Q. What's the upside?
A. In terms of game theory, it's called "agility." Agility is a Golden Principle. Every master, of every game, wants to multiply his attacking options.
As mentioned before, if this were Strat-O-Matic, then moving Ackley from LF to 2B is positively a no-brainer. The simple math of it, if defense isn't finely measured, leaves no debate at all.
In Yahtzee, if you roll three 6's and two 5's first turn, you don't put "18" in the sixes. You put the 35* in the Full House column. There is no debate about this. It's the Golden Principle of flexibility. Centralize your pieces, multiply your options, and you will be much more effective.
There is no way to measure the benefits associated with having more options available to you. Fangraphs will give Ackley +10.0 runs for moving from LF to 2B. But having the LF Yahtzee slot clear -- the benefit is not subject to measurement.
....
My favorite team, the Big Red Machine, jelled when it moved a LF to 3B. The Reds were like 28-26 in 1975 when Rose moved to 3B. George Foster took over in LF and the Reds won about 40 of their next 50.
.
Q. How much could this hurt Ackley's career?
A. It could hurt his hitting anywhere from "a little" to "a lot" to "not at all."
Bill James, in the early 1990's, noticed that in baseball history, the evidence was overwhelmingly in favor of putting players at their easier defensive positions.
But you also have your Rose-Foster situations.
And the "downside," in a Jack Zduriencik organization, will be that Ackley moves back from 2B to LF. Very little downside.
That's what Zduriencik is evidently talking about, an "experiment." The minute that the move begins hurting Ackley's progress, he switches back.
.
Q. Do you agree with that?
A. Not necessarily. ;- ) As James has said with respect to several of the Red Sox' decisions:
There are times when that which is in the individual ballplayer's best interest, is not in the best interests of the organization as a whole.
In other words, it could easily be that Ackley will be hurt, offensively, by moving to second base -- but that this won't matter much in the big picture.
Crawford LF - Ackley 2B would be much preferable to Ackley LF - Polanco 2B, even if Ackley hit .305 instead of .330.
.
Q. How do you weigh the two?
A. It's one thing if you have a 2B-3B move to debate. But the benefits associated with an LF-2B move simply become overwhelming.
The differences in offensive value, between having a 2B slot open and a LF slot open, are vast.
Ackley's move to 2B essentially adds a #3-4 bat to the lineup. It's an offer you can't refuse.
.
Q. Does SSI think that Ackley's offense would suffer?
A. That makes little intuitive sense to me. The coaches I talk to, they all insist, "It's two different games. You field, and then you hit. Making 25 errors is no excuse for not hitting .300."
But, there's a lot of pressure in big league baseball, I guess.
.
Q. Do you expect the move to work?
A. I will be shocked, shocked, if it does not.
There's one scout who has seen Ackley 10x, 20x times as much as any other scout, that being Mike Fox, Ackley's college coach.
Fox thinks that Ackley will be not an okay second baseman, not a good one, but a great second baseman.
That being the case, I like Ackley's chances to be an okay one.
A ballclub that has a .400 OBP at second base has taken a pretty nice step towards a championship.
Yee Haw,
Dr D
"Fox thinks that Ackley will be not an okay second baseman, not a good one, but a great second baseman.
That being the case, I like Ackley's chances to be an okay one".
Thats a pretty good stance. He projects at minimum to be an ok every day player. Why set your self up for disappointment. But I can't wait for the gravy!
Here's how I interpret:
1. Their impression of Ackley as potential Boggs/Carew profile awesome hitter without much pop: UP. That type of hitter is going to be a better roster-construction "fit" at 2b. And they are now sufficiently comfortable about his ability to hit .300 "with ease" that they can start playing around with defense (I mean, he picks up a wood bat and busts out .315/.412/.425 against advanced AA/AAA pitchers; I don't think they're worried about anything but the power.)
2. Their impression of Ackley as George Brett/Chipper Jones awesome hitter with some pop: UNDECIDED. He hasn't shown that potential yet, but he did in his last year in college. At 2b, that extra level is "gravy"; whereas you want some pop in LF in Seattle, where you will always have a defense-oriented outfield.
3. Their impression of Saunders as a guy who could force MLB playing time: UP. They can't look at Crawford and Granderson trade scenarios and not see the potential logjam. They can't say that it will happen, only that it could. Ackley at 2b is one way out without giving up a cheap young player.
4. Their impression of Triunfel as a SS: UP. I'm just guessing, but it's still a looming question as to how they transition from Jack Wilson. Triunfel can't be the 2b and the SS of the future. More options at 2b makes it more likely that Carlos would be the SS.
5. Their impression of Tui as a near-term MLB impact player: DOWN? In terms of moving the chess pieces, this gives them a chance to open with Tui 3b-Lopez 2b, but if Tui struggles and Ackley impresses, they can slide Lopez over to 3b. They're not as "locked in" to Tui as they are in the current configuration. I know I'm not the only one with nagging doubts about Tui.