UpandIn

Ok...I get all of that. But what I DO need explained is if you're 2B, SS and 3B includes Adames, Urias and Turang...why should we care at ALL how their positions fit their offense? It quite literally makes no difference. With regard to Adames, I really don't think he'd be spending much time at all learning a new position. It's a simple transition. I actually think SS to 2B is quite a bit more difficult. When to cover on a SB, on a bunt, you're on the opposite side of the IF, the throwing angles change. I think asking him to play 1B(for example) would be FAR more difficult than 3B as a SS. But again, we clearly have a different opinion on that. I also really think Urias is better suited at 2B. He's quick, good range...not a great arm. But sure, lets say it's marginal. It may be.

Ok...I get all of that. But what I DO need explained is if you're 2B, SS and 3B includes Adames, Urias and Turang...why should we care at ALL how their positions fit their offense? It quite literally makes no difference. With regard to Adames, I really don't think he'd be spending much time at all learning a new position. It's a simple transition. I actually think SS to 2B is quite a bit more difficult. When to cover on a SB, on a bunt, you're on the opposite side of the IF, the throwing angles change. I think asking him to play 1B(for example) would be FAR more difficult than 3B as a SS. But again, we clearly have a different opinion on that. I also really think Urias is better suited at 2B. He's quick, good range...not a great arm. But sure, lets say it's marginal. It may be.

I didn't say they should see him as the worst defensive 2nd basemen because of 1 season. I said; It's like the actual content goes into someone's head, it gets cut with their own opinion and they repeat what you said how they interpreted and it bares almost no similarity to what was actually said. Do you deny that if he was coming off another Gold Glove season rather than a terrible defensive season, his value would be higher? And again...never said he should be evaluated as the worst defensive 2B because of 1 season. I don't think Wong is the worst defender. I don't think he's a bad defender. I do think the article makes a good point, the fact that he's 32 and at an age where defensive skills naturally decline and that he's not a 40/45 runner as opposed to a 60/65, that would also contribute to lowering his value. You can say you need 3000 innings to properly evaluate a players defensive value, but that's seldom realistic. To start a career, fine. When a player is 32 and his defense has been trending in the wrong direction for a couple years, you need to PROJECT how a player is going to play moving forward.

It has been. The articles go into the main forum... And the author is apparently going position by position looking at next years teams.

It has been. The articles go into the main forum... And the author is apparently going position by position looking at next years teams.

....so you think it's unlikely that an elite SS with a strong arm would be able to play 3B? Is THAT the argument? Adames can't do it or is unlikely to do it? Because that's a very different argument. Yet that's generally what happens with SS's when they lose their range. They move to 3B. Unless they lack arm strength, then they move to 2B. He's played SS because there hasn't been a reason NOT to play him at SS. It's like arguing it's not as simple as moving a CFer(with a very strong arm...say a Garrett Mitchell) to RF because...he just might not have success there. You're doing the same thing...it's just a less difficult position. You're also making that argument while simultaneously arguing FOR Luis Urias to stay at 3B because he's "fine" there. Urias was a SS coming up. A SS who they said profiled more as a 2B. So where is the complication in moving Adames over to 3B with regard to his ABILITY to play the position? Arm? Check Range? Check Hands? Check Him playing 20 feet away is going to fundamentally change his ability to pick up a ball and throw it? Why? How many good defensive Shortstops have we seen move from SS to 3B and struggle? Or...as I suggested earlier, we COULD just agree to disagree.

....so you think it's unlikely that an elite SS with a strong arm would be able to play 3B? Is THAT the argument? Adames can't do it or is unlikely to do it? Because that's a very different argument. Yet that's generally what happens with SS's when they lose their range. They move to 3B. Unless they lack arm strength, then they move to 2B. He's played SS because there hasn't been a reason NOT to play him at SS. It's like arguing it's not as simple as moving a CFer(with a very strong arm...say a Garrett Mitchell) to RF because...he just might not have success there. You're doing the same thing...it's just a less difficult position. You're also making that argument while simultaneously arguing FOR Luis Urias to stay at 3B because he's "fine" there. Urias was a SS coming up. A SS who they said profiled more as a 2B. So where is the complication in moving Adames over to 3B with regard to his ABILITY to play the position? Arm? Check Range? Check Hands? Check Him playing 20 feet away is going to fundamentally change his ability to pick up a ball and throw it? Why? How many good defensive Shortstops have we seen move from SS to 3B and struggle? Or...as I suggested earlier, we COULD just agree to disagree.

I disagree. I think it is.

I disagree. I think it is.

That sounds good in theory, but there's little question his value has taken a hit after a season in which he was one of the worst defensive 2B as opposed to if he'd won a GG. 3000 innings is close to 3 years. Teams aren't going to wait for 3000 innings when things are pointing in the wrong direction(age, speed as the article mentions). I hope teams would value him as an above average defender at 2B. I don't think they're going to be overly concerned with the 3000 inning benchmark when making their evaluations though....so I think the risk may not be worth it in exercising his option.

Ok...but he barely has 3000 career innings at any position. So we have what we have to go on. The Brewers saw him struggling at SS, they made a trade. We saw him play 2B last year, he was better there. His prospect profile showed that he had a fringe arm. I don't think you need to give him 3000 innings at 3B because you conclude he's likely a better fit for 3B.

Ok...but he barely has 3000 career innings at any position. So we have what we have to go on. The Brewers saw him struggling at SS, they made a trade. We saw him play 2B last year, he was better there. His prospect profile showed that he had a fringe arm. I don't think you need to give him 3000 innings at 3B because you conclude he's likely a better fit for 3B.

Right. But I don't think there are millions of dollars on the line. If anything, if he plays 3B at an elite level, I think his value would go up. Trea Turner moved to 2B(and played better there than he did at SS which as mentioned in his FA write up may assuage teams concerns about how he ages and loses his strongest physical attribute, his speed). Adames will hit FA at the same age roughly. I doubt team are going to say, "well, he was an elite defensive SS when he was 26, but can he do it at...29?" Plus, he'd almost certainly get time at SS as I mentioned.

Right. But I don't think there are millions of dollars on the line. If anything, if he plays 3B at an elite level, I think his value would go up. Trea Turner moved to 2B(and played better there than he did at SS which as mentioned in his FA write up may assuage teams concerns about how he ages and loses his strongest physical attribute, his speed). Adames will hit FA at the same age roughly. I doubt team are going to say, "well, he was an elite defensive SS when he was 26, but can he do it at...29?" Plus, he'd almost certainly get time at SS as I mentioned.

Well...Urias may be fine at 2B, but he's much better at 2B. Maybe even elite if this years production is an indication. And the logic of saying Turang would be an elite 2B, but we don't know about Adames at 3B doesn't really track with me. 3B is the easier position. It requires less range...but sometimes more difficult throws. It actually leans into his wheelhouse and is likely where he ends up long term(if he plays long enough for his athleticism to deteriorate enough while still being productive enough offensively). And AGAIN, 3B moving forward is going to be more like playing SS in the past with the shift limited. So lefties, you'll have Adames swung over near where a SS would lineup straight away, Turang right up the middle, Urias on the edge of the grass at 2B. It is possible Adames isn't happy with it. I'm more concerned with the Brewers than Adames preferences though and he doesn't strike me as the type to throw a tantrum or sulk. I guess we just disagree on this.

Well...Urias may be fine at 2B, but he's much better at 2B. Maybe even elite if this years production is an indication. And the logic of saying Turang would be an elite 2B, but we don't know about Adames at 3B doesn't really track with me. 3B is the easier position. It requires less range...but sometimes more difficult throws. It actually leans into his wheelhouse and is likely where he ends up long term(if he plays long enough for his athleticism to deteriorate enough while still being productive enough offensively). And AGAIN, 3B moving forward is going to be more like playing SS in the past with the shift limited. So lefties, you'll have Adames swung over near where a SS would lineup straight away, Turang right up the middle, Urias on the edge of the grass at 2B. It is possible Adames isn't happy with it. I'm more concerned with the Brewers than Adames preferences though and he doesn't strike me as the type to throw a tantrum or sulk. I guess we just disagree on this.

Turang is a SS. An elite defensive SS. So yes, I think it'd be a "BIT" of a waste to play him at 2nd. Wong has nothing to do with this unless he's brought back next year after an abnormally bad season defensively at 2B. So...yeah, I saw it. I just don't see the relevance. Urias struggles with his throws more than anything. 2B easier throws than SS. Urias +4 OAA at 2B, -1 at 3B, -4 at SS. So I do think his defense is enough better to justify it. And if you're playing the same 3 players at 3 positions, I'm 100% indifferent to who profiles better at what position offensively. It makes literally zero difference. Seems like the only reason or reasonS you don't do this is if A-You don't think Adames can handle it. B-Because Adames doesn't want to because it could hurt his value. I don't buy either. I think he'd be an elite defender at 3B. Arguably better at 3B than SS with his arm strength.

Turang is a SS. An elite defensive SS. So yes, I think it'd be a "BIT" of a waste to play him at 2nd. Wong has nothing to do with this unless he's brought back next year after an abnormally bad season defensively at 2B. So...yeah, I saw it. I just don't see the relevance. Urias struggles with his throws more than anything. 2B easier throws than SS. Urias +4 OAA at 2B, -1 at 3B, -4 at SS. So I do think his defense is enough better to justify it. And if you're playing the same 3 players at 3 positions, I'm 100% indifferent to who profiles better at what position offensively. It makes literally zero difference. Seems like the only reason or reasonS you don't do this is if A-You don't think Adames can handle it. B-Because Adames doesn't want to because it could hurt his value. I don't buy either. I think he'd be an elite defender at 3B. Arguably better at 3B than SS with his arm strength.

This is exactly the argument. Adames and Turang are going to be starting next year(most likely). Turang at 2B is a bit of a waste of his defensive ability. Adames at 3B, especially with the new rules regarding the shift...is not a waste defensively. I also don't think you're "jerking" Adames around by asking him to move over a few feet. You field the ball, you throw the ball. It's not like you're asking a CB to switch to WRer, or asking a Catcher to move to pitcher like Carlos Marmol. This is the same team that moved Travis Shaw to 2B. Is the concern that Adames will struggle because of this? Or that Turang's not proven? Because if it's the prior, we've seen plenty of good defensive SSs move to 3B and thrive. If it's Turang, well...you always have the option of moving Adames back. I doubt he's going to forget how to play defense. You're likely going to start Urias, Adames and Turang next year in the IF. Why not line them up in the position that maximizes all of their strengths the most? Not to mention, Turang's likely our SS of the future while Adames may be traded in a year.

This is exactly the argument. Adames and Turang are going to be starting next year(most likely). Turang at 2B is a bit of a waste of his defensive ability. Adames at 3B, especially with the new rules regarding the shift...is not a waste defensively. I also don't think you're "jerking" Adames around by asking him to move over a few feet. You field the ball, you throw the ball. It's not like you're asking a CB to switch to WRer, or asking a Catcher to move to pitcher like Carlos Marmol. This is the same team that moved Travis Shaw to 2B. Is the concern that Adames will struggle because of this? Or that Turang's not proven? Because if it's the prior, we've seen plenty of good defensive SSs move to 3B and thrive. If it's Turang, well...you always have the option of moving Adames back. I doubt he's going to forget how to play defense. You're likely going to start Urias, Adames and Turang next year in the IF. Why not line them up in the position that maximizes all of their strengths the most? Not to mention, Turang's likely our SS of the future while Adames may be traded in a year.

I'd argued it might be worth it to pick up the option and then trade him rather than eat the 2M and let him walk...but that is obviously a bit risky. That said, he appears to be the top 2B on the market...unless the Phillies decline Segura's 17M TO(which is certainly possible). Even then, Wong's been a better the last several years by WAR. I'd guess they'll just decline the option and go with Turang to save ~7.3M. If he just had an average year defensively, he's likely a 4+ WAR player and it'd be a no-brainer.

It's kinda crazy how bad Drury's been for most of his career. When he was a potential trade target, I went back and looked at how he'd done historically and was definitely surprised. The production did not meet my perception. I'd gladly roll the dice at 5-6M per, but I'll guess he gets a 1/10 with a TO for 10. Something in that range. Or not, these players are sometimes next to impossible to predict. Jace Peterson...I have a hard time believing he gets 8M per year after going from a AAAA type player for most of his career to one year at age 32 where he puts up 2.3 WAR. At the same time...I thought he was a pretty big part of this team in 2021. His OB skills were extremely important for that team. So I'd definitely go 2/10 total, maybe throw in one of those 3rd year TOs that's just a way to defer some money.

No...we can't say that about Mitchell. Mitchell was also out 5th or 6th best prospect this past year. I feel pretty confident however that we can say that about Frelick and the farm system as a whole. You were just putting Chourio in a group just below Griffey Jr and squarely with Julio Rodriguez, Ronald Acuna Jr(pretty much anyone). I don't think we actually do need to wait before we can label it improved. We're saw a clear, obvious about face in the way we go about drafting and developing position players, PLUS we've drastically changed our entire approach to Latin America and after signing Gilbert Lara, it wasn't until 2018 we were able to get back in and start spending after a 2 year period in which we lost our bonus money for going so far over to sign him.

No...we can't say that about Mitchell. Mitchell was also out 5th or 6th best prospect this past year. I feel pretty confident however that we can say that about Frelick and the farm system as a whole. You were just putting Chourio in a group just below Griffey Jr and squarely with Julio Rodriguez, Ronald Acuna Jr(pretty much anyone). I don't think we actually do need to wait before we can label it improved. We're saw a clear, obvious about face in the way we go about drafting and developing position players, PLUS we've drastically changed our entire approach to Latin America and after signing Gilbert Lara, it wasn't until 2018 we were able to get back in and start spending after a 2 year period in which we lost our bonus money for going so far over to sign him.

Did I NOT already answer all of these questeions? Ignoring how you've reworded this in an obviously sarcastic tone ...you said To whit I responded; You also said; Last sentence; You realize that this conversation didn't start with you, right? I made a comment saying I think SOME of the trade suggestions may be a little overly ambitious on our behalf, comparing it to what SOME fans expected for Hader(two top 15 prospects for example). I listed a couple and you said that's exactly what they should get. But just for clarity real quick, Cartaya(8), Miller(26), Stone(77). That seems reasonably inline with your 1-25(#8), 1-50(#26), 50-100(#77). In fact...it's quite literally that. I agree, the Dodgers likely won't do that...which is how this conversation started. Now, YOU said that would be a fair return, but you weren't the person this comment was initially directed to. I made a general statement; And then you responded with; So I'm not sure what the debate is here, but I feel like I address all these statements. The idea that it'd be just "casual fans," who...-by the way, are the lifeblood of an MLB franchise as it takes more than a small pct of the fan base in a market as small as Milwaukee's to help generate the revenue that would allow them to push the payroll into the 140+ range- Who'd be upset with the Brewers trading Burnes...I disagree with that. I think it's a bit of an arrogant statement calling fans who don't agree with you "casual" fans. It's also, as I've said when I pointed out how the Cleveland Guardians fan base has gone from a fanbase that went from selling out every game over a 7 year period to now being 25th, ahead of only KC, Pitt, Tampa, Miami and Oakland...this depsite the fact that they won 90 games and made the playoffs with the youngest core in MLB and and having a nice stadium...as opposed to Oakland and Tampa who have terrible stadiums. And they were the only ahead of Tampa Bay in attendance and over 1.1M behind Philly in attendance, the next lowest rated team. So yes, I'd say you should PROBABLY give at least some thought to those "casual" fan base. What I DIDN'T say was that you shouldn't trade Burnes. Just that it should be taken into consideration whereas you said; This-This is the part I disagreed with and VERY clearly said; I feel like I made that point when I cited the Brewers fanbase outspending every other fan base in MLB per capita and again, object to the idea that the fans who'd be upset are "casuals." But again, NO, I did not say; I addressed this from EVERY angle and STILL never said you don't trade Burnes and I rejected the "it hurts the future of the team just so it doesn't piss off some "casual fans." Tell me what well run business ANYWHERE becomes one without a completely disregard for a teams paying customers?