Defense over the last Twenty Years - Part TwoTop Career Performances by Position – NL
Top Career Performances by Position – National League Infield
There have been a lot of players over the last twenty seasons in MLB. Twenty years covers entire careers for even the greatest players. We’re going to take a look at who the top career performers have been. Some players haven’t gotten to the decline phase of their careers, but many players have come and gone.
Some players have played multiple positions, and we’ll cover there entire career sooner or later, but usually if you only play a few innings at a given position, you cannot play it so poorly or so well as to affect your career value.
Years of watching baseball would probably allow you to guess at who the top fielders at a given position. The top fielders get good press and there is usually some accuracy to it. So who are the best fielders at first? JT Snow? Jeff Bagwell? Second? Ryno? Third? Caminiti? Shortstop? Okay, we know number one, but who was second? Rey Ordonez?
First Base
At first base, there have been a number of good fielders. Most first basemen careers end up with 10 runs of average. Even some of the guys expected to be great. Jeff Bagwell played 15 years and approximately 18500 innings. He’s +12 RSpt. This is about the NL players, so some guys’ totals will be less than you might imagine. Later we’ll look at both leagues and see if anyone special turns up. JT Snow played 9000 innings for the San Francisco Giants, and most of them were bad. He posted –12 RSpt in those 9 seasons. As I said, we’ll look at Snow’s performance in the AL and overall later.
The best first baseman in the NL over the last twenty years is pretty easy to pick out. He stands significantly, nearly twice as valuable defensively as the next best. He played alongside other reputed good defenders, and has been recognized as a good fielder, often given credit for making his teammates look better than they were.
The best NL glove man at first base over the last twenty years is Mark Grace. The Cub first baseman had to catch lasers from Shawon Dunston and coolly gather in Ryne Sandberg’s work.
YEAR POS NAME TEAM LG GP INN RSpt RS/150
1988 1B Mark Grace ChC NL 133 1133.7 -1 -2
1989 1B Mark Grace ChC NL 142 1240.3 9 10
1990 1B Mark Grace ChC NL 153 1315.3 6 6
1991 1B Mark Grace ChC NL 160 1404.3 10 10
1992 1B Mark Grace ChC NL 157 1414.0 11 11
1993 1B Mark Grace ChC NL 154 1350.3 12 12
1994 1B Mark Grace ChC NL 103 906.7 3 4
1995 1B Mark Grace ChC NL 143 1268.0 -3 -3
1996 1B Mark Grace ChC NL 141 1218.0 0 0
1997 1B Mark Grace ChC NL 148 1291.0 9 9
1998 1B Mark Grace ChC NL 156 1390.3 0 0
1999 1B Mark Grace ChC NL 160 1380.7 11 11
2000 1B Mark Grace ChC NL 140 1216.3 8 9
2001 1B Mark Grace Ari NL 135 1111.0 -3 -3
2002 1B Mark Grace Ari NL 98 682.0 -4 -9
2003 1B Mark Grace Ari NL 39 268.0 0 2
16 yrs 1B Mark Grace NL 2162 18590.0 68 5
Yes, that is a cumulative stat, but as noted above, Bagwell played about the same number of innings and saved 56 fewer runs.
Honorable mention in the National League goes to Kevin Young and Sean Casey.
YEAR POS NAME TEAM LG GP INN RSpt RS/150
1992 1B Kevin Young Pit NL 1 2.0 0 0
1993 1B Kevin Young Pit NL 135 1057.7 3 4
1994 1B Kevin Young Pit NL 37 141.3 1 11
1995 1B Kevin Young Pit NL 6 39.0 1 31
1997 1B Kevin Young Pit NL 77 576.0 7 16
1998 1B Kevin Young Pit NL 157 1359.0 -3 -3
1999 1B Kevin Young Pit NL 155 1359.7 15 15
2000 1B Kevin Young Pit NL 129 1071.3 -5 -6
2001 1B Kevin Young Pit NL 137 1079.0 8 11
2002 1B Kevin Young Pit NL 144 1131.7 7 8
2003 1B Kevin Young Pit NL 44 200.7 1 8
11 yrs 1B Kevin Young Pit NL 1022 8017.3 36 6
YEAR POS NAME TEAM LG GP INN RSpt RS/150
1998 1B Sean Casey Cin NL 86 683.3 1 2
1999 1B Sean Casey Cin NL 148 1297.0 0 0
2000 1B Sean Casey Cin NL 129 1079.0 4 5
2001 1B Sean Casey Cin NL 136 1127.0 5 6
2002 1B Sean Casey Cin NL 108 935.0 8 11
2003 1B Sean Casey Cin NL 144 1252.7 11 11
2004 1B Sean Casey Cin NL 145 1246.7 6 6
2005 1B Sean Casey Cin NL 134 1139.7 3 3
8 yrs 1B Sean Casey Cin NL 1030 8760.3 37 6
Casey has managed to avoid any slumping seasons with the glove. He hasn’t gotten to his decline phase and has about the same value as Young did in his career. The gap between Young (36 RSpt) and Grace is nearly the gap between Young and average. Had Grace retired after his Cubs career, he would have been.
Grace undoubtedly deserves more accolades for his performance.
You can tell that a first baseman simply has difficulty outpacing his peers in the field. Even after 16 years, the best was just seven wins above average. But is it “just” seven wins? We’ll see how much other position players contribute with their glove over a career. Is 70 RSpt a high value? We’ve seen Ozzie at nearly double that, but as noted, he was 50-60 RSpt above the next NL shortstop.
Second Base
We all heard about how great Ryne Sandberg was at second, but lookin at how good Grace was, did Grace raise Ryno’s status? We’ll see. And who else might have challenged for the best defensive second baseman in the NL over the past two decades? Is it Robby Thompson?
Sandberg, like Ozzie, played for a few seasons before ZR was kept. A couple of those seasons would probably add to his score. In the seasons we have, Sandberg is very good. He isn’t the best, but none has the innings and quality that he does.
YEAR POS NAME TEAM LG GP INN RSpt RS/150
1987 2B Ryne Sandberg ChC NL 131 1133.3 -11 -13
1988 2B Ryne Sandberg ChC NL 153 1357.3 -3 -3
1989 2B Ryne Sandberg ChC NL 155 1339.3 -6 -7
1990 2B Ryne Sandberg ChC NL 154 1315.0 3 4
1991 2B Ryne Sandberg ChC NL 157 1375.7 12 12
1992 2B Ryne Sandberg ChC NL 157 1379.3 19 19
1993 2B Ryne Sandberg ChC NL 115 989.0 1 2
1994 2B Ryne Sandberg ChC NL 57 490.7 7 20
1996 2B Ryne Sandberg ChC NL 146 1234.0 6 6
1997 2B Ryne Sandberg ChC NL 126 991.3 10 14
10 yrs 2B Ryne Sandberg ChC NL 1351 11605.0 39 4
Sandberg was a very good defensive second baseman. There was considerable stathead backlash regarding his lateral range, and usually someone would say he has good hands and not so much range, and that Mark Grace was saving his can a lot. This data shows that Ryno was more than that – over the last twenty years, he’s one of the top five defensive second basemen.
So who is the best? And how much better is the best second baseman than his peers? Bear in mind that these numbers do not include the ability to turn the double play, and there are players that excel at that.
The Honorable Mentions go to Luis Castillo and Pokey Reese. Reese is a good shortstop playing second base, and he played alongside Sean Casey, which certainly helped. Just like with Ryno. Castillo is seeing a nice career path and is probably on the decline. Nonetheless, his excellent work has helped the Marlins to two World Championships.
YEAR POS NAME TEAM LG GP INN RSpt RS/150
1996 2B Luis Castillo Fla NL 41 352.0 4 16
1997 2B Luis Castillo Fla NL 70 575.3 2 4
1998 2B Luis Castillo Fla NL 44 378.3 3 11
1999 2B Luis Castillo Fla NL 126 1068.3 -1 -1
2000 2B Luis Castillo Fla NL 136 1176.3 6 7
2001 2B Luis Castillo Fla NL 133 1157.0 3 4
2002 2B Luis Castillo Fla NL 144 1258.7 1 1
2003 2B Luis Castillo Fla NL 152 1312.3 12 12
2004 2B Luis Castillo Fla NL 148 1274.3 12 13
2005 2B Luis Castillo Fla NL 120 1012.3 4 6
10 yrs 2B Luis Castillo Fla NL 1114 9565.0 47 7
YEAR POS NAME TEAM LG GP INN RSpt RS/150
1997 2B Pokey Reese Cin NL 8 49.7 1 40
1998 2B Pokey Reese Cin NL 3 14.7 0 -18
1999 2B Pokey Reese Cin NL 147 1223.7 23 26
2000 2B Pokey Reese Cin NL 133 1129.0 13 16
2001 2B Pokey Reese Cin NL 51 407.7 4 14
2002 2B Pokey Reese Pit NL 117 991.3 10 14
2003 2B Pokey Reese Pit NL 33 259.0 4 23
7 yrs 2B Pokey Reese Cin/Pit NL 492 4075.0 57 19
It’s a shame Reese couldn’t hit more. He was a great fielder.
But enough about the runners-up. The top fielding second baseman during the last twenty years is the Cardinals’ secret weapon and Ozzie Smith’s keytone partner, Jose Oquendo. Oquendo seemed like a utility infielder and also played some shortstop pretty well (about 1000 inings over this period). Oquendo played every position in a game in 1988. Most of all, he was an excellent second baseman.
YEAR POS NAME TEAM LG GP INN RSpt RS/150
1987 2B Jose Oquendo StL NL 32 195.0 5 37
1988 2B Jose Oquendo StL NL 71 530.3 12 31
1989 2B Jose Oquendo StL NL 156 1361.7 28 27
1990 2B Jose Oquendo StL NL 150 1203.7 17 20
1991 2B Jose Oquendo StL NL 118 905.7 17 25
1992 2B Jose Oquendo StL NL 9 54.0 -3 -66
1993 2B Jose Oquendo StL NL 16 72.3 -1 -18
1994 2B Jose Oquendo StL NL 16 125.7 1 12
1995 2B Jose Oquendo StL NL 62 417.0 2 7
9 yrs 2B Jose Oquendo StL NL 630 4865.3 79 22
Interestingly, the advantage a second baseman provides above the position average is approximately equal to the first baseman’s advantage. The runners-up also compare to the first base runners-up. So far, the advantages at the positions isn’t large – possibly 12% or so.
Third Base
If this were data for the 1975-1993 period, I’d feel quite comfortable stating Mike Schmidt was the best. As it isn’t, I think it is going to be Scott Rolen (I haven’t looked yet). Rolen has been a very good fielder his entire career, and has a good chance at being the top fielder. Other strong candidates are Terry Pendleton and Matt Williams. Then there is Ken Caminiti.
Later we’ll look at how ZR has changed over the last two decades. Here’s a sneak preview: only third base defense has clearly improved over the period.
To put it bluntly, Caminiti wasn’t that good. He was pretty good, but he doesn’t compare to the great fielding third basemen of the last twenty seasons. At all. Caminiti is +30 RSpt. That would be pretty good at second base, but third base is a position where teams sometimes undervalue defense in favor of a big bat. Players like Bobby Bonilla wasted countless (okay, I’ve counted them) at third base, and that gave opponents some substantial gains at the plate.
There are outstanding third basemen who are significantly better than other third basemen. My cursory guesses were spot on. Getting the honorable mention slots are Terry Pendleton and Matt Williams. Pendleton is the third player from the late 80s Cardinals’ infield. That could mean several things – it was the park, or they were really good. Ozzie’s reputation was top notch in San Diego and Pendleton was just as good in Atlanta.
YEAR POS NAME TEAM LG GP INN RSpt RS/150
1987 3B Terry Pendleton StL NL 158 1385.7 -7 -7
1988 3B Terry Pendleton StL NL 101 863.3 12 18
1989 3B Terry Pendleton StL NL 161 1390.0 22 21
1990 3B Terry Pendleton StL NL 117 1010.0 12 16
1991 3B Terry Pendleton Atl NL 149 1284.7 11 11
1992 3B Terry Pendleton Atl NL 158 1389.0 11 10
1993 3B Terry Pendleton Atl NL 161 1393.7 6 6
1994 3B Terry Pendleton Atl NL 77 677.7 6 11
1995 3B Terry Pendleton Fla NL 130 1129.3 12 14
1996 3B Terry Pendleton Fla NL 108 928.7 6 9
1996 3B Terry Pendleton Atl NL 41 342.3 -2 -7
1997 3B Terry Pendleton Cin NL 32 220.7 0 0
12 yrs 3B Terry Pendleton StL/Atl/Fla/Cin NL 1393 12015.0 88 10
Pendleton was an outstanding fielder, but he still is just the third best from his era. This isn’t comprehensive for his career – Pendleton also played from 1984-1986, but Pendleton is neither likely to move up, nor drop out of the top three.
Coming in second is Matt Williams. Williams had the reputation of being a good fielder, and he was. He was good enough to play shortstop on occasion.
YEAR POS NAME TEAM LG GP INN RSpt RS/150
1987 3B Matt Williams SF NL 17 104.3 0 3
1988 3B Matt Williams SF NL 43 302.7 2 10
1989 3B Matt Williams SF NL 76 518.3 16 42
1990 3B Matt Williams SF NL 159 1373.7 12 12
1991 3B Matt Williams SF NL 155 1318.7 9 9
1992 3B Matt Williams SF NL 144 1248.7 9 10
1993 3B Matt Williams SF NL 144 1276.7 11 12
1994 3B Matt Williams SF NL 110 965.3 14 20
1995 3B Matt Williams SF NL 74 642.3 7 15
1996 3B Matt Williams SF NL 92 796.3 6 10
1997 3B Matt Williams Cle AL 151 1285.7 12 12
1998 3B Matt Williams Ari NL 134 1127.7 7 9
1999 3B Matt Williams Ari NL 153 1358.0 2 2
2000 3B Matt Williams Ari NL 94 804.0 7 12
2001 3B Matt Williams Ari NL 102 852.3 -3 -4
2002 3B Matt Williams Ari NL 56 472.0 4 11
2003 3B Matt Williams Ari NL 42 324.7 2 10
16 yrs 3B Matt Williams SF/Ari NL 1595 13485.7 107 11
17 yrs 3B Matt Williams SF/Cle/Ari All 1746 14771.3 119 11
Williams was a dominant fielder. He is well separated from Pendleton, and his RS/150 is one of the best at any position.
The top fielder at third base for the last twenty years is Scott Rolen. Rolen has always looked stellar in the field, and has struggled through some back problems. Never the less, Rolen has always been a great fielder. Even last season when he played only half the season, he had saved more runs in his half season than anyone else did over the entire year. He’s just a great fielder.
YEAR POS NAME TEAM LG GP INN RSpt RS/150
1996 3B Scott Rolen Phi NL 37 322.3 3 12
1997 3B Scott Rolen Phi NL 155 1337.0 12 12
1998 3B Scott Rolen Phi NL 159 1419.0 18 17
1999 3B Scott Rolen Phi NL 112 962.3 14 20
2000 3B Scott Rolen Phi NL 128 1080.0 16 20
2001 3B Scott Rolen Phi NL 151 1329.3 22 22
2002 3B Scott Rolen Phi NL 100 874.0 11 17
2002 3B Scott Rolen StL NL 55 486.0 6 17
2003 3B Scott Rolen StL NL 153 1339.0 -4 -4
2004 3B Scott Rolen StL NL 141 1228.0 15 17
2005 3B Scott Rolen StL NL 56 486.0 10 28
11 yrs 3B Scott Rolen Phi/StL NL 1247 10863.0 124 15
Rolen is having a good year in 2006, and he’ll continue to increase his value above the other third basemen. Rolen’s excellence afield as well as at the plate should have him in line for the Hall of Fame with any normal decline in the next five seasons. Rolen may well end his career as one of the top handful of third basemen of all time.
Shortstop
We’ve already seen that Ozzie Smith was a remarkable 130 RSpt (17 RS/150) during the downside of his career with the glove. I mentioned that was much higher than the next player, but who is that? Let’s take a look at the honorable mention shortstops, as we’ve already crowned the champ. That isn’t to say the NL was devoid of good fielding shortstops. There are a couple.
YEAR POS NAME TEAM LG GP INN RSpt RS/150
1987 SS Barry Larkin Cin NL 119 1012.7 6 8
1988 SS Barry Larkin Cin NL 148 1279.3 9 10
1989 SS Barry Larkin Cin NL 82 690.0 1 2
1990 SS Barry Larkin Cin NL 156 1344.0 19 19
1991 SS Barry Larkin Cin NL 120 1032.0 5 7
1992 SS Barry Larkin Cin NL 140 1208.7 10 11
1993 SS Barry Larkin Cin NL 99 846.7 0 0
1994 SS Barry Larkin Cin NL 110 960.3 11 15
1995 SS Barry Larkin Cin NL 131 1091.7 0 0
1996 SS Barry Larkin Cin NL 151 1242.3 -5 -6
1997 SS Barry Larkin Cin NL 63 503.7 4 12
1998 SS Barry Larkin Cin NL 145 1236.0 11 12
1999 SS Barry Larkin Cin NL 161 1373.7 15 15
2000 SS Barry Larkin Cin NL 102 845.7 1 1
2001 SS Barry Larkin Cin NL 44 341.3 -6 -22
2002 SS Barry Larkin Cin NL 135 1090.3 -4 -5
2003 SS Barry Larkin Cin NL 60 470.7 3 9
2004 SS Barry Larkin Cin NL 85 684.3 -5 -11
18 yrs SS Barry Larkin Cin NL 2051 17253 74 6
Barry Larkin has great career value at shortstop. He has the second highest total in the National League, and a significant lead over third. Had Ozzie Smith been in the AL, Larkin would have a big lead as the top NL shortstop. It’s impressive to see. Larkin was a very good fielder for a very long time, and yet his total value at short is just a little better than Mark Grace’s. It is an interesting phenomenon.
I think Larkin is a slam-dunk Hall of Fame player, and his defensive contribution really adds to that. I hope the writers feel the same way.
No other shortstop really produced with the glove as a long-term starter over the last 20 years. There are a few that deserve mention lest they be forgotten as outstanding fielders.
Garry Templeton was traded for Ozzie, and I’m not sure Garry wasn’t Ozzie’s peer with the glove. Templeton posted enormous numbers like Ozzie in the late 70s and early 80s, and here, late in his career, he’s still dominant.
YEAR POS NAME TEAM LG GP INN RSpt RS/150
1987 SS Garry Templeton SD NL 146 1243.3 27 30
1988 SS Garry Templeton SD NL 105 899.7 8 13
1989 SS Garry Templeton SD NL 140 1193.0 14 16
1990 SS Garry Templeton SD NL 135 1166.7 1 1
1991 SS Garry Templeton NYM NL 40 279.0 3 12
1991 SS Garry Templeton SD NL 1 4.0 -1 -1
5 yrs SS Garry Templeton All NL 567 4786 52 15
The next guy played in both leagues and a few seasons at second base. His defense is nearly as good as Smith’s as well. Rey Sanchez’ defense was probably enough to warrant carrying his bat, and that’s why he kept getting to play. Sanchez AL defense was +46 at short. That’s a hundred runs saved in his shortstop work. Sanchez also saved about 40 runs at second and third, but that’s for another column.
YEAR POS NAME TEAM LG GP INN RSpt RS/150
1991 SS Rey Sanchez ChC NL 10 65.7 2 40
1992 SS Rey Sanchez ChC NL 68 593.3 8 19
1993 SS Rey Sanchez ChC NL 98 762.3 17 30
1994 SS Rey Sanchez ChC NL 30 189.3 1 10
1995 SS Rey Sanchez ChC NL 4 20.0 0 20
1996 SS Rey Sanchez ChC NL 92 768.0 6 10
1997 SS Rey Sanchez ChC NL 63 279.0 -1 -6
1998 SS Rey Sanchez SF NL 76 505.0 10 27
2001 SS Rey Sanchez Atl NL 48 391.3 7 23
2003 SS Rey Sanchez NYM NL 42 344.3 3 12
10 yrs SS Rey Sanchez All NL 531 3918 53 18
I would be remiss if I didn’t mention Adam Everett. He’s just outstanding. He will be a very valuable shortstop for uite a few years, and is going to be an excellent free agent worth the money. Everett was outpacing the NL at the All-Star break this season by 15 RSpt. I don’t know how well teams evaluate defense, but Everett is likely to be a great defensive player for his career.
YEAR POS NAME TEAM LG GP INN RSpt RS/150
2001 SS Adam Everett Hou NL 6 7.0 0 60
2002 SS Adam Everett Hou NL 34 253.7 1 4
2003 SS Adam Everett Hou NL 128 1001.7 6 7
2004 SS Adam Everett Hou NL 99 842.0 11 18
2005 SS Adam Everett Hou NL 150 1292.7 12 12
5 yrs SS Adam Everett Hou NL 417 3397 30 12
Next!
Coming up next, I’ll look at the NL outfielders. Is Andruw Jones the greatest?
Chris Dial
Posted: August 18, 2006 at 04:10 AM |
52 comment(s)
Login to Bookmark
Related News:
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
1. Spivey Posted: August 18, 2006 at 05:21 AM (#2145331)For 1B, is this just range or does it include receiving throws? I'm really having a hard time wrapping my brain around the idea of Sean Casey as a 1B with a lot of range. And if it does include throws, I'd wonder if Sandberg is making Grace look better because Sandberg almost never made a bad throw.
And I'm fine with Oquendo as a fine 2B but having a hard time imagining him being that much better than anyone else -- maybe on a per 150 basis, but he played so few games it seems impossible he could be that good in counting stats ... and if he was that good, why didn't the Cards play him more?
For Rspt vs RS/150, you should (1) probably not report RS/150 for seasons below a certain number of innings/games and (2) it shouldn't be a sum in the total row and (3) the total should be calculated as (total RSpt)/(total g ... or innings equivalent) times 150. Pokey Reese's career RS/150 is around 17; Oquendo's is around 19.
F
When Oquendo came up Tommy Herr was still fairly productive so playing every day at second base wasn't going to happen. But Jose was SOOO good with the glove Whitey kept him around as a super-utility guy. When Herr finally departed and Luis Alicea flopped Oquendo broke out of his Tony Phillips routine and was outstanding. But then injuries struck, other guys took his place, and by the time he was healthy again he was out of job. I believe it was also understand that because of his injuries Jose wouldn't be able to play every day and no manager likes to have that type of uncertainty at a key defensive position.
Besides, Jose had NO power and really couldn't run so his game was sterling defense and drawing walks. If he can't stay in the lineup that makes him a pretty limited option.
He had some hands. Oquendo was one of those guys who just knew what do on defense. Just really something to watch.
I believe Chris covers that in the Dr. Strangeglove article.
link
yes, I will be doing more rate stat stuff later. There are some curious isues there as well. This is more of a count stat basis.
heh
At the time that Herr left, I questioned why they would hand the job to Alicea when they had Oquendo available. Oh, well.
that's a function of very few innings for Young. His 39 IP season inflates his number. Evidently that's got a bug in it. He's likely to end up closer to 15 in a given season.
Well, Herr got traded to Minnesota early in April of 1988 and Herzog went with Alicea immediately. I believe the thinking at the time was that Alicea was the better hitting prospect, ALMOST as good defensively, and Whitey liked Jose's versatility. Alicea was only 22 and had done pretty well in Double A and then 100 or so decent at bats at Triple A.
But after Luis flamed out with the bat it was Jose at second base in '89.
that could be what I'm doing wrong. Thanks. I should not sum it,but calc it.
Sometimes I'm not very smart.
Which, regardless of how much more important defense is than what typical stathead methodogy believes, only gives more weight to the idea that you should judge position players primarily on estimated offensive talent level than estimated defensive talent level (because your estimate for their offensive talent level is likely to be much better).
That's only an issue if the article discusses rate stats. For counting stats..post away!
you are completely right. Dunno what I was thinking. I am in the process of corrrecting the totals for RS/150. I apologize for my error.
Note: Oquendo still reigns supreme.
The writing though is just me.
I always understood the "versatility" to be a simple consequence of the defensive spectrum. A high quality defensive shortstop ought to be able to play well all over the place. He had played all over the place more out of circumstance than ability. It was probably a mistake of Whitey to make too much of that.
Indeed he does, no argument now that the rate stat's been cleared up.
A closer look at Sandberg is interesting. It was generally agreed at the end that his range wasn't there any more, and I tended to agree from what little I saw, but this has him getting much better toward the end than he was in his physical prime. As a result it's hard to know what to think about the pre-1987 Sandberg.
I note that Ozzie Smith comes in at a career mark of 17 RS/150 for what data we have.
Good, but not Alicea.
Regarding the variability with the defensive stats, the fact that they're defensive rankings within a position makes them look more volatile then they really are. If we ranked all players defensively regardless of position, it would look a lot more steady year-to-year.
For example (I'm pulling these numbers out of my ass just to illustrate what I'm trying to say).
Let's say that compared to other shortstops, Jeter was like this the last 5 years:
2001: +5
2002: -15
2003: -17
2004: -9
2005: -6
2006: +1
That looks really volatile.
But if we're looking at all defensive players, it would be something like this:
2001: +55
2002: +35
2003: +33
2004: +41
2005: +44
2006: +51
Now, there is some good-sized year-to-year variation there, but it's magnified due to the fact that it's subset of players with similar absolute defensive abilities.
But if we took his offense and compared it to a subset of offensive players, in this case, the 20 best, this is where Manny stands against the 10th most valuable offensive player every year.
2001: -12
2002: +8
2003: +0
2004: -11
2005: -3
2006: +3 (pace)
I am sorry. You distracted me terribly with the first sentence of your post. So you get all teh credit for e trying to fix that...
Dan,
thanks, I knew that was the issue (from that same question in about 1999 in rsb), but didn't know the best way to express it. I appreciate it.
Very interesting series, Chris. I look forward to the follow-ups.
But if we took his offense and compared it to a subset of offensive players, in this case, the 20 best, this is where Manny stands against the 10th most valuable offensive player every year.
Is that the baseline for the defensive metric? The 10th most valuable defensive player?
The tail ends of a distribution should be more volatile than the middle and the 10th most valuable offensive player is certainly not in the middle.
Now, I do buy that if the average is the average of only 20 people, then that will have some variability and it could be why the metric looks more variable than it really is.
If you did the same Manny exercise with the median LF offensive output, would you see the same volatility? And if you did it with respect to total LF offensive output in the AL normalized to a 162 game season, would you see the same volatility?
Well, when shortstops are being compared, I'd say yes. They're the top defensive players around.
Jeter's always one of the best defensive players in the majors, but among the group of the very best, shortstops, he tends to be towards the bottom. The base of the performance, the ability to simply play SS, is contained in how we value players offensively already - we're comparing the cream of the performance, not the whole body.
It's not quite the same. The selection is different - I have confidence that all MLB shortstops are in at least the 85th percentile of defensive players in the majors while I have zero confidence that all MLB leftfielders are in the the 85th percentile of offensive players in the majors.
Does anyone who knows what I'm trying to say have a better way to explain this?
1B: 281
2B: 507
3B: 430
SS: 532
LF: 348
CF: 462
RF: 365
So even a "bad" defender like Jeter is seeing more chances and converting them into outs than a player who would otherwise be put at shortstop without Jeter's ability to play the position. Is that right?
BTW, if this is true, I'm wondering if we should re-think the defensive hit we give a subpar defender at a premium position. In other words, if we say Jeter's a -10 defender and just subtract that from his value on offense, are we punishing him more than we should when we compare him to someone who plays a less challenging position and is rated better?
I would say "sort of," noting that we don't know that Jeter would be a <u>good</u> player at the other positions. We can suppose, but we don't know.
The OF for the NL is ugly.
Anyone have a good feel for how many innings is enough for a cutoff?
I'm not so sure that's what he's saying, though he can probably speak for himself.
My interpretation is more that if you took most baseball players and tried sticking them at SS, 85% of them would do a worse job them Jeter. It doesn't really have to do with the chances at each position, but whether those players are able to handle the position itself.
What'd be interesting to see is if there could be some study done comparing just how good a fielder someone has to be to be a SS, 2B, CF, etc.
It'd also answer the thorny problem of how to value DHs with respect to players who actually play the field.
I was thinking a little about it while I was in the shower last night.
One possible way of valuing the DH would be to give him either 0 value defensively or the fielding value above replacement fielder of the worst position player whichever is lower. So, that means that the DH would get 0 or a negative number (because the team would rather have him DH, then put him out in the field and DH the other player).
There are numerous problems with this approach, however.
1) You're making the DH's value dependent upon another player. It SHOULD be independent, IMO.
2) You're leaving out the problem of talking about OVERALL contribution that players bring. That is, if say Manny was a defensive negative compared to a replacement fielder in LF, but Ortiz was a defensive positive compared, it STILL might make sense for the Red Sox to DH Ortiz, if they had a good 1B player and no real other options at LF.
There are probably other problems that I'm missing, but I can't think of them right now.
F
If we could figure out what each position was worth wrt to each other (i.e., how much harder is it to play one position above another), we wouldn't have to go through the kluge that I suggested.
F
Tango did some of this. He doesn't like using hitters "above position", so he did a relationship analysis. I think a SS > 1B = +9 runs.
I think that is wrong because any LHer will be much worse. Also he used older UZR, which is now overhauled, and my data is now much closer to UZR (using ZR zones). So, Tango's work can be re-done witht he database I have - it will have thousands more innings than the original work Tango did (Tango had 3 seasons), now we have 20 and many many more players that have multiple positions. So, when Tango gets this database, he'll produce more/better data.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main