Article: Early Returns: Polanco's Play At Shortstop

[Seth Stohs]

Days before the July trade deadline, the Minnesota Twins traded their All-Star Game representative Eduardo Nunez to the San Francisco Giants for lefty Adalberto Mejia. Also that day, the Twins announced that infielder Jorge Polanco was being recalled.

 

At the time, I wrote an article asking Where Should Jorge Polanco Play?

 

With Brian Dozier at shortstop, and Miguel Sano and Trevor Plouffe at third base, shortstop made the most sense, at least until you looked at his playing time at shortstop at that time in 2016::

 

In Rochester, he had played:

• 2B - 64 games, 559.1 innings
• 3B - 2 games, 17 innings
• SS - 0 games, 0 innings

In his brief time with the Twins, he played:

• 2B - 4 games, 34 innings
• 3B - 1 game, 7 innings
• SS - 1 game, 8 innings

And there was good reason for it. In 2015, between Chattanooga and Rochester, he had 28 errors in 102 games at shortstop. In AAA, he had a .908 fielding percentage at shortstop in just 19 games. In 83 games in AA, his fielding percentage at shortstop was just .942.

 

As noteworthy, I had people who watched him frequently last year wonder whether he could play any defensive position adequately. His arm was questioned at shortstop, but many saw that he struggled mightily just fielding the ball at times. His spring training performance this year was more than enough to understand why he was moving to second base.

 

Since that article was written, here is the breakdown of games and innings played by Polanco:

• 2B - 1 game, 9 innings
• 3B - 8 games, 70 innings
• SS - 34 games, 310 innings

In the first weeks or two following the Nunez trade, Polanco pretty much split time between third base and shortstop. However, with his start at shortstop on Sunday, his last 29 games have been played at shortstop.

 

What does our readership think of the Polanco defense at shortstop?

 

Here’s a look at some numbers:

• In 148 chances, Polanco has just six errors. That is a .959 fielding percentage.
• If you’re a fan of UZR (Ultimate Zone Rating), Polanco has been a -2.4. That equates to a UZR/150 of -11.3.

Both of those bullet points certainly indicate - in a small sample - that Polanco is clearly a below average defensive shortstop. Again, no surprise.

 

But can Polanco be a regular shortstop if this is the question: Can he make the routine play? For many, if you don’t have a shortstop with huge range, the key is for that player to make the routine plays.

 

In watching, the eye test tells me that he’s been solid. He’s made most of the plays. He’s had a half-dozen errors, but not many have been of the really bad category. My eyes tell me that he has been fine. Certainly not great. Maybe not even all that good, but certainly well within the realm of adequate.

 

Well, Inside Edge provides some numbers to FanGraphs to help quantify that. They break each ground ball into six categories: 1.) Routine, 2.) Likely, 3.) Even, 4.) Unlikely, 5.) Remote, 6.) Impossible. Here is how Polanco has fared in each of those categories:

 

Routine: 96.9% (of 98)

Likely: 80% (of 5)

Even: 42.9% (of 7)

Unlikely: 25.0% (of 4)

Remote: 0% (of 12)

Impossible: 0% (of 3)

Of course, for each of these categories, the sample size is far too small to make any grandiose statements. For the routine, 96.9% is low end of where you would want to be. However, that is 95 out of 98 which isn’t too bad at all. For the most part, Polanco has made the routine play. Of the likely category, four out of five isn’t too bad. Very small sample. Over time, you would certainly want this number to come up a little bit. “Even” would, in my mind, be a 50/50 proposition. Polanco is at 42.9%, but if he had made one more of those, he’d be at 57.1%, which could be good.

 

Unlikely,remote and impossible are all “bonus” categories, in my mind. Remote would be the great diving plays where not only you make the grab but are able to throw the runner out too. It appears that Polanco has been successful in one out of just four opportunities. I’m not even worried about the 15 that showed up in the remote or impossible categories.

 

A week or so ago, Nick wrote an article in which he discussed the scary idea of Polanco and Sano manning the left side of the Twins infield. It is difficult to envision. It certainly would not provide a lot of range. There would certainly be some limitations.

 

However, after reading Tom’s article on the Recent Success of 100 Loss teams, I am OK should the Twins and their new front office decide they would like to see that alignment on the left side of the infield.

 

Of course, should the Twins decide to trade Brian Dozier, Polanco could make the move to second base and they could go get a new shortstop.

At least in my mind, and eyes, and my review of the defensive stats (admittedly small sample), Polanco has expectedly been a little bit below average. However, I believe he has done enough to keep the experiment going, even beyond the 12 games remaining in this season.

 

What do you think?

 

Click here to view the article

[diehardtwinsfan]

Trade Dozier.  I think Escobar is a better defender at SS anyways, and with Gordon not that far away, he's a decent placeholder.

[beckmt]

If not Gordon, Vielma could man the position for a year or two.  Your other choice would make Sano a DH until Mauer retired and force trades or release of both Vargas and Park.

Maybe you try and find a way to get Mauer to retire,  that would also open up the possilbility of make Jake Mauer the manager.

[Yossarian]

Trading Dozier sometime over the next 12 months makes sense if good value is offered and if Gordon continues to progress in AA next year. Polanco is not the long-term SS solution.

[Platoon]

I got the impression on yesterday's radio broadcast the Polanco Ole'd yet another hot GB? His arm is better than I thought it would be, but not anywhere near "strong". It would play well at second. I would move Dozier, for a decent SP if possible or for a very good glove SS, to fill in until or if Gordon or Vielma show up. Polanco is the SS that teams that go 81-81 have. So, if that's our ultimate goal, he's the guy.

[Blackjack]

Good article Seth!!! I was wondering how the 'Polanco experiment' was going!!!

 

Dozier only has one more year on his contract, correct??  If he's not traded in the off season or at the trade deadline, it won't hurt to have Polanco get more ML at-bats before he moves to second base in 2018.

[Teddy]

As much as I love the guy, I'm firmly in the "Trade Dozier and Put Polanco at 2B" camp. Trading Dozier right now could yield a Knoblauch-level return, which as we've seen with the Detroit Tigers, could give a huge boost to the pitching staff. Frankly, as Dozier said over the past few days, it all depends on who the GM is going to be.

[Seth Stohs]

 

Good article Seth!!! I was wondering how the 'Polanco experiment' was going!!!

 

Dozier only has one more year on his contract, correct??  If he's not traded in the off season or at the trade deadline, it won't hurt to have Polanco get more ML at-bats before he moves to second base in 2018.

 

He's got two years left on the contract. 

[clutterheart]

Watching Polanco has been one of the nice things about the end of this year.  I have doubts that a manager like Gardy, or TK would put Polanco's name in the running for the 2017 SS but who knows what Moliter will do.  

 

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

I also am willing to keep the Polanco-SS experiment going into next year.

 

No team has the luxury of waiting around for 3 full seasons of data to be collected before making a decision. Until Statcast is made for public use, Fangraphs is the best we got. I disagree that a Polanco-Sano left side would have poor range. Polanco has shown range on a few plays and Sano's range grades out really well. Assuming Plouffe is not around, I think a left side with those two would play right around average or slightly below over a long stretch, with its good moments and not so good moments. I think Dozier can continue at second just fine and we are good at first base. It's a myth that only Twins players make errors, though you'd never think that from reading the game threads.

 

Infield, like the outfield, seems ok to me. It will be interesting to see who is calling the shots, and what they make of this.

[ashbury]

I haven't watched Polanco so many times as to be an expert, but the random sample of times he's played for my viewing pleasure has me pegging him as decent range with a sub-par arm for SS. People say he should work on strengthening the arm - like, that hasn't already been tried?

 

If on a 1-to-10 scale for major league SS defense, where 5 is average (meaning damn good among all humans) and 1 means most players because they just can't play the position, I'd put Escobar at about a 4 and Polanco a 3. Escobar's fine as a utility player but a mild liability as a SS starter; Polanco a bit more so.

 

But on a similar scale for SS offense, where 5 is again average (and below par for any other position on the field), Escobar's about a 6 and Polanco looks like potential to be an 8. He won't be in ARod territory (who else is?), but he could eventually deliver .300+ BA year after year, with a little pop and hopefully an improving walk rate as he gets experience. He could win Silver Slugger for his position some years. He's not a maybe, like Florimon was. You kind of have to keep him unless some GM knocks you over with a starting pitcher offer.

 

Polanco needs to play 2B but is blocked. For a last place team, it's not the end of the world to stash Polanco at SS rather than trade him for less than full value. That doesn't mean he's a SS, long term. Actually, I suspect Dozier at SS and Polanco at 2B would be marginally stronger defensively, but that's not going to happen, for reasons of clubhouse chemistry and so forth; you may wish otherwise, but teams just don't move veterans very often.

 

Long term, Dozier will eventually depart. I think right now it's just not expedient to trade Dozier, for business reasons, due to this late HR outburst; I expect fans' valuation of our second baseman has increased far more than competing GM's valuation has. That's why this dilemma is even up for discussion, and IMO will continue into 2017 if not all the way through it.

[Vanimal46]

Out of curiosity I wanted to see Escobar's numbers from Fangraphs and compare it to Polanco... 

Routine: 96.1%  (of 203)    ----- Polanco: 96.9% (of 98)

Likely:    69.2% (of 13)       ----- Polanco: 80% (of 5)

Even:     33.3% (of 9)        ------ Polanco: 42.9% (of 7)

Unlikely: 0% (of 1)            ------ Polanco: 25.0% (of 4)

Remote: 0% (of 9)        --------- Polanco: 0% (of 12)

Impossible: 0% (of 2)  ---------- Polanco: 0% (of 3)

 

 

Over the same amount of reps, perhaps Polanco's numbers regress. But just looking at it, there doesn't appear to be too far of a decline in defense if they do choose Polanco to handle SS duties. 

I may be analyzing this wrong, so feel free to correct if I am. 
 

 

Edited September 19, 2016 by Vanimal46

[HitInAPinch]

I like Escobar at short.  And i also like Polanco there as well.

 

But I think one of them may be heading to 3rd.  For all the love for Sano, my eye test says he should have been switched to another position a long time ago.  Escobar has played 3rd a few times late this year.

 

Dozier is superior to Polanco at 2nd.  I'm not in a hurry to trade Dozier unless there's real value to be had.  If he plays the 1st half of next year like he is not, his trade value could be enormous!

 

 

 

 

[Badsmerf]

If they can't trade dozier, then absolutely keep him at ss. Let him play every game and get more comfortable. He is the heir to lead off. Good average, takes good at bats, good obp. At ss his defense might only ever be average, but that is why the twins have Nick Gordon coming. If the twins keep dozier, Gordon will be ready about the time his contract is up. Polanco can hold it down until then.

[USAFChief]

My impression, based on entirely too little information, is that it isn't Polanco's arm that's his primary problem, nor his range.  It's his "hands."

 

Playing SS involves accepting and catching so many hard chances that someone with a bit of a case of "iron hands" is probably destined to fail.  

 

I haven't seen enough, though, to form any kind of solid opinion.

 

 Based on lack of SS play in his recent minor league history, I'd guess the Twins already decided he's not going to be able to play the position long term.  Teams don't often move players off SS in the minors until they're forced to.  SS's are too valuable.

[Linus]

I'm now of the belief the only way out of this mess is to deal Dozier for the best starter you can get. Then sign a defense first ss and your defense and pitching are dramatically improved. Esco stays an excellent utility guy.

[gocgo]

I'm not in the trade Dozier camp...UNLESS it reaps major league ready elite talent either at SS, catcher, or SP.  That said, I'd love to see what Polanco can do at SS after an offseason of work to prepare him for the position.  I don't think it's fair to put him at SS when he hasn't had any real time over there any more than I think it was fair to put Sano in RF without any real time out there.

[Doomtints]

 

 Until Statcast is made for public use, Fangraphs is the best we got.

 

 

The best defensive metrics that come out of Statcast are arm strength (velocity & accuracy of throws), exchange (time between fielding and throwing), and first step (reaction time).  These three things can be reliable with very small samples.  Realize, however, that these three things are what we all measure with the "eyeball test."  So how does Polanco LOOK out there?  Are his throws accurate?  Does he react quickly?  Does he field and throw quickly?

 

Many of the other Statcast stats are very raw, are measuring things that really say the opposite of what we expect (e.g., the player showing the highest average range is actually a guy who is playing out of position).  For the most part, statcast provides "averages" and raw data (which can be analyzed by looking at "best plays" and "worst plays" by a player).  The defensive metrics are hard to find mostly because they are so raw and because they use unweighted averages which are misleading.  For this stuff, you still need big sample sizes. 

 

Statcast routing data is simply a computer computing distance from point A (the fielder) and point B (where the ball is fielded).  It's a two-dimensional computation that is currently too basic.  It's not much better than what we already have easy access to. 

 

Offensive and pitching statcast data can be found with some hunting around and this is where statcast really shines.

 

 

Edited September 19, 2016 by Doomtints

[70charger]

 

Out of curiosity I wanted to see Escobar's numbers from Fangraphs and compare it to Polanco... 

Routine: 96.1%  (of 203)    ----- Polanco: 96.9% (of 98)

Likely:    69.2% (of 13)       ----- Polanco: 80% (of 5)

Even:     33.3% (of 9)        ------ Polanco: 42.9% (of 7)

Unlikely: 0% (of 1)            ------ Polanco: 25.0% (of 4)

Remote: 0% (of 9)        --------- Polanco: 0% (of 12)

Impossible: 0% (of 2)  ---------- Polanco: 0% (of 3)

 

 

Over the same amount of reps, perhaps Polanco's numbers regress. But just looking at it, there doesn't appear to be too far of a decline in defense if they do choose Polanco to handle SS duties. 

I may be analyzing this wrong, so feel free to correct if I am. 
 

 

Is this just this year? The eye test tells me Escobar is more solid than Polanco, but using 2016 data for Escobar probably isn't fair to his true abilities, since he's been fighting injuries all year. 

 

Or maybe my eye test is wrong. Either way, I think I'd be more inclined to compare Polanco's healthy 2016 with Escobar's healthy 2015.

[dxpavelka]

Often overlooked possibility about why Polanco spent all of his minor league time at 2B prior to Nunez being traded is that for the five months immediately preceding the six week period preceding the trade Dozier was brutal with a bat in his hand.  We are all convinced that those days are behind us.  We've been fooled before.  Hopefully, not again.

[Doomtints]

For me, the eyeball test doesn't look tragic for Polanco.

 

His reaction time is fine.  For positioning, often he is in the right position both for fielding hits and for covering the bag.  He doesn't have to move much to do either task.

 

His throwing accuracy is fine but he is slow to release the ball.  However, he could certainly be taking his time because he can see where the baserunner is.  Good players don't rush the throw when there is no reason to.  I haven't seen a play where he has had to throw the ball quickly, though at least one such play surely has happened. 

 

Long story short -- we haven't seen enough of him out there to know.

Edited September 19, 2016 by Doomtints

[ashbury]

 Based on lack of SS play in his recent minor league history,

Until 2016 he played more SS than 2B in the minors. Even with 2016 the ratio is still toward SS. 2015 counts as "recent", and he played 83 games at SS with Chattanooga, and only 8 at 2B; in Rochester he played no innings at 2B at all.

 

If they concluded anything about him at SS, it was from watching him try to play it for six seasons, 2010-15.

 

Granting that the farther back one goes, the more one should discount whatever was seen, and basically throw out age 16 and 17, I still dislike the narrative that the Twins abandoned him to 2B and ignored the potential value of developing a good-stick shortstop. Everyone recognizes the value of that, and IMO they tried.

 

And he doesn't pass the eye test for me. Maybe further development and improvement is possible at his age - that is the real art of evaluation of young'uns, and I'm just a patzer.

 

My interpretation of 2016 in Rochester: the brain trust said, we think he slots in better at 2B - let's find out if he's actually consistent there, instead of guessing and assuming, by playing him every day and letting him get comfortable. Nothing wrong with that IMO. And then Dozier crossed them up with a career year on a dismal team.

[ashbury]

 Based on lack of SS play in his recent minor league history,

Until 2016 he played more SS than 2B in the minors. Even with 2016 the ratio is still toward SS. If they concluded anything about him at SS, it was from watching him try to play it for six seasons.

 

Granting that the farther back one goes, the more one should discount whatever was seen, I still dislike the narrative that the Twins force-fed him at 2B and ignored the potential value of developing a good-stick shortstop. They tried. And he doesn't pass the eye test for me; maybe further development and improvement is possible, that is the real art of evaluation of young'uns.

[Willihammer]

Player A played 2500 minor league innings at SS, with a .962 FP and 4.34 RF/9.

Player B played 2900 minor league innings at SS, with a .932 FP and 4.20 RF/9.

 

Hint- Player A is a our starting 2B. Player B is Polanco.

[Vanimal46]

 

Is this just this year? The eye test tells me Escobar is more solid than Polanco, but using 2016 data for Escobar probably isn't fair to his true abilities, since he's been fighting injuries all year. 

 

Or maybe my eye test is wrong. Either way, I think I'd be more inclined to compare Polanco's healthy 2016 with Escobar's healthy 2015.

 

Those were his 2016 SS numbers. Quite frankly his numbers aren't all that different from 2015. Slight uptick in the routine plays from 96.1 (2016) to 98.5% (2015) and a decline in the likely plays 69.2% (2016) 58.3% (2015) 

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

 

The best defensive metrics that come out of Statcast are arm strength (velocity & accuracy of throws), exchange (time between fielding and throwing), and first step (reaction time).  These three things can be reliable with very small samples.  Realize, however, that these three things are what we all measure with the "eyeball test."  So how does Polanco LOOK out there?  Are his throws accurate?  Does he react quickly?  Does he field and throw quickly?

 

Many of the other Statcast stats are very raw, are measuring things that really say the opposite of what we expect (e.g., the player showing the highest average range is actually a guy who is playing out of position).  For the most part, statcast provides "averages" and raw data (which can be analyzed by looking at "best plays" and "worst plays" by a player).  The defensive metrics are hard to find mostly because they are so raw and because they use unweighted averages which are misleading.  For this stuff, you still need big sample sizes. 

 

Statcast routing data is simply a computer computing distance from point A (the fielder) and point B (where the ball is fielded).  It's a two-dimensional computation that is currently too basic.  It's not much better than what we already have easy access to. 

 

Offensive and pitching statcast data can be found with some hunting around and this is where statcast really shines.

Right. Fangraphs is free and on the open web so I used that. I think it still has a pretty good reputation. 

[stringer bell]

 

Is this just this year? The eye test tells me Escobar is more solid than Polanco, but using 2016 data for Escobar probably isn't fair to his true abilities, since he's been fighting injuries all year. 

 

Or maybe my eye test is wrong. Either way, I think I'd be more inclined to compare Polanco's healthy 2016 with Escobar's healthy 2015.

I think Escobar has had an off-year defensively at shortstop, compared to previous seasons. He has bobbled or kicked more balls this year than in the previous two IMHO, some resulting in errors, some called hits and some ruling out double plays.

 

My eye test of Polanco (limited reps) is that overall he probably fails in the "adequate" category. The arm is sufficient, but I"ve seen enough misplays to consider him in the bottom half of the shortstop pool. While SS may not be his eventual position, I have no problem with sending him out there to start the season in 2017. Perhaps, with many reps, he'll improve. Maybe someone will trade for him as a shortstop,

[mickeymental]

 

Player A played 2500 minor league innings at SS, with a .962 FP and 4.34 RF/9.

Player B played 2900 minor league innings at SS, with a .932 FP and 4.20 RF/9.

 

Hint- Player A is a our starting 2B. Player B is Polanco.

slide polanco over to second, return dozier to short until he's traded. problem solved.

[Thrylos]

SSS.

 

Give the kid the off-season and the entire Spring Training to play and prep as a shortstop and I suspect that he will be much better next season.

 

Kepler has a .971 fielding percentage, which is worse for a RF than Polanco's .959 is for a SS.  He also has a negative UZR (even though UZR is useless in both sample sizes.)

 

Any concerns there?

 

The bottom line is that both players are young enough to improve and unless you play them there, they will not improve.

 

 

[jimmer]

21 RF with 800 of more innings in RF.

 

Kepler has 5 DRS in RF this year (and another in CF).  Places him 8th and he has quite a few less innings than the guys ahead of him. He's arguably a top 5 defender in RF in the near future, though top 10 now. He's doing just fine.

Edited September 19, 2016 by jimmer