To be fair, there's a level on which I already know the answer. But still, commentators and staff around any team regularly speculate and spitball about "out of the box" ideas, yet I've seen/heard basically nothing about an idea that seems fairly obvious to me.
Going into the off-season there was a widely held view that among the positions that were in some sense available to be used to upgrade the team - 3B, 2B, LF, DH - the one with the best internal solution was 2B because the organization seemed pretty high on getting Will Wagner's bat into the lineup. But since the Andrés Giménez acquisition that got a lot more cloudy. If you want Wagner in the lineup, where does he play? They're now, belatedly, mumbling about giving him a look at 3B (where he has played some in the minors but word is the arm will be short for that) or even a lot of reps at DH (not ideal for a 26 year old, and not an option when you want one of your corner outfielders to get a half-day off) or, even worse, putting him at 1B and Vlad at DH (all the best of luck in THAT making him feel better about re-signing).
Less discussed but at least mentioned is the idea of moving Vlad to third (which he would love and might move the needle in terms of getting him signed) and playing Wagner at 1B - but most of the metrics aren't liking him much by now as a first baseman so it's difficult to believe that they'd give very many 3B reps to Vlad this year, and less easy to believe they would have some plan to do that which wasn't buzzing around Dunedin by now. But there IS another option.
I'll say this up-front, from an "intangible" point of view, this would have to have the player involved out in front saying "It's all good, anything for the team" and be sincere about it. Look at George Springer this week - Not lead-off? Okay. Left field some? Fine, whatever they think makes us stronger" - or words to that effect. If you don't have that, you create the potential for bad blood and resentment which washes out whatever you might have gained.
What am I talking about? Bo Bichette at third base. I know, I know, Bo's been pretty vocal about "I'm a shortstop" and discouraging the idea of any position change, but better shortstops than him - some significantly so - changed positions for the good of the team and in so doing proved they could be good at more than one position. From a business perspective (as a player), it's good for your next contract. Bo's team ought to consider, if your market is winning teams willing to, in theory, give you over $20 million a year - almost all of them already HAVE a highly paid SS or a young one they believe in. Being willing to play some other position maximizes the chance of a bigger contract.
If Bo is willing to contentedly play 3B (he can't really afford to get twisted up because he's got to feel focused in the batter's box or there's no big contract) then Giménez slides to SS (improving the defense outcome at the most important position on the field) and Wagner plugs in at 2B. Problem solved.
I've been a defender of and advocate for Martinez and Barger in particular along with Loperfido and the other younger players that are on the margins of the roster but this - analytically, on-paper - SEEMS like a pretty obvious way to stabilize the lineup. With the DH slot still in play there's opportunities for those other guys to get some reps but I feel like there's a lot of value in having an "everyday" group of at least 8 out of 9 spots.
So why is it NEVER mentioned? I get that the team might be on eggshells a bit about giving Bo a new reason to want to leave, but if they offered him, say, a six-year deal are they really prepared to commit to him as your SS for the next six years? If not that's a bridge you're gonna have to cross at some point.
But even so, none of that keeps the beat writers and radio hosts and what not from mulling the option. Let's talk about it.
No comments:
Post a Comment