When your GM describes a newly acquired player as "a winning-type player, someone that understands the game" and "would fit in well," chances are, he’s not talking about an All-Star. Not that every player on a roster has to be (unless you’re the Yankees). But when the Cardinals traded Blake Hawksworth for Ryan Theriot Tuesday, we got the feeling that something is rotten in the state of Denmark.

This is one of those trades that:

• we initially liked from a head but disliked from a heart point-of-view, but
• can only be evaluated in light of another move, or lack thereof.

First, the head-heart reaction: We esteem Hawksworth, primarily as a person, and will miss him as a Cardinal (we hope he’ll continue to blog). As a fan, we cheer first for the name on the front of the jersey, but we can’t escape the reality that the name on the back means a lot, too. As important as winning is, we want our teams to play with dignity and respect for the game and fans, and Hawksworth struck us as that sort of player. That said, when you can obtain a cost-controlled major-league shortstop, even a replacement-level one, for a replacement-level middle reliever, it’s usually a good move. The Cardinals need some help in the infield, and Theriot provides it.

As for the second characteristic of the trade: How we understand the move to bring on Theriot depends on what happens next. As Bernie Miklasz wrote, "Theriot as a super utility guy: like it. Theriot as the starting shortstop: don’t like it." We agree. Theriot has played all three leftward infield positions capably in his career. He’s essentially a best-case-scenario Aaron Miles. And like Miles at his best, he wasn’t a player who was good enough on either side of the ball to entrust a season to, not in hopes of a playoff spot, anyway. That said, he’d be a super super-sub, perhaps getting "Felipe Lopez" playing time, without the headache. He can platoon at second base with the leather-challenged lefty Skip Schumaker (who could even still get into the lineup in right field), function as insurance at third base for however many games David Freese misses and of course play shortstop on occasion.

But given that general manager John Mozeliak said after the trade that “if we did have to start today, [Theriot] would likely be our shortstop," Brendan Ryan appears ticketed for another team. That would be a mistake, since it’s not even clear that Theriot is an upgrade at all over Ryan. Yet, incredibly, that is just the line that Mozeliak is taking: "“We look at him as a winning player, somebody who will bring more offense to the position than we’ve had in the past." For a player coming off a .288-wOBA season, that’s quite a claim. Even considering Ryan’s .253-BABIP-induced .256 wOBA last year, he’s still a more "winning player" than Theriot, who has registered WARs of 2.3 and 0.0 in 2009 and 2010; Ryan is 2.7 and 1.0 over the last two years. Furthermore, Theriot is on the downside of his career, turning 31 this Dec. 7 (full disclosure: our sharing the birthday admittedly endears him to us a bit); Ryan will be 28 on opening day. What are we missing?

What we’re missing of course is that old "attitude" canard. A least a couple of writers have commented on Ryan’s "flightiness." We have a notion of what that means — inconstant, a penchant for going his own way — but last we checked, flightiness didn’t win or lose ballgames. To the extent that it inhibited his fielding, it doesn’t appear to have been much, since he had arguably his best defensive season of his career and in the league. As Miklasz helpfully notes, "Ryan saved the Cardinals 19 runs in 2009 and 24 runs in 2010 with his defense at shortstop.
Ryan was ranked No. 1 among qualifying major-league shortstops in 2010 with a plus/minus ranking of +31 according to Dewan. He was ranked No. 2 in 2009, at +25." If the Cardinals failed to win the division because of "mental errors," which seems to be the explanation du jour of the chattering class, Ryan is far from alone, and as we say, those mental errors would show up in stats somewhere (in baserunning, for example, Ryan was actually third-best on the team; the other player with "concentration problems," Colby Rasmus, was second-best). It may endear him to La Russa and vets like the churlish Chris Carpenter (who clashed with Ryan last year over "attitude"), but Theriot being "the proverbial tough-minded competitor" is mostly meaningless if it can’t elevate his wOBA above .300. For that level of offense, we’ll take Ryan’s defense, baserunning and "flightiness" every day of the week, Chris Carpenter be damned.

A final word on "Flightiness": It is of course the disparaging side of the coin whose other side is "free spirit." So what the organization — read: Tony La Russa and a few tenured veterans — sees in Ryan as a negative, some teams — most importantly, some championship teams — value as a positive. Only just this fall Aubrey Huff — the red-thong-clad "free-spirited" first baseman for the World Champion Giants — observed that "I never really heard of an uptight team that wins." On a team less fastidious and punctilious than Tony La Russa’s clubby bunch, a guy with the youthful exuberance of Ryan would be welcomed (think: the 2004 Red Sox "idiots"); ironically, his "antics" might even be less noticed in an atmosphere that is less antipathetic to outside-the-box performers. After all, one of the most celebrated (and successful) groups of fun-seekers, the Gas House Gang, wore the birds on the bat. How long would Pepper Martin and Dizzy Dean have lasted under TLR?

This entry was posted by Pip on Wednesday, December 1st, 2010 at 11:55 pm and is filed under analysis. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.