Is anyone hottah than Tejada?

Well, yes...lots of people. But it sounded cool, so I said it anyway.

One of the biggest questions about the team this season will be the play at shortstop. Why? Well, because it's one of the only major changes on the team from 2010 to 2011. One thing to note, however, is that this isn't a straight transition -- Juan Uribe only started 96 games at shortstop last year, while Edgar Renteria, hurt for most of 2010, started almost all of the others (62).

Uribe gets most of the press because he started the most games there, had a couple of significant postseason home runs, and also because of his unexpected defection to the LA Dodgers. Renteria, postseason heroics of his own notwithstanding, was considered expendable for reasons of both health and general lack of production during the regular season.

Also, to think Miguel Tejada is going to start any more than about 100 games is probably wishful thinking. He did start 58 games at SS for the Padres last season, but this was a result of the late season trade bringing him from Baltimore to San Diego, and that the Padres were desperate at that position. With the Orioles, he didn't start a single game at SS, playing exclusively at 3B.

Barring either a prodigious productivity increase or a further productivity decline (not to mention, injuries at age 36 must be considered), I imagine Tejada's total at-bats and starts defensively could look a lot like Uribe's from 2010. In addition, Pablo Sandoval's production will weigh in -- Uribe's 26 starts at 3B last year were mostly because of Panda's struggles. If Sandoval hits more like he did in 2009 and isn't bit by the injury bug, Tejada's 3B starts would be sporadic at best.

So, given all of those factors, the real comparison to consider will be offensively, especially given that the Giants' great hope is to, at least, not be a worse offense than last season. Let's compare some stats between Uribe and Tejada from 2010:

• Line: Uribe - .248/.310/.440, Tejada - .269/.312/.381
• Strikeout-to-walk ratio: Uribe - .49, Tejada - .44
• Pitches per plate appearance - Uribe - 3.59/PA, Tejada - 3.34/PA
• Ground ball-to-fly ball ratio: Uribe - 0.68, Tejada - 0.98

We could go a lot further, but this is really pretty simple -- the Giants are losing some power, and gaining...well, some degree of empty batting average. The two hitters are both hackers, drawing relatively few walks. Uribe, at this stage of their careers, has more power, but strikes out at a significantly higher rate than Tejada.

So, is this a downgrade? In a word, yes, but probably not to a large degree. Here's why.

Tejada had an absolutely horrible time hitting in Petco last season. While having 18.4% of his total at-bats last season in Petco, Tejada only hit 9.8% of his total extra-base hits in that park, and his ISO power was a paltry .69. If you look at his time there as an anomaly (and despite his age and the power-dampening effects of Petco, I think that's easy to do) and adjust his power numbers more towards his numbers everywhere else, his line would look more palatable.

The key here, really, will be age -- Tejada's numbers took a significant dip last year, but it was an odd, uneven composition: he hit acceptably at Camden Yards with Baltimore (.743 OPS), yet horribly on the road in his time with that team, then hit horribly at Petco with San Diego (.536 OPS), yet extremely well on the road for the Padres until the end of the season.

To me, it's a bit difficult to make the assertion Tejada is done based on those trends (or really, the lack of a trend), and given he hit pretty well for the Houston Astros in 2009 leads me to believe that he'll have somewhat of a resurgence for the Giants.

Will he be worth the $6.5 million the Giants will pay him in 2011? I don't think so, but it's only a one-year deal, so I can't imagine Brian Sabean won't be amenable to looking for other options should Tejada's performance not be along acceptable lines, which I imagine to be somewhere in the .740 OPS range.