but I think Blalock would be a liability in the OF.

Why does everyone assume he’s going to be an above average 3B? I’m not saying I don’t, but is the reasoning simply that if he can play SS he can play 3B??

Would Everett and his sub .200 BA be any better than Andrus?

Orlando Cabrera CWS
Alex Cintron CWS
Alex Cora BOS
Craig Counsell * MIL
Adam Everett MIN
Rafael Furcal LAD
Cristian Guzman WAS
Cesar Izturis STL
Ramon Martinez LAD
Edgar Renteria * DET
Juan Uribe CWS

http://mlbcontracts.blogspot.com/2002/02/2008-09-free-agents.html

Of course, this brings up an interesting side-point: was this decision made entirely of Blalock’s own volition? Per MLB.com:

Blalock, out since April 26 with a torn left hamstring, started thinking about making the shift to first base while watching Friday’s game against Houston. The Rangers have risen from a 9-18 low point to the .500 mark at 22-22 with Ramon Vazquez the primary third baseman. Vazquez is batting .400 in his last 16 games.

Blalock approached Washington about the idea on Friday.

“I went to Wash and asked him if we were a better team with me at first base, and he said yes.”

Blalock then had a meeting on Saturday with Washington and general manager Jon Daniels.

“That was Hank’s suggestion,” Washington said. “That was Hank’s decision. Looking at the team, it will probably help first base.”

Timing still seems exceedingly odd, in any event.

I would like to see him up again after he shakes the rust off in AAA. He is obviously a plus defender at 3B and he started to look comfortable at the plate towards the end last year. Spring had me very optimistic until his injury.

if Metcalf, Duran and Vasquez all are up in the majors, do we have a decent 3b in Frisco and OKC? just a thought. i know whittleman isnt destroying bakersfield but he has plose to a 400 obp and close to 300 BA and averaging more than a hit a game…

What happens to Frank Catalanotto? I have to think BB (2 for his last 30, down to .246/.321/.420) is optioned back to OKC to make room for Blalock, because the Rangers, unless they have a trade partner already lined up, won’t have a use for Catalanotto other than LF once Hank returns.

We could survive Blalock defensively 3B when we had a fairly rangy ARod at SS. However, you put 2 statues next to each other, like Blalock and MY, and you had a huge problem for our “pitch to contact” philosophy. The other reason, which isn’t being mentioned, but I’m sure was brought up by Boras, is that its easier to remain healthy at 1B than it is at 3B, and healthy players get more money in free agency.

Personally, I have no problem with Vazquez and Blalock rather than Cat and Blalock. Cat can sit down and ride pine and be a bench bat and defensive injury replacement, or they can try to trade him. I think age has deteriorated Cat to the point where he really isn’t a starter anymore. Defensively, all you can put him at is high offensive output positions, and his offense hasn’t been particularly high output since he has been with the rangers.

Getting a better D from 3B should close up some of the gap between 3B and SS. Then move MY to 3B (where I think he would just fine) and bring in a better defensive SS and I think the infield has been improved defensively.

My only problem is the offense. MY probably doesn’t have the stick for 3B.

I think the team isn’t any worse off this year. The mix at 3B will be a bit worse offensively than the mix at first. But Blalock back will help the offense at 1B enough to make this a zero-sum-offensive move. The help in D should make them a better team. This should also allow the Rangers to not rush Davis but we’re going to need a SS pretty damn soon.

have both homered today….

good overall decision, but terrible timing because Andrus isnt ready to become the full time SS.

and the same the same thing is going on in the minors as well as Davis blows at 3rd.

Nice first AA start for him.

http://tinyurl.com/4szutr

Probably not, but I like the thought.

Is the Boras angle…did he ok this? I am sure the move had his blessing. Given that assumption, is to too much of a stretch to think that Boras is lining up a trade for Hank later this summer? If Boras is betting the Rangers are just a mirage, and will fade down the stretch, Hank very well could be moved.

Of course, who is the team who needs an upgrade at 1st? NYY.

Just a thought…

Well, offensively, this puts the team in a pretty rough place next year. I think that the team should reasonable expect to compete if things go right. However, they have some holes to fill. What is set right now (You would think) Kinsler at 2B, Young at 3B, Murphy/Boggs LF, Hamilton in CF.

You can live with Young’s slightly below average 3B offense. You can live with Murphy/Boggs slightly below average offense in LF. You can live with slightly below average offense from your catcher (Laird). You can live with bad offense from a shortstop like Everett. You can live with all of these if it comes with good/great defense, but can you live with all of them at the same time?

This means that Salty will have to be the guy behind the plate every day and produce. You will be counting on Blalock and/or an inexperienced Chris Davis to stay healthy/produce. You better find a right fielder that will produce.

I don’t know, this whole thing really worries me.

left infield defense improves and the 1B hitting production improves is that wouldn’t it make more sense just to trade for a 1B?

The Boras angle has come to mind, and I’ve wondered if Hank was showcasing himself for NYY, but I really think Hank likes playing with MY, Kinsler, et al. and I think I recall an interview in which he said he thought it would be cool to play for one organization for his entire career. The FA market in 2009 for both 1B and 3B is less than stellar.

Metcalf could be a decent 1-yr stopgap for next year until the Rangers are ready to promote Elvis, prompting the MY move. If he can hit as well as Buechelle but with a little more power, he’ll be an upgrade at the plate over Vazquez and maybe in the field as well.

is going to completely counter the defensive upgrade.

If Adam is right I bet Boggs gets more time even if his bat cools off. He’s certainly not going to lose time in LF to Catalanotto.

I didn’t read through all the comments, but I wonder what Blalock’s motivation was for volunteering to make this move? Does it make him more valuable? Is 1B less taxing physically than 3B? Will Hank be injured less often going forward?

Regarding Young going to 3B, it sounds like there may be some worry that he will be resistant. Is that the case? And if so why?

How is Joaquin Arias looking this year so far?

...except that it is part of a master plan (which I guess is your central point, hah). I agree that there is a master plan to overhaul the lineup to drastically improve its defensive value. That evidence is all over the place. But the timing of this move doesn’t fit any logical picture for the long term. I believe that this move has two or three pieces of logic: Blalock is better served by a move to 1B because he isn’t very good at 3B and because it might be easier on his body, and we like the idea of who we have at 3B better than who we have at 1B. That’s it.

While a lot of us have seen the writing on the wall for a Young to 3B, Andrus to SS future, because of how much that could help you defensively, especially if you focus on GB pitchers like Feldman and Gabbard filling out a good portion of your rotation, this move still comes at completely the wrong time, if you want to place it as a big picture move.

Doing this now has very little affect, in my opinion, on how open Young might be next spring to move to 3B. Besides, Young is stuck here. He basically can’t be traded because of his own salary, and he’s committed for several years. I don’t care whether he’s “on board” with a move to 3B or not, I really don’t. You sit him down and show him on tape and statistically, if you think you need to, that it’s just not happening at SS, and you tell him that you believe that this will be his most effective position for the remainder of his career, and that you would like to see a little more power from him if possible, and that’s that. You shouldn’t need to create this passive aggressive picture and hope that he does like Blalock and figures it out for himself. You tell him that it’s time to move.

At any rate, the key to this overall plan is having a true shortstop, and everyone knows that the organization’s plan is for Andrus to be its shortstop in the future. Andrus is not going to fulfill his end of the move until sometime in 2010. If we could hit the fast forward button and make it May or June of 2010, then yes, this move makes perfect sense. But this move doesn’t accomplish a big picture goal until Young moves to 3B and a quality SS is inserted. You’re just dealing with the immediate, plugging gaps, ironing creases, until the rest of the picture is ready.

Is it good for now? Eh, probably not, but whether it is or isn’t, the margin probably isn’t that great. So what frustrates me isn’t the effect that it has on things now, but the mistiming that the move has if you want to take it as a big picture move.

And one of the reasons, as I said several times yesterday, that this makes me uncomfortable in regard to the big picture, especially if they do move Young next spring and bring in a crappy short term fix, is that it puts the pressure on Andrus to get ready quickly and for the organization to move him up quickly. While I think that he is a level headed guy who can probably deal with it long term, I really don’t like the idea of rushing his bat. I think that he has offensive potential and maybe even top of the order potential. But he needs to develop it the right way, not by being dunked repeatedly.

This all hinges on SS next year. There are two options since Andrus won’t be ready. A free agent or Arias. Now wait you say, Arias’ arm isn’t healthy. And I say so what? I’m not worried about his arm this year. The question is does it improve as the season goes on and will he be on some strength and conditioning program this off-season. Unless anyone has heard different no one in the Rangers’ organization is seriously concerned about his arm long term. He’s hitting .325 in AAA, if his arm is a go next year he’s the most obvious and best choice for a year or a year and half till Andrus is ready. The nice part is if he plays well he can be traded to fill another hole.

They can also keep Blalock if they feel Davis/company aren’t ready or they can trade him at the deadline or this off-season. Many possibilities are opened up because of this move. Good for Blalock and good for the club.

Next year should look like:

1B Davis (Blalock)
2B Kinsler
SS Arias
3B Young
C Salty (Teagarden)
LF Murphy/Boggs
CF Hamilton
RF JMJ/Cruz
DH Ramierz

Tell me that’s not a better lineup going forward? It’s also pretty good defensively.

Excellent, excellent analysis. I’ve held off from saying this before, but we haven’t had very many posts of this quality and length over the past 12 months.

I love the blog Adam, but I’d love to see more pieces of this type and fewer link roundups that have zero commentary.

What if this is HB’s idea? No one else, just HB. What does it do for the team today…the 2008 team. We have hardly any production at 1B. Vasquez has played well, above his norm, but well. Bring Hank in at 1B provides production where we have had none. Short term maybe, but it does add production to the team the Rangers are fielding now. If Vasquez, Duran, Matcalf cannot keep their end up, HB is not married to 1B. He can move back to 3B and then you haveShelton, Cat platoon at 1B. I really think this is a “Let’s see if I play 1B,can we keep on wining and get into the play-off picture?” Maybe JD is thinking long term, but I think this is HB tring to “win now.” So why not?

I just don’t see how in the short term, it can hurt. Long term, you are more than likely correct, and it looks like we are going to find out…