You have no choice at that point but to move 1 likely to the OF. But why did we emphasize SS in trade with that scenario very much within the realm of possibility? The company line is that “you can never have enough good MIF.” But the company line is no more than that.
Sure it may make some sense as a drafting or intl signing strategy when these kids are years away from the bigs. But Freeman was knocking on the door when each of the other 2 were acquired and those other 2 also happened to be either knocking on the door or in the big league building when acquired. Rosario is just the cherry on this upside down cake.
So your analysis is misplaced. The question was not gee how good of a SS is Rosario, Gimenez, or Arias. It was how helpful is one of their bats—or the resulting Freeman bat—when they’re playing LF. Hint: their value diminishes significantly. Their perceived value drew in large, large part to the fact that they had the defensive chops for MIF and their bats profiled well there. What would Kipnis’s value have been if he was coming up as a corner OF prospect rather than a 2B? And he hit well in the bigs!
Bite the bullet, accept the scorned looks of the analytic peers, and push for the corner OF prospect in the first place. I know it pains you—where do you think the “company line” comes from in the first place but the company—but if these kids youre acquiring are destined to be moved to the OF anyway (and hint: multiple are) save the growing pains I’ve spent today talking about regarding a defensive move to a new position. Just get the fricking LF/RF or, GASP, the 1B to begin with. Have you seen what we’re trotting out there lately? All the more reason it makes very little intuitive sense beyond the obviously significant desire to do what you think smart people do and continue to toe that company line.
First off Amed and Gimenez are both extremely good athletes, both top in sprint speed and other physical abilities like that. Both guys would slaughter the combine when it came to physical abilities... Also both Amed and Gimenez with the Mets have played off of SS as well, so it's not like they were only straight SS. Gimenez had played 2B every single season and played 3B for the Mets last season. So to say he is only a SS, isn't knowing his background at all. Plus I believe he stated he is okay with playing OF as well if they asked him to play it. Amed also got a little bit of playing time at 3B and LF before this season. Both guys where open to moving positions and the fact they weren't hurt by moving positions, they were hurt because they weren't good fits for the Mets batting development team hence why Gimenez went back to AAA...
Freeman, many scouts said, wasn't a future SS... He can play SS, but he has a weaker arm than many would like for SS, so majority of the scouts saw him as a 2B, who could play SS. But at the moment, he is the best SS on Akrons roster, but his future likely isn't there. So do you only have him play 2B while hurting the team defensively and pigeon holing into one position or keep him versatile until he makes it to the pros? Indians are going with the latter defensively with their players since they don't know who will actually succeed so it's better than can play more than one than be blocked because they can't...
Tampa moves guys around more than we do in the minors and at the big league club and they have been one of the best teams to develop ball players. Why is it wrong for the Indians to do the same thing? Also who cares about their "value" via like the MLB.com top prospects and other stuff like that. That is not a teams internal rankings but an analysts ranking which, by the way, never had Bieber or Plesac as a top prospect until after the fact.... If the Indians decided to move Freeman to LF right now, it wouldn't diminish his value within the organization at all. If anything it could strengthen it since it's quite possible it could get him to the bigs faster and he could help out the organization better for finally taking one of the OF spots long term...
Kipnis was drafted as an OF and was an OF at first who got switched to 2B... Kipnis was hurt because he couldn't play other positions very well...
Also our biggest issue on the MLB club is we lack bats and it's not because we changed guys positions, it's just the fact guys didn't pan out. If you think about most of the prospect that didn't pan out for us positionally, it wasn't cause we moved them around, it is because they couldn't hit big league pitching... We drafted too many athletes and not enough pure hitters in my mind. Also another personal thing I feel that not everyone agrees with, is the fact we don't have a Michael Brantley type of guy on this roster anymore. Someone who in the batters box is always calm, collected and lead hitting by example and did help his peers out (even if he wasn't the most well liked guy, he still could help out young hitters). I know coaching should do better blah blah blah, but you learn just as much from your teammates as you do your coaches. If you don't have any team mates to learn from, you really are limited in resources to learn from.
Okay back to topic... The reason why we are struggling at the pro level is because we lack bats at the moment and the bats we do have, are either out of position/not good defensively. Harold isn't a good OF and bad in CF. Amed isn't a good SS, etc...
Also Miller, if you didn't know if being trained to be a Zobrist type, so he is setup to be an everyday utility guy and Chang go thrown into playing 1B, but he was stuck with the utility role (which is why I was hoping they would keep Mike Freeman, to keep Chang playing everyday in the minors rather than trying to do it a couple days a week in the pros).
Is there anything I missed?