I love this move. It makes the Red Sox better and prevents another team from improving by signing Drew right after the draft. I don't see any downside.
I love this move. It makes the Red Sox better and prevents another team from improving by signing Drew right after the draft. I don't see any downside.
I don't like the move but since it's done Drew has to play SS. I wouldn't platoon him but I'd make sure he has a decent number of rest days against lefties only.
I agree with the majority on the first two questions, but I think he should be part of a platoon with WMB when he comes back. X will survive moving between SS and 3b.
He shouldn't platoon if Holt is the UIF. And it's absolutely ridiculous to think of him playing third. He's the best defensive shortstop in that clubhouse as soon as he walks in. That's where he plays. Drew at short and Xander at third won a World Series last year; hard to see why it's a problematic arrangement now. I think there's an argument to be made that we shouldn't have signed Drew because Xander deserved a shot at playing the whole year at short. But there's no argument to be made for signing Drew and then playing him at third while Xander plays short.
Savin Hillbilly said:
I think we want Drew at short against RHP at short, with Bogaerts at third. Xander plays short against LHP, and Brock Holt and his .750 OPS (Drew is .681 vs. LHP) plays third.
Here's a table:
OPS SS 3B
vs. LHP .969 (XB) .750 (BH)
vs. RHP .795 (SD) .628 (XB)
I'm assuming Bogaerts' numbers against RHP are likely to improve. And if we could get a better lefty-mashing UI than Holt, I'd be all for it.
edit: Sounds like Farrell is thinking along these lines, but not in terms of a hard and fast platoon. Via brimac: "Farrell indicates that Bogaerts could play third base against righties, shortstop against at least some lefties."
Hate this move. Suspect that if there is any offensive contribution from Drew at all, it won't come until around the All-Star break, at which point it may be too late. Like the person, don't believe we are getting same player we had last year, does not do much to solve roster turmoil, and is a slight net negative offensively, imo.
Mediocrity, thy name is 2014 Red Sox.
Mediocrity, thy name is 2014 Red Sox.
Love it, SS, full time until WMB is back and (if) is hitting again, then semi-platoon.
[edit: to expand on "Love it": anything that adds 3 more Drew threads in under an hour!]
[edit: to expand on "Love it": anything that adds 3 more Drew threads in under an hour!]
DrewDawg said:
I assume that DPU is taking into account that Drew hasn't faced live pitching at all this year, so there's going to be a ramping up period even after his "rehab" assignment in the minors. If you figure two weeks of rehab plus another 2-3 weeks to ramp up and get acclimated (similar to the start to his season last year after the concussion), that's putting you toward the end of June before he's at 100% efficiency. So the net effect he's going to have over the next month, at least, is probably nil compared to the replacements.
I would put Drew in a platoon when WMB is healthy and ready to return to the majors. Until then, no platoon.
Like dbn said.
Like dbn said.
If Middlebrooks makes it back onto the major league roster, that makes sense. I think they're going to look to trade him, but that's just because that's what I would do if it were my decision. If Middlebrooks is back, however, mixing him into the lineup to give Drew days off against most lefties, give Xander time at both positions and maximizes the production they'll get out of the left side of the infield.
Snodgrass'Muff said:
While leaving Pedroia to pull off another 161 game season at 2B? If Middlebrooks isn't "back" until August, maybe. I can't see them going back to the Middlebrooks-Bogaerts-Drew rotation for more than a week or two without the benefit of the expanded rosters in September.
Snodgrass'Muff said:
Ugh. I can't imagine anything quite so detrimental to Bogaerts' offense in 2014 and his defensive development in the long term as being jerked around the infield every day. Let the kid play one position and settle into it.
Sprowl said:
I think we make a bigger deal of that here than is warranted. The organization apparently isn't afraid to use Bogaerts that way.
https://twitter.com/PeteAbe/status/468847552964866049
So if Drew is only playing vs RHP than we just paid prorated $14m for a guy who will play what, 65% of the games and come in for defense in late innings?
That seems like an absurd price tag if that's the case.
That seems like an absurd price tag if that's the case.
mikeford said:
I don't really see how this is an issue for a <1 year contract. And I'm not sure it's an issue anyway. $14M translates to about 3 wins (at least). Last year he had a 137 wRC+ vs. RHP. Even if he falls well short of that--to, say, 115--a 115 wRC+ shortstop who plays plus defense is pretty much what Ian Desmond was last year, and 65% of 2013 Desmond is about a 3.25-win player. OTOH, if you play him every day, you're getting about a 100wRC+ full-time shortstop with plus defense, which translates to more or less 2013 J.J. Hardy--a 3.4-win player. Either way, he should give you 3+ wins (in a full year, that is; obviously all these numbers would be pro-rated now) and therefore is making about the right amount of money. It's just a matter of whether you have the budget and the roster flexibility to pay a little extra for a marginal win or two by platooning him.
I would like to see Drew playing the same role he did last year. Full time at SS. Does not hit LHP'ers but his defense makes up for that.
Team is a better team with XB at 3B and Drew at SS. I have seen enough of XB at SS to believe his future should be at 3B. He is going to get a lot bigger in a couple of years as he matures physically.
Where they actually play him depends on how set they are on XB as their future SS. Maybe they play Drew at 3B if they are really set on XB at SS, and then platoon Drew with WMB at 3B when he comes back. Even so, Drew is great insurance for SS in case XB gets hurt.
Its really just a positive any way you look at it. Dempsters salary coming off the books made it possible, so thanks to him as well.
Team is a better team with XB at 3B and Drew at SS. I have seen enough of XB at SS to believe his future should be at 3B. He is going to get a lot bigger in a couple of years as he matures physically.
Where they actually play him depends on how set they are on XB as their future SS. Maybe they play Drew at 3B if they are really set on XB at SS, and then platoon Drew with WMB at 3B when he comes back. Even so, Drew is great insurance for SS in case XB gets hurt.
Its really just a positive any way you look at it. Dempsters salary coming off the books made it possible, so thanks to him as well.
The best Stephen Drew is one that does not have to face LHP. The stats have been cited enough. It was out of some idea that his glove was amazing and he was the starting SS at the beginning of the year we're going to stick with him against LHP last year was only reason he didn't platoon during his atrocious early summer slump (probably a bit of can be blamed on a concussion he suffered in spring training if i remember correctly. )
X having to do less thinking defensively(looked pretty effortless on the hot corner. Also the Mets Rays O's don't seem to have a problem with a offensive minded hot corner if X starts to look more locked in at the plate I might leave him alone but that's a much longer term picture)
JF's comments seem to indicate the team needed more value and production from the left side. Offense very well may go up from X and if you limit Drew to righties he might hit over or around 300.
Then its a matter of WMB or Cecchini or for the more daring aggressively moving the getting more versatile Betts.
RHH
1) X 3b
2) Pedroia 2b
3) Ortiz DH
4) Napoli 1b
5) Victorino RF
6) Drew SS
7) Sizemore RF
8) Pierzynscki C
9) JBJ CF
Betts ( CF/ 2b/ 3b ? more upside then carp)
Cechinni ( 3b batting 7th against LHP)
Gomes LF/RF ( in LF for Sizemore against righties batting 6th)
Ross C ( ( Batting 8th against LHP
X and Drew play SS so no more need for the lightly used Herrera. Cechhini may not be ready defensively yet but maybe in 2 weeks ? Probably keep WMB or Carp around a couple more weeks if I'm still not ready on Cecchinni or Betts.
X having to do less thinking defensively(looked pretty effortless on the hot corner. Also the Mets Rays O's don't seem to have a problem with a offensive minded hot corner if X starts to look more locked in at the plate I might leave him alone but that's a much longer term picture)
JF's comments seem to indicate the team needed more value and production from the left side. Offense very well may go up from X and if you limit Drew to righties he might hit over or around 300.
Then its a matter of WMB or Cecchini or for the more daring aggressively moving the getting more versatile Betts.
RHH
1) X 3b
2) Pedroia 2b
3) Ortiz DH
4) Napoli 1b
5) Victorino RF
6) Drew SS
7) Sizemore RF
8) Pierzynscki C
9) JBJ CF
Betts ( CF/ 2b/ 3b ? more upside then carp)
Cechinni ( 3b batting 7th against LHP)
Gomes LF/RF ( in LF for Sizemore against righties batting 6th)
Ross C ( ( Batting 8th against LHP
X and Drew play SS so no more need for the lightly used Herrera. Cechhini may not be ready defensively yet but maybe in 2 weeks ? Probably keep WMB or Carp around a couple more weeks if I'm still not ready on Cecchinni or Betts.
mikeford said:
I've never really understood this line of reasoning. It's not like we're not in a position to take on a contract or two and it's not like it's the budget-setting offseason. It's essentially a mid-season acquisition for cash, all of which is someone else's money (albeit perhaps a marginal impact on ticket prices, etc AT WORST)
If your focused on the ten million I don't know what to say. They thought that was going to be Dempster money. Any move would have cut into that money but required a prospect cost which they obviously hate. They had Dumpster and Drew on the roster last year and it doesn't help them win games for Henry to unexpectedly save 10 mill from one year to the next.
Take a deep breath. They won a WS last year and Fenway prints money.
Take a deep breath. They won a WS last year and Fenway prints money.
Yes, sorry for the delay. RHF characterized my thoughts on Drew's offense well. I don't think it will effectively "lengthen" the lineup much at all. Hard to tell how his defense will make an extraordinary difference, either, though that obviously remains to be seen. Essentially, for a resource utilization of $10M, it amounts to a half year rental on a team not showing any signs of being championship caliber while stunting the defensive development of one of the brightest prospects in the game.Red(s)HawksFan said:
My only question is what this does for 2015.
I think this will make us better for 2014 but I assume Drew isn't going to be signing any one year deals after this season (though maybe that's an assumption I shouldn't make) which means we go into 2015 with the same situation, but with Bogaerts now having a whole season at SS under his belt and with Cecchini and Marrero being one year closer.
If we could sign him for 2015 we could just make Bogaerts to third permanent, anticipate replacing Drew with Marrero after 2015, and start playing Cecchini in left and at first.
As it is, things are messier than I would like.
I think this will make us better for 2014 but I assume Drew isn't going to be signing any one year deals after this season (though maybe that's an assumption I shouldn't make) which means we go into 2015 with the same situation, but with Bogaerts now having a whole season at SS under his belt and with Cecchini and Marrero being one year closer.
If we could sign him for 2015 we could just make Bogaerts to third permanent, anticipate replacing Drew with Marrero after 2015, and start playing Cecchini in left and at first.
As it is, things are messier than I would like.
I really don't understand why Drew decided to go this direction. He wanted a long-term contract and you'd think if he waited two weeks he would have had a chance at getting that. With the long lay off it wouldn't be shocking if he struggled to match last year's production, and if his production dips he may never receive the multi-year deal which was reportedly his goal all along..
kazuneko said:
No guarantees he would have got one. I think Boras has been pretty clear for awhile now that he would take a 1 year deal if he could play SS but needed a multi-year deal to play another position. Now that he has a compensation pick off his back, and a deal to play at a place where he put up good numbers, and at SS, he has a real good shot at a decent deal after the season . Obviously, he has to stay healthy and put up good numbers.
Also, last year he missed most of ST and the first 3 weeks of the season with a concussion and got off to a dreadful start. This year should be no worse, just starting a month later, and hopefully he gets off to a better start. Also, he has been working out at Boras sports institite in Florida so should just need some AB to get ready.
Drew needs to get some time playing second base before he's activated, so that we don't need a no-hit futility infielder on the roster anymore. If he can cover SS and 2B, then we won't need a Herrera anymore. He wouldn't need a ton of time at second base, just enough to cover Pedroia getting the occasional day off.
Then when Middlebrooks is ready to come back, you have with Pedroia, Bogaerts, Drew and Middlebrooks (or maybe Garin Cecchini) covering 2B, 3B and SS. Drew replacing Herrera/Holt on the roster is a solid upgrade.
Then when Middlebrooks is ready to come back, you have with Pedroia, Bogaerts, Drew and Middlebrooks (or maybe Garin Cecchini) covering 2B, 3B and SS. Drew replacing Herrera/Holt on the roster is a solid upgrade.
I agree with this 100%. Give the UI spot to Holt until WMB is back. Then WMB gets another run at it until the end of July or mid-August. Then you could replace him with either Cheech or Betts, depending on who has made more progress (Cheech with the glove, Betts with AAA pitching).The Gray Eagle said:
If Drew (or maybe XB) can't play a passable 2B, they either need to stick with Holt until Betts is ready (whenever that might be) or hope that WMB can show some 2B ability while on rehab.
Sampo Gida said:
I think the good news here is that Drew clearly likes Boston and wants to play here. Otherwise he could almost certainly have rolled the dice on a post-June 1 multiyear deal--as you say, no guarantees he would have gotten one, but you have to think he would have found somebody somewhere to sign him up for the remainder of 2014 either way, so all he would have lost by taking the gamble is a few weeks of PT and a little money.
Part of me can't help but feel bad for X. I think we tend to view players as chess pieces that can be moved around with little regard for their feelings. It's hard to know what would be better: being shuffled around in a strange platoon where he's always in the lineup but moving between third and short, or sticking at third for the year.
AlNipper49 said:
Jnai said:
"Limited" is an interesting word choice; I'm sure many baseball fans would argue against the notion the Red Sox have a "limited" pool of money.
$10M is pocket change to Fenway Sports Group. If any part of their fiscal philosophy is "tied" to success, it is the divestment of the silly, TV-driven deals for Gonzalez and Crawford and their refusal to give out similar contracts in the future. Avoiding long term, huge money deals is "efficient use" of their "pool of money". Not avoiding $10M/one season deals.
There's lots of valid baseball reasons to argue against the Drew signing. There's decent chemistry and/or development reasons to argue against the Drew signing. There might even be an argument to be had on general team building philosophies, though I disagree because: one year contract.
But there's absolutely no valid "money" reasons to argue against the Drew signing. None. $10M for one year is absolutely in the petty cash box in Lucky's office, collecting dust. Such a paltry sum for a business like FSG is the very definition of chump change. One year contracts are the very definition of "efficient use" of the money pool, especially when (h/t to Rudy) the Dempster money was just sitting there, doing nothing for the team.
soxfan121 said:
Well, those fans would be idiots. Clearly, the Red Sox have some limited pool of resources with which to build their baseball team. The limit may be imposed by the personal preference of the owner, or the realities of selling tickets at Fenway park, or whatever other reason, but there's some limit.
I don't even think the money was all that poorly spent - wins cost about $7m/yr on the free agent market, and Drew is projected to be somewhere in the range of a 1.5 win player or so, depending on his playing time, over the course of the year.
But if 10M is such chump change, when does the money start being important?
Jnai said:
I get this and don't totally disagree, but I think this sentiment can be overdone. We (and he) should remember that he is a rookie that has played in only 60 regular season games in his entire career, being moved back to the position he played as a starter in the World Series last year, to make room for the veteran guy who was the starting SS all of last year. It's not like they traded for Alex Gonzalez and sent him to Portland.
Jnai said:
(1) C'mon. Those fans of teams without the ability to spend up to or over the luxury tax threshold are not "idiots" and it's stupid for a Red Sox fan to even try to make the "limited resources" argument. But whatever, you keep on thinking that the Red Sox are a team "limited" by their finances. It is, and always will be bullshit, but it does help some fans and John Henry sleep at night, so who am I to point out reality?
(2) When it recurs annually or when it exceeds the amount already budgeted to be spent (i.e. Dempster) in that calendar year.
The budget for this season included Dempster being paid; when Dempster decided to not get paid, that budgeted money went to petty cash, available to be spent on any item that that did not have a long term commitment.
soxfan121 said:
If the Red Sox have unlimited resources, why didn't the Red Sox resign Jacoby Ellsbury, sign Brian McCann, and acquire 3 or 4 more stud starters, some of which they would move to the bullpen?
Oh, I know. Because the Red Sox have limited resources.
Jnai said:
It seems like this would be covered by part 2 of soxfan's post, right?
I think the point is that signing Drew now shouldn't strongly effect the Red Sox ability to make other feasible moves. I think that's when money starts getting important. I actually agree that $10M is a lot, but with Middlebrooks out for a couple weeks/months, and there being some room under the luxury tax threshold (which the owners have decided to try to stay under), this isn't the worst use of money.
I'm not sure "like/don't like" is a good fit for me. I don't like the move, because it represents the fact that WMB has been ineffective over the past season and a third. However, its better than the alternative: giving up prospects for a position that may just be a 2 year stopgap, or playing herrera/holt.
I think there's no question that Drew wil be SS against righties, and X will probably get some reps at SS against lefties. I'd rather have X-man continue to progress at shortstop, as opposed having to shift around the left side of the infield, but I'm not sure if missing some time at SS this year will negatively impact him in the long run.
I think there's no question that Drew wil be SS against righties, and X will probably get some reps at SS against lefties. I'd rather have X-man continue to progress at shortstop, as opposed having to shift around the left side of the infield, but I'm not sure if missing some time at SS this year will negatively impact him in the long run.
Jnai said:
I agree there is a limit. However, recently JWH said the benefits of being under the LT threshold were not what he expected (related to rebates), and suggested it may no longer be a limit. They have been over the threshold in the past before rebates. So we don't eactly know what the limits are.
As for the value of an incremental win, one could argue that Drews additional 1-3 wins might be far more valuable to the Red Sox than the league average, especially if they are the difference between making the playoffs and not making the playoffs.
10 million is about 2.5% of annual reeenues, less if you include NESN's contribution to the ownerships cash flow. I would not call it chump change, but I doubt JWH loses sleep over such expenditures, If I had to guess, I would guess he gets more involved when numbers approach the 100,000,000 mark, but only he knows
I dislike this move because I want Xander playing at SS and settling in to his long term position there.
I can't possibly believe that they are giving up on him there already, and that means you put an expensive blah at SS to hinder Xander's development and confuse the situation at 3B yet further.
You have WMB and Cecchini for third. If neither work out there is the improvement for Marrero to get excited about (who can play short and Xander at third) and also the Betts wildcard for SS and 3B.
Next year you are going to have uncertainty about Xander's position. A huge question mark at 3B / SS for whichever Xander isn't playing.
All for a league average SS who might need to platoon who isn't cheap and isn't ready to play. Woopdeeedoo.
Yeah it's not my money and maybe it makes the team better this year ina pretty crappy AL East but it's a dumb win now move for a team that looks a long way from winning now.
It smacks to me of not wanted to add another rookie to the mix with JBJ and Xander.
Frankly the team's performance doesn't exactly scream one half season from one ok shortstop from doing something special. We did something special and are in position to have an extended period of really contention. If we can figure out who to keep, who to trade and how this farm depth settles out. This delays answering most of those questions.
Now : Counter argument. The team knows WMB is out for a long while, Cecchini isn't ready and neither is Mookie nor Marrero, they need something now, and they are still in the mix so the time to act is now. Which might be fair, the WMB piece in particular being important info I don't have.
I do worry that bedding in two young players this year has been ... interesting. Right now you are looking at two more next year (3b/ SS and C) and maybe a third (LF).
I can't possibly believe that they are giving up on him there already, and that means you put an expensive blah at SS to hinder Xander's development and confuse the situation at 3B yet further.
You have WMB and Cecchini for third. If neither work out there is the improvement for Marrero to get excited about (who can play short and Xander at third) and also the Betts wildcard for SS and 3B.
Next year you are going to have uncertainty about Xander's position. A huge question mark at 3B / SS for whichever Xander isn't playing.
All for a league average SS who might need to platoon who isn't cheap and isn't ready to play. Woopdeeedoo.
Yeah it's not my money and maybe it makes the team better this year ina pretty crappy AL East but it's a dumb win now move for a team that looks a long way from winning now.
It smacks to me of not wanted to add another rookie to the mix with JBJ and Xander.
Frankly the team's performance doesn't exactly scream one half season from one ok shortstop from doing something special. We did something special and are in position to have an extended period of really contention. If we can figure out who to keep, who to trade and how this farm depth settles out. This delays answering most of those questions.
Now : Counter argument. The team knows WMB is out for a long while, Cecchini isn't ready and neither is Mookie nor Marrero, they need something now, and they are still in the mix so the time to act is now. Which might be fair, the WMB piece in particular being important info I don't have.
I do worry that bedding in two young players this year has been ... interesting. Right now you are looking at two more next year (3b/ SS and C) and maybe a third (LF).
LondonSox said:
We all want the rookies to settle in to their positions and field and hit well. Do you also want the Red Sox to try to win the WS this year?
LondonSox said:
Do you really think that signing Drew on a 1- yr contract = giving up on a 22 yr old XB as a SS? And S. Drew is blah?
LondonSox said:
Right. One who is injured and has underperformed at the MLB level, and others who are not ready for 2014. Do you care at all about 2014? Again, Drew is on a 1- yr contract.
LondonSox said:
Why? Drew is not under contract for the Red Sox in 2015. Xander is the presumed SS for 2015-?. WMB and Cecchini are the front -runners for the 2015 3B position. How does the current Drew signing significantly affect the future of either position?
LondonSox said:
Drew is not a league average SS.
LondonSox said:
Yeah, who would want to win now? Though, we should weigh the value of trying to win now against the value of the prospects they gave up for Drew. Oh, wait.
Drew is a career 98 OPS+ and a 96 wRC+ hitter. Seems pretty average
He's also not replacing a SS he's replacing a 3B, which is a higher degree of difficulty (ie Xander could have stayed at SS and a 3B be brought it or he's playing at 3B which would also hurt his value defensively).
He was better than average last year, but that was one of his best defensive seasons and his second best season of his career overall. I think we was good not great last year and would expect less this year, and for only ~ half a season assuming he needs time to get ready.
I personally think last year was exceptionally fortuitous and assuming that the same team can repeat is somewhere past optimism into farce.
The team is about the young talent right now. Be it having reached the majors or in the farm. There's no solution to LF, RF is still a huge question mark as in CF, as is Catcher. As is most of the rotation. I'm not writing off the year but if you think Stephen F-ing Drew is saving the season (whenever he's ready to play) I think you're smoking.
The next decade will be decided by who they keep, who they move and who comes back. Do it right and it's a cheap talented team which allows huge flexibility on payroll for the rest of the roster. Do it wrong and you can set back the team for years and end up never trading nor trusting rookies.
Personally I'd rather be looking to the future and the next decade and be happy to luck into contention due to a weak division (for once). That's before you consider 10mm was used for this purpose. Not my money sure.
He's also not replacing a SS he's replacing a 3B, which is a higher degree of difficulty (ie Xander could have stayed at SS and a 3B be brought it or he's playing at 3B which would also hurt his value defensively).
He was better than average last year, but that was one of his best defensive seasons and his second best season of his career overall. I think we was good not great last year and would expect less this year, and for only ~ half a season assuming he needs time to get ready.
I personally think last year was exceptionally fortuitous and assuming that the same team can repeat is somewhere past optimism into farce.
The team is about the young talent right now. Be it having reached the majors or in the farm. There's no solution to LF, RF is still a huge question mark as in CF, as is Catcher. As is most of the rotation. I'm not writing off the year but if you think Stephen F-ing Drew is saving the season (whenever he's ready to play) I think you're smoking.
The next decade will be decided by who they keep, who they move and who comes back. Do it right and it's a cheap talented team which allows huge flexibility on payroll for the rest of the roster. Do it wrong and you can set back the team for years and end up never trading nor trusting rookies.
Personally I'd rather be looking to the future and the next decade and be happy to luck into contention due to a weak division (for once). That's before you consider 10mm was used for this purpose. Not my money sure.
Is the AL East weak or is the American League just approaching much greater parity and therefore becoming more and more competitive? In either case, upgrading by 1 or 2 wins at the margin is worth far more than the average value of a win.
This signing does not change anything about 2015, and improves the chance to win in 2014. Now, if they could just make a similar move to fix the catcher or CF positions, that would be great.
This signing does not change anything about 2015, and improves the chance to win in 2014. Now, if they could just make a similar move to fix the catcher or CF positions, that would be great.
According to Fangraphs, shortstops this season have a wRC+ of 87, while third basemen are at 93. If WMB is out for a while (which seems reasonably likely) then our options for the mean time are Jonathan Herrera (projected ~68 wRC+ averaging Steamer and ZiPS) and Brock Holt (projected ~85 wRC+). Middlebrooks, once he returns, is projected as a ~95 wRC+ hitter. Drew is also an above average defender.LondonSox said:
If WMB were healthy you could make a pretty good case that this is such a marginal upgrade that it is not worthwhile if you believed that WMB+XB is basically a wash defensively compared to XB+Drew, but with WMB out for some amount of time the upgrade over our current options is pretty clear. He won't singlehandedly make up our current deficit, but there are maybe 6-7 players in the game who could be reasonably projected to do that and we are not going to be acquiring any of them.
I've been saying since the offseason to resign Drew. I believe he was 5th in WAR for AL SS. I think we extend the line-up with this move. Shore up a better defensive left side of the infield with XMan to Third. Honestly cant see any downside to this move. Plus was never enthralled with the likes of Herrera as back-up. I believe the scouts were thinking X Man (who I really like ) was the future SS for a decade + (much like a Jeter). So why cant he move back to SS once we get Cecchini up or Middlebrooks gets his mojo back? I believe you build a team from the center up. I could turn out to be wrong but think this move strenthens the center.