Our lack of infield depth

Merkle's Boner · Apr 18, 2014

Mookie!! Until he's ready, however, which could be as early as August if he keeps his early tear up, I am interested to see what they will do. Specifically, when WMB is back, do they keep Herrera or Roberts. Obviously, Herrera was the choice as Utility Infielder when the season started, but I agree with you that he is pretty piss-poor with the bat. Can Roberts play adequately enough at SS on occasion to make him be the UI?

rembrat · Apr 18, 2014

Expecting your backups to be just as good as your starters at every position seems a little unreasonable.

TheoShmeo · Apr 18, 2014

rembrat said:
Expecting your backups to be just as good as your starters at every position seems a little unreasonable.

Where in Jose's post are you geting that expectation?

I don't see that at all. I see a concern about Herrerra and Roberts that is both understandable and not necessarily premised on the notion that there should be no drop off at every position. Wanting guys to be serviceable doesn't mean you expect them to be equivalent to the starters.

That said, we saw last year that Ben was willing to go long periods of time with guys at third who were quite limited (Holt and Snyder), and we also saw that having guys of that talent level in the line-up was not debilitating.

TomRicardo · Apr 18, 2014

I am not sure why we are talking about Mookie Betts when we are talking about 3B. Cecchini who is already on the 40 man roster is more relevant. They didn't bring him up to have him work on defense however He would probably be better than the Herrera / Roberts combo

Savin Hillbilly · Apr 18, 2014

Another possibility would be to bring up Marrero, who is tearing it up in Portland (.324/.395/.471), and slide Bogaerts to third until WMB is back.

But we might be better off just hanging in there with what we've got if it's only going to be another couple of weeks. I think we've seen the worst of Roberts--he's not a good hitter, but he's not this bad.

EDIT--For some reason I thought Marrero was on the 40-man. He's not, which makes that a less attractive option.

wolfe_boston · Apr 18, 2014

All major leagues have the same problem-you can't have Steve Young on the sidelines to back up Montana. Mookie isn't on the roster but even if he was he needs to play everday and not be a MLB utility player. Brock Hollt is on the roster, is playing well at Patucket,is on the roster and has played some shortstop.

kieckeredinthehead · Apr 18, 2014

The problem was Pedroia and Middlebrooks being out at the same time, forcing both Herrera and Roberts into the lineup. As a platoon pair at third (or second), you'd get:

271/336/328 from Herrera batting lefty, and
261/337/435 from Roberts batting right.

Compare to Middlebrooks' 253/295/463 career, and you lose some slugging but gain considerable OBP. League average last year was 256/320/404. As a backup in case of one injury, Herrera and Roberts seem a decent option.

teddywingman · Apr 18, 2014

The team would be so much better with a plus glove at short and Bogaerts at 3rd.

Reggie's Racquet · Apr 18, 2014

teddywingman said:
The team would be so much better with a plus glove at short and Bogaerts at 3rd.

You mean like Drew? At the right price....

Yelling At Clouds · Apr 18, 2014

Roberts DFA'd just now. Holt up.

teddywingman · Apr 18, 2014

Reggie's Racquet said:
You mean like Drew? At the right price....

11 Posts without the name Drew was a pretty good run. But yes, they would be better with him.

After last season I've become convinced that SS defense is where it's at. Maybe the market inefficiency if that's the correct term.

If you can find a guy who plays gold glove caliber shortstop, it doesn't matter if he hits .235 with no power.

teddywingman · Apr 18, 2014

Danny_Darwin said:
Roberts DFA'd just now. Holt up.

Not gonna miss Roberts. If everything goes well maybe his 2014 World Series ring will be on an episode of Pawn Stars in 2030.

kieckeredinthehead · Apr 18, 2014

kieckeredinthehead said:
The problem was Pedroia and Middlebrooks being out at the same time, forcing both Herrera and Roberts into the lineup. As a platoon pair at third (or second), you'd get:

271/336/328 from Herrera batting lefty, and
261/337/435 from Roberts batting right.

Compare to Middlebrooks' 253/295/463 career, and you lose some slugging but gain considerable OBP. League average last year was 256/320/404. As a backup in case of one injury, Herrera and Roberts seem a decent option.

Of course, Herrera actually bats right-handed... and Roberts is gone. I guess I'm not Ben Cherington.

Hee Sox Choi · Apr 18, 2014

kieckeredinthehead said:
Of course, Herrera actually bats right-handed... and Roberts is gone. I guess I'm not Ben Cherington.

Herrera is a switchy. Holt bats L. Seems like having both on the roster is redundant. Get well WMB. BROCK HOLT TIME!

Toe Nash · Apr 18, 2014

To me this seems like a similar issue as with catcher. They have young guys who can help but they're just enough away that thrusting them into the majors would be too much, especially with the team having a relatively slow start. There would be a lot of pressure and while I'm not sure it would hurt Cecchini or Betts long-term, they may simply not do very well. So the team is left looking at the waiver wire and other freely available talent, which by definition is going to not be very good.

I thought Roberts actually would be pretty good for a free backup based on his career numbers, but I guess not.

This is the kind of situation where having an Alex Cora or Nick Punto on the team would be nice, but if we had signed someone like that to a 2 yr / $2m AAV contract there'd be plenty of complaining about how guys like that should just be freely available. Or when Farrell gave them one start a week when everyone was healthy people would complain about that.

DennyDoyle'sBoil · Apr 18, 2014

Herrera seems to me to be a perfectly decent backup UI. He'll take a pitch, he seems to be able to make decent contact (his SO numbers so far this year are aberrationally high), seems like a competent bunter, and can play 4,5 and 6. I guess you'd like your UI guy to have another tool -- like base stealing for late-game pinch running opportunities. But nothing I've seen so far this year suggests that the seeming plan going into the season should be scrapped.

Losing your 4, 5 or 6 for more than a couple of days, and having to press your UI into regular duty, just sucks. Some teams have the luxury of an heir apparent in the minors who can come up and play multiple infield positions, but those that don't don't have great options. I have no problem playing the year with WMB, Xander, and Pedroia as the every day guys with Herrera as the UI. If one of those three takes a significant knock, or if WMB turns out to be less than durable or to suck, then maybe you have to do something more significant. Or if Holt starts playing so well as to be difficult to ignore, maybe you re-think. Barring that, though, I'm not sure there are any realistic options out there. I can't think of anyone who is near starter quality, who can play all three infield positions to the left of first base, who is available and who it would make sense to sit 5 days a week. Given his big league history, it was worth kicking the tires on Roberts to see if he was that guy, but he wasn't.

HriniakPosterChild · Apr 19, 2014

Edit: thoughts belonged in the 2nd guesser's club thread.

Paradigm · May 14, 2014

The White Sox DFA'd Jeff Keppinger today in order to continue giving more playing time to their young infielders.

Keppinger has had injury trouble for the last year-plus, but in 2012 he .325/.367/.439 for the Rays, playing 1B, 2B, and 3B. He hasn't played SS regularly since 2008, so no reason to think he can fill in there.

An ability to play SS is the only thing Herrera has on him, but how important is it? Herrera can fill-in once every two weeks so that Bogaerts gets an off day, but (GOD HELP US) if the Sox ever needed a long-term fill-in, they might look to Marrero instead of Herrera.

Meanwhile, Keppinger might give the team a more stable bat to back up 2B and 3B.

Red(s)HawksFan · May 14, 2014

Paradigm said:
The White Sox DFA'd Jeff Keppinger today in order to continue giving more playing time to their young infielders.

Keppinger has had injury trouble for the last year-plus, but in 2012 he .325/.367/.439 for the Rays, playing 1B, 2B, and 3B. He hasn't played SS regularly since 2008, so no reason to think he can fill in there.

An ability to play SS is the only thing Herrera has on him, but how important is it? Herrera can fill-in once every two weeks so that Bogaerts gets an off day, but (GOD HELP US) if the Sox ever needed a long-term fill-in, they might look to Marrero instead of Herrera.

Meanwhile, Keppinger might give the team a more stable bat to back up 2B and 3B.

Unless he's willing to be stashed at Pawtucket, Keppinger is of little value to the Red Sox. They only have room for one utility infielder on the roster, so if he can't play at least a passable shortstop, there's no fit for him.

He played in more games last year than the year before in Tampa, to the tune of .253/.283/.317. Given he hasn't played at all this year due to being on the DL, I'm not sure why we should be dismissing that season as injury-related as if he can fully recover his 2012 form.

I suppose since he's played a little 1B, he could conceivably replace Carp on the roster, but frankly I trust Carp's bat more right now. And I'd rather not replace his LH bat with Keppinger's questionable RH bat.

WenZink · May 14, 2014

Red(s)HawksFan said:
Unless he's willing to be stashed at Pawtucket, Keppinger is of little value to the Red Sox. They only have room for one utility infielder on the roster, so if he can't play at least a passable shortstop, there's no fit for him.

....

I mentioned this point in another thread, but now that it's standard to have a 5 man rotation and a 7 man bullpen, it makes it difficult to have a deep bench. And the Red Sox situation is even more limited since they have dedicated DH in Ortiz. Add in a dedicated backup catcher, and that's 14 men, and the 8 field positions makes 22, leaving just 3 bench players to add depth for infield and outfield.

The 25 man roster worked 50 years ago, when you had a 4-man rotation and they completed a significant portion of their games, but it seems a little out-dated today. It should be increased to 26 or 27. I know the MLBPA would be delighted, and, in fact, they should stress that it might limit the strain on pitchers. Of course, the owners would just see an increase in payroll. There has been plenty of speculation about this idea... just "use the google.,"

btw, Remember back in the '80s when they actually reduced the roster to 24 to save a few bucks?

HriniakPosterChild · May 15, 2014

Bill James has argued that you can win more games by having a deeper bench and a thinner bullpen. The cost of winning some of those games that you are "supposed" to lose is that you'll lose a few games that you are supposed to win. Managers loathe losing games that they are supposed to win.

There's a psychology experiment in there somewhere; I don't think the phenomenon is limited to baseball at all.

Reverend · May 15, 2014

HriniakPosterChild said:
Bill James has argued that you can win more games by having a deeper bench and a thinner bullpen. The cost of winning some of those games that you are "supposed" to lose is that you'll lose a few games that you are supposed to win. Managers loathe losing games that they are supposed to win.

There's a psychology experiment in there somewhere; I don't think the phenomenon is limited to baseball at all.

Do you follow football?

HriniakPosterChild · May 15, 2014

I know who won the Super Bowl. Aside from that, not really.

Reverend · May 15, 2014

HriniakPosterChild said:
I know who won the Super Bowl. Aside from that, not really.

Ah. Owing to some of the specifics of the the discrete choices head coaches make in football, the phenomenon has been studied more extensively in football, mostly in economics departments. The results have been a resounding showing that they err on the side of avoiding blame by making what appears to be the conventional and therefore "safe" call at the cost of significant yards and points.

The neat thing in football is that it's linearity makes it easier to quantify in tangible terms, e.g. in yards. I bring this up because the reason it's been big in economics is because, as you say, it's clearly bigger than football and almost certainly exists in baseball as well--and, as you say, in the rest of life as well.

The key is to figure out where those moments in baseball are and exploit them. Could add a win or two and if you don't and someone else does...

Our lack of infield depth

Earl of Acie

Member

Member

Earl of Acie

Skrub's sympathy case

rusty cohlebone

Earl of Acie

loves the secret sauce

Commissioner of Calvinball

Member

Looks like Zach Galifianakis

Member

Post-darwinian

Looks like Zach Galifianakis

Looks like Zach Galifianakis

Member

Member

Member

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill

Member

juju all over his tits

Member

New Member

Member

for king and country

Member

for king and country