Daniel Descalso is still not a shortstop

Daniel Descalso's career year lasted right up until he was forced to come into regular contact with Pete Kozma's anticareer year, which is not quite his fault. Nevertheless, what was once an occasion to remember Descalso's tenure as the original suspicious Springfield left-handed hitter is now right about halfway between his strong 2011 and his 2012, which was not that: .238/.292/.363.

Major League shortstops are hitting .255/.308/.374. Descalso is being included in that total, despite not being a shortstop.

At the outer limits of a baseball season it becomes difficult and maybe unhelpful to put the blame on a particular baseball player. The 1969 Padres who weren't Nate Colbert were major leaguers under very particular circumstances--not platoon-with-Pete-Kozma particular, but still particular--and if some of them weren't ready yet, and others were never going to be, they were given a job to do and they kind-of-did it.

Daniel Descalso was declared not-a-shortstop last year, the last time the Cardinals were forced to ponder a Kozma-filled infield; it's only an even emptier pantry and his hot start on offense that's brought him back there 43 times so far. As a potential 2014 bench piece Descalso is the same player he was before.

But whether we feel like blaming him or not--whether it seems fair to talk up his shortcomings there--events have once again proved that Daniel Descalso is not a shortstop. He hits like one but he doesn't field like one, and while the direction of his platoon split could prove useful in this one terrifying scenario, this seems like an experiment that's no longer worth prolonging. Not even if the alternative is--All right. All right. Since the All-Star Break, Daniel Descalso has batted .181/.215/.267 and fielded like Daniel Descalso. Pete Kozma has hit .179/.269/.226 and fielded like a shortstop.

And the Cardinals aren't even an expansion team. Their extenuating circumstance is that they thought Rafael Furcal would be healthy.