Second Base: A Dialogue
My friend Tyler Chirdon and I have been arguing about second base a great deal lately. After some back and forth, it seemed that an abridged version of our debate would be worth sharing here. What follows is clipped from email conversations. Due to its totally inappropriate length, the second half will be posted in the next few days.
TC: Kevin Kouzmanoff, Sean Smith, Franklin Gutierrez, Cliff Lee, and two consecutive second round Rule 4 picks: This is some measure of cost of the Indians’ failure to establish a Major League talent at second base in the post-Belliard era.
And, yes, Andrew, I’ll cop to over-stating my case, if you’ll admit it’s possible we’ve been under-stating the damage wrought by our second-base foibles. I don’t want to turn this into the Ronnie B. Appreciation Hour or anything, but when we flipped Belliard to the Cards for Hector Luna (Hector Luna!) and plugged in Josh Barfield, about 40 points of OPS+ out of the keystone evaporated. We’ve been scratching and clawing to get those points back ever since Barfield’s unceremonious slide down the depth chart and into irrelevance.
AH: Briefly, a meager defense of the incredible misadventure that was the Indians' second basemen in the second half of decade now ending. Once Belliard was shipped to St. Louis in 2006, management moved quickly and acquired what appeared to be a solution better than any on the free agent market:

TC: Carlos Baerga.
AH: Josh Barfield. If you look at the players that were being seriously bandied about pre-Barfield it's obvious that, in the offseason between 2006 and 2007 the Indians did not let a permanent long-term solution get away.
Then, in 2007, the Indians watch their new second baseman of the future, the son a major leaguer no less, play himself completely out of the major leagues. Of course-why wouldn't that be the case?
TC: Some cle.commers play out alternate histories in which Brandon Phillips never left. Mine is that Josh Barfield never sucked.
AH: Seriously, how much more stunning an occurrence could there have been? What more of an omen did we need before we'd realize, "Oh, it's GOD that doesn't want us to have a good player at second!"
(As an aside, isn't it staggering that Josh Barfield got to play 3/4 of a season at that level before the plug was pulled and Andy Marte never got the same shot? If you had rewound to 2007 would any of us have thought that would be the case? How utterly strange and how totally instructive of the fickle nature of getting a shot in the majors.)
We didn't get the message and, besides, we (thought we) basically had the best team in the majors. The front office had been decisive in making Asdrubal Cabrera the new solution at the two-bag (trade mark it -- that one’s going places), and how could you blame them? All he'd done was punch out at 775 OPS in 45 big league games, and, of course, Peralta had OPSed 991 in the postseason. Portly Shortstop was still close enough to 2005 for us to believe his post-season performance was some kind of return to form.
TC: Revisionist history, I know, but there was still a hole at second. Or, rather, we plugged the hole at second with our best shortstop, choosing instead to create what looked less like iceberg-sized holes on the left side of the infield by using a third-baseman at short and a right-fielder at third.
AH: Then, in 2008, GOD smites us again! Peralta's range (or maybe just our perception of it) finally shrinks to an unacceptable level, the Indians go totally in the tank and everyone starts squealing because wasn't Cabrera a glove-first guy, anyway? Who knows if he really was, but he got tagged that way because he was so young that his bat hadn't caught up to his level in the minors. Regardless, he was better than Peralta. This was clever of the Almighty who was tormenting us -- he took away our pivot man not by striking down the second basemen himself, but by striking down the shortstop. Pretty ingenious.
Even with all of this keystone adversity, the management made the requisite moves again in the offseason and again we ended up with a decent fix --
TC: Carlos Baer--all right I'll stop.
AH: No, you get one more -- Rule of Three. Anyway, the (next) new answer was Luis Valbuena, -- a 23-year-old former Mariners prospect who played 103 games at second, OPSed 714, and seemed fine defensively. How much better hands could we be in than those of a former Mariners prospect?
TC: Time to give some kudos to Dr. Van Arsdale here for his demure foresight into L-Val's career in the aught-nine Annual: "[G]iven the wreckage of other recent Indians attempts to fill the second base position, a degree of caution would seem to be in order." Ah, so.
The storms of the last two seasons have washed away the veterans and roster detritus and Tony Graffanino, exposing the Indians’ middle infield for what it is. Jamey Carroll bid us a gap-toothed adieu; Jhonny Peralta shuffled off to the hot corner en route to Detroit, taking out his frustration on Asdrubal’s forearm as a parting gift; and Valbuena lost his bat somewhere on northbound I-71. Looking over the production the Tribe’s managed out of second base, I am reminded of my college macro-economics professor’s flat-toned assessment of our mid-terms: "I have graded your tests. The scores are not good."
AH: Admittedly, I'm playing the process game-who care if the patient's dead? I took the blood pressure, just like I was supposed to do! However, if you really want to talk about the second base problem, I'd contend that watching LV stumble out of the gate is the first time I really got the uh-ohs. The Indians had cheaply acquired three different guys over three seasons (Eduardo Perez, Franklin Gutierrez, and Kevin Kouzmanoff do not a kingdom make) and, by all accounts, one of them should've solved the issue. One cratered -- unlucky but understandable. Another has cratered -- very unlucky and harder to understand. Most improbably, one moved to SS and, in doing so, moved the SS not to 2B, where I feel sure a majority of fading SS go first, but instead to 3B!
Ever since Barfield it always seemed like a solution was in place. Watching Valbuena play himself out of the starting nine of my dreams was when I realized that solution was four years coming and still hadn't arrived. Like Frank Slade says, I'd been in the sugar business so long I'd forgotten to taste the honey. We hadn't really paid steeply for any of our second base solutions (Devotees of Death To Flying Objects, speak to me when his OPS is over 710) and yet they all seemed like they were going to work out. And then they didn't. "The eternal silence of these infinite spaces frightens me." -Blaise Pascal
TC: I don’t know. Doesn’t the fact that the Indians have been working on this problem for so long have a dollar value? I mean, the out-of-pocket cash and talent hasn’t been extraordinary, but after so many years and roster spots, I’d think the opportunity costs would mount significantly. Or -- if you're right, and it hasn't been that expensive of an endeavor -- did we get what we paid for?
I'll counter that the Indians probably believed there was a problem sooner than 2010, given that A) Jamey Carroll played a LOT and B) they continued to amass and promote upper-level second basemen with a vigor that bordered on compulsion. Since the Gutierrez-for-Valbuena swap, the Indians have drafted Cord Phelps (favorite anagram: "Perch Plods"), drafted Jason Kipnis ("Ninja Ski Ops"), and traded for Jason Donald ("Carlos Baerga").
AH: They knew Valbuena wasn't going to work?! Couldn't they have told us? We could've signed Carlos Baer-

TC: You missed it, I disguised it as an anagram joke. And in answer to your question, I don’t actually argue that the Indians had suspicions about Valbuena necessarily. I do think that somewhere up the brain trust, there were spreadsheets titled "Middle Infield Depth" with yellow-highlighter exclamation marks all over them. It’s like in the Oregon Trail: You have no REASON to believe you’re going to break another axle, but after watching multiple literally snake-bit loved ones waste away, log-entry by log-entry, for want of an axle, damned if you’re not going to duck in Fort Walla Walla and buy enough of the suckers to outfit a 19th Century big-rig.
AH: I've always thought of Barfield as a victim of that most poetic Oregon Trail death: exhaustion.
TC: Anyway, here’s the apparent glitch in the Andrew Humphries Divine Failure Matrix: This season, none of the wagon axles are breaking. (Today’s recipe: metaphor smoothies!) Absurd (blasphemous?) though it is to imagine in light of the last half-decade, the Indians might -- might -- be paddling toward a logjam at second.
Photos via:
36 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Ninja Ski Ops may be the awesomest potential Indians player anagram ever.
Seriously, though, the 2B problem is also a result of the 3B black hole and all the dominoes falling from the failure to solve that problem, necessitating the dynamically shifting infield of suck.
"If Brown is the answer, then you’re asking the wrong question." - Ryan
Hmmm, not sure I understand. Is the idea that Peralta would have played 2b? That seems unlikely. 3b seems like a much better fit for his skills (good arm, fields ball hit right at him) and weaknesses (poor range, doesn’t like to get dirty).
by dgcambridge on Aug 26, 2010 11:14 AM EDT up reply actions
I think the idea is that most players who play short profile to move to second as their skills diminish. Peralta is one of the rare breed who is better fit to move to 3B, thus still leaving us with a hole at 2B.
Come on, four billion!
Not only that, but the lack of faith in Andy Marte and the continual trading that resulted from being out of contention didn’t help (Blake, DeRosa). So we stuck Phat Shortstop at 3B so we could move Cabrera to SS, plugging one hole temporarily and creating another one. Now, with Phat Shortstop a Tiger, we have two holes.
"If Brown is the answer, then you’re asking the wrong question." - Ryan
by woodsmeister on Aug 26, 2010 12:45 PM EDT up reply actions
Not only that, but the lack of faith in Andy Marte and the continual trading that resulted from being out of contention didn’t help (Blake, DeRosa). So we stuck Phat Shortstop at 3B so we could move Cabrera to SS, plugging one hole temporarily and creating another one. Now, with Phat Shortstop a Tiger, we have two holes.
"If Brown is the answer, then you’re asking the wrong question." - Ryan
by woodsmeister on Aug 26, 2010 12:46 PM EDT up reply actions
I thought he was going to be better than fine. I willfully ignored his poor OBP in San Diego because, hell, he was a rookie who looked superficially good and came from a successful minor league career. I thought he was going to be at 2B for the next ten years in Cleveland.
Apropos of nothing, Josh Barfield’s agent is Scott Boras. This amuses me.
Steel Nick
Ever think we might overestimate the importance of age. It’s talked about here as being the number 1 factor, and seems like our FO believes it. We love the guy who has some AAA success at 21, or MLB success at 22/23. The vast majority of our guys are on the right side of 27, and it’s been that way for a long time now. Seems to have worked according to plan for Asdrubal. Less so for a bunch of other guys.
Is it possible that we have too much emphasis there?
I don’t think anyone has ever suggested that age has value for its own sake (except of course that it is correlated with affordability)… the sense in which age is the “number one factor” is as a lens through which to view performance: if a guy who is young for his level puts up great numbers, that’s a lot more impressive than if a 27-year-old in double A does so. That doesn’t translate into a strategy that says, in general, “acquire young players” so much as it helps to differentiate between two guys with otherwise similar numbers (and, similarly, to decide how excited to get about some prospect).
by Logodaedalus on Aug 26, 2010 10:26 PM EDT up reply actions
To be fair, I don’t really know what I’m talking about. But this seems right.
by Logodaedalus on Aug 27, 2010 12:44 AM EDT up reply actions
It is possible that we have underestimated the possibility that at guy is peaking well before 27, as Peralta did, for example. As Logo suggests, the main point of focusing on age has been to recognize that a guy who’s 25-27 in the high minors isn’t any kind of up-and-comer. If a guy is doing well at 21 in Double-A, he’s quite far removed from being a non-prospect.
Hopefully this is a vehicle for fleerdon to make his grand return to LGT
"I spoil a lot of people with my play."
"But I mean, even my family gets spoiled at times watching me doing things that I do, on and off the court." -Lebron James
I can’t believe he’s been cheating on us with Andrew all this time.
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Aug 26, 2010 9:51 AM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
Was the Tribe serious in its bid for Orlando Hudson? As I recall, Orlando said no, and went to play for a winning team.
That’s my recollection too, and was a huge flag regarding Valbuena.
by dgcambridge on Aug 26, 2010 11:12 AM EDT up reply actions
This will be like reading about the collapse of the economy and saying “All true, but NOW everything is ok”:
All true, but NOW second base is ok. (/shakes fist at the baseball gods)
Either Donald or Nix is better than Valbuena or Barfield. Plug either one in every day and go. It would be incredibly silly to spend any resources on upper level 2b talent in the near future.
By the way, we don’t really think the Indians draft according to what they need at the major league level, do we? Or think that Kipnis was moved for that reason?
Where did his Cliff Lee reference come from? If we had a solid second baseman, we would have been competitive in 2009?
In the new Geico commercial, Marte sings "Let me be myself" on Wedge's front lawn (with the cavemen).
What exactly are you guys arguing about? I mean, what’s your position, and what’s his? Or is this just lyrical exercise?
In the new Geico commercial, Marte sings "Let me be myself" on Wedge's front lawn (with the cavemen).
It’s a dialog, not a debate. Says so at the top.
by jhon on Aug 27, 2010 2:21 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions

by 



















