Originally Posted by WVRedsFan
Hmmm. Kind of like the bull we were given on Royce Clayton being an All-Star caliber shortstop and Deno replacing Kearns, right?
Nah, I wouldn't go anywhere near that far. The Reds were reaching into a tattered and wet paper bag by trying to convince people that Royce Clayton had any value, and most keen observers knew that right away.
The thing with Alex Gonzalez is that he actually was
a good defensive shortstop ... all the way up through last season. The problem with Alex Gonzalez is so far through May 23rd of 2007, he hasn't been a good defensive shortstop for the Reds. The Alex Gonzalez of pre-2007 and the Alex Gonzalez of so far through 2007 have been two totally different players defensively.
Basic zone rating is far from the best defensive tool, but it's probably the best defensive tool easily accessible that's available midseason (Dial may post some rankings in early July around the ASB). Here's Gonzalez's zone ratings defensively for the past few years compared to his 2007 zone rating ...
2001-2006 rough average: .858
An .858 zone rating, which is around Gonzalez's six year average through 2006, is above average to good and oftentimes places a shortstop in the top 10 for the majors. If Gonzalez was performing to those 2001-2006 standards of defensive prowess, then most people would be satisfied with his defense and that contract would be tolerable ... not preferred, but something that myself and most others could live with. The problem is Gonzalez hasn't been performing to his previous standards of defensive prowess, and so far he's cost the team a couple runs. If he can't rebound back up to his 2001-2006 levels then that contract handed out to him goes from being tolerable to being awful.