to me it means Grissom can’t handle short and they don’t believe in Shewmake’s bat, at least not yet.
"Well, you’ll learn soon enough that this was a massive red wave landslide." - thethe on the 2020 election that trump lost bigly
“I can’t fix my life, but I can fix the world.” - sturg
Remember when folks on this board were smart enough to not let 20 ST PAs influence their views on a player? Now all of a sudden half the posters here think Shewmake was an actual option at SS.
We knew Grissom might not be able to handle SS. We knew Arcia was the backup plan.
So none of this should be surprising to anyone. Arcia at SS was always a good chance of happening. He is clearly a low end regular, but nothing I’ve seen suggests Grissom is more than that either. At least these moves keep all the mediocre options in the organization.
Or. Hang with me here for a minute. Or maybe it was shew was getting a lot of reps and our beat writers were hyping him as a possible opening day player. Couple that with high draft pick pedigree and folks got caught up in it. But was it really for shew. Or was it for ANYONE else but Arcia. We as fans have been spoiled by watching prospects come up after 20 at bats in the minors and cement themselves as a starter for the big club. So maybe it has less to do with who we want as our starting SS. But who we don’t want. Give me potential all day everyday versus 6 prior years of ****.
Coppy
Happy ****ing Soroka Day bitches.
Coppy
buck75 (03-22-2023)
Man I don’t care how he pitches today as long as he’s healthy
Last edited by Hudson2; 03-22-2023 at 07:17 AM.
If anyone thought Shewmake should win the job because of a few ST ABs, then they should never be allowed to evaluate baseball talent. But I don't think everyone who ranks Shewmake over Arcia uses that reasoning. Shewmake is almost certainly the best defensive SS out of the three candidates. Grissom is brand new to the position and Arcia is below average defensively these days. If we were chiefly concerned about defense, we'd be going with Shewmake.
Grissom most likely has the best bat of the three. If we were willing to run a below average glove out there, Grissom would have been the better choice.
Arcia is just bad all around. He's below average defensively, he's not terribly useful at the plate, he really brings nothing to the table. I don't know why AA thinks for a second that Arcia should be anything other than a reserve infielder and a mediocre one at that.
If Arcia were to start all year, I'd be surprised if he put up a WAR over 1. Over the last 4 years his total WAR has been 0.1 in over 1,000 PAs. The lowest WAR of any SS with enough ABs to qualify last year was 1.2. No SS last year with at least 300 PAs put up a WAR less than 1. Arcia isn't a low end regular, he's a replacement level player.
So is anyone else sort of worried about our pen being a bit thin..
I mean we have Minter and Riggy.. but after that, it feels like some '?'
Yates, Anderson, Stephenson, Jiminez.. is that an inspiring next 4
after that it is Chavez and Lee..
Coppy
It depends what the player needs. If the player needs game reps to get comfortable with a new approach at the plate to combat the book everyone has on him, 100 PAs in AAA can be huge. 100 PAs also gets Grissom roughly a month's worth of games to further polish his defense and prove his arm plays at SS.