Ranking the Greats: Positional Afjustments

Three Kinds of Successful Shortstops

I) Ozzie Smith: (Small, Graceful bodies capable of acrobatics and precision)

The name just echoes through time. We all know who Ozzie Smith is. All those gold gloves, the back-flips, the leadership role on some great teams, the dives, it all blurs together into one whirlwind of awestruck wonder when you look back on it. He had everything a franchise could ever want from its' star shortstop in the time before the big shortstops arrived and challenged our notion of what a middle infielder could be. From the moment he set foot on a diamond, everyone knew he would be one of the greatest fielders of all time. As with many great fielding shortstops there was some question about whether he would hit enough to hold down a job in the majors, but as it turned out, he was so overwhelmingly gifted defensively that he held a job long enough while he struggled to learn to hit that he had time to adjust and become a solid top of the order catalyst. In fact his career didn't end when he stopped hitting...it ended when he finally lost a couple of steps in the field and his defensive edge vanished. Smith was already a legend by this time thanks to the gold gloves and to his fiery and exciting style on the field, and as such, he dictated his own terms on the way out. However, there've been other great shortstops of this type that weren't quite as flashy and didn't have the media momentum or hordes of fans in the stands to put financial pressure on their franchises to keep them around.

**Ozzie Smith**
Age	Yr	OWC	XOWC	ADWC	XDWC	Tot	PA	PRG
32	1987	8.92	3.36	5.28	2.08	14.2	706	150
27	1982	3.03	2.7	8.62	1.92	11.65	567	139
33	1988	4.87	3.18	6.14	2.02	11.01	669	146
30	1985	4.65	2.92	5.73	2.17	10.38	615	157
31	1986	4.8	2.9	5.21	1.98	10.01	609	143
25	1980	3.45	3.38	6.48	2.19	9.93	712	158
36	1991	7.34	3.04	1.99	2.02	9.33	641	146
29	1984	4.68	2.3	4.53	1.69	9.21	484	122
23	1978	3.75	3.18	4.98	2.08	8.73	668	150
34	1989	4.5	3.16	3.9	2.1	8.4	664	151
37	1992	3.78	2.8	4.31	1.83	8.09	590	132
38	1993	4.2	2.86	3.71	1.76	7.91	603	127
28	1983	3.45	2.98	4.38	2.1	7.83	626	151
24	1979	0.49	3.08	4.61	2.05	5.1	649	148
26	1981	0.75	2.41	3.82	1.51	4.57	507	109
35	1990	2.29	2.81	1.76	1.86	4.05	592	134
39	1994	2.29	2.06	1.2	1.36	3.49	433	98
41	1996	1.72	1.24	1.5	0.74	3.22	261	53
40	1995	-0.6	0.86	1.05	0.57	0.45	182	41

**Herman Long**
Age	Yr	OWC	XOWC	ADWC	XDWC	Tot	PA	PRG
26	1892	4.61	3.32	7.94	2.05	12.55	698	151
25	1891	5.66	3.16	6.86	1.92	12.52	665	139
32	1898	2.81	3.06	6.93	2.01	9.74	645	145
23	1889	6.74	3.08	2.74	1.93	9.48	648	139
27	1893	5.62	3	3.56	1.78	9.18	630	128
24	1890	2.55	2.26	5.66	1.48	8.21	475	107
31	1897	3.93	2.34	4.27	1.43	8.2	492	103
33	1899	3.71	3.1	4.42	2.02	8.13	651	146
30	1896	4.94	2.58	3.15	1.65	8.09	544	119
29	1895	5.47	2.8	1.84	1.73	7.31	590	125
34	1900	3.07	2.62	3.78	1.78	6.85	550	128
28	1894	4.35	2.44	1.43	1.44	5.78	514	104
35	1901	0.34	2.66	4.94	1.94	5.28	559	140
36	1902	2.02	2.3	3.26	1.7	5.28	484	122
37	1903	0.71	1.64	0.97	1.3	1.68	344	92
38	1904	0	0	0	0.03	0	0	2

**Rabbit Maranville**
Age	Yr	OWC	XOWC	ADWC	XDWC	Tot	PA	PRG
22	1914	4.12	3.16	8.43	2.17	12.55	664	157
24	1916	4.12	3.23	6.11	2.13	10.23	680	154
32	1924	2.02	3.04	6.97	2.23	8.99	640	153
29	1921	4.57	3.26	4.42	2.13	8.99	685	154
23	1915	3.15	2.75	4.94	2.06	8.09	579	149
25	1917	3.82	2.91	3.56	1.97	7.38	613	142
30	1922	4.5	3.55	2.77	2.23	7.27	747	160
21	1913	4.65	3.13	2.36	1.98	7.01	659	143
31	1923	2.7	3	3.63	2	6.33	633	144
37	1929	3.67	3.01	2.62	2.04	6.29	634	147
38	1930	3.67	2.98	2.58	2	6.25	628	145
27	1919	2.55	2.52	3.41	1.82	5.96	529	131
28	1920	2.32	2.54	2.36	1.79	4.68	534	129
36	1928	0.94	1.96	3.52	1.47	4.46	412	106
40	1932	1.05	3.02	3.3	2.12	4.35	635	145
39	1931	1.5	3.02	2.62	2.02	4.12	636	146
34	1926	0.6	1.26	1.61	0.99	2.21	266	71
33	1925	0.41	1.45	1.24	1.06	1.65	305	76
26	1918	0.34	0.2	0.26	0.16	0.6	42	12
35	1927	-0.07	0.14	0.26	0.12	0.19	31	9
20	1912	0.04	0.48	0.11	0.43	0.15	101	31
41	1933	-1.31	2.52	1.46	2.02	0.15	532	139
43	1935	-1.12	0.34	0.07	0.2	-1.05	71	14

The player profiles presented above are listed in descending order of total value contributed so it's easier to see how these players gained the most value and how strong they were in their best years. An accidental benefit of this organization is that you can also see that it's very rare for a player to have all of his best seasons in a well organized cluster in his peak years, rendering the whole idea of measuring a player at his best by grabbing a span of years rather useless.

In any event, these are all great examples of the classically built, naturally acrobatic shortstops. They made the plays look artistic, had the tiny builds that made it possible for them to be in perfect control of every limb at all times, and hit like small people tend to hit.

II) Omar Vizquel (Small bodies lacking in the natural raw talent necessary to fully master precision fielding)

Scouts often have trouble at an early age identifying the difference between the Omar Vizquel type on the Ozzie Smith type. They both possess the same kinds of raw abilities. They have the size and speed to cover ground while staying under control, the flashy play-making acrobatics and the soft hands. Guys like Vizquel often fool spectators and the media as well given the human predilection for memorializing the sensational. They make highlight reel plays but lack the natural grace and artistry of the best shortstops. Vizquel got his golden reputation as "the human vacuum" in his Seattle days and he was a gifted fielder, but those who watched him play were aware, at least early on, that he was not mechanically perfect and lacked the powerful throwing arm you'd like to see from your shortstop. Nonetheless he had a solid career and there are many who have similar stories. All of them, much like Vizquel and the other more artistic shortstops discussed above were slap hitters due to their small size.

**Omar Vizquel**
Age	Yr	OWC	XOWC	ADWC	XDWC	Tot	PA	PRG
32	1999	7.16	3.16	2.02	1.92	9.18	664	138
29	1996	4.8	2.96	3.45	2.01	8.25	623	145
35	2002	5.47	3.15	2.06	2.02	7.53	663	146
31	1998	3.56	3.14	3.9	2.05	7.46	660	148
28	1995	3.67	2.96	3.18	1.84	6.85	622	133
37	2004	4.65	3.1	2.06	1.87	6.71	651	135
30	1997	3.6	3.05	2.73	2.02	6.33	642	146
33	2000	4.27	3.4	1.76	2.06	6.03	717	149
24	1991	1.01	2.29	4.87	1.8	5.88	482	130
26	1993	1.05	3	4.68	2.06	5.73	630	149
25	1992	1.95	2.5	2.92	1.8	4.87	527	130
34	2001	1.61	3.29	1.09	2.04	2.7	693	147
36	2003	0.97	1.36	1.65	0.9	2.62	285	65
23	1990	0.37	1.36	1.76	1.07	2.13	285	77
27	1994	1.09	1.53	0.79	0.92	1.88	322	66
22	1989	-0.9	2.05	1.8	1.83	0.9	431	132

**Alan Trammell**
Age	Yr	OWC	XOWC	ADWC	XDWC	Tot	PA	PRG
29	1987	14.5	3.18	1.72	2.04	16.22	668	147
28	1986	7.57	3.1	3.75	2.04	11.32	653	147
25	1983	9.4	2.76	1.65	1.83	11.05	581	132
32	1990	7.27	3.02	3.78	1.88	11.05	637	136
26	1984	8.13	2.98	1.65	1.48	9.78	626	107
30	1988	7.12	2.48	2.17	1.69	9.29	523	122
22	1980	6.71	3.1	1.69	1.94	8.4	652	140
24	1982	4.72	2.64	2.66	2.06	7.38	556	149
23	1981	2.29	2.2	4.5	1.4	6.79	463	101
35	1993	5.81	2.12	0.86	1.15	6.67	447	95
27	1985	3.71	3.22	1.91	2.05	5.62	677	148
21	1979	3.45	2.47	1.61	1.9	5.06	520	137
20	1978	1.84	2.4	2.77	1.86	4.61	504	134
31	1989	2.88	2.4	1.57	1.69	4.45	506	122
33	1991	2.58	2	1.42	1.19	4	421	86
36	1994	1.65	1.48	0.49	0.94	2.14	311	68
37	1995	1.05	1.21	0.6	0.72	1.65	255	52
34	1992	0.86	0.57	0.37	0.36	1.23	120	26
38	1996	-0.37	0.98	0.3	0.65	-0.07	207	49
19	1977	-0.37	0.23	0.15	0.14	-0.22	48	10

**Bert Campaneris**
Age	Yr	OWC	XOWC	ADWC	XDWC	Tot	PA	PRG
28	1970	8.05	3.09	3.11	1.94	11.16	650	140
26	1968	6.67	3.36	4.05	2.12	10.72	707	153
30	1972	3.97	3.24	6.29	2.04	10.26	681	147
24	1966	6.93	2.88	2.7	1.86	9.63	606	134
32	1974	5.43	2.79	2.44	1.8	7.87	587	130
31	1973	4.83	3.19	3.03	1.94	7.86	671	140
23	1965	6.14	3.01	1.61	1.73	7.75	634	136
34	1976	4.68	3	2.4	1.97	7.08	631	142
29	1971	3.48	2.9	3.41	1.79	6.89	609	129
27	1969	4.91	2.81	1.57	1.69	6.48	592	122
35	1977	2.85	3.08	3.56	1.98	6.41	648	143
25	1967	4.5	3.08	1.72	2.04	6.22	649	147
33	1975	4.57	2.8	1.35	1.83	5.92	588	132
22	1964	1.99	1.38	0.63	0.71	2.62	290	62
36	1978	0.49	1.52	1.39	1.12	1.88	319	81
37	1979	0.82	1.35	0.79	1.08	1.61	283	78
38	1980	1.12	1.11	0.34	0.8	1.46	234	58
41	1983	0.79	0.74	0.56	0.42	1.35	155	34
39	1981	0.56	0.43	0.11	0.18	0.67	91	20

Some traits these players all seem to have in common when I go through the records:

They don't hit for much power (with the exception of a bizarre fluke season from Campaneris in 1970 in which he managed to crank 22 HRs out of nowhere despite his elative lack of bulk). To be offensively valuable they run the bases and some of them (not Campaneris - his greatest weakness was that he never managed to make the most use of his speed by keeping the ball down and legging out hits) master the art of the slap single and learn to minimize their strikeouts. A strikeout is a guaranteed out whereas they know if they can put the ball in play more often, they can get a few extra hits. To be fair, Trammell, despite his slight frame (6 foot tall, which isn't too short, but 175 pounds in his prime years isn't exactly a slugger's weight), managed to grow into a line drive hitter and had one or two offensive seasons that made him a legitimate MVP candidate.

They are always visually impressive defensively but defensive metrics like PCA Defensive Wins and BP's Fielding Runs Above Replacement (FRAR) tend to show a lot of season to season inconsistency.

The decline quickly, earlier than normal in their careers, but their reputation for defensive excellence follows them well past their actual prime.

Fielding skill, unlike hitting skill is very intricate, it can be exceedingly difficult to make everything work exactly correctly for a long period of time, and shortstops that have most of the skills needed for defensive excellence but lack one or two key things (arm strength, fundamentals of footwork or perfect coordination) tend to have shorter periods of true excellence, but it's very difficult to tell the difference between one of these players having a great year and having a poor year because they look talented. The little things that go wrong and turn a great year into a poor one in terms of play-making aren't throwing errors or obvious mistakes, they're things like off-balanced throws instead of set feet or quick double-clutches of the ball that result in base hits or the ball squeaking through the hole instead of being caught. Some shortstops are blessed with the talent and coordination to be nearly perfect for a long time. Some become great fielders for shorter time periods because they work to overcome small holes in their talent and maximize their other impressive gifts.

III) Cal Ripken Jr. (Large-framed, athletic, fundamentally sound machines lacking in the usual gifts that turn a player into a great shortstop)

Ripken isn't just known as the "Iron Man" for his consecutive game streak, he was also a consummate professional who dedicated his entire life to the perfection of his fundamentals on defense. He had a cannon for an arm which allowed him to play far deeper than the average shortstop in order to try and compensate for his ungainly size. He was not the first big shortstop, but he was one of the first to hold his position for a tremendous length of time. He gathered a reputation as a great fielder through years of limiting errors, knowing the pitchers and opposing hitters well enough to position himself perfectly to make plays, and showing off his strong arm. He's a relatively recent phenomenon in the game and has thus far proven to be a "best case scenario" defensively among big shortstops (and he was huge, weighing in at 225 pounds and measuring six foot four inches tall) although it is still early in the progression of this trend.

**Cal Ripken Jr.**
Age	Yr	OWC	XOWC	ADWC	XDWC	Tot	PA	PRG
30	1991	12.47	3.4	2.51	2.2	14.98	717	159
23	1984	9.89	3.4	4.38	2.24	14.27	716	162
22	1983	8.84	3.45	3.45	2.24	12.29	726	162
25	1986	8.17	3.36	2.7	2.24	10.87	707	162
27	1988	7.75	3.28	2.4	2.23	10.15	689	161
24	1985	7.01	3.41	2.47	2.23	9.48	718	161
29	1990	6.11	3.3	2.51	2.19	8.62	695	158
28	1989	4.68	3.38	3.9	2.24	8.58	712	162
26	1987	6.41	3.4	2.06	2.22	8.47	717	160
34	1995	3.37	2.91	4.53	2	7.9	613	144
21	1982	5.39	3.11	2.33	1.92	7.72	655	162
32	1993	3.75	3.41	3.03	2.24	6.78	718	162
35	1996	4.91	3.36	1.73	2.19	6.64	707	160
31	1992	3.15	3.4	3.03	2.24	6.18	715	162
33	1994	3.63	2.3	2.32	1.56	5.95	484	112
36	1997	3.22	3.26	2.55	1.42	5.77	686	155
38	1999	4.16	1.68	0.67	0.67	4.83	354	73
37	1998	3.48	3.13	0.64	1.44	4.12	659	158
39	2000	2.17	1.61	0.6	0.66	2.77	339	72
40	2001	0.9	2.45	1.69	1.04	2.59	516	114
20	1981	-0.9	0.19	0.19	0.12	-0.71	40	10

**Alex Rodriguez**
Age	Yr	OWC	XOWC	ADWC	XDWC	Tot	PA	PRG
24	2000	14.65	3.19	3.56	2.02	18.21	672	146
26	2002	11.05	3.44	4.76	2.19	15.81	725	158
25	2001	13.34	3.48	2.14	2.17	15.48	732	157
20	1996	13.22	3.22	1.72	1.96	14.94	677	141
27	2003	11.13	3.4	2.32	2.15	13.45	715	155
22	1998	8.95	3.56	2.51	2.23	11.46	748	161
28	2004	8.88	3.32	0.94	1.41	9.82	698	154
23	1999	7.12	2.72	1.69	1.74	8.81	572	125
21	1997	5.96	3.03	1.72	1.97	7.68	638	142
19	1995	0.45	0.71	0.45	0.54	0.9	149	39
18	1994	-0.15	0.28	0.15	0.22	0	59	16

**Miguel Tejada**
Age	Yr	OWC	XOWC	ADWC	XDWC	Tot	PA	PRG
27	2003	7.12	3.34	3.75	2.19	10.87	703	158
26	2002	6.14	3.4	4.5	2.2	10.64	715	159
28	2004	7.57	3.44	3	2.19	10.57	725	158
24	2000	6.22	3.24	2.47	2.2	8.69	681	159
25	2001	5.24	3.24	2.73	2.22	7.97	683	160
23	1999	4.16	3.2	3.11	2.13	7.27	674	154
22	1998	1.65	1.94	1.39	1.48	3.04	407	107
21	1997	-0.34	0.5	0.37	0.34	0.03	104	25

(Note, these statistics are current only through 2004 at the moment, my apologies on that)

These guys can hit - in their primes they're MVP candidates - and because of their raw athletic talents, they sometimes manage to be decent fielders as well, turning them into pure gold for their organizations, but it appears their size is preventing them from peaking in the realms of the smaller, faster, more agile shortstops in terms of defensive ability. Modern philosophies about how the game is played are allowing teams to realize that sacrificing some of your defensive production from the middle infield positions won't hurt you if you can get a guy who can knock the ball around the yard when he's hitting, but along with that change in the game has come a warped perception about what a great defensive middle infielder looks like.

We all know that the gold glove selection process tends to be biased toward players who also hit at least a little bit. This has been the case since day one because the media (the folks that vote on who wins these awards and essentially make or break the reputations of the players) doesn't tend to focus on players who are not stars, and being a great fielder alone tends to prevent players from becoming true stars. Some of the worst gold glove selections have come in years where the league was weak at a position, forcing writers to focus on the few legitimate stars there were, and if none of them were great fielders, than someone undeserving tended to win (2004: Derek Jeter, 1999, Rafael Palmeiro...classic examples).

Since the media isn't really focusing on guys like Pokey Reese (except in the one year where he also hit), Neifi Perez and Rey Ordonez, the best fielders they're seeing today are the likes of A-Rod, Nomar, and (at least apparently) Jeter. I believe some of them have forgotten what a truly great fielder looks like, and so good solid fielders are getting labels they haven't earned and being compared to true defensive greats from generations past. This is tending to blur the lines enough to convince some people that you can be big and a "great" glove at the same time.

hat we find when we total the careers up and determine who the great defensive shortstops were and who were merely good and/or adequate, we come to an important point. Let's take a look at the GI leaderboard for defensive greatness.

**40 "Greatest" Defensive Shortstops of All Time**
Ps-Rk	DP-Rk	First	Last	Wgt	PRG	%PS	CAREER	PRORATE	PEAK	RANGE	INDEX
4	1	Ozzie	Smith	150	2455	1.000	79.20	64.52	17.04	9.74	170.50
12	2	Herman	Long	160	1890	0.955	61.75	63.78	15.77	10.96	152.26
14	3	Joe	Tinker	175	1767	0.976	56.90	61.21	15.30	11.49	144.90
22	4	Rabbit	Maranville	155	2657	0.812	68.61	51.64	9.98	11.90	142.13
15	5	Dave	Bancroft	160	1877	0.991	56.78	59.05	12.32	9.25	137.40
9	6	Bill	Dahlen	180	2471	0.873	63.30	51.23	9.41	10.12	134.06
1	7	Honus	Wagner	200	2754	0.695	66.93	48.61	7.42	9.38	132.34
13	8	Jack	Glasscock	160	1743	0.936	49.61	54.36	10.43	9.79	124.19
17	9	Luis	Aparicio	160	2508	1.000	59.67	47.58	5.58	9.28	122.12
48	10	Mark	Belanger	170	1723	0.991	50.19	55.31	7.49	6.20	119.19
40	11	Germany	Smith	175	1717	0.971	45.27	50.50	11.04	11.77	118.58
46	12	Marty	Marion	170	1492	1.000	46.04	55.43	9.05	5.72	116.24
34	13	Dave	Concepcion	180	2254	0.911	54.74	48.57	4.15	7.25	114.71
29	14	Art	Fletcher	170	1465	0.965	42.62	52.51	10.08	9.30	114.51
16	15	Pee Wee	Reese	175	2083	0.951	49.45	47.48	5.12	8.47	110.52
36	16	Garry	Templeton	190	1928	0.985	46.10	47.43	6.66	8.98	109.18
24	17	Bobby	Wallace	170	2347	0.775	49.92	42.54	6.19	9.90	108.55
58	18	Billy	Jurges	175	1707	0.881	41.86	47.28	8.24	9.85	107.23
20	19	Hughie	Jennings	150	1267	0.713	35.21	48.76	10.18	9.93	104.08
35	20	Travis	Jackson	160	1593	0.812	39.93	47.45	5.68	7.99	101.05
53	21	Tommy	Corcoran	165	2218	0.942	46.44	41.88	3.28	7.90	99.50
23	22	Tony	Fernandez	175	1961	0.772	42.98	43.70	4.14	8.64	99.46
30	23	Dick	Bartell	160	1957	0.849	44.85	45.64	2.46	6.10	99.06
27	24	Phil	Rizzuto	160	1535	1.000	41.41	50.01	3.53	4.10	99.04
64	25	Greg	Gagne	170	1636	1.000	38.04	44.77	5.08	7.84	95.72
140	26	Neifi	Perez	175	1044	0.871	33.93	51.60	6.40	3.43	95.36
11	27	Lou	Boudreau	160	1563	0.964	38.19	46.27	3.65	5.84	93.94
70	28	Larry	Bowa	155	2134	0.999	42.81	40.12	2.09	7.17	92.19
83	29	Roy	McMillan	170	1940	0.992	41.10	42.21	2.33	6.46	92.09
7	30	Barry	Larkin	190	1988	0.999	42.43	42.65	1.23	5.40	91.71
49	31	Ron	Hansen	200	1212	0.906	33.07	47.64	4.87	5.20	90.78
6	32	Cal	Ripken Jr.	225	2931	0.778	49.69	33.91	0.54	6.60	90.73
84	33	Bob	Allen	175	609	1.000	24.84	50.56	9.49	5.39	90.28
61	34	Eddie	Miller	180	1450	0.948	33.91	44.08	4.38	7.20	89.56
42	35	Omar	Vizquel	165	2036	1.000	40.72	40.00	1.82	6.87	89.41
21	36	Bert	Campaneris	160	2128	0.945	41.06	38.59	2.22	7.20	89.07
50	37	Chris	Speier	180	1953	0.908	41.43	42.30	0.68	4.17	88.58
3	38	Luke	Appling	185	2317	0.944	43.86	37.86	1.26	5.58	88.56
41	39	Roger	Peckinpaugh	165	1958	0.999	38.74	39.52	3.04	7.14	88.43
95	40	Everett	Scott	145	1594	1.000	36.03	43.54	2.63	5.63	87.83

Quick note here, Ps-Rk refers to the player's overall GI rank (when you combine offense and defense, and for those that also pitched a bit, pitching) among shortstops, DP-Rk refers to the player's rank in Defensive GI among shortstops, and %PS refers to the percentage of the player's PRG that occurred while he was playing his primary position (shortstop in this case). No player was listed who failed to have at least 55% of his PRG at the shortstop position (meaning Robin Yount, Ernie Banks, George Davis, and a few other high profile shortstops aren't GI-ranked for position. Wgt refers to the player's listed weight where it exists.

Take note of those weights. The 40 "greatest" fielders at the position of all time, and the only "heavyweight" that even cracks the top 15 is Honus Wagner. Wagner is, if anything, the exception that proves the rule that shortstops have to be small to be great fielders. He was a freak physically - probably the most talent baseball player of the first 50 years of its' history. He was once-in-a-generation. Once in a century even. There may eventually arrive other exceptions to this rule, but generally, it appears that heavier shortstops can be good fielders, but their ceiling is limited.

The Best Shortstops are Light: So What?

OK...I just went a long way out of my way to try to prove the point that little guys make better midde infielders. What does this have to do with positional adjustments? Here's a little fact of baseball life that will bring this discussion (however long-winded) full circle. Little guys don't hit as well as big guys. Some of them master "little guy" skills like stealing bases, using the whole field, and handling the bat well, but generally, it's easier to be a productive hitter if you're big.

This is the most important point of the article, and I want to stress it here and make sure it is stated as clearly as possible. If little guys make worse hitters...but you (usually) have to be little to play shortstop, is it any wonder that shortstops tend not to produce much offensively as a group? You see, when you adjust a player's offensive statistics to account for the fact that he's playing a defensive position where offense is more rare, you're making the tacit assumption that either (a) the position demands something of the player than hurts his offense directly but would not be intrinsic to his body were he playing any other position (this argument can and should be made for catchers...the position is hell on the body and has a noticeable impact on a catcher's ability to hit) or (b) there is something more valuable about the offense you get from positions where offense is difficult to acquire.

As it turns out, the shortstop position, although it may be stressful, does not do anything physically to the players that wouldn't happen to them if they played somewhere else (aside from possibly causing more catastrophic injuries on take-out slides). There's no cumulative wear-and-tear factor like there is for the guys wearing the tools of ignorance. There's no physical reason shortstops can't hit except...they're small. And although it's tempting to team-build from a construct of "if I can get production at a skill position, it's easier to field an offensively gifted team"...there is a trade-off involved. If you get offense from the shortstop position, you're probably giving up some defense. What's more, when all is said and done, a run is a run, no matter who produces it, and it's way easier to find (relatively cheap) effective offensive outfielders and corner infielders than it is to find middle infielders or catchers who can hit, so most GMs don't go around looking for offense from skill positions.

In short, adjusting offensive statistics to account for the position denies the reality that there is a very real reason why teams continue to field light hitting shortstops and power hitting left fielders - the reality that size and offense are related and that fielding is far more important to team defense than is generally believed (meaning that giving up fielding at a key position in order to get offense which will cost more money to acquire (supply and demand!) is probably not a cost-effective strategy toward maximizing your chances to win.

To answer the question of whether I would trade an average fielding shortstop who could hit like your average first baseman for an average hitting first baseman who was a great fielder...let's just say it would depend on (a) how old the shortstop was (shortstops who hit like first basemen tend to be ineffective fielders at a younger age), (b) whether I thought I could find a better first base option and (c) who I had to replace the shortstop. None of that conflicts with my belief that value is value, no matter how you acquire it, and that offense should be evaluated independent of position (with the exception of catchers, because the position actually does have a physical effect on the players). Those weaker-hitting shortstops would not be the great fielders they were if they were better hitters. The very reason they're capable of playing short is the same reason they don't hit, and that's a truth that transcends the numbers.

Those of you who are still miraculously reading, I thank you for taking the time to give it a look. Questions, comments, or suggestions? E-mail the author at m_souders@yahoo.com

Ranking the Greats: Positional Adjustments - Part II