Zimmerman to Short?
Ryan Zimmerman played shortstop for Harrisburg last night, and I just heard on the radio that this was at Bowden's request/order. The idea is that he'll spend the next two weeks or so adjusting to the position, and then come up to replace Guzman in September.
I know the Nationals are desperate and that Guzman sucks, but this seems like a case of Bowden getting increasingly crazy to cover up his own mistakes and save his job when the new owners come in, whoever they may be.
I know that Zimmerman is considered a fantastic defensive 3B, but I really worry that this will hurt his development -- he's being rushed as it is, and now he has to learn an even more demanding defensive position.
What do folks think -- is this as insane as I think it is? Can Zimmerman make this transition? Will Bowden screw this team irrevocably before he gets axed?
Update [2005-8-18 11:2:52 by Joltin Joe Orsulak]:Here's a link to the Washington Times story that mentions this: http://www.washingtontimes.com/sports/20050818-125642-8027r.htm
And here's the relevant text, for folks who don't feel like following the link:
"Zimmerman at short
Ryan Zimmerman, the Nationals' 2005 first-round draft pick, played shortstop for the first time as a minor leaguer last night for the Class AA Harrisburg Senators. He had three putouts and two assists in an errorless night.
This move is a strong indication the club is considering replacing slumping shortstop Cristian Guzman when rosters expand to 40 players on Sept. 1.
Zimmerman, a third baseman throughout his collegiate career at Virginia, is hitting .310 with seven home runs and 27 RBI for the Senators. The Nationals selected Zimmerman with the fourth pick overall in June's draft.
Zimmerman started his professional career with the low-Class A Savannah Sand Gnats, hitting .471 (8-for-17) in four games before quickly being promoted. Many within the club believe Zimmerman will skip Class AAA ball and go straight to the majors."
0 recs |
38 comments
Comments
Bowden
I think Bowden's signings of Castilla and Guzman are the most concrete examples of bad GMing you can find. They are moves that almost any non-casual baseball fan knew were horrendous.
Meanwhile, the Abreu-Stocker trade that everyone is such a fan of calling bad GMing... it was not known that Abreu would be even close to this good. If it had been evident 1.) Houston would have protected him 2.) Houston would have traded him rather than lose him for nothing 3.) Another org would have offered more for him than Stocker.
Fact of the matter that Abreu was a bit of an unknown. But Bowden's mistakes were evident at the time to any remotely knowledgeable - that is as true a sign of ineptness as you get.
By the way, I'd knee cap him if their weren't laws against such things... I don't know what to think of these Cashman rumors. Hard to get a handle on whether Cashman knows how to use resources efficiently and run an organization well. To what degree are the whims of the Boss preventing him from running the ship the way he otherwise would? Hard to quantify.
by natsfan2005 on Aug 18, 2005 11:20 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
It was a bad deal at the time, too
by Steve F on Aug 18, 2005 1:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Abreu
Stocker was not a good player. But Abreu was not a surefire thing. If anybody should have known what they had it was Houston as their org got to see him everyday for many years. Point being Stocker for Abreu is not good but saying it is the worst thing ever is revisionism. The most truely terrible moves are both obviously truly terrible short term and long term.
by natsfan2005 on Aug 18, 2005 1:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
A better comparison
by Tyler on Aug 18, 2005 1:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
hahaha
Truth lies somewhere in between both of our extremes examples. Probably Jeremy Reed is the close.
by natsfan2005 on Aug 18, 2005 1:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ridiculous idea
Zimmerman is being rushed. But he's handling it well. He struggled a little at first in AA, but seems to be coming on lately.
If their plan is really to move him to short, it's insane that they want him to play in the majors in sept. He's not ready as a 3B, let alone as a SS.
I don't think they should move him at all, but if they are going to, they should do it in the AFL or some instructional league. Definitely not OJT in Washington.
by losgigantes on Aug 18, 2005 11:24 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
But ...
The contortions he's going through to solve the very problems he has created are driving me nuts. He's already divested the team of a lot of its surplus (albeit marginal) talent for guys like Preston Wilson and Junior Spivey. I'm just scared of what he'll do if he gets really desperate. It would almost have been better for this team to fall completely out of the wildcard race in July than to have this lingering, faint hope.
by Joltin Joe Orsulak on Aug 18, 2005 11:31 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not so ridiculous...
Whether or not this will adversely affect his hitting remains to be seen. as it is, he's obviously caught up with the league, and so I don't think giving him a trail at short is a bad idea. If he sticks there, he'll be far more valuable to the nats than if he stays at 3b.
by beastball on Aug 18, 2005 11:52 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
It's true
And even if the Nats did think that he could play short and would be more valuable there, why only make the switch now? Why not start him off at short in Savannah and let him adjust at a lower level?
The overall idea is not totally impossible or totally without merit, although I still think it's unnecessarily risky (and it's not like the Nats don't also need help at third, given Castilla's bat and gimpy knees), but the way it's being carried out is totally half-assed and reflects desperation rather than any well-considered plan.
by Joltin Joe Orsulak on Aug 18, 2005 12:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Don't know their thinking...
So after a terrible year at the plate, the front office decided that maybe Guzman isn't the answer at SS afterall and decided to try a move which they'd considered an option at the time Zim was drafted.
Also, they may have felt adjusting to pro ball and a wood bat was challenge enough for the new player. And now that he's demonstrated a level of mastery of AA pitching, they feel he wouldn't be overwhelmed by the challenge of a new position.
Kinda like how Pedoria moved from SS to 2b, not nessicarily because he can't play SS but because they need a 2b. Or how ARod moved the 3b for Jeter, not because he can't play SS, but because the club needs him to play 3b. The same thinking may have guided the Nats front office.
by beastball on Aug 18, 2005 2:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I see the point
by Joltin Joe Orsulak on Aug 18, 2005 2:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bartlett
And why not start Zim out professionally as a SS? Maybe they wanted to let him adjust to hitting with a wood bat first and then hoist the defensive learning on him?
by cooper7d7 on Aug 18, 2005 2:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Interesting
I don't particularly object to the idea of seeing if Zimmerman can play short, but the timing and the things Bowden is saying make me very suspicious of this move. Rushing him on both offense and defense just seems like a very bad long-term proposition. He's barely out of college and Bowden is trying to use him to save his job -- focusing on the short-term potential rather than what's best for Zimmerman and the Nats. The risk is simply too high, in my opinion.
by Joltin Joe Orsulak on Aug 18, 2005 3:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I tend to agree...
by beastball on Aug 18, 2005 3:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
my college coach
I asked him what he meant with the statement and he said something along the lines that 3B demands great quick first step instincts, soft hands, and the ability to work your feet getting your legs under you to make the throw across the diamond.
I've heard nothing but great reports on this guy's D, so I bet he succeeds.
by So Cal Bob on Aug 18, 2005 4:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Totally, 100% ridiculous
Having him move to the position for 2 weeks in AA with plans to have him play it in Sept in the Majors is utterly ludicrous.
If, as another poster suggest further down this thread, the Nats drafted him with the intent of moving him to SS, then they should have played him there all year.
I'm not saying it will affect his bat either, but saying he has "caught up" with AA pitching is a bit of a stretch. He has a grand total of 184 ABs in 50 AA games. 10 walks. If he's not "Ryan Zimmerman, First Round draft pick" no one would be saying he's ready for AAA, let alone the majors. Not to mention at SS!
Even if he manages to pull it off, it will be a testament to him, and not a validation of this horrible idea. In fact, it's such a ridiculous notion that I am skeptical that it is actually a plan.
by losgigantes on Aug 18, 2005 3:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well...
I can see how they may want to shift his position in order to meet the perceived needs of the team. They drafted him as someone they felt could play SS or 3b. Just because he's played 3b up to this point doesn't mean he can't play SS, it just means the organization felt he was more valuable to them at 3b, at the time. They changed their minds.
In so far as him adjusting to AA, you have to make the call as to whether or not you feel a player has adjusted to a specific level of play based on his trend. I traded Zim off my fantasy team a month ago when he was hitting about 280, and a month before that he was hitting around 220, and now he's hitting 310 with about half his hits going for extra bases. So the trend appears to be that he's adjusted to the level. His K/BB ratio isn't good, but projects to about 30 walks and 90 ks, which isn't terrible. So objectively examining the data would seem to indicate the Zim has made the proper adjustments to AA, as he gets stronger as the season progresses. Given what I think you're saying, you think he should still be in A ball.
Of course, you expect more out of a first round pick. Why is that a problem? First round picks are presumably, the most skilled, and talented amateurs available, so why wouldn't your expectations be higher for them? Why wouldn't you push them to find the right level of challenge for them?
by beastball on Aug 18, 2005 4:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree he should be challenged
by NFA Brian on Aug 19, 2005 8:10 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Difference between good and "mastery"
You said it yourself, he's had a hot month. Anything can happen in a month, and it could just be dumb luck.
"Given what I think you're saying, you think he should still be in A ball."
Really? Is that what you take from what I said? Obviously, he's playing well. No need to demote him. In fact, I think he's playing better than could be reasonably expected at AA in his first pro season. But it is a huge leap to say that he's ready for the majors while learning a new position. And on a team whose games matter.
by losgigantes on Aug 20, 2005 12:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Minor Leaguers
by cronie on Aug 18, 2005 12:05 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Didn't...
by templeUsox on Aug 18, 2005 12:19 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
castilla
Vidro is playing horribly at 2b, Johnson is the only decent defensive infielder on the team. So now you are going to take a promising 3b, move him to ss causing a possible defensive lapse, on a team with no infield defense to cover for him? Hey why not start Cordero, trade for another lfer so that Church will never play, and pickup another retread pitcher to compliment Halama? Bowden is doing his best to screw up this team.
by LindInMoskva on Aug 18, 2005 12:51 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Casto?
by koolkerns101 on Aug 18, 2005 1:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
What about moving Vidro to 3B next year?
by gatling on Aug 18, 2005 2:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why in September?
This being said, I don't expect the Nats in the playoffs, b/c simply put they aren't very good.
by jonpyardi on Aug 18, 2005 2:03 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I think that's no longer the rule
by Mean Dean on Aug 19, 2005 3:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
K-Rod was not
by irwin on Aug 19, 2005 4:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
who knows?
by JFP on Aug 18, 2005 2:19 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Right from the horse's mouth
by NFA Brian on Aug 18, 2005 2:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just because it's the Washington Times
Seriously, though, he's speculating, but he's not pulling it out of thin air -- Bowden has been talking about calling Zimmerman up for weeks now.
Another link I found (this one from the Fredericksburg Free Lance-Star) has actual quotes from Bowden:
Zimmerman began playing shortstop at Double-A Harrisburg yesterday, Bowden said, and could be a potential late-season replacement for struggling shortstop Cristian Guzman. [...]
"That protects us at both positions as we head into September," Bowden said. "He's a very special defensive player with great hands and a good arm. He is going to hit, hit with power and probably be rushed to the big leagues. That's life."
Zimmerman was hitting .315 with seven home runs and 27 RBIs in 49 games entering play yesterday and had made just four errors in the field. Bowden watched him play last week and reaffirmed his original opinion that the 21-year-old could play both third base and shortstop.
"I saw him take infield at shortstop before we drafted him and I came back and on my written report I said I thought he could be Cal Ripken at shortstop and somewhere between Scott Rolen and Brooks Robinson at third base," Bowden said.
by Joltin Joe Orsulak on Aug 18, 2005 2:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
My appologies
by JFP on Aug 18, 2005 3:06 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Bowden and his Leather Pants Must Go
by NFA Brian on Aug 18, 2005 4:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
On second thought...
Now if they think they are chasing a wildcard and think that benching Guzman in favor of Zimm is a good idea... well, maybe that is addition by subtraction.
If he wasn't good enough to be UofM's starting SS, I don't think he'll end up at SS for the Nats.
by losgigantes on Aug 18, 2005 3:50 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Zimm's college
I'm not sure why Zimm played 3B in college instead of SS if he could handle SS. Have to plead ignorant on that one.
Here's an interesting tidbit:
"Perfect Game scout Bobby McKinney points out that Washington first rounder Ryan Zimmerman played on the same AAU team as a teenager with B.J. Upton (Tampa Bay) and David Wright (NYM). Zimmerman, an acclaimed defensive third baseman, played second base. That must have been a heck of a team."
by natsfan2005 on Aug 18, 2005 4:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh yeah...
I will concede that he may be athletic enough to pull it off (but there is a reason he was 3B at UVa, not SS). And that 3B is not really a step down from SS, just different: more quickness, less range, no DP).
The thing that is ridiculous is the thought that he will play SS for two weeks in AA then be a contributor for a "playoff team". It's not a reasonable expectation.
He's not ready to aid a pennant run as a 3B, let alone at a new position.
Throwing him into a new position at the ML level during a pennant race risks him getting injured. I can see his inexperience getting him taken out on a DP, or involved in some other collision.
But if he sits the bench after the minor league season is over and manages to not get hurt, probably no harm done.
by losgigantes on Aug 20, 2005 12:19 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
An idea....
In other words, it'd be much worse to mess up Zimmerman than Castilla....
by superpriebe on Aug 20, 2005 3:35 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
in my opinion
by Isisaston on Dec 22, 2006 10:27 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

by 











