Thursday, January 8, 2009

Eckstein would make sense

ESPN's Rumor Central (Insider info) has suggested Kansas City as a possible destination for FJM favorite David Eckstein. I've never gotten the dislike for Eckstein as he's always struck me as a player who gives the game everything he has and then some. I understand the frustration by some people (FJM) when it comes to the hero worship by some sportswriters but that's not really Eckstein's fault. As a utility infielder who plays a capable SS & 2B he would be a good fit for the Royals and I can think of more reasons why DM should sign him than why he shouldn't.

Pros:
.351 career OBP - KC had a team OBP of .320, it never hurts to have players with on-base skills (Right DM?Hello, is this thing on? DM are you there?).

Does the little things well - Here is why alot of people dislike him, he is adept at bunting and moving runners over. While it's never wise to give an out away we have to realize that it is still part of the game and players are going to be asked to do it.

Won't hurt you defensively - While he may not have TPJs range or arm he makes up for it through positioning. He may or may not be Aviles equal at SS but he is an upgrade over Callaspo at 2B.

Post season experience - He played a big part in helping the Angels (2002) and Cardinals (2006) win the World Series. He hit .310/.364/.310 in the '02 WS and .364/.391/.500 in the '06 WS. So yeah he was a major contributor. If you want to believe that the ALC is up for grabs this season then having guys who have had successful playoff experiences will come in handy if in fact a miracle happens and KC wins the division.

No more Pena -  TPJ will most certainly be done in KC if Eckstein is signed.

Cons
Hillman may Gload him - You know what I mean, give him 500 PA's instead of 200-300 regardless of performance. Offensively Eck and Callaspo are identical hitters and Eck has the edge defensively but KC needs to find out what they have in Callaspo so benching him wouldn't be to the Royals future benefit - 2010 and beyond, when Callaspo will be here and Eck won't.

This is the only con I have and it would turn into a pro if Callaspo fails - then it would be nice to turn to Eck for the remainder of the year and with the Callaspo question answered go about finding a long term replacement after the season.

6 comments:

keith said...

good post...i would definitely take him as a utility infielder.

Anonymous said...

I would absolutely sign him to upgrade the bench and spell callaspo

schaum

Ray W said...

I remember when he was a Cardinal and had 3 errors in a game vs the Royals.
But an upgrade over at util IF for sure and would provide the type of depth contenders have

keith said...

I guess Bloomy isn't so bad either.

Jeff said...

Bloomquist is more versatile defensively but is not Eck's peer with the bat. If he's strictly used as a backup its not a terrible signing. Nothing to get excited about but not anything to hate on either.

Antonio. said...

It's the way they gush over him...as if it's more about him than Vlady or Pujols. As if he did it by himself. And the reason why most of them love him the way they do is because they've determined long ago that if they were good enough to be there, they'd play it like Eck...just to show the big boys a thing or two about playing the game "right" and other such cliches.