Mar 11, 2013, 7:25 PM EST
After spending two games in the designated hitter spot, Derek Jeter is itching to test his surgically-repaired ankle at his familiar shortstop position.
According to Andrew Marchand of ESPN New York, Jeter said following today’s Grapefruit League game that the plan is for him to play shortstop Wednesday against the Phillies. After going 1-for-2 with a single in his return during his spring debut on Saturday, Jeter was hitless in two at-bats this afternoon against the Cardinals.
The Yankees will wait to see how Jeter’s ankle feels before making an official decision about Wednesday, but manager Joe Girardi said that he’ll play four or five innings for his first time back on the field. It’s unlikely that he’ll play back-to-back games at shortstop right out of the gate, but he should have plenty of time to get there before Opening Day.
Jeter, 38, led the majors with 216 hits last season and currently sits 11th all-time with 3,304 career hits. If healthy, he should continue to climb that illustrious list this year. He’s just 12 hits away from passing Eddie Collins for 10th place and 16 away from passing Paul Molitor for ninth.
- Suspending Josh Hamilton for a year would be obscene 108
- Report: MLB panel split on rehab for Josh Hamilton; one-year suspension is in play 40
- Joc Pederson goes 2-for-2 in Cactus League debut 5
- Braves scratch Mike Minor from start with more shoulder problems 4
- Daniel Murphy on Billy Bean: “I do disagree with the fact that Billy is a homosexual” 367
- Blue Jays sign Dayan Viciedo to a minor league deal 8
- Chris Sale will be sidelined for three weeks with foot fracture 11
- Aramis Ramirez says 2015 will be his last year 33
- Daniel Murphy on Billy Bean: “I do disagree with the fact that Billy is a homosexual” (367)
- If addiction is an illness — and it is — Josh Hamilton shouldn’t be suspended (307)
- Curt Schilling lowers the boom on some men tweeting threats against his daughter (137)
- Suspending Josh Hamilton for a year would be obscene (109)
- Billy Bean responds to Daniel Murphy’s comments (85)