Author Topic: What a good to great shortstop means to a team  (Read 3541 times)

Noe

  • Guest
What a good to great shortstop means to a team
« on: May 23, 2009, 11:42:55 am »
You know, often we accuse the Texas Rangers of, well, not being a very bright organization.  What they've done in the past to accent that is continue to do the same thing over and over and over again to try and convince everyone that they can win, only to be out of things by early August.  The formula that the neighbors to the North (and I use the term neighbor loosely) have hung their cap on was this: Offense (and plenty of it).

Funny how some local nine fans and also media have urged the Astros to employ the same formula, but I digress.

One cannot truly fault an American League team from falling into the trap of believing that all it takes is a great DH and a bunch of mashers to win in that league.  In fact, I would probably be inclined to agree with them.  I would also be wrong just like they are.  Baseball is still baseball and that means that the key to being a consistent winner is this: Pitching and Defense and just enough Offense.  I know, how then would one explain Derek Jeter?  Well, lately Mr. Jeter has not sniffed the World Series, much less going deep into a playoff series.  Funny how the lack of solid pitching has made this so. While the Yankees went out and tried to employ a bunch of mashers (Matsui, Giambi, A-Rod) to offset the lack of pitching and certainly the less than spectacular defense, the appearances in the October classic have come to a halt.  You love watching a young team like the Rays take it to the Yankees last year by using, of all things, Pitching, Defense and just enough Offense.  Wonders of wonders.

So now I take a long hard look at the Texas Rangers and lo and behold they've moved the one-time immovable statue that is Michael Young out of shortstop and placed a phenom named Elvis Andrus in his stead.  Andrus came over in the Teixiera deal with the Braves several years ago and now as a 20 year old, this kid is showing he's ready for the show.  Good thing the Rangers weren't inclined to be so stupid as to look at Young and say to themselves "no thanks" on that move.  So Young's feeling were hurt when he caught wind of the thinking by the Rangers braintrust (led by the old man Nolan Ryan no less... go figure, he's thinking Pitching and Defense... go figure).  And the Rangers reaction was "so what?".  Good for them.  Finally they have someone who is thinking baseball and not just fantacrap masher ball up in Arlington and look where they are now.

So what impressed me the most about the Rangers last night?  Was it the hitting?  No, not really.  Was it the pitching?  A little but not really all that much.  Was it the defense up the middle?  Oh yes, now we're talking!  Andrus and Kinsler are two very good, nay great up the middle defenders and will be for many years to come.  Young, good hitters, yes... but defensively is where they impress the most, especially Andrus.  The double play they turned on the Astros was simply amazing.  And then the put out of Matsui by Andrus late in the game was a game changer.

*sigh*

I know I'm beating a dead horse around here, so forgive me for this one moment of melancholy if you will.  I miss defense up the middle on the Astros.  Okay, mostly I miss seeing great shortstop work.  I like Tejada, really I do and his defense is okay.  Game changer?  No, not really.  See the Ranger's pitchers must feel so comfortable knowing that they have a SS like Andrus behind them.  It does effect how a pitcher does his work.  I know you'll say that a pitcher has to get people out regardless but I am of the opinion that the defense behind a pitcher plays a good role in performance of said pitcher.  I don't mind less than spectacular defense in the corners, even though in RF I would like to see a stronger arm (but I digress).  It is up the middle that makes for a consistent winner.  Notice I said "consistent", something that the Houston Astros are not.  They are not consistent, some may argue, because they have health issues in key areas (closer, middle relief, set up man, Berkman for a while).  Once those areas are solidified they'll be more consistent.  Okay, that may be true, but you want true consistency... I say you make an effort to walk away from those who clamor for more offense from a shortstop and go and make a commitment to a true range enabled, gun for an arm, awesome display of a shortsop and along with Bourn in center and Matsui at second, watch how well this team will change.  Watch how well all pitchers will feel and perform.

Okay, I'm off my soapbox for now... but as the season progresses, I just may be inclined to revisit this.  Especially if the Astros keep losing ground and do a fire sale this trading deadline.  If they trade a over .300 hitting Miggy and insert a Manzella into the shortstop position, it may be time to stand up and pay attention to what may happen.  Just saying, because hitting #6, Miggy isn't really part of the offense that much (reality check, Blum, Keppinger or Pudge could handle the six spot).  If Pence is for real (and I see signs that he is) and so is Born, it could be time to make a bold move.
« Last Edit: May 23, 2009, 11:45:40 am by Noe in Austin »

SaltyParker

  • Should Have Quit 500 Posts Ago
  • Posts: 1455
    • View Profile
Re: What a good to great shortstop means to a team
« Reply #1 on: May 23, 2009, 11:59:48 am »
Tejada's lack of range has really been showing lately. Add in a few less then stellar plays and it begins to add up. Let's hope that his bat holds up better this year then last. As far as a bold move of Tejada, good luck getting someone to pick up his 14mm salary.

moriartp

  • Fantasy Team Owner
  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 3203
    • View Profile
Re: What a good to great shortstop means to a team
« Reply #2 on: May 23, 2009, 12:05:35 pm »
I couldn't agree more. Tejada obviously brings a lot to the team, but I think it would be unwise to bring him back as the shortstop next year. If he proves he's got enough left in his bat, though, I think he'd be a very good option at third base.

Noe

  • Guest
Re: What a good to great shortstop means to a team
« Reply #3 on: May 23, 2009, 12:14:18 pm »
Tejada's lack of range has really been showing lately. Add in a few less then stellar plays and it begins to add up. Let's hope that his bat holds up better this year then last. As far as a bold move of Tejada, good luck getting someone to pick up his 14mm salary.

If the get back is a prospect (pitching), I'd eat the salary.  100% if it's a top of the line prospect (the going rate of a bonus baby prospect is reaching top of the line salaries any way, why not a prospect that is even closer to the majors?)
« Last Edit: May 23, 2009, 12:19:28 pm by Noe in Austin »

Noe

  • Guest
Re: What a good to great shortstop means to a team
« Reply #4 on: May 23, 2009, 12:18:08 pm »
I couldn't agree more. Tejada obviously brings a lot to the team, but I think it would be unwise to bring him back as the shortstop next year. If he proves he's got enough left in his bat, though, I think he'd be a very good option at third base.

A couple of things to think about (mind you, I have no idea if this is true, just saying keep on ear to the ground and an eye on the horizon on this one):

1. Tejada is in his walk year and may be... just may be... playing for a contract (at minimum two year contract).  You may be seeing great hitting right now and it may be tied to Miggy really trying hard to get his contract for next year.  I wouldn't re-up him any way, so better to ship him out when he's hot and a contender may want a solid bat.

2. Third base is pretty well set with Blum and Keppinger already.  As is Keppinger is getting very little playing time and if you add Miggy to the mix, you would bury Keppinger even more.  I don't think it is a good idea to hang on to Miggy for a third base job myself.  I'd rather move him and even free up more time for Keppinger to play.

SaltyParker

  • Should Have Quit 500 Posts Ago
  • Posts: 1455
    • View Profile
Re: What a good to great shortstop means to a team
« Reply #5 on: May 23, 2009, 12:24:34 pm »
If the get back is a prospect (pitching), I'd eat the salary.  100% if it's a top of the line prospect (the going rate of a bonus baby prospect is reaching top of the line salaries any way, why not a prospect that is even closer to the majors?)
There will be no option other then to eat his salary if they move him.

Noe

  • Guest
Re: What a good to great shortstop means to a team
« Reply #6 on: May 23, 2009, 12:30:05 pm »
There will be no option other then to eat his salary if they move him.

I'm unsure what you're saying.  Are you saying you don't want him traded?  If so, just say so... you won't hurt my feelings.  I said you only eat his salary if you get back a top of the line prospect, meaning I wouldn't trade him just for the sake of trading him.  It still has to be a deal that works for both sides.  The Astros are not stupid (contrary to popular belief), they wouldn't do such a thing so why even bother to ask them to do that?  Anyone did that to me, I would hang up the phone on them, ever so politely as I could, but hang up the phone nonetheless.  And, oh by the way, someone would want a good hitting Miggy if he proves for another month that he's not an aberation.  A contending team will bite the bullet on some sort of salary that the Astros and that team can share.  Again, the *ONLY* way the Astros eat a salary entirely is if the prospect being offered is a top of the line guy... else, no deal.  Simple as that.
« Last Edit: May 23, 2009, 12:42:32 pm by Noe in Austin »

SaltyParker

  • Should Have Quit 500 Posts Ago
  • Posts: 1455
    • View Profile
Re: What a good to great shortstop means to a team
« Reply #7 on: May 23, 2009, 01:08:56 pm »
No, no....I totally agree with you. Just saying they won't be able to move him under any circumstances unless they take a hit on his salary to some degree. As far as next year I also would pass.

juliogotay

  • Pope
  • Posts: 8738
    • View Profile
Re: What a good to great shortstop means to a team
« Reply #8 on: May 23, 2009, 01:09:37 pm »
I'm unsure what you're saying.  Are you saying you don't want him traded?  If so, just say so... you won't hurt my feelings.  I said you only eat his salary if you get back a top of the line prospect, meaning I wouldn't trade him just for the sake of trading him.  It still has to be a deal that works for both sides.  The Astros are not stupid (contrary to popular belief), they wouldn't do such a thing so why even bother to ask them to do that?  Anyone did that to me, I would hang up the phone on them, ever so politely as I could, but hang up the phone nonetheless.  And, oh by the way, someone would want a good hitting Miggy if he proves for another month that he's not an aberation.  A contending team will bite the bullet on some sort of salary that the Astros and that team can share.  Again, the *ONLY* way the Astros eat a salary entirely is if the prospect being offered is a top of the line guy... else, no deal.  Simple as that.


Andrus came over from the Braves in the deal for Texiera in late '07. The Braves had the services of Texiera for a little over one season. I'm sure they thought they could sign him long-term because he played at Ga. Tech and his wife was from Atlanta. He said Atlanta was were he wanted to be all along. Alas, he had the baseball anti-Christ for an agent so he prostituted himself and ended up a Yankme. The Rangers absolutely took the Braves to the cleaners on this deal....something I didn't think could be done. In addition to Andrus they got one current starter in their rotation, LHer Matt Harrison, who is useful and a real stud named Perez in the minors that is a future top-of-the-rotation type. They got Saltlamachia the catcher and there was one other player coming from Atlanta that I can't recall. This trade was orchestrated by Jon Daniels the very young GM of the Rangers. Ryan was not affiliated with the Rangers at that time. Daniels has done a very good job with deals after getting off to a rocky start on a couple that turned out poorly. This deal may go down as one of the best in baseball history in time. Obviously Tejada wouldn't bring that bounty but if he brought a missing piece I would seriously consider it.
This organization needs to cash in some assets if they are going to be run-of-the mill. They currently are very ordinary and a classic Astros mid-season run is not guaranteed. If this team is allowed to continue to age and retire as Astros they will have nothing to show for it but a Sunday afternoon on-field ceremony before a game where Milo and Drayton give the player some nice momentos. We have a few building blocks....Bourn, Pence, Wandy, and hopefully our future 3B, catcher and a couple of pitchers at AA and higher that should be useful. Where is the next Lance Berkman in the organziation? The next Roy Oswalt, Brad Lidge? They probably won't all come from the next couple of drafts.  

juliogotay

  • Pope
  • Posts: 8738
    • View Profile
Re: What a good to great shortstop means to a team
« Reply #9 on: May 23, 2009, 01:12:41 pm »
You know, often we accuse the Texas Rangers of, well, not being a very bright organization.  What they've done in the past to accent that is continue to do the same thing over and over and over again to try and convince everyone that they can win, only to be out of things by early August.  The formula that the neighbors to the North (and I use the term neighbor loosely) have hung their cap on was this: Offense (and plenty of it).

Funny how some local nine fans and also media have urged the Astros to employ the same formula, but I digress.

One cannot truly fault an American League team from falling into the trap of believing that all it takes is a great DH and a bunch of mashers to win in that league.  In fact, I would probably be inclined to agree with them.  I would also be wrong just like they are.  Baseball is still baseball and that means that the key to being a consistent winner is this: Pitching and Defense and just enough Offense.  I know, how then would one explain Derek Jeter?  Well, lately Mr. Jeter has not sniffed the World Series, much less going deep into a playoff series.  Funny how the lack of solid pitching has made this so. While the Yankees went out and tried to employ a bunch of mashers (Matsui, Giambi, A-Rod) to offset the lack of pitching and certainly the less than spectacular defense, the appearances in the October classic have come to a halt.  You love watching a young team like the Rays take it to the Yankees last year by using, of all things, Pitching, Defense and just enough Offense.  Wonders of wonders.

So now I take a long hard look at the Texas Rangers and lo and behold they've moved the one-time immovable statue that is Michael Young out of shortstop and placed a phenom named Elvis Andrus in his stead.  Andrus came over in the Teixiera deal with the Braves several years ago and now as a 20 year old, this kid is showing he's ready for the show.  Good thing the Rangers weren't inclined to be so stupid as to look at Young and say to themselves "no thanks" on that move.  So Young's feeling were hurt when he caught wind of the thinking by the Rangers braintrust (led by the old man Nolan Ryan no less... go figure, he's thinking Pitching and Defense... go figure).  And the Rangers reaction was "so what?".  Good for them.  Finally they have someone who is thinking baseball and not just fantacrap masher ball up in Arlington and look where they are now.

So what impressed me the most about the Rangers last night?  Was it the hitting?  No, not really.  Was it the pitching?  A little but not really all that much.  Was it the defense up the middle?  Oh yes, now we're talking!  Andrus and Kinsler are two very good, nay great up the middle defenders and will be for many years to come.  Young, good hitters, yes... but defensively is where they impress the most, especially Andrus.  The double play they turned on the Astros was simply amazing.  And then the put out of Matsui by Andrus late in the game was a game changer.

*sigh*

I know I'm beating a dead horse around here, so forgive me for this one moment of melancholy if you will.  I miss defense up the middle on the Astros.  Okay, mostly I miss seeing great shortstop work.  I like Tejada, really I do and his defense is okay.  Game changer?  No, not really.  See the Ranger's pitchers must feel so comfortable knowing that they have a SS like Andrus behind them.  It does effect how a pitcher does his work.  I know you'll say that a pitcher has to get people out regardless but I am of the opinion that the defense behind a pitcher plays a good role in performance of said pitcher.  I don't mind less than spectacular defense in the corners, even though in RF I would like to see a stronger arm (but I digress).  It is up the middle that makes for a consistent winner.  Notice I said "consistent", something that the Houston Astros are not.  They are not consistent, some may argue, because they have health issues in key areas (closer, middle relief, set up man, Berkman for a while).  Once those areas are solidified they'll be more consistent.  Okay, that may be true, but you want true consistency... I say you make an effort to walk away from those who clamor for more offense from a shortstop and go and make a commitment to a true range enabled, gun for an arm, awesome display of a shortsop and along with Bourn in center and Matsui at second, watch how well this team will change.  Watch how well all pitchers will feel and perform.

Okay, I'm off my soapbox for now... but as the season progresses, I just may be inclined to revisit this.  Especially if the Astros keep losing ground and do a fire sale this trading deadline.  If they trade a over .300 hitting Miggy and insert a Manzella into the shortstop position, it may be time to stand up and pay attention to what may happen.  Just saying, because hitting #6, Miggy isn't really part of the offense that much (reality check, Blum, Keppinger or Pudge could handle the six spot).  If Pence is for real (and I see signs that he is) and so is Born, it could be time to make a bold move.


While Andrus' fielding contributions are many, he will hit a little too. He's the complete package. Manzella probably won't be even if he fields as Andrus (which I don't think he does).

Noe

  • Guest
Re: What a good to great shortstop means to a team
« Reply #10 on: May 23, 2009, 01:18:30 pm »

While Andrus' fielding contributions are many, he will hit a little too. He's the complete package. Manzella probably won't be even if he fields as Andrus (which I don't think he does).

Please explain more clearly what you're saying... it's not clear to me yet.

MRaup

  • Fantasy Team Owner
  • Double Super Secret Pope
  • Posts: 11432
  • The goddamn Germans ain't got nothin to do with it
    • View Profile
Re: What a good to great shortstop means to a team
« Reply #11 on: May 23, 2009, 01:21:17 pm »
Please explain more clearly what you're saying... it's not clear to me yet.


Two words: Negative Nancy.
"Terrorists, Sam. They've taken over my stomach and they're demanding beer." - Norm.

"Your words yield destruction, sorrow and are meant just to hate and hurt..." - Das

Noe

  • Guest
Re: What a good to great shortstop means to a team
« Reply #12 on: May 23, 2009, 01:25:14 pm »

Andrus came over from the Braves in the deal for Texiera in late '07. The Braves had the services of Texiera for a little over one season. I'm sure they thought they could sign him long-term because he played at Ga. Tech and his wife was from Atlanta. He said Atlanta was were he wanted to be all along. Alas, he had the baseball anti-Christ for an agent so he prostituted himself and ended up a Yankme. The Rangers absolutely took the Braves to the cleaners on this deal....something I didn't think could be done. In addition to Andrus they got one current starter in their rotation, LHer Matt Harrison, who is useful and a real stud named Perez in the minors that is a future top-of-the-rotation type. They got Saltlamachia the catcher and there was one other player coming from Atlanta that I can't recall. This trade was orchestrated by Jon Daniels the very young GM of the Rangers. Ryan was not affiliated with the Rangers at that time. Daniels has done a very good job with deals after getting off to a rocky start on a couple that turned out poorly. This deal may go down as one of the best in baseball history in time. Obviously Tejada wouldn't bring that bounty but if he brought a missing piece I would seriously consider it.
This organization needs to cash in some assets if they are going to be run-of-the mill. They currently are very ordinary and a classic Astros mid-season run is not guaranteed. If this team is allowed to continue to age and retire as Astros they will have nothing to show for it but a Sunday afternoon on-field ceremony before a game where Milo and Drayton give the player some nice momentos. We have a few building blocks....Bourn, Pence, Wandy, and hopefully our future 3B, catcher and a couple of pitchers at AA and higher that should be useful. Where is the next Lance Berkman in the organziation? The next Roy Oswalt, Brad Lidge? They probably won't all come from the next couple of drafts.  

Obviously you follow the Rangers (I don't).  But I wasn't trying to be hyper analytical about that organization so forgive me for the lack of gnats hair definitions on how good young players came to the organization.  Jon Daniels is doing well, but I will continue to say that the Nolan Ryan influence is being felt *now* and not because Daniels laid the plans in place to have what you see today in that team come to fruition.  In fact, I don't know (and it is easy for me to say this as an after thought) if a Nolan Ryan-led organization would make a deal of Volquez for Hamilton, not matter how much of a natural Hamilton has turned out to be.  I know Ryan saw plenty of Volquez when he was pitching for Frisco and Oklahoma City.  

If you're seeing a quicker turnaround for the Rangers than even years past, believe me it is not because of the same old ideals of garnering as much offense as possible.  I would imagine that the trade of Teixiera is a tip-off that if they can get pieces that fit the Pitching and Defense equation for a replaceable offensive player, they will do it.  Michael Young needed to hear that message loud and clear to stay the course and not be a burr in Ryan's saddle.  I'm sure, knowing the old man's way of not pulling punches, that Ryan made it known to the players that there was a new sheriff in town and he was intent of making pitching and defense as much if not more of a staple of Ranger baseball as offense was.
« Last Edit: May 23, 2009, 01:29:14 pm by Noe in Austin »

Noe

  • Guest
Re: What a good to great shortstop means to a team
« Reply #13 on: May 23, 2009, 01:27:20 pm »

Two words: Negative Nancy.

I was kind of getting that vibe, but wasn't sure.  One thing a fan must realize is that you can watch a team because of the love of the game or you can watch a team because of the love of the frontrunning.  I think the Astros are currently one fun team to watch.  Not consistent by any means, but fun nonetheless.  And I can see how improvement will be clearly made and it may not be 10 years from now as some naysayers are happy to scream at the rest of us.

juliogotay

  • Pope
  • Posts: 8738
    • View Profile
Re: What a good to great shortstop means to a team
« Reply #14 on: May 23, 2009, 02:24:50 pm »
Please explain more clearly what you're saying... it's not clear to me yet.


Manzella may be an average to above average shortstop defensively. I don't know, haven't seen him. He will never be the offensive player Andrus will be. Since your post was about the defensive contributions of a great SS I was only adding that this is a bonus with Andrus' game.

Jacksonian

  • Contributor
  • Double Super Secret Pope
  • Posts: 12893
  • Anonymous Source
    • View Profile
Re: What a good to great shortstop means to a team
« Reply #15 on: May 23, 2009, 02:27:47 pm »
You know, often we accuse the Texas Rangers of, well, not being a very bright organization.  What they've done in the past to accent that is continue to do the same thing over and over and over again to try and convince everyone that they can win, only to be out of things by early August.  The formula that the neighbors to the North (and I use the term neighbor loosely) have hung their cap on was this: Offense (and plenty of it).

Funny how some local nine fans and also media have urged the Astros to employ the same formula, but I digress.

One cannot truly fault an American League team from falling into the trap of believing that all it takes is a great DH and a bunch of mashers to win in that league.  In fact, I would probably be inclined to agree with them.  I would also be wrong just like they are.  Baseball is still baseball and that means that the key to being a consistent winner is this: Pitching and Defense and just enough Offense.  I know, how then would one explain Derek Jeter?  Well, lately Mr. Jeter has not sniffed the World Series, much less going deep into a playoff series.  Funny how the lack of solid pitching has made this so. While the Yankees went out and tried to employ a bunch of mashers (Matsui, Giambi, A-Rod) to offset the lack of pitching and certainly the less than spectacular defense, the appearances in the October classic have come to a halt.  You love watching a young team like the Rays take it to the Yankees last year by using, of all things, Pitching, Defense and just enough Offense.  Wonders of wonders.

So now I take a long hard look at the Texas Rangers and lo and behold they've moved the one-time immovable statue that is Michael Young out of shortstop and placed a phenom named Elvis Andrus in his stead.  Andrus came over in the Teixiera deal with the Braves several years ago and now as a 20 year old, this kid is showing he's ready for the show.  Good thing the Rangers weren't inclined to be so stupid as to look at Young and say to themselves "no thanks" on that move.  So Young's feeling were hurt when he caught wind of the thinking by the Rangers braintrust (led by the old man Nolan Ryan no less... go figure, he's thinking Pitching and Defense... go figure).  And the Rangers reaction was "so what?".  Good for them.  Finally they have someone who is thinking baseball and not just fantacrap masher ball up in Arlington and look where they are now.

So what impressed me the most about the Rangers last night?  Was it the hitting?  No, not really.  Was it the pitching?  A little but not really all that much.  Was it the defense up the middle?  Oh yes, now we're talking!  Andrus and Kinsler are two very good, nay great up the middle defenders and will be for many years to come.  Young, good hitters, yes... but defensively is where they impress the most, especially Andrus.  The double play they turned on the Astros was simply amazing.  And then the put out of Matsui by Andrus late in the game was a game changer.

*sigh*

I know I'm beating a dead horse around here, so forgive me for this one moment of melancholy if you will.  I miss defense up the middle on the Astros.  Okay, mostly I miss seeing great shortstop work.  I like Tejada, really I do and his defense is okay.  Game changer?  No, not really.  See the Ranger's pitchers must feel so comfortable knowing that they have a SS like Andrus behind them.  It does effect how a pitcher does his work.  I know you'll say that a pitcher has to get people out regardless but I am of the opinion that the defense behind a pitcher plays a good role in performance of said pitcher.  I don't mind less than spectacular defense in the corners, even though in RF I would like to see a stronger arm (but I digress).  It is up the middle that makes for a consistent winner.  Notice I said "consistent", something that the Houston Astros are not.  They are not consistent, some may argue, because they have health issues in key areas (closer, middle relief, set up man, Berkman for a while).  Once those areas are solidified they'll be more consistent.  Okay, that may be true, but you want true consistency... I say you make an effort to walk away from those who clamor for more offense from a shortstop and go and make a commitment to a true range enabled, gun for an arm, awesome display of a shortsop and along with Bourn in center and Matsui at second, watch how well this team will change.  Watch how well all pitchers will feel and perform.

Okay, I'm off my soapbox for now... but as the season progresses, I just may be inclined to revisit this.  Especially if the Astros keep losing ground and do a fire sale this trading deadline.  If they trade a over .300 hitting Miggy and insert a Manzella into the shortstop position, it may be time to stand up and pay attention to what may happen.  Just saying, because hitting #6, Miggy isn't really part of the offense that much (reality check, Blum, Keppinger or Pudge could handle the six spot).  If Pence is for real (and I see signs that he is) and so is Born, it could be time to make a bold move.

Manzella is good but not Andrus good.  He'd be better defensively than Miggy, esp in the range department, but IMO he won't elevate the team much.  I don't know if he will be successful at the plate and as a rookie I would be concerned he'd take his offensive trouble out on the field with him.  But, my biggest concern is bringing any younger player in under Cooper's influence.  I don't believe this team can overcome his "managing."
Goin' for a bus ride.

juliogotay

  • Pope
  • Posts: 8738
    • View Profile
Re: What a good to great shortstop means to a team
« Reply #16 on: May 23, 2009, 02:43:12 pm »
Obviously you follow the Rangers (I don't).  But I wasn't trying to be hyper analytical about that organization so forgive me for the lack of gnats hair definitions on how good young players came to the organization.  Jon Daniels is doing well, but I will continue to say that the Nolan Ryan influence is being felt *now* and not because Daniels laid the plans in place to have what you see today in that team come to fruition.  In fact, I don't know (and it is easy for me to say this as an after thought) if a Nolan Ryan-led organization would make a deal of Volquez for Hamilton, not matter how much of a natural Hamilton has turned out to be.  I know Ryan saw plenty of Volquez when he was pitching for Frisco and Oklahoma City.  

If you're seeing a quicker turnaround for the Rangers than even years past, believe me it is not because of the same old ideals of garnering as much offense as possible.  I would imagine that the trade of Teixiera is a tip-off that if they can get pieces that fit the Pitching and Defense equation for a replaceable offensive player, they will do it.  Michael Young needed to hear that message loud and clear to stay the course and not be a burr in Ryan's saddle.  I'm sure, knowing the old man's way of not pulling punches, that Ryan made it known to the players that there was a new sheriff in town and he was intent of making pitching and defense as much if not more of a staple of Ranger baseball as offense was.


I don't diminish Ryan's contributions in the least. I wish he was a bigger part of the Astros management team and have posted to that effect many times here. Daniels is a good young GM and will work well with Ryan because they seem to be on the same page philosophically. Daniels deal with Atlanta was masterful. But i am not a Rangers fan. Living in the Metroplex I get alot of Rangers news by osmosis. I don't root for them or against them except when they play Houston. I hate to see the Astros lose to the Rangers. I don't enjoy getting painted with the "negative" brush. I have only written that I agree with you that  it may be time to consider dealing Tejada and have added possibly another aging vet as well if if will help re-build this team faster. If I am considered negative for not believing this team will still challenge in the division then so be it. But I don't see the pitching to allow that.
I am no more a front-runner than you or any of the long-time posters here. I think we agree alot more than we disagree.

Noe

  • Guest
Re: What a good to great shortstop means to a team
« Reply #17 on: May 23, 2009, 07:10:00 pm »
Manzella is good but not Andrus good.  He'd be better defensively than Miggy, esp in the range department, but IMO he won't elevate the team much.  I don't know if he will be successful at the plate and as a rookie I would be concerned he'd take his offensive trouble out on the field with him.  But, my biggest concern is bringing any younger player in under Cooper's influence.  I don't believe this team can overcome his "managing."

I wasn't comparing Manzella to Andrus or even Miggy.  I was merely trying to point out that the value of a good to great shortstop with range is undersold in many circles and the reality is that you *need* a shortstop at that position and Manzella is just that.  I really don't care about offense from a guy who will probably hit 8th on the team.  I would be more concerned if what you're telling me is that he is pedestrian at shortstop defensively.  What I saw this season is not a pedestrian range at short.  However, your point about Cooper is valid, seeing as how I saw him handle Bourn last year and a little bit this year... I'm really of the opinion that Cooper is a bit like Dusty Baker when it comes to young players.  Meaning, they don't know how to handle kids at all.

Noe

  • Guest
Re: What a good to great shortstop means to a team
« Reply #18 on: May 23, 2009, 07:10:54 pm »

Manzella may be an average to above average shortstop defensively. I don't know, haven't seen him. He will never be the offensive player Andrus will be. Since your post was about the defensive contributions of a great SS I was only adding that this is a bonus with Andrus' game.

Again, who cares about offense?  I was talking about "pitching and defense", so that point was really not something I expected to have even touch upon.

Noe

  • Guest
Re: What a good to great shortstop means to a team
« Reply #19 on: May 23, 2009, 07:15:54 pm »
I don't diminish Ryan's contributions in the least. I wish he was a bigger part of the Astros management team and have posted to that effect many times here. Daniels is a good young GM and will work well with Ryan because they seem to be on the same page philosophically. Daniels deal with Atlanta was masterful. But i am not a Rangers fan. Living in the Metroplex I get alot of Rangers news by osmosis. I don't root for them or against them except when they play Houston. I hate to see the Astros lose to the Rangers. I don't enjoy getting painted with the "negative" brush. I have only written that I agree with you that  it may be time to consider dealing Tejada and have added possibly another aging vet as well if if will help re-build this team faster. If I am considered negative for not believing this team will still challenge in the division then so be it. But I don't see the pitching to allow that.
I am no more a front-runner than you or any of the long-time posters here. I think we agree alot more than we disagree.

I was speaking to Mark about the issue as it seemed because truth be told, this team is good, not great and could have a really outstanding season.  Likelihood is low if they do not have a consistency in their game.  Meaning every time Oswalt hits the mound, you know what to expect, everytime Berkman swings the bat, you know what to expect, every time a lineup card is filled out, you know what to expect, everytime a ball is handed to a setup man, you know what to expect, everytime you call on your closer, you know what to expect.  Basically, they don't know right now.  This team came into the season with a ton of "Ifs" and instead of answering those "ifs", they've basically added on to those question marks.  No one expected to have Cooper regress as a manager, no one expect Berkman to slump, Oswalt to look average, Valverde to have an injured calf and so on.

It's early enough in the season to weather these storms, but there is some things that may need to change.  My suggestion is to change shortstop because if Oswalt is going to look average and most of the other starters are looking the same way (and your bullpen is in disarray), you cannot afford to have an average looking defense out there.  Bottomline, instead of losing 6-5, I'd rather they win 2-1.

Jacksonian

  • Contributor
  • Double Super Secret Pope
  • Posts: 12893
  • Anonymous Source
    • View Profile
Re: What a good to great shortstop means to a team
« Reply #20 on: May 23, 2009, 07:32:38 pm »
I wasn't comparing Manzella to Andrus or even Miggy.  I was merely trying to point out that the value of a good to great shortstop with range is undersold in many circles and the reality is that you *need* a shortstop at that position and Manzella is just that.  I really don't care about offense from a guy who will probably hit 8th on the team.  I would be more concerned if what you're telling me is that he is pedestrian at shortstop defensively.  What I saw this season is not a pedestrian range at short.  However, your point about Cooper is valid, seeing as how I saw him handle Bourn last year and a little bit this year... I'm really of the opinion that Cooper is a bit like Dusty Baker when it comes to young players.  Meaning, they don't know how to handle kids at all.

I understand what you are saying.  Manzella is very good.  He's not Everett, but he's a fair sight better than Miggy.  My point about offense wasn't the contribution offensively.  It was that I would be concerned if he had trouble at the plate that he would carry that over onto the field and affect his defense.  That is where I believe Coop would hurt Manzella.
Goin' for a bus ride.

Andyzipp

  • Guest
Re: What a good to great shortstop means to a team
« Reply #21 on: May 23, 2009, 07:35:49 pm »
I think Coop would find someway to either platoon or play him in a Keppinger-esque manner.  Which would be fascinating to watch.

Noe

  • Guest
Re: What a good to great shortstop means to a team
« Reply #22 on: May 23, 2009, 07:47:09 pm »
I understand what you are saying.  Manzella is very good.  He's not Everett, but he's a fair sight better than Miggy.  My point about offense wasn't the contribution offensively.  It was that I would be concerned if he had trouble at the plate that he would carry that over onto the field and affect his defense.  That is where I believe Coop would hurt Manzella.

I remember when AE had the same issue.  He allowed the whispers to get to him.  But he had the support of his teammates who basically told him his outstanding defense was more than welcome on the team.  Especially when it was a pitcher who said so.  I just don't like how any talk about shortstop now has to center around batting average or OPS (for goodness sake).  Even my mention of Andrus carries very little weight if he doesn't hit well in the majors (for some fans).  If were talking about a dazzling shortstop hitting .220-.230, I would be called nuts and asked why not make Andrus a defensive replacement in the late innings for Michael Young.

It is probably the way the world works nowadays when talking shortstops.  One day, we'll be able to get through an entire thread with defense as the focus... or so I hope, because I truly believe the Astros lack that as one thing that helps the pitching and defense.  The offense is fine, but they're losing ballgames 6-5.  I'd rather they win 2-1.  I know what others want, they want to win 6-1 (re: have a great fielder and a solid hitter all rolled into one).  I know Manzella isn't that guy.

But at some point, it would be nice to hear someone say "who cares about offense!" when you see how well a defensive stud shortstop truly helps a club.
« Last Edit: May 23, 2009, 07:50:39 pm by Noe in Austin »

Noe

  • Guest
Re: What a good to great shortstop means to a team
« Reply #23 on: May 23, 2009, 07:49:18 pm »
I think Coop would find someway to either platoon or play him in a Keppinger-esque manner.  Which would be fascinating to watch.

That point is rock solid.  I don't think Coop is a good manager for young players, albeit he seems to have a crush on Gunther.  But he likes him because he can (in his own mind) move him up and down the lineup all he wants and be fine with it.  It's kind of mad scientist manager in a way.  "watch me put Hunter at leadoff today guys!"  (Romero and other coaches) "NO!!! Coop, not today, please!"

Duder

  • Roster Filler
  • Posts: 203
    • View Profile
Re: What a good to great shortstop means to a team
« Reply #24 on: May 24, 2009, 12:10:33 pm »
I understand what you are saying.  Manzella is very good.  He's not Everett

Not being quite as good as Everett defensively is definitely nothing to be ashamed about.  I too would like to see us get a defensive oriented shortstop.

Noe

  • Guest
Re: What a good to great shortstop means to a team
« Reply #25 on: May 24, 2009, 01:41:27 pm »
Not being quite as good as Everett defensively is definitely nothing to be ashamed about.  I too would like to see us get a defensive oriented shortstop.

Everett, according to the fielding bible, was once the best shortstop in the entire MLB.  Being just below AE is not a bad place to be as you say.