...where Gordon was worth at least a win on defense almost every full year he had at the position.
I'm just saying, Doc...even if you take Pierre's peak years, he was a decent player, but hardly the sort of guy that makes or breaks a GM, and I don't see any significant difference between them. Pierre was a negative WAR player because his defense was lousy. It is not a given that Gordon will avoid this fate, though I suspect he will. And I'm not saying that Gordon is likely to be a bad player (I think he's likely to be a useful player) or that acquiring him was a bad move (it wasn't). I'm saying I don't see the excitement. I think it's every bit as likely that Gordon, playing in a park that murders GB BABIP, playing an unfamiliar position, and lacking in good plate discipline (Pierre had that going for him...Gordon does not), he manages 2 WAR as managing 3.5+.