Priced To Play A Certain Spot

[Max Power]

Recently saw an interview with Chipper Jones re: His move to LF.

He said that he was fine with it after chatting with the Braves GM - - because of this reason:

Chipper's salary was high. The Braves needed a LF. To go out and get a semi-quality FT LF would cost some bucks - - and, the Braves thought it would be cheaper to find a semi-quality FT 3B.

OF/Hitters make more $ than CM/Hitters.

So, Chipper was cool with the move because it was cheaper for the Braves to get a Castilla than it would have been to get (say) an Alou. His move helped the team; so, it was a good thing.

This makes me think about guys like Piazza and soon to be Soriano. It's probably cheaper for a team to find a catcher than a 1B or a 2B than an OF. No?

Is the Braves attack on this situation the right rational? Should more players do a Chipper?

[moose]

well, i think the chipper move (and the soriano and piazza moves) was kinda natural.

i dont think money should be the driving force, but rather positioning and team needs (with an eye to money, but not because of money alone)

[rcartman28]

I am okay with Chipper's thinking about this, but the Braves need to actually go out and get a semi-quality 3B instead of playing Castilla......

[JamesI]

For the money they paid Castilla they could have gotten someone better at either position, 3b or left. Chipper should play wherever the team needs him. 3rd, left, 1st wherever the he helps the team the most.

[VNV Nation]

well I think the logic is a little goofy but the conclusion is valid. the market at the time had few cheap options in LF but several at 3B.

[pwdennis]

Castilla was not a total failure at 3B - defensively he remains far better than Chipper ever was. The Braves infield defense was better than it has been for several years, especially on the left side. Also he was not an offensive zero although he hit in spurts.

A long-term solution ? No.

A decent stop-gap measure ? Yes .

[tortured angel]

3rd base or LF, Chipper's primary contribution is with a bat in his hands. If these players were good defensively, no one would be looking to move them. Soriano is not a good infielder but may turn out to be a good outfielder. Given someone with his offense, is that more valuable packaged as a bad 2B or a good CF? I would rather have the good OF.

[LeGrandOrange]

Remember, Soriano would be in LF by now if Chuck Knoblauch hadn't developed a fear of throwing to the 1B. Who do you place at 2B if you're the pinstripers though? I mean, the Yankees could sign anyone they damn well pleased, but what if they don't? Who do you turn to?

[poorme]

it's easier to find a left fielder than a 3B. you coulda found someone on the waiver wire that would have hit way better than castilla.

although i would have expected castilla to hit much better than he did - .260 20 homers or something.

[gyb13]

It's an interesting logic, and my position has elements of VNV and moose...

the driving force should not be money, but rather the team's needs and the best way to allocate its resources based on what is available in the 'market' (minors and free agents).

[boot2112]

Originally posted by poorme
it's easier to find a left fielder than a 3B. you coulda found someone on the waiver wire that would have hit way better than castilla.

although i would have expected castilla to hit much better than he did - .260 20 homers or something.

I agree with this in and disagree with Chipper. While I am not downplaying how difficult it is to play LF; but it is the easiest position of the nine defensively. I think if Chipper plays 3B and they find someone to play LF the Braves are a better ball club. Chipper is no Brroks Robinson but I have never thought much of Vinny over there either. With Chipper being adequate defensively I think it is MUCH easier to find an offensive threat to play LF than it is to play 3B. There are dozens of kids that can hit and play LF that can't find jobs in the bigs because pretty much every team has a LF than can hit (please no Chuck Knoblauch responses). I think the Braves could have found many players on the cheap that given the at bats would have produced as well if not better than Vinny. The idea of it being easier to find a 3B to me is silly.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Originally posted by poorme
[b]it's easier to find a left fielder than a 3B. you coulda found someone on the waiver wire that would have hit way better than castilla. [b]

It's easier to build a platoon combination in LF than at 3B.

[Alan Smithee]

I think chipper got it totally backwards. Castilla created about 60 -70 runs this year. ( didn't bother to go firgure his RC but its in that range.) the Braves could have left chipper at third and gotten a cheap guy to play LF who could create 60-70 runs. OF course Castilla did improve the braves D so I dont think its a BAD move BUt I dont agree with chippers logic. If that makes any sense.

[VNV Nation]

I think Chipper had to move, and whatever logic convinced him was worth it. He was starting to become completely overmatched by the position, and when he's your best hitter, that's not a good thing.

Boot - I don't mean to quibble, but I would imagine that first is actually the easiest of the nine to play defensively. I think Bill James ranked the positions and talked about being about to go from left to right, but not right to left (not field, his list). In fact, when you think about it, it is probably easier to get more offense from the easier defensive positions. One of the things that has been so amazing about the Yanks is their relatively lack of offense from left field, the second easiest position to play. The contributions from center, short, second and catcher have covered for it over the years.