The Inge-at-Shortstop Question

by Ian Casselberry on Nov 12, 2008 4:00 PM EST in Detroit Tigers News

A question that pops up now and then (or perhaps more frequently) with the Detroit Tigers' need for a shortstop is whether or not Brandon Inge and that slick glove of his could move over to the left from third base. (Zappatista brought it up in a comment last week, in fact.)

That question also found its way into Jason Beck's shortstop-themed mailbag at tigers.com this week. Here's his answer:

This question keeps coming up in the mailbag. And indeed, Inge was a shortstop in college, though the Tigers drafted him with the intention of making him a catcher. Keep in mind, though, that he hasn't played shortstop at all since college, and he's now in his early 30s. He could play there in a pinch, but playing Major League-caliber shortstop every day is another matter.

One argument as to why Tigers struggled so much defensively was the shifting of positions, starting with Spring Training. The idea behind shifting Inge back to third is to let the Tigers take advantage of their best defensive option at the hot corner and help out their pitching staff, while also letting Inge work at his strongest position. Will it work long term? Time will tell, but the Tigers believe it's their best combination right now.

The reluctance to have players switch positions next season is a point worth noting. Something that was brought up in Mike McClary's podcast interview with Jon Paul Morosi is that Jim Leyland wants his best defensive lineup out there to take away that excuse - or letdown, to put it more fairly - from his pitchers. No experiments next year. (Although Carlos Guillen in left field arguably runs contrary to that philosophy.)

Tweet Comment 4 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Inge

As much as I would not want to see Inge at SS, I think it could work – emphasis on could. I saw him play a game at short in spring training last year and he looked good. In fact he looked more comfortable there than Carlos ever did.

It won’t happen, it shouldn’t happen, and I doubt Leyland will ever even address it, but the question will continue to pop up. Im glad Beck decided to speak on it.

by seanheyboer on Nov 12, 2008 4:22 PM EST reply actions

Inge at Short

I had to sign up just to say ENOUGH already with the speculation on Inge floating around to another position. OK, so he has the ability. He still bats .200

Have the Tigers conceded that someone with no bat can seal ANY position as long as he is not a liability in the field? I absolutely love Inge at 3rd, and still cringed most every time he came to bat.

And what would be the hope if D-ski chose to move him to short? I don’t see the gain. He still has no stick.

Brandon, go on a crash course in making contact on offense. Choke up and take the ball to right. Watch Placido. Do something with your bat. You have the D down pat.

BUT

Regardless of where you are played, nobody should lock a starting position solely on their glove. Hovering around .200 is not good enough. Look forward to the article that begins “Inge Commits to Bumping Average Up 40 Points.”

Now THAT’S a story!

by basebl on Nov 12, 2008 8:40 PM EST reply actions

Beck failed...

to substantively answer the question, as has everyone else whose “answers” I’ve read. Yes, I know he hasn’t played short in a long time. So what? I see no evidence that he’d ever played 3B before he moved there in 2004. He’s got the arm, he’s got range. I get that he probably won’t. But I don’t get why he can’t.

basebl: he’s going to be a regular until his contract runs out or he’s traded. So we’re stuck with his bat. We’ve got some good bats (Guillen, Larish, Raburn) who can play 3B and LF (Joyce, Thames), not to mention that such guys are pretty plentiful. It’s a bit tougher to find a good SS. So if we’re stuck with him, he probably does the least harm at SS. Any money spent on a SS, in my mind, is wasted, if there’s a possibility that Inge could fill that hole. That money’s better spent on filling the holes at C and on the pitching staff.

by russkiejedi on Nov 12, 2008 9:46 PM EST reply actions

As far as this argument...

“One argument as to why Tigers struggled so much defensively was the shifting of positions, starting with Spring Training. The idea behind shifting Inge back to third is to let the Tigers take advantage of their best defensive option at the hot corner and help out their pitching staff, while also letting Inge work at his strongest position. Will it work long term? Time will tell, but the Tigers believe it’s their best combination right now.”

Will it help the pitchers out less to have Inge’s glove at SS? Do we know that 3B is his best position? When Rodriguez came, Inge needed to find a new position, and 3B just happened to be open. Guillen was at SS, so the Tigers had no incentive to move him to SS, but that move could have been made just as easily. Don’t tell me why it’s unlikely, TELL ME WHY IT CAN’T HAPPEN!!!

by russkiejedi on Nov 12, 2008 9:52 PM EST reply actions