Geno to short?

[757690]

No one is denying that Suarez would be a poor SS. The question is whether, all things considered, a lineup with Suarez at SS would be worse than one with other options the Reds have at the position. I suspect, with the Reds' embrace of defensive metrics and Suarez's massive improvements in terms of error rate, Suarez would be Tim Beckham/ Asdrubel Cabrera bad at SS. If that's the case, it makes sense to at least kick the tires on what he looks like rather than a knee-jerk reaction. Especially if he can return to 2019 numbers offensively.

Were the Reds in less dire need of a SS solution, thinking outside the box wouldn't be necessary. However, because Garcia and the rest project so poorly, this is what's left. You don't seem to view Garcia as woefully as all but Marcel does. And that's fine. However, the metrics would seem to confirm it's not outlandish to suggest he'd be a boon to the lineup.

This arrangement would mean Winker's bat would replace that of Garcia, Holder, and/or Farmer. That's a net positive no matter how good those gloves might be, IMO.

If the Reds thought that Suarez would only be as bad as Beckham/Cabrera, he would have been the Reds SS the last two seasons, definitely last season. That would have been better than what they had.

It seems they think he would be worse and I would agree with them based on the evidence that I have seen.

[Bourgeois Zee]

If the Reds thought that Suarez would only be as bad as Beckham/Cabrera, he would have been the Reds SS the last two seasons, definitely last season. That would have been better than what they had.

It seems they think he would be worse and I would agree with them based on the evidence that I have seen.

Well that's untrue.

They had no clue what they had with either Winker or Shogo, and they thought Iglesias and Galvis were capable hitters and elite defenders.

I don't think you're understanding how much worse that SS (sans Suarez) is than league average.

[757690]

Well that's untrue.

They had no clue what they had with either Winker or Shogo, and they thought Iglesias and Galvis were capable hitters and elite defenders.

I don't think you're understanding how much worse that SS (sans Suarez) is than league average.

In 2019, they tried Senzel as SS and abandoned it immiedately. People forget that Peraza started 2019 spring training as the Reds starting SS and Iglesias won it away from him.

In 2020, they started with Galvis, but felt he couldn’t play SS anymore, which is why they brought up Garcia. If they thought Suarez could play SS, they would have played him there first.

It’s clear the Reds don’t think it is worth it to try Suarez as SS. They had chances both in 2019 and 2020 and passed both times.

[Joeyjection19]

C. Trent Rosecrans
#Reds David Bell when asked if Nick Senzel is the "everyday CF" he said yes

https://twitter.com/ctrent/status/13...419832832?s=20

So I guess that means Shogo to 2B, for the sake of this thread.

[Kc61]

Just as a general proposition, I wouldn’t degrade the defense too much. Just as with any other unit, in all sports, there does come a point where a weak unit’s whole can be worse than the sum of its parts.

The Reds’ defense was so-so last year. In 2021, if no DH, guys like Winker, Cast, arguably Votto, maybe not the strongest defensively right now, will have to play the field.

Personally, I wouldn’t take it much beyond that. If it turns out in ST that Suarez at short, or Senzel in IF, flash leather and are capable, fine.

[Bourgeois Zee]

In 2019, they tried Senzel as SS and abandoned it immiedately. People forget that Peraza started 2019 spring training as the Reds starting SS and Iglesias won it away from him.

In 2020, they started with Galvis, but felt he couldn’t play SS anymore, which is why they brought up Garcia. If they thought Suarez could play SS, they would have played him there first.

It’s clear the Reds don’t think it is worth it to try Suarez as SS. They had chances both in 2019 and 2020 and passed both times.

Again, this is sidestepping the analysis.

Suarez, even if he's a really poor defender, is still currently a better option than what analysts project from Holder, Farmer, and/or Garcia.

In 2019, ZiPS projected Peraza to be worth 1.8 fWAR. That's 2.5 more than Garcia or the platoon of Holder and Farmer currently project. Iglesias projected to 2.0 WAR more than Garcia or the platoon of Holder and Farmer.

There's a massive difference in those projections. The hole is pervasive, and (worse) there's no other option that projects to be adequate.

Put another way, Suarez at 2.0 WAR > Holder/ Farmer -0.7 WAR OR Garcia -0.7 WAR.

[757690]

Again, this is sidestepping the analysis.

Suarez, even if he's a really poor defender, is still currently a better option than what analysts project from Holder, Farmer, and/or Garcia.

In 2019, ZiPS projected Peraza to be worth 1.8 fWAR. That's 2.5 more than Garcia or the platoon of Holder and Farmer currently project. Iglesias projected to 2.0 WAR more than Garcia or the platoon of Holder and Farmer.

There's a massive difference in those projections. The hole is pervasive, and (worse) there's no other option that projects to be adequate.

Put another way, Suarez at 2.0 WAR > Holder/ Farmer -0.7 WAR OR Garcia -0.7 WAR.

First, Peraza’s ZIP projection should be a warning sign against using it.

Second, you are throwing out Suarez as a 2 WAR player as SS as if it’s fact. If the Reds thought that was the case, they likely would have played him there last year over Galvis, and the year before over Iglesias, who were not 2 WAR players.

As I pointed out earlier, we have seen the damage that having a poor defensive SS can have on a team. It leads to losses. It demoralizes a pitching staff. It something teams work hard to avoid.

[Bourgeois Zee]

First, Peraza’s ZIP projection should be a warning sign against using it.

Second, you are throwing out Suarez as a 2 WAR player as SS as if it’s fact. If the Reds thought that was the case, they likely would have played him there last year over Galvis, and the year before over Iglesias, who were not 2 WAR players.

As I pointed out earlier, we have seen the damage that having a poor defensive SS can have on a team. It leads to losses. It demoralizes a pitching staff. It something teams work hard to avoid.

You realize you're ignoring the numbers (and castigating them) in favor of your own personal narrative?

You don't like the projections, so you dismiss them snidely.

You continue to ignore the facts of what was then projected versus what is now projected.

Then you make a blanket generic statement as if it were fact.

C'mon, man.

[Kc61]

First, Peraza’s ZIP projection should be a warning sign against using it.

Second, you are throwing out Suarez as a 2 WAR player as SS as if it’s fact. If the Reds thought that was the case, they likely would have played him there last year over Galvis, and the year before over Iglesias, who were not 2 WAR players.

As I pointed out earlier, we have seen the damage that having a poor defensive SS can have on a team. It leads to losses. It demoralizes a pitching staff. It something teams work hard to avoid.

While I’m not in favor of Suarez at short, I would note that it’s unclear what a shortstop is in today’s game.

They play all over the infield with all the shifting.

One argument in favor of trying it is that the shift has so disrupted the infield alignment that the usual shortstop analysis no longer applies.

Again, I’d rather have a slick two-way shortstop and I don’t think Reds will make this Suarez move. But in today’s game, what is a shortstop anyway?

[757690]

You realize you're ignoring the numbers (and castigating them) in favor of your own personal narrative?

You don't like the projections, so you dismiss them snidely.

You continue to ignore the facts of what was then projected versus what is now projected.

Then you make a blanket generic statement as if it were fact.

C'mon, man.

I’ve presented plenty of stats and evidence to back up my claim. Go back and look at what I posted. This is not just a narrative. And the Reds seem to agree with me, which is what is most important.

Where are the stats and evidence that back up your claim that Suarez would be a 2 WAR player at SS?

[757690]

While I’m not in favor of Suarez at short, I would note that it’s unclear what a shortstop is in today’s game.

They play all over the infield with all the shifting.

One argument in favor of trying it is that the shift has so disrupted the infield alignment that the usual shortstop analysis no longer applies.

Again, I’d rather have a slick two-way shortstop and I don’t think Reds will make this Suarez move. But in today’s game, what is a shortstop anyway?

The shift is mostly against LHH. Against RHH, the majority of PA’s, you need a good left side of the infield.

More importantly, in all defensive alignments, the SS is placed where the ball is most likely to be hit. The fact that the SS plays on top of the 2B bag doesn’t deminish the importance of his range and accuracy,

[Kc61]

The shift is mostly against LHH. Against RHH, the majority of PA’s, you need a good left side of the infield.

More importantly, in all defensive alignments, the SS is placed where the ball is most likely to be hit. The fact that the SS plays on top of the 2B bag doesn’t deminish the importance of his range and accuracy,

I dunno. Shortstop is now often one of three fielders on one side. Or he’s in short right field. And even against RHH there is a shift, although it’s less effective perhaps.

Today, sometimes I look at the infield alignment on TV and I frankly don’t know which fielder is which.

I view all these positions traditionally, shortstop is a premium position, defense up the middle, all that. But not sure it’s correct today, maybe a different thought process is needed.

LOL, sometimes the poor third baseman is alone on the left side. Imagine that!

[Bourgeois Zee]

I’ve presented plenty of stats and evidence to back up my claim. Go back and look at what I posted. This is not just a narrative. And the Reds seem to agree with me, which is what is most important.

Where are the stats and evidence that back up your claim that Suarez would be a 2 WAR player at SS?

Let me try this again (and for the last time):

Things We Know:

1. The nominal SS on the Reds' roster-- Garcia, Holder, and/ or Farmer-- project to be seven runs below replacement. Either choice projects to -0.7 WAR on the season.

2. Suarez has a history of playing SS at the major league level.

3. Suarez has proven himself to be an offensive force in the last two full seasons of 2018 and 2019.

4. Suarez projects to be a 111 wRC+ bat and a 3.0 WAR player at 3B.

Things We Can Confidently Project

1. The Reds have no answer at SS that would be considered "good."

2. Value is as value provides, no matter what it might look or feel like. The Reds at least accept this premise via shifting-- sometimes in the extreme. This has resulted in lineups that may appear to be lumbering and relatively poor defensively, but have proven to be at least adequate as determined by team DER.

3. The Reds likely need to think outside the box if they choose not to acquire an outside SS for this season. Garcia is unlikely to be adequate offensively, nor are Farmer or Holder.

4. The Reds have a surplus of players who are major league ready and can play both OF and infield positions other than SS.

5. The Reds' offensive strength is their OF, where four players project to add value to the team either with their glove or their bats.

6. Dee Strange-Gordon is unlikely to man SS for any length of time due to deficiencies in his bat and his glove.

Therefore

1. IF (Notice the capital letters) Suarez could be adequate but very poor with the glove (ie, Asdrubal Cabrera/ Tim Beckham levels of bad), he'd out-WAR any of the other Red SS options by a significant amount. Even if he is historically bad at the position-- which is unlikely, as he has past experience, is in decent shape, still relatively young, and has analysts and shifting to help prevent that-- he'd still almost assuredly out-earn the projections of other (remarkably poor) options at the position. In short, his floor as a defensive SS can be cavernous, yet, because of his offensive projection, would still provide more value than that of the all-glove, no-hit brigade of other options. If he approaches his offensive ceiling (2018/ 2019), Suarez could (again, using similar defenders Cabrera and Beckham) earn 2.0 WAR without too much of an issue.

2. IF (Again, capital letters) Suarez proves capable in Spring Training, great! All he needs to do is be adequate with the glove to be a relatively valuable piece. If he proves incapable of handling to position, you've lost nothing but innings. We already know Garcia can defend the position fairly well. Letting him DH to get ABs (if he needs them) would hamstring nothing. Ditto Farmer and Holder.

TO BE CLEAR, I would much prefer the Reds acquire an actual living, breathing, MLB-capable shortstop. Short of that, Suarez might be the best shot on the roster for added value.

[757690]

BZ, everything you intellegently described above works only if Suarez is a SS at worst at the level of Beckham/Cabrera. That is where he was back in 2015 when the Reds moved him to 3B. And even then, it just is a breakeven move, it doesn’t actually add wins.

I think it’s reasonable to assume that Suarez will be far worse today as SS than he was 6 years ago, when he was rather terrible.

[MikeS21]

In 2019, they tried Senzel as SS and abandoned it immiedately. People forget that Peraza started 2019 spring training as the Reds starting SS and Iglesias won it away from him.

Actually, that's not quite true. Peraza was the starting SS and Scooter was the starting 2B. Peraza had a great spring. Iglesias was signed to be the backup SS. But in the last game of spring training, Scooter got hurt, and suddenly come Opening Day, Iglesias was starting SS, and Peraza got bumped to 2B.

If you recall, Iglesias had a great Opening Day, and Dietrich came off the bench to hit a dramatic HR. And both of them stayed hot throughout April, and Peraza was "Wally Pipp'd" out of a job. Peraza was young, had done everything they asked of him in order to be the starting SS, but he still lost the job because of an injury to Scooter, which led to two guys (Iglesias and Dietrich) having the best months of their careers (neither have come close to repeating).

I think the Reds failed Peraza because somebody on the coaching staff should have sat Peraza down and attempted to talk him through the situation. He was young! He was pressing! His 2018 numbers proved that Peraza had the talent to succeed. I think the coaching failed him, and it still shows two or three seasons later.