I don't get the statement that "Happ would be the ideal second baseman" followed by a huge "IF" regarding his offense. If he has offensive questions, what makes him ideal? He is not great at second defensively. No terrible. But what makes this "ideal" if offense is an issue?
I will concede that we may trade Russell. But if I am the Cubs I am not trading him within the division. (I know. It's the Reds, but still.)
I can't see any point in trading for Billy Hamilton and playing him at 2nd base. Was this a joke? He is a CF and doesn't hit. What value is there to playing him at 2nd base? I'd love to know what the reasoning is there.
We have Happ playing CF/2nd now, along with Almora. We have others who can play / have played 2nd base. I am just not getting this at all.
Came up as a 2B. So there is that part.
Has avg 39.57 SB per season (including his 19 AB one that netted 13 SB.)
He is completely 1 dimensional on O but it is a huge tool set. D wise he is considered GG quality at CF.
End of the day if he held a OBA around .350 this convo would be flipped where Russell doesn't buy him.
Happ needs to make more contact. Rookie he put the ball into play 57% of the time. Translated to .253/.328/.514. This year 46% .233/.353/.408 I think it is pretty obvious that he went over board on the taking a pitch and it ended poorly.
He needs to get passive aggressive. Which means wait for the pitcher to throw the first called strike then attack in the zone. If the pitcher wants to act cute around the edges then hit it the other way vs get into a losing battle.