SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
SS of the Future: Bogaerts or Marrero?
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,912
|
Post by ericmvan on Jun 24, 2014 4:19:25 GMT -5
Stop. Don't. Don't try to figure it out, because right now it's impossible to know. Every brain cell devoted to merely having an opinion about this is a brain cell that could be put to more productive uses, like watching reality TV or your microwave.
We can, however, discuss the nature of the eventual decision, and what knowledge will be needed to make it, and how that knowledge will be used to make it.
In a nutshell:
1) Bogaerts has more value at SS than 3B. The baseline is that he loses 10.5 runs of value making the switch. He may, however, gain some defensive value by playing 3B better than SS. Exactly how much value, we don't know yet (and it could be zero). We ought to know much better by the end of 2015, especially if he plays most of this year at 3B and most of next at SS.
2) We don't know how good a hitter Marrero will be. We'll know much better by the end of next year, as well.
3) We don't know how good our other 3B options will be, and this is much more uncertain than the other two. How good will we think WMB is, a year and a half from now? How about Cecchini? How about Coyle? If JBJ has established himself in center, is Mookie available to play 3B? Who's available on the trade market? Maybe Billy Beane has finally won himself a WS and is looking to sell high on Josh Donaldson with 3 years of control left.
Now, here's the logic you use to make the decision.
You start with how good Deven Marrero is.
You deduct from that, the amount of value that Xander will be losing if he moves to 3B (10.5 runs per 150, less any defensive value gained).
You then take this devalued Deven Marrero and ask, do we have a 3B that good? Or might be we able to get one?
If you have a 3B as good or better than [Marrero minus Xander's lost value], then you deal Marrero (this includes scenarios where Marrero himself is traded for the 3B).
If there's no one anywhere close to being that good, then you move Xander to 3B and play Marrero at SS.
If there is a 3B option nearly as good as the devalued Marrero, and you can trade Marrero to get a big upgrade in an outfield corner, then you do that.
Now, right now, with WMB and Cecchini struggling and Mookie looking like he'll be needed in CF, and Marrero rocking our worlds, it certainly looks like the smart thing to do might be to move Xander to 3B. But that bears little or no relationship to what the best course of action will be 16 months from now. I mean, really. Sixteen months ago Mookie was nobody. It's an eternity in player development.
The one thing we do know is that it would be great if one of WMB, Cecchini, Coyle, or Betts (via JBJ) emerges as a great in-house option at 3B. That frees Marrero to get a corner OF bat.
I know people will be tempted to start guessing now what they think will be the case 16 months from now. If there were fewer moving parts, that might be productive. But when you're guessing about eleven different things*, your overall guess is just not likely enough to be accurate to be worth the trouble. Don't. Just don't.
And I swear -- if anyone does, I will post Photoshopped images of you in flagrante delicto with farm animals.
Now, a very useful bit of information would be the contract status of the top 3B, come the end of next year.
*Xander's SS glove Xander's 3B glove Marrero's bat Middlebrooks' bat Cecchini's bat Cecchini's glove Coyle's bat Coyle's glove Bradley's bat (making Betts available) Betts's glove at 3B Trade options
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Jun 24, 2014 4:25:06 GMT -5
Or 10 months from now. It also doesn't need to be as you imply, it only needs to be what level of offense constitutes the break even of Xander at third and Marroro's defense at short vs the value of Xander at SS vs the average third baseman id WMB & Cecchini are out of the equation. By bringing in an outside third baseman who is superior, you could have just as easily said trade for Tulo and move Xander to 3B. It's an unfair bias and doesn't include the value of the players traded. Those players could be used to trade for an outfielder instead. As I said elsewhere, until another alternative develops, I view it as a three way race between Marerro, Ceccini and WMB.
Pics already available at my Facebook.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,912
|
Post by ericmvan on Jun 24, 2014 4:34:28 GMT -5
Debating the methodology is encouraged! Why would we be making this decision at the end of next April, though? Is that Filipino months? I could see making it in 13 months, at next year's trading deadline. That could be when they either call up Marrero and move X to 3B (again), or deal Marrero for an outfielder. If that's what you meant, it's a great point.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Jun 24, 2014 4:50:39 GMT -5
Debating the methodology is encouraged! Why would we be making this decision at the end of next April, though? Is that Filipino months? I could see making it in 13 months, at next year's trading deadline. That could be when they either call up Marrero and move X to 3B (again), or deal Marrero for an outfielder. If that's what you meant, it's a great point. Player service time which is calculated the same in the Philippines. I also don't think anyone has advocated making the decision now.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Jun 24, 2014 5:11:28 GMT -5
I think by the end of next April we will have a pretty good handle on the value of Xander at both positions, a reasonable projection of Marrero's offense and a better handle on the likely contributions of both Cecchini and WMB as third basemen.
I am expecting Marrero to be bumped when WMB returns to Boston if either the move of Cecchini to left is permanent or if Boston falls out of contention. Right now he's blocked by the need for taxi squad readiness because one infield skill position, 3B is already occupied by a prospect.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jun 24, 2014 7:19:36 GMT -5
I don't think Betts at 3B is a realistic option. If his arm was good enough for 3B, it would almost by definition be good enough for SS. By all accounts, Betts' range is good enough for SS, and the only thing that has stopped him from playing SS is his arm. If they were going to have a Bogaerts/Betts left side of the infield, I imagine the superior defensive alignment would have to be Betts at SS and Bogaerts at 3B.
One variable that isn't discussed here: the strong crop of free agent third basemen and shortstops available this winter. Available shortstops include Hanley Ramirez, J.J. Hardy, Jed Lowrie, Asdrubal Cabrera, and Stephen Drew. Available third baseman include Pablo Sandoval, Chase Headley, and Aramis Ramirez. Because the free agent market is virtually devoid of impact position players at other positions, the Red Sox might find themselves with cash to spend and see an opportunity to pick up someone like Headley (think Victorino-esque buy-low opportunity) or Hardy (someone's going to get left out of the SS carousel) for good value.
|
|
|
Post by raftsox on Jun 24, 2014 8:48:20 GMT -5
Good question.
I have a concern though; in 2013, Marrerro had a 0.317 wOBA, largely down because he doesn't project to have any power. In 2014 he has a 0.371 wOBA; his AVG is up quite a bit with a similar ISOd, howevery he's slugging almost .100 points higher. Normally I would say "great!", but the entire Portland team is running roughshod over the Eastern League. The stats on MILB.com aren't great and B-R doesn't function on my work computer, so I'm not sure where to get advanced milb stats for a direct correlation; however... Portland is OPSing at least 0.020 points higher than any other team in the Eastern League has during the MILB.com era (2005+), and usually a minimum of 0.030 points higher. Since 2005, their team slugging % would tie for second place. Pitching wise, the second-best ERA (Portland has #1) would rank from 3rd to 6th over the previous few seasons. So, pitching seems to be a bit down, too.
Methinks that maybe the Eastern League is just sub-par this season and we should temper our expectations somewhat with these players.
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Jun 24, 2014 8:52:11 GMT -5
I've been beating the Betts to SS drum for a while now, and I'm sure you guys are sick of hearing it from me, so I'll refrain from saying it again except for passive aggressive inserts in posts about different subjects.
I don't buy the runs lost by moving Bogaerts. He personally loses that value, but the team does not. Correct me if I am wrong, but that is saying Bogaerts is worth X runs, and if he moves from SS to 3B he is worth (X runs - 10.5) But that is not to say that the Red Sox do not have a short stop playing the position who is going to be worth that 10.5 runs. Also, I believe if you have a better player at SS, that turns into > 10.5 runs. Moving Ortiz from DH to 1B may boost his WAR or whatever stat you are looking at, but it is not better for the team.
I'm of the belief that your bat gets you into the lineup, but your defensive skills defines your position. You put your best defensive guys in the highest leverage defensive positions, and work your way down from there. At that point all you have to determine is who's bat justifies a line up spot. This is assume that the player we are talking about is playable at the open position. I am not saying Ortiz should be catching or anything.
Let's take an example with Middlebrooks, Bogaerts, and Marrero. Assuming Bogaerts is the real deal, an average SS and 3B. Let's also assume that Marrero is a superior SS, and Middlebrooks is a better 3B than Bogaerts (just to prove an example), and that the only two open lineup spots are 3B and SS. Well if Marrero and Middlebrooks have roughly the same value with their bats, the best team is Marrerro at SS, Bogaerts at 3B. If Middlebrooks starts hitting like 2012 again, the best team is Xander at SS, Middlebrooks at 3B. If all three are hitting enough to justify a spot, over let's say the LF'er, than the best team is Marrero at SS, Middlebrooks at 3B, and Bogaerts in LF. If that hurts Bogaerts value, I am fine with that because it will help the Red Sox win games.
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on Jun 24, 2014 9:16:51 GMT -5
I'll say Marrero at shortstop and Xander at 3b. I can give up some offense for defense at shortstop. Especially, since I'm saving a lot of money and have a lot to throw at the corner of positions. One this year. And, one next year.
|
|
|
Post by onbase on Jun 24, 2014 10:57:47 GMT -5
Thanks for the discussion, eric. I will admit that I desperately want to see Marrero play short stop forever, he's that much fun to watch.
Like jrffam, I'm having trouble with the player value approach, especially when it leads to this: The one thing we do know is that it would be great if one of WMB, Cecchini, Coyle, or Betts (via JBJ) emerges as a great in-house option at 3B. That frees Marrero to get a corner OF bat.
In my business of baseball deficient mind, a position player's offensive value is what it is regardless of position, and they add or subtract from their value to the team with their defense. Given 3 players with offense worthy of a starting position and capable of playing SS, 3B and LF, it seems to me you'd always put the best defensive short stop at short stop, the better 3B glove of the remaining two at 3B, and the third guy gets LF. Which guys we have to choose from and which positions will be open are the things we can't know yet, that I get, but if Marrero or a defensively equivalent player is one of them, and you put him anywhere but SS, I think the pitchers might be the ones posting photo-shopped pictures.
|
|
|
Post by burythehammer on Jun 24, 2014 11:11:56 GMT -5
I think Marrero is trade bait, personally. Not a blue chipper but will have value to other organizations and we have an obvious long term answer at SS already in the big leagues.
|
|
|
Post by terriblehondo on Jun 24, 2014 11:20:11 GMT -5
I would say Marrero if he can hit even a little bit. My 1st choice for next year would be Hardy. I wanted him when the O's got him and I still do. Good defense and adds a little punch.
|
|
|
Post by terriblehondo on Jun 24, 2014 11:29:37 GMT -5
I think Marrero is trade bait, personally. Not a blue chipper but will have value to other organizations and we have an obvious long term answer at SS already in the big leagues. I do not think the Red Sox see Xander as an obvious answer at SS. They moved him off the position for Drew and when Drew sits Herrera plays short. If they thought he would get better with more reps you would think they would play him there on Drew's off days. He sure isn't going to get better for next year by not playing there this year.
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Jun 24, 2014 11:54:04 GMT -5
Bogaerts value is in his bat, not his glove. The important part to the team is that he is in the lineup. His ability to play short stop only really adds value when you fill all the other positions. The thought that the average SS in the MLB is not a good hitter, so if we have a good hitting SS it is good for the team, but that isn't true until all the other positions have average or better players. It's pointless to have a average defensive SS if you have a great SS on the bench and WMB hitting 74 wRC+. I'd rather take the 74 wRC+ with great defense than take it without.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jun 24, 2014 12:08:56 GMT -5
Like jrffam, I'm having trouble with the player value approach, especially when it leads to this: The one thing we do know is that it would be great if one of WMB, Cecchini, Coyle, or Betts (via JBJ) emerges as a great in-house option at 3B. That frees Marrero to get a corner OF bat.In my business of baseball deficient mind, a position player's offensive value is what it is regardless of position, and they add or subtract from their value to the team with their defense. Given 3 players with offense worthy of a starting position and capable of playing SS, 3B and LF, it seems to me you'd always put the best defensive short stop at short stop, the better 3B glove of the remaining two at 3B, and the third guy gets LF. Which guys we have to choose from and which positions will be open are the things we can't know yet, that I get, but if Marrero or a defensively equivalent player is one of them, and you put him anywhere but SS, I think the pitchers might be the ones posting photo-shopped pictures. This logic only makes sense if we assume that they can't or won't add free agents or make trades, and so it's just a question of slotting guys where they fit best defensively. Eric's logic assumes that you can trade a blocked player for a player of comparable value at a position of need, and so the best configuration could be a WMB/Xander infield even if it provides you slightly worse production than a Xander/Marrero one as long as you can get a much better trade return for Marrero than you can for Middlebrooks. The truth is likely somewhere in between. The trade and free agent markets lack the liquidity to make it easy to get appropriate value for your blocked players or pick up a market-priced free agent to fill a need. But at the same time, the optimal solution may very well involve trading a guy like Marrero, even if he's one of the better infield options available in the system.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jun 24, 2014 12:14:32 GMT -5
Bogaerts value is in his bat, not his glove. The important part to the team is that he is in the lineup. His ability to play short stop only really adds value when you fill all the other positions. The thought that the average SS in the MLB is not a good hitter, so if we have a good hitting SS it is good for the team, but that isn't true until all the other positions have average or better players. It's pointless to have a average defensive SS if you have a great SS on the bench and WMB hitting 74 wRC+. I'd rather take the 74 wRC+ with great defense than take it without. Similarly to my above post, the logic is that Xander is super valuable at SS because you can pick up a 100 wRC+ hitting 3B (either by developing from within or through the free agent/trade markets) much more easily than a 100 wRC+ hitting SS. If the only other alternative is a crappy-hitting Middlebrooks, sure, move Xander to 3B, but that's not really the case. They could fill 3B internally if one or more of Middlebrooks/Holt/Cecchini/Coyle break out, and they could fill 3B externally with someone like Sandoval or Headley or A. Ramirez or Alvarez, etc.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,912
|
Post by ericmvan on Jun 24, 2014 13:31:36 GMT -5
I've been beating the Betts to SS drum for a while now, and I'm sure you guys are sick of hearing it from me, so I'll refrain from saying it again except for passive aggressive inserts in posts about different subjects. I don't buy the runs lost by moving Bogaerts. He personally loses that value, but the team does not. Correct me if I am wrong, but that is saying Bogaerts is worth X runs, and if he moves from SS to 3B he is worth (X runs - 10.5) But that is not to say that the Red Sox do not have a short stop playing the position who is going to be worth that 10.5 runs. Also, I believe if you have a better player at SS, that turns into > 10.5 runs. Moving Ortiz from DH to 1B may boost his WAR or whatever stat you are looking at, but it is not better for the team. I'm of the belief that your bat gets you into the lineup, but your defensive skills defines your position. You put your best defensive guys in the highest leverage defensive positions, and work your way down from there. At that point all you have to determine is who's bat justifies a line up spot. This is assume that the player we are talking about is playable at the open position. I am not saying Ortiz should be catching or anything. Let's take an example with Middlebrooks, Bogaerts, and Marrero. Assuming Bogaerts is the real deal, an average SS and 3B. Let's also assume that Marrero is a superior SS, and Middlebrooks is a better 3B than Bogaerts (just to prove an example), and that the only two open lineup spots are 3B and SS. Well if Marrero and Middlebrooks have roughly the same value with their bats, the best team is Marrerro at SS, Bogaerts at 3B. If Middlebrooks starts hitting like 2012 again, the best team is Xander at SS, Middlebrooks at 3B. If all three are hitting enough to justify a spot, over let's say the LF'er, than the best team is Marrero at SS, Middlebrooks at 3B, and Bogaerts in LF. If that hurts Bogaerts value, I am fine with that because it will help the Red Sox win games. The team indeed loses the value. Your various hypotheticals demonstrate the complexity of the situations that can result. Before you move a guy, you have to determine that you wouldn't be better off keeping him where he is, and trading the resulting excess guy for a player who plays the position you were going to fill by the shuffle. In your last example, you've essentially made Marrero the LF. You've added maybe 10 runs of defense in the process, but, in theory, LFers who can hit like Marrero are easy to come buy. I say in theory because I really don't assume that the trade markets are all that liquid, or the FA markets all that robust. But a simple way to look at is this: imagine Xander, Marrero, and WMB are all as great as we dream of. You want to play Marrero at SS, WMB at 3B, and Xander in LF, where he loses 21 runs of value - 2 wins. But I would use Marrero as the centerpiece of a Stanton trade. And that's obviously better. You're maybe 10 runs weaker defensively, but Stanton's bat is going to be a lot more than 10 runs better than Marrero's. If you can turn Marrero's value into the equivalent portion of Stanton's value, you have 21 extra runs of value from keeping Bogaerts at SS. Here's a non-baseball analogy for why positions shifts lose value. Let's say you're putting on a high school class play, and you've decided on that "bloody and unrelenting depiction of class struggle," The Persecution and Assassination of Jean-Paul Marat as Performed by the Inmates of the Asylum of Charenton Under the Direction of the Marquis de Sade, a/k/a Marat/Sade. The key role in this play is that of Charlotte Corday, the assassin. It's the make-or-break part. You happen to find a girl who's really, really good, as high school actors go. She's the undoubted MVP of the production. (In reality, my prep school (Northfield Mt. Hermon) class play production of Marat/Sade (in 1972!) did not have a strong Charlotte Corday, and that, and an equally mediocre Marat, were the only weak links in a production that was otherwise as good as any professional theater I've ever seen. This helped start a tradition of great student theater at the school; Uma Thurman was discovered in a later class play, and Laura Linney and Elizabeth Perkins are also grads. As is Buster Olney, BTW.) Now, this girl ends up in L.A., thought not as an actress, and they're casting for a movie version of the play. How valuable is she going to be to that production? Zero. Because as good as she was compared to the other kids in your high school, there are hundreds of better actresses in L.A. Your value to an endeavor is relative to the talent of the peer group, the alternatives. Xander is a great SS and a good 3B because when you move him to 3B, you're moving him to a much tougher peer group of hitters.
|
|
|
Post by dmaineah on Jun 24, 2014 13:31:59 GMT -5
I have watched Marrero and Bogaerts play SS here in Portland (along with Iglesias & Middlebrooks at 3B) and I am telling you Marrero is REAL close to Iglesias defensively at SS and much better than Bogaerts. Also Middlebrooks is better defensively at 3B then Bogaerts. Long term, Bogaerts is a 1st Baseman I believe. So, Marrero is the SS of the future.
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,963
|
Post by jimoh on Jun 24, 2014 14:11:59 GMT -5
.... Long term, Bogaerts is a 1st Baseman I believe. ... Yikes. You can argue about whether Bogaerts can stick at SS, but there is zero-point-zero indication that he cannot stay at 3b for ten or fifteen years. Why would you say this?
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Jun 24, 2014 14:23:12 GMT -5
Yea given the athleticism Bogaerts has, I don't get why you would waste him at a position like 1B. I kinda see 1B as the place you put the best hitter you have who can't play another position competently, not somewhere you'd put a good athlete with a plus arm
|
|
|
Post by onbase on Jun 24, 2014 14:25:26 GMT -5
Reading comprehension ... In the opening post I read "frees Marrero to get a corner OF bat" as moving Marrero to LF. With the response to jrffam above, I see the intent.
And I hope it doesn't happen that way because I think Marrero isn't just REAL close to Iggy, he might be better.
Question - what defensive metric really tells us the break even point where an imaginary .300/.370/.800 player has to be with his glove and an Iggy level defender has to hit in order for them to have equal value at SS?
|
|
|
Post by iakovos11 on Jun 24, 2014 14:31:52 GMT -5
I have watched Marrero and Bogaerts play SS here in Portland (along with Iglesias & Middlebrooks at 3B) and I am telling you Marrero is REAL close to Iglesias defensively at SS and much better than Bogaerts. Also Middlebrooks is better defensively at 3B then Bogaerts. Long term, Bogaerts is a 1st Baseman I believe. So, Marrero is the SS of the future. Yeah, but you also called for Brentz to be a starting OF in Boston this year, I believe, and have called him an RBI machine. You'll excuse me if I don't trust your evaluation that Xander is a 1B.
|
|
|
Post by okin15 on Jun 24, 2014 15:02:29 GMT -5
I have watched Marrero and Bogaerts play SS here in Portland (along with Iglesias & Middlebrooks at 3B) and I am telling you Marrero is REAL close to Iglesias defensively at SS and much better than Bogaerts. Also Middlebrooks is better defensively at 3B then Bogaerts. Long term, Bogaerts is a 1st Baseman I believe. So, Marrero is the SS of the future. Yeah, but you also called for Brentz to be a starting OF in Boston this year, I believe, and have called him an RBI machine. You'll excuse me if I don't trust your evaluation that Xander is a 1B. While I think dMaine's suggestion of X at 1B is weak, I'm not sure that disqualifies him from making suggestions or predictions of the future, a) because this is a message board, and b) because we're all wrong a lot. Furthermore, there are lots of better arguments to make here, other than, you were wrong once, so you're not right here. Plus, our OF could use the help, and if Brentz were healthy, he likely would have gotten some PT this summer in Boston. OTOH, I might argue that opinions of X from over a year ago at two levels below MLB are probably worthless at this point. Just think about how much people change between 20 and 21. Also, we have ALL seen him play much more recently, and can base our opinions on that, though which sample is more relevant -- the brilliant stretch right before he moved to 3B, or the poor play prior to signing Drew -- is debatable. Or I might argue how much of Bogaert's talents we'd be wasting by putting him at 1B where he might never hit enough to justify every-day play (unlikely, but certaily possible). He can nearly play passably at either left side position, and probably has the arm to play RF if needed (though maybe not the speed for Fenway's pesky corner (pun intended)). Or I might mention the well-regarded first base prospect in AA, the excellent hitter we have there for the next couple years, or the replacement options we have from our current crop of 3B (Checcini, Middlebrooks, Holt). There's also Carp, who could (maybe) make strides on both O and D playing every day. In short, I think it's a silly projection, but I hope this board never devolves into holding grudges on failed predictions. We still trust Mike after a less than draft stellar bonus projection, right?
|
|
|
Post by brendan98 on Jun 24, 2014 15:16:21 GMT -5
I don’t have any intention of looking up tons of defensive metrics to backup my opinion, but I strongly believe that defense and run prevention is the most overlooked/undervalued part of the game. Coaching at the HS level for many years now, I’ve seen stronger offensive teams beaten by better defensive teams time and time again, if you can pitch and play defense you will be in almost every game, and that formula translates to every level of baseball.
IF Marrero’s defense at SS is as advertised, and IF he can continue his recent development offensively, my hope is that Marrero be the SS of the future. There certainly doesn’t appear to be any reason (skillset wise) to believe that Xander could not be a very good 3B (versus probably a ceiling of average as a SS).
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,912
|
Post by ericmvan on Jun 24, 2014 15:39:26 GMT -5
I think Marrero is trade bait, personally. Not a blue chipper but will have value to other organizations and we have an obvious long term answer at SS already in the big leagues. I do not think the Red Sox see Xander as an obvious answer at SS. They moved him off the position for Drew and when Drew sits Herrera plays short. If they thought he would get better with more reps you would think they would play him there on Drew's off days. He sure isn't going to get better for next year by not playing there this year. They expressly said that they would have him play 3B exclusively to begin with in order to settle in at the position. I think it's obvious that they plan to have him play SS versus LHP when Middlebrooks returns (WMB platooning with Drew), especially so since Herrera is almost certainly getting optioned to make room for WMB, and they don't like Holt at SS. Let me further opine that anyone who has watched the Boston Red Sox baseball club this year and who doesn't think that Xander Bogaerts has the tools to be a solid average MLB defensive SS, and maybe even a good one, should question their understanding of the game. When he fails to make plays, it's almost always because of lack of technique or experience: lack of developed instincts which leave him caught in between, questionable footwork, unnecessarily rushed throws, and so on. And none of that has been epidemic, just occasional (more frequently than desired, though). He has shown the ability to make very good plays by dint of having more than enough athleticism for the position.
|
|
|