SB Nation - Login for mobile commenting

Lookout Landing

Jack Hannahan, Backup Shortstop

Note: We claimed Tommy Everidge today. Tommy Everidge is a big fat guy who plays like a big fat guy.

-----

It's easy to say things with words. Check it out, I'm doing it right now. And it's with words that the Mariners and, far more importantly, myself have either implied or directly suggested that we're going to go into the 2010 season with Jack Hannahan serving as the utility infielder.

This, rather predictably, has made several people uncomfortable, because we're heading into the year with one of the more fragile starting shortstops in the league, and his backup has all of three games' worth of experience at the position as a professional. How much sense, these people ask, does it really make for a competitive team to go into the year with such uncertainty?

It is, without doubt, a ballsy move. It's the sort of move few people in baseball would be willing to make, like signing Richie Sexson, or joining the Mets. However, that alone is a valueless statement. There are a lot of things that a lot of people in baseball wouldn't do, and it's by doing the right ones that you give yourself a competitive advantage. It doesn't matter that Jack Hannahan is an unusual pick. What matters is whether or not picking him makes sense.

And I believe it does, for four reasons:

  1. Jack Hannahan appears to be a pretty good, if not excellent, defensive third baseman. According to UZR, he's been worth more than 20 runs over 202 defensive games. According to plus/minus, he was the second-best defensive 3B in 2008 and among the best again in 2009. Even if you regress his performance towards the mean (which you absolutely should), he comes out looking shiny. Hannahan knows his way around the hot corner. Not quite to the same degree as Adrian Beltre, but Beltre is nobody's fair standard.

  2. Tom Tango's Fan Scouting Reports suggest that Hannahan has all the tools necessary to play a decent short. In 2008, he was rated as being pretty similar to guys like Jed Lowrie, Bobby Crosby, and Miguel Tejada. Last year, he came out looking like Tejada (again) and Ronny Cedeno. You can choose to put stock in this approach, or you can choose not to, but the information, I believe, is not without value. According to people who have seen a lot of Jack Hannahan in the field, he has all the tools he needs to slide over to his left.

  3. Moving from third base to shortstop honestly isn't that big of a deal. You can believe Tango's positional adjustment, which asserts a difference of about five runs. Or you can believe Jack Hannahan:

    "But anytime you can stay on the same side of the infield, the transition isn't too bad."
    ...
    Hannahan said he felt comfortable during his two-inning stint and doesn't anticipate any difficulties with learning a new position.

    When pressed, most people will tell you that third base is a position for sluggers while shortstop is a position for slick little glovemen. This then creates the illusion of far greater difficulty when you play up the middle. To my knowledge, this isn't reflected in real life. We can expect people to look a little worse at short than they do at third, but it's not some kind of ability crippler. If you think about it, what's really the difference? Nothing's the same, but everything's similar. The angles, the range, the off-balance throws...like Hannahan says, it isn't too bad. I'd be more concerned about his adjustment to playing a little second.

  4. You don't only pick up experience in games. Fielding balls at short in practice isn't meaningfully different from fielding balls at short in a game, and Hannahan's going to put in no small amount of work. Hell, according to that article, he already got started around last July. The team is not just going to drop Hannahan into short for some game and say "here, play this." He will have been preparing.

On a roster with a lot of questions yet to be answered, I actually have a great deal of confidence in Hannahan's proving capable of handling his job. It's not going to be easy, mind you, but I see no reason to believe that it's too great a challenge for someone of his ability. As always, it's entirely possible that I'm missing something. Hannahan, however, got here because of his glove, and it's a glove that appears able to play a number of positions.

You can worry about Jack Wilson. You can worry about Milton Bradley. I would not worry about Jack Hannahan. He's going to be fine.

1 recs  |  58 comments

Comments

There's also the fact

that he played a good amount of second base in the minors, so turning the double play isn’t new to him.

I think our starting shortstop has about ten times as much uncertainty as his backup
That uncertainty is making me regret a little bit the contract he got

I’m sure it will be fine when the season starts up and he reminds me how good his defense is but I’m afraid he’s gonna start the season off batting 0.100 and then get hurt.

I think it's great that we're stealing Oakland's infielders

and also great that my favorite player is going to be contributing greatly this season. People seem to treat Hannahan like an unknown quantity at shortstop when we do have plenty of information that can be applied to him.

Aw jeez couldn't we have stolen Mark Ellis
It sure would be nice to have a competent second baseman
#2 is the most important point I think

His skillset is more likely to transfer to SS than most of those power 3B types. He’s got great range and reaction time with a good arm, which is what you need at SS.

I think he’ll be okay.

Alright.

Here’s my comment for you. Don’t want you to get all butt hurt.

Damn you Graham
I never should have taken this off topic
Hidden subthread!
Drive up the comment count to confuse those who can't see this!
I didn't fill out Tango's Fan Scouting Reports, but I would agree.

We won’t be below average defensively if Wilson takes some time off at shortstop.

I'm a firm believer in the strategy of

keeping your defensive-minded backup shortstop at AAA. I love that we’re using Hannahan as the major-league infield backup. If Jack W. goes out for an extended period of time, we can call up Josh W. For a game or two here or there, Hannahan is a terrific idea.

I don't know if Josh Wilson is actually that good SS

Not really gonna trust the UZR numbers I see and I haven’t ever heard a real scouting report on him that didn’t sound like PR BS so I’m not really sure what to think of him. I’m pretty sure he’s bad all around but I’m holding out judgement.

Eh

Honestly, knowing what we know right now, I think I’d much prefer Hannahan. Josh Wilson just isn’t good at anything.

But, but...

he’s bad at offense, so he must be good at defense, right? Or does that only work for catchers?

Josh Wilson

isn’t as bad as you think he is.

I’m not really sure what to think of him. I’m pretty sure he’s bad all around
How much better of a SS is Jack Wilson over Jack Hannahan over a full season?
I imagine a good number of runs
Probably like 10-15 points of UZR
I hope so

I’m happy I feel like one of the few pessimists of Wilson around here. He’ll probably be fine and we’ll all be happy. I just need to get rid of that bad feeling I’ve got.

Would Figgins shifting over be a better option?

Figgins at 3rd: +5 to +10
Hannahan at 3rd: +5 to +10

Figgins at SS: -5 to -10
Hannahan at SS: ?

Hard to make an argument that it would make much of a difference, but Figgins does have more experience at the position. Also, I believe +5 to +10 is a conservative estimate for Hannahan, but everyone wants to regress his high UZR.

I imagine the team would rather leave Figgins as the regular 3B
I feel like Figgins might be Lopez's backup at 2B when he needs days off

Then Hannahan would fill in at 3B, shifting Figgins to 3B. Only reason why I said that is because I heard somewhere that Figgins is preparing to play 2B or 3B.

I'm sure Figgins will play a couple positions this year

but the team, I’m guessing, doesn’t want to use his flexibility to the max.

Yeah I'd agree with this

Mostly just thinking it would probably make Hannahan’s life easier if he only had to backup SS/3B and not worry about 2B. Figgins has played both 2B and 3B a lot so it would probably be easier for him to cover 2B and put Hannahan in at 3B where by all accounts he’s awesome.

I really doubt we see Figgins at SS or in the OF much.

And only at 2B due to Lopez getting a day off.

Great post. This is the key to the rest of the roster.

If Hannahan can play SS and 2B, then he is a valuable backup with a LH bat. Especially if Wilson misses 30-40 games, and if Lopez is rested for 5-10 games.
 
I hope that he can play SS and 2B, as it allows the M’s to get that RH bat for LF/1B.
 
However, if he can play SS and 2B, then it begs the question, Why did Beane and the A’s trade him to the M’s?
 
I wonder if the M’s are considering Felipe Lopez? He probably would not want to sign here as a Utility player, but he is a switch-hitter, and can play 2B, SS, 3B, and LF (although only average to below-average defense). He could be like a Mark McLemore for us.
 
Still, I would rather have Hannahan be able to be our LH utility player, and get the RH bat for LF/1B.

Why did Beane and the A’s trade him to the M’s?

He’s not a good hitter. With Oakland in in 2008 he had a .289 wOBA, and in 2009 with Oakland it was .291. They gave up on him.

The various projection systems have him somewhere between .302 and ..309 wOBA in 2010.

But with solid defense at multiple infield positions, that's not a bad player to have around at all

especially since he has a good approach, a little power, and hits left-handed

Jack Hanahan, break out player of the year.

And that isn’t sarcasm.

Great post. Not just because I love me some Jack Hannahan. I think I actually learned something!
Yeah, I don't have much of an issue with Hannahan covering the backup SS duties.

Starting, I would have.

how reliable are fan projections?

I have seen tangos fan projections used lately and I can’t help but feel that these should be taken with a huge grain of salt. You said that people who have seen a lot of jack h projected him. I would imagine many of those projectors were mariners fans so how much could they have seen him play? I just can’t see using fans projections as a reliable source. Otherwise great piece.

They correlate surprisingly well with the advanced metrics, I believe
Pardon my cynicism,

but I suspect the causality there is working in reverse.

I know people are instructed not to take stats into account when filling the form out. I’d be shocked if that instruction worked any better at insidethebook than it does in courtrooms where juries are instructed to ignore prejudicial statements (which is to say, I’d be shocked if it was even slightly effective).

My only question here is how the biased voters turn a UZR value into rangle/hands/whatever the fan surveys use
I think this is the main defense to that question

It is a troubling problem though. If the voters are tainted by UZR somehow then the fan’s database will not have anymore use than UZR and therefore you might as well just use UZR. I don’t think that happens because of what Graham says about splitting skills into categories however I’m sure there is some effect that skews the results to fall in line with UZR. Even if it isn’t conscious, I’m sure people use UZR to develop a feeling of how good of a defender players are and use that in rating players.

What's wrong with that?

I think that’s good actually. It tells us that educated fans that use stats can make better (possibly, of course) judgment guesses than projection systems. I think that’s interesting. It would mean that somehow the projection systems are not taking into account things that everyday analysts are.

Also, Psych is one of my favorite shows, so I dig your signature. One free rec for you for having it.

It's really a wisdom of the masses argument, though

500 smart baseball fans average projections will likely be as good as a single projection system since you can eliminate a lot of the noise with the larger sample size

And pardon my cynicism

But so what? If you cheat and get a better answer, you’ve got a better answer. This isn’t school where cheating is (or should be) an automatic failure. This is baseball where cheating… well, nevermind. The point is, if we get better projections, who cares what kind of machinations, cynical or otherwise, led to it? Better is better.

Now, you could argue that we don’t yet know if they are better, or reliably so, and therefore shouldn’t wholly rely on them but offer other more-established projections alongside the fan ones… and hey, lookee there.

The point is not the produce the best projections using the fan survey

Its to add new information to the pool.

Tango does it to develop a fielding database independent of the other databases all the other stats use. He is interested in getting new and original thoughts. In the end, if we want to include the UZR info we can always average the two databases together.

Why not give Tui that time instead?

Honestly, there is no upside w/ Hanahan whereas Tui could prove to be the blue chipper some think he is. Let him learn as a backup and if Wilson goes down then slide Chone over to SS.

I looks to me that the front office wants to do as much as they can to keep a good defensive team on the field as much as possible.

There are not a whole lot of people that view Tui as a competent defensive player. It’s only a bench role, so you wouldn’t think it would affect our defense that much, but it does go against their basic philosophy. I think there might also be the desire to see him play regularly right now rather then getting spotty play as a big league backup.

Putting a 'blue chipper' on the bench wouldn't be a great idea anyway

If Tui wants to raise his game or prove himself, he should be in Tacoma.

Exactly

Your good players should be starters. If you think Tui is a good player at a particular position, then you should be drumming for him to get a starting position, not a bench role. Sitting on the bench “learning the game” or whatever effect is so supposed to happen there (osmosis?) should only be employed in small doses, like in September. Anyway, you may remember he got a dose of that (with zero playing time) at the start of last season as well. How much of that does he actually need?

Jack Hannahan

I believe Jack Hannahan plays such awesome defense & puts in the work when playing on any given day or not that he will do great at any infield position. He has my vote & confidence anytime!

I don't think I can take you seriously with that screen name.
Look at the fanpost she put up last season. She comes by the name honestly.

It was a neat story.

I actually did that, yeah.

I feel kind of bad now. He does indeed seem like a great guy!

You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Lookout Landing to post a comment.