it's not a matter of who can field a ground ball. it's about range. it's about literally stealing away hits that lead to runs. i've seen very few SS's in my life that get to as many balls as AE does. there is HUGE value in that. it's easier to see value in runs created...more difficult to see value in runs prevented.
Astros pitchers are 4th in MLB in GB/FB ratio. More telling, they are 6th in total number of groundball outs, while only 17th in total number of outs (IP). Strikes me that they get an inordinate number of groundball outs relative to other MLB teams and that having the best defensive SS on the planet might be a pretty good thing.
what's funny is that both sides seem to argue from the point of view that the season is short and the decision to install loretta to see if it kick-starts the offense is irreversible. not saying i'm for the move, but there is nothing wrong with shaking things up a bit.
This is just comical...first the argument is made that since Lee and Berkman are finally coming around, that we need Everett to start hitting so they can have some guys on base in front of them; and if he can't do it to start Loretta. Well first, Everett does not hit in front of Lee and Berkman, so that doesn't make any sense. Secondly, I've seen Loretta sub for Everett...and I've thought to myself on numerous occasions "well there's a ball Everett could have gotten." Loretta can't even get to groundballs that are ROUTINE for Everett...and that has cost the team runs. It was almost as if one particular game the opposing team was taking advantage of that weakness in the defense and just kept knocking hits right over to Loretta because he couldn't get to them. Loretta is getting starts all over the infield and that is just fine w/ me. But you put Loretta at SS w/ Bidge at 2nd...that's a serious hole up the middle. But hey, Lee and Berkman got some timely hits yesterday, Scott may be coming around too...and don't forget about the team's saviour in Pence. Simply, if certain players in the lineup get their hits like they're supposed to, we don't need to worry about AE.
The Astros LEAD the NL in quality Starts. They are in the top half in ERA. You are ignoring my point. YES, we would be giving up hits on defense but the hits on offense would compensate for the hits on defense. We would be gaining more runs than we would be giving up. On Defense, Everett can give up a hit to anyone in the lineup. Top or bottom of the order. We're not talking about an Outfielder that can get to a well hit ball, we're talking about ground balls. Everyone in the lineup hits ground balls. There is no reason to think that guys at the top of the order or middle would make more ground balls than the guys at the bottom. I think it is reasonable to conclude that the hits we would be giving up if we benched Everett would be spread thoughout the order. BUT, if we replace him in the lineup with a guy who can hit and put him in the top of the order, those hits we would be gaining would put a guy on base for Berkman/Lee. Put Everett in at the end of games like Phil does with all the other above average defenders.
i'm suggesting we need to win games. i'm suggesting that when the meat of the order does its job, scoring runs isn't a problem. i'm suggesting i've seen loretta play SS and i'm not impressed.
This is a bit of an exaggeration. While I'm not here to argue whether or not Everett should be starting at SS, I have always been curious as to how many times the SS is involved in defensive plays for a game. I went back for the last week and looked at play-by-play listings to see. Here are the outs Everett accounted for: 5/8 - 1 gb, 1 liner 5/7 - 2 gb, 1 flyball 5/6 - 3 gb 5/5 - 2 gb 5/4 - 2 gb 5/3 - 3 gb 5/2 - 4 gb It doesn't look as if he is involved in as many defensive plays as the average defense-preaching fan probably thinks. And these don't account for difficulty. Since these are all outs that Adam makes, it can be assumed that SOME of these wouldn't be made by Loretta...but then again, most probably would. Consider maybe 20% of the outs Adam makes would not be made by Loretta (and I think that is a high number), then that's roughly 4 more hits over a week that Loretta accounts for. Really not as big a difference as I thought it would be. Certainly there are more factors that go into it, many that can't be proven either way (like the calming factor a great SS would have on a pitcher to not need to strikeout all the hitters). But it does show that the misconception that Adam is making several plays a game that Loretta or an average defensive SS wouldn't is way off...in reality it would account for less than a hit a game.
Astute Observation Sherlock Holmes. If we put a guy in the lineup that is hitting as well as Loretta, we can put him at the top of the order. If we now have a guy hiting over .300, why the hell would be keep him at the bottom of the order? No one is hitting well in the 2 spot. Biggio sucks for a top of the line guy (.331 OBP ) and we never get much out of the 2 spot so it would only make sense to move one of those guys down if we now had a guy that could hit. I've seen Everett up to bat... and I've thought to myself on numerous occasions "well there's a ball that Derek Bell could have hit"
No, I'm not. I'm dismissing it as inaccurate, along with almost everyone else in this thread. I can see the train of thought you followed; I don't think it's necessarily "stupid" or "ridiculous" or anything like that, I just disagree. I think it's inaccurate. I think the Astros would either a) win the same amount of games or b) win fewer games.
Then let's assume the starter would get 30 ABs over a 7 game stretch (probably a little high, especially if down in the order). If Everett hits .200, that's 6 hits. If Loretta hits .333, that's 10 hits. So, there's your 4 hits saved a week. Nevermind that you lose Loretta's bat off the bench as well, or that over the long haul, AE will probably end up closer to .240-.250 and Loretta closer to .290-.300
wait...what??? loretta's batted .285 last year. that means if he gets 100 AB's, he'll get 28 hits. everett batted about .240 last year. that means if he gets 100 AB's, he'll get 24 hits. that's a difference of 4 hits in 100 AB's. the game a few weeks ago where loretta played SS...i saw about 3 balls go through in one inning that i think AE makes plays on. i wasn't alone in that, as i noticed a few people here mention it and a friend who was listening to the radio broadcast of the game said the announcers were saying the same thing. that led to a big inning. again...you're talking about 4 more hits in 100 AB's...but you're giving up a lot more than that on the other end.
here's the problem...these are plays that AE MADE. does Loretta make 3 outs on 5/3? or does he just make 1? i don't think you can look at these numbers in a bubble...because you don't have anything to compare it with.
The simpler way to look at it is that Everett leads the NL (tied with the Rockies SS) in total chances at 155 in 30 games played. He averages over 5 chances a game.
Iill reply to my own post here... Everett averages 5.3 chances per 9 innings at SS, Loretta averages 2.79 in the 29 innings he has played there. Obviously Loretta does not have near enough innings to draw any complete conclusions, but that IS quite a difference.
i know, i'm just suggesting that the season is a gazillion games long and people are on the panic wagon. member when torre was about to get fired? i like everett, but it is true, he can't hit, at all. just sayin'
i hear ya. it is a gazillion games long. but i don't believe 4 more hits over 100 AB's justifies moving the best defensive SS in the game from that position.
