Tuesday, January 25, 2005

I've assumed this whole offseason that Craig Biggio would move back to 2nd base, where he's played the majority of his career (including stints at catcher and the outfield). That way we could go with an OF of Lane / a CF who we trade for / Berkman, and an IF of Lamberg / Everett / Biggio (and Burke) / Bagwell, and Ausmus at C. I still think we'll trade for a CF, but is asking Biggio to move back to 2nd base really the best course of action?

You might have heard of the defensive spectrum, and it goes a little something like:

SS - 2B - CF - C - 3B - RF - LF - 1B.

At least that's what I think; maybe you could switch 2B and CF or LF and 1B. Anywho, second base is a much more demanding defensive position than left field, particularly at The Juice Box, where left field is approximately the size of a Cracker Jack Box because of the short wall.

Biggio is a special case since he's played more of his career at 2nd than anywhere else, but I think that it might work out better to have Biggio as a 4th OF / utility guy, able to play 2B only in case of an emergency. As long as he doesn't take playing time away from Jason Lane - Lane 'deserves' playing time more than Burke does. So an OF of Biggio / CF / Lane (with Palmeiro and Taveras as backup) to start, then Lane / CF / Berkman, with Biggio and Palmeiro as backup.

There are still plenty of CF rumors out there, but frankly, I'm sick of talking about them, so I won't mention them until one actually happens.

1 comment:

Andres said...

No matter what, I think management will guarantee Biggio a starting position. That's what any ballplayer wants, even one like Biggio who's willing to do whatever is asked of him. Biggio won't like it if we relegate him to a glorified back-up role. And neither will the fans. So expect a lot of Biggio next year. Which is not a bad thing at all. Yet.