2009 2B, SS, and 3B Situation
by oconnobe on Nov 20, 2008 4:59 PM CST
30 comments
What would be the most preferable combination of 2B, 3B, and SS starters for the 2009 Brewers, taking both offense and defense into account? I like the idea of Gamel at 3B and Escobar at 2B ... It would add another LH bat in the lineup, and Escobar's defensive skills would offset Gamel's lack of defensive skills. I would hate to move Hardy to 3B, only to have Gamel arrive shortly thereafter.
That's just my opinion ... Vote for your preference in the poll!
0 recs |
30 comments
Email
Print
Comments
Just curious...
Why isn’t anyone talking about putting Weeks at 3B, especially if Gamel isn’t glove-ready?
Some of the throwing errors he’s made seem to me that the tosses are too easy for him, thus he f’s them up. Let’s put him at 3rd where he has to use that arm he has.
Wouldn’t it be better to have an error-prone guy at 3rd where he can use his athleticism to make plays rather than him playing tight because he’s expected to make the easier plays at 2B?
Obviously we’ve gotten through error-prone guys at 3B before, and up-the-middle defense is more important, so why not move Weeks over?
I’m just talking this idea out… Feel free to add your thoughts.
Frank Kremblas for Crew Manager.
by CATALYST on Nov 20, 2008 8:19 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I don't know...
he seemed to struggle on balls hit right to him, and his strength was his range. Why put him over with either JJ or Escobar, both of whom have good range?
by dickie_thon on Nov 20, 2008 8:45 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
problem=
Who plays second then?
I’m still not convinced Weeks is so terrible at second.
And neck size to baby eating ratio.
by Jordan M on Nov 20, 2008 9:00 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
hard to put a word to it, but I could go for "decent"
given his athleticism, and the changes in coaching as well as getting another year beyond his wrist injury, he might surprise us all.
I think he’s considered a disappointment from his potential and he has had some muffs in critical situations. As a fan those are always painful, but maybe he’s not all that different from most others – I don’t know. (translation: the blown DP in the Cubs sweep with CC pitching – aaaaaaaaaahhhh…)
by ol Pete on Nov 20, 2008 9:41 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
if he cant make a throw from 2nd to first, what makes you think he can make a throw from 3rd to first?
The Brewers have won the C.C. Sabathia sweepstakes-Ken Rosenthal
by baseballdan1092 on Nov 20, 2008 9:23 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Where's the love for Russell the Muscle?
by Rendezvous on Nov 20, 2008 9:37 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
none of the above
weeks, escobar, hardy
or…
weeks, escobar, FA
trade hardy, prince, and jeffress for dejesus, greinke, and soria
haha talk about blockbuster
by BrewerBlue87 on Nov 20, 2008 11:51 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I wouldn't be a fan of that trade.
There would have to be some kind of major superstar if I liked a trade of Prince AND Hardy.
Eric Gagne DL time: May 23-June 29 Brewers record in that span: 20-9
by NoahJ on Nov 21, 2008 9:35 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
nick (albuquerque, nm): Mr. Law, what is the one side dish that you cannot live without next Thursday? Also, you see the Yanks going after Cameron?
SportsNation Keith Law: Stuffing, made from scratch with chicken stock and fresh herbs. That’s really on Milwaukee; the Yanks have some interest, but the Brewers seem to be inclined to keep him. I’ve said before that I think trading him and moving Weeks to CF, playing Escobar at 2b, is the best use of the talent on their roster right now.
by HRF on Nov 20, 2008 11:56 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
You must be so happy right now
Obscure baseball records and more at my blog, Recondite Baseball.
by TheJay on Nov 21, 2008 12:01 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Since Upton did it
It should be a pretty smooth transition for Weeks.
by Supertramp on Nov 21, 2008 8:00 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
That was never my argument. Congratulations on missing the point in, now, two threads.
by HRF on Nov 21, 2008 6:20 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
What was your point?
Just curious.
by Supertramp on Nov 22, 2008 12:38 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Comparing Weeks to Upton is far more worthwhile than comparing Weeks to Hall. That Weeks is still young enough and has all the tools. While although it’s no guarantee he can pull it off it is worth the risk because he has the ability and hasn’t been able to put together a full season of being good both at the plate and in the field at second.
by HRF on Nov 22, 2008 1:19 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I did have to make a new Boner Jam Mixtape, yes.
by HRF on Nov 21, 2008 6:19 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I like Klaw and I read that too
but does he really think a .650 OPS 2b is a good use of our talent? I don’t mind the Weeks in CF thing, but if Escobar has any value in the next year it’s as a defensive god at short, not as a decent defender learning second base and hitting poorly. Let him hit in AAA to start the year and make him force the issue.
And neck size to baby eating ratio.
by Jordan M on Nov 21, 2008 8:25 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
It'll be a good year..
for Nashville baseball. Gamel is not even CLOSE to being ready to man the hot corner in the Show. He should definitely get another chance at 3B, but let him pepper the reserve seating in Nashville with his throwing errors, not MIlwaukee.
I like Gamel, Escobar, and Hurricane Hernan for 3B, SS, and 2B. But in Nashville please.
by balldeagle on Nov 21, 2008 6:34 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
I think Hernan
is pretty much an outfielder now, but maybe not
He’s been playing CF for Lara in Winter League
by ol Pete on Nov 21, 2008 10:39 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah.
Despite all the talk, I’ll be surprised if we actually end up with Gamel or Escobar (let alone both) in our infield next April. Frankly I’m worried that the inclination to rush Gamel to the majors to fill the hole in the lineup might backfire both at the plate and in the field.
I have an unreasonable dislike of Bill Hall.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Nov 21, 2008 12:16 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't know why
people would vote for a Gamel/Hall platoon specifically, other than to try to extract value from Hall b/c we’re paying him $6mil+ next year, but that reason alone is a poor one. Gamel doesn’t have a platoon split so far (in fact, his AVG and OBP vs. LHP were better last year, and for his career). To platoon him early on would stunt his growth, so if he plays, he needs to play full-time.
That said, Gamel could probably use some more time in AAA. In that case, I’d love to have Branyan back to platoon with Hall to start the season. If everything goes right (i.e. all three of those guys have good first halves), we might be able to flip Branyan and/or Hall mid-season and call up Gamel (would they do that?).
Somehow Escobar keeps putting up ridiculous BABIP. If that comes back down to earth, it should be at AAA. If his BABIP was caught up more in LD% than GB%, I’d be less concerned, maybe.
by baumann on Nov 21, 2008 12:59 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Agreed on the splits
I think “platoon” in this sense would be the Gamel for 6 innings, Hall/good defender for 3 situation instead of righty/lefty platoon.
I’m scared of Esco’s BABIP too, but it’s worth noting that he had a ton of bunt hits last year and reached something like 50% of the time he bunted.
I like the Branyan/Hall platoon at third w/ Gamel in AAA for a while, too.
And neck size to baby eating ratio.
by Jordan M on Nov 21, 2008 8:27 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
im kinda new to the brewers blog…. is there any interest in moving hardy to 3rd and having gamel be groomed for 1B… assuming the Brewers feel they will lose Fielder after his arbitration is over (which according to his comments about being unhappy he didnt receive a long term deal and that he was unhappy with his salary this year seems likely. If Hardy played 3rd and Gamel first Escobar could play SS.. it still doesnt fix the problem at 2B, but it allows Hardy and Escobar to play in teh same infield, at which point the infield defense is drastically improved (theoretically).
"We win today, that's two in a row... if we win tomorrow, that's called a winning streak. It has happened before..."
by Swo12bv on Nov 26, 2008 11:00 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
most of that has been suggested
I don’t think I’ve heard of Prince being unhappy about not getting a long term deal though
by ol Pete on Nov 27, 2008 8:58 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Fielder got offered 5 years, $60 million last spring and turned it down
Problem with ^^^^ is that Fielder is under contract for three more years, Gamel will be in the majors at some point this year. If you want to trade Fielder, that would work. Gamel would be a downgrade from Fielder on offense for sure; it would depend on his glove at first— if he’s well above average there, like 5 or 10 runs, you could justify it because you’re already getting a 2-win upgrade over Fielder on defense salary savings and trade return. If Gamel sucks at first too, it would be a pretty substantial downgrade.
That doesn’t even touch on the fact that Hardy probably won’t want to move to 3rd because it lowers his value.
And neck size to baby eating ratio.
by Jordan M on Nov 27, 2008 9:14 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
there should be a "plus" between "defense" and "salary" up there
And neck size to baby eating ratio.
by Jordan M on Nov 27, 2008 9:15 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
NL Central Standings
| W | L | PCT | GB | STRK | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
St. Louis
|
91 | 71 | .561 | 0 | Lost 6 |
|
Chicago
|
83 | 78 | .515 | 7.5 | Lost 1 |
|
Milwaukee
|
80 | 82 | .493 | 11 | Won 3 |
|
Cincinnati
|
78 | 84 | .481 | 13 | Won 2 |
|
Houston
|
74 | 88 | .456 | 17 | Lost 3 |
|
Pittsburgh
|
62 | 99 | .385 | 28.5 | Lost 2 |
(updated 11.8.2009 at 4:18 AM CST)
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
