groundball, flyball, line-drive, popup, mob hit, etc.

Um, what?

I don't know what a mob hit is, either. Is that a regional dialect or something?

Is that a regional dialect or something?

Not if the region is New York, anyway.

I don't know what a mob hit is, either

"leave the gun--take the cannolis"

I don't know what a mob hit is

With Jeter it has to do with Big #####. (Sal Bonpensiero)

With Jeter it has to do with Big #####.

haha ha. nice work

edit about your edit: since when are you worried about people getting your references?

edit about my edit: i guess because people might not have known which censored word it was

Wow. I am an idiot. At least we don't have to wonder any more.

"Maybe it was a computer glitch," Jeter told The Post.

QOTY.

Maybe it was computer herpes.

Assuming Jeter is re-signed after 2010, it's going to be really interesting how things play out with him, both contractually and with regard to his defensive position. How much money does he get? Where does he move? And who decides?

Man, people have really up and ran with this herpes rumor. I guess a guy with so many incidents of shady behavior on the record doesn’t deserve the benefit of the doubt, especially when taken to task by a media source with such irrefutable credibility.

Yeah, that’s right, I defended Jeter on the herpes issue. I’m a true fan. [Fist pump]

Matt, I'm thinking a fist pump is the least of your worries.

When I run for office one day, I’m thinking “I defended Jeter on the herpes issue” would look great on one of those lawn signs.

"Maybe it was a computer glitch," Jeter told The Post. "Every [shortstop] doesn't stay in the same spot, everyone doesn't have the same pitching. Everyone doesn't have the same hitters running, it's impossible to do that."

Good points, actually (well, except for the "computer glich" argument).

This, on the other hand:

James also serves as a senior advisor/baseball operations for the Red Sox.

was a complete unnecessary addendum. There is no reason to think that James's affiliation with the Red Sox affects what appears on Bill James Online.

-- MWE

There is no reason to think that James's affiliation with the Red Sox affects what appears on Bill James Online.

Full disclosure is no problem. But I didn't RTA, so I don't know the context. If it was, "A conclusion such as this suggests James is delusional and feasts on live puppies. James also serves as a senior advisor/baseball operations for the Red Sox," then, yeah, I see what you're saying.

When I run for office one day, I’m thinking “I defended Jeter on the herpes issue” would look great on one of those lawn signs.

As long as the back of the sign says "I [Fist Pumped] Jeter".

One of their conclusions was that Derek Jeter was probably the least effective defensive player in the major leagues, at any position.”

The numbers showed he was 22nd, among the most talented defensive players in the league, not last. We also know that Jeter didn't rank that far below average in terms of missed plays, even if he was 22nd, unless they the numbers have changed dramatically since August/September. I wonder what they thought about the 8 guys that ranked below him and all the terrible defensive players playing further down the defensive spectrum.

CP, he was 22nd among shortstops. Presumably there was an innings cutoff, since obviously more than 22 players played shortstop last season. Heck, the Dodgers came close to that number by themselves.

But you're right in that the conclusion is wrong. He can only be compared to shortstops.

The article that Bill wrote is from 2005.

The vote totals are from the current season though.

Assuming Jeter is re-signed after 2010, it's going to be really interesting how things play out with him, both contractually and with regard to his defensive position.

Defensive position is easy: he will remain the "shortstop" until he retires, but will position roughly 100 feet behind the traditional position, while the "left fielder" will move forward 100 feet. Voila, problem solved.

Defensive position is easy: he will remain the "shortstop" until he retires, but will position roughly 100 feet behind the traditional position, while the "left fielder" will move forward 100 feet. Voila, problem solved.

This made me COL (chuckle out loud).

with normal aging, one would hope jeter will continue to get worse, to the point where even he and his supporters will admit he's no longer good and move to first base or something.

More likely, the example of vizquel will give them an excuse to say there's no reason to expect great shortstops to lose their ability.

As a Blue Jays fan, this makes me happy.

It's nice that a panel 'voted' and they're intense voters, etc. But it's still a poll until I see all the data. When possible, I need to know the background of each of the voters. While there may be no reason to doubt them at this point, there is no reason for me to accept them. If their conclusions and various headline therefrom intended to defame a player are worthy, there will be no issue.

I don't know which is more courageous, defending Jeter's herpes, or defending his defense.

"Maybe it was a computer glitch," Jeter told The Post. "Every [shortstop] doesn't stay in the same spot, everyone doesn't have the same pitching. Everyone doesn't have the same hitters running, it's impossible to do that."

Yes, Derek. No event can be compared to another. Every hit is unique, like a snowflake. Especially since you play in Yankee Stadium, and how would our silly statistics or objective measurements capture that special twinkle a ground ball hit in Yankee Stadium has?

"Maybe it was a computer glitch," Jeter told The Post. "Every [shortstop] doesn't stay in the same spot, everyone doesn't have the same pitching. Everyone doesn't have the same hitters running, it's impossible to do that."

This is a wonderful quote. I wonder if Jeter had been voted best offensive shortstop would he have said "Maybe it was a computer glitch, every defense isn't in the same spot, every hitter doesn't face the same pitchers, everyone doesn't have the same fielders trying to stop him, it's impossible to do that."

Good points, actually

I don't think they are good points. I think they are obvious limitations. However, they also apply to every other aspect of the game, as OCD notes in #24.

The likelihood that Derek Jeter, over his career, has seen a sample set of BIP, within a small margin of error, nearly identical to other long-term SS is high. GBs do not have to be identical to have the same odds of being turned into an out.

Isn't the only comparison that makes any sense, total value (offense & defense) across shortstops?

Jeter could be the worst regular defensive SS in baseball (I'm not sure if he's that bad, but he's bad) and it still make sense for him to play there.

Jeter could be the worst regular defensive SS in baseball...and it still make sense for him to play there.

If he's going to put up a 102 OPS+ it makes sense to seriously question it.

Isn't the only comparison that makes any sense, total value (offense & defense) across shortstops?

Jeter could be the worst regular defensive SS in baseball (I'm not sure if he's that bad, but he's bad) and it still make sense for him to play there.

Well, yes, but that just tells you where he ranks. It doesn't really say whether or not the Yankees would be better off with Jeter somewhere else and his defense elsewhere, and someone overall better at theposition.

It's nice that a panel 'voted' and they're intense voters, etc. But it's still a poll until I see all the data. When possible, I need to know the background of each of the voters. While there may be no reason to doubt them at this point, there is no reason for me to accept them. If their conclusions and various headline therefrom intended to defame a player are worthy, there will be no issue.

The voting is transparent. The voters themselves were Bill James, the BIS Video Crew, Dan Casey, Hal Richman (Strat-O-Matic), Joe Posnanski, John Dewan, Matt Olkin, Mike Murphy, Rob Neyer and the Tangotiger Fan Poll. As previous posters stated, worst is a bit misleading. He finished 22nd in the voting. Other shortstops did not receive any votes, such as Jeff Keppinger, Alex Cintron or David Eckstein.

If he's going to put up a 102 OPS+ it makes sense to seriously question it.

If he's going to put up a 102 OPS+, he doesn't belong in 1B or RF/LF either.

If he can get his OPS+ back to the 120 range, it depends on your other options at SS/1B/OF on where he should play.

If he puts a 100 OPS+ up the next two years, his Yankee career needs to end.

Isn't the only comparison that makes any sense, total value (offense & defense) across shortstops?

Jeter could be the worst regular defensive SS in baseball (I'm not sure if he's that bad, but he's bad) and it still make sense for him to play there.

I think you may be right. The Red Sox front office is considering moving David Ortiz to SS to take advantage of this.

Well, yes, but that just tells you where he ranks. It doesn't really say whether or not the Yankees would be better off with Jeter somewhere else and his defense elsewhere, and someone overall better at theposition.

Chris,

Looking at your OPD spreadsheet, you have Jeter as very valuable this year, even given his down offense. Now let's assume the positive defense was fluky, but I'd also assume he rebounds some on offense. It's going to be hard to find a SS that has more total value, unless Jeter's offense doesn't recover and/or his defense regresses a lot.

In other words, the rank matters. If he's in the top half of SS in total contribution, it will be expensive to replace him with someone better (either in money or talent).

I think you may be right. The Red Sox front office is considering moving David Ortiz to SS to take advantage of this.

I know you're being facetious, but if you thought Ortiz could be a -30 R/150G SS w/o hurting himself or reducing his offense, it might make sense, given your other option.

It sounds ridiculous, b/c we know what Ortiz looks like, and he probably would hurt himself in the first game, but there is no reason why terrific offense/terrible glove can not be the answer at a given position.

If I had 9 Babe Ruth clones, I'm pretty sure starting all 9 of them and accepting the defensive damage would be the right answer.

In other words, the rank matters. If he's in the top half of SS in total contribution, it will be expensive to replace him with someone better (either in money or talent).

I agree. I was speaking in generalities.

If I had 9 Babe Ruth clones, I'm pretty sure starting all 9 of them and accepting the defensive damage would be the right answer.

Foxx, maybe - not so sure the Babe would hang in there well on the DP.

Foxx, maybe - not so sure the Babe would hang in there well on the DP.

I agree.

I addressed Jeter's "impossible" claim in last year's THT Annual. It's available in Google Docs in its entirety for those interested.

***

The ballot had 27 SS. Here was the ballot, with the Fans' picks:

Shortstops Rank
Mike Aviles, KC ___
Erick Aybar, LAA _2_
Jason Bartlett, TB _5_
Y. Betancourt, Sea ___
Orlando Cabrera, CWS ___
Bobby Crosby, Oak ___
Stephen Drew, Ari ___
Yunel Escobar, Atl 10_
Khalil Greene, SD _7_
Cristian Guzman, Was ___
J.J. Hardy, Mil ___
Cesar Izturis, StL _9_
Derek Jeter, NYY ___
Jeff Keppinger, Cin ___
Julio Lugo, Bos ___
Tony F Pena, KC ___
Jhonny Peralta, Cle ___
Hanley Ramirez, Fla ___
Edgar Renteria, Det ___
Jose Reyes, NYM _4_
Jimmy Rollins, Phi _8_
Miguel Tejada, Hou ___
Ryan Theriot, ChC ___
Troy Tulowitzki, Col _3_
Omar Vizquel, SF _1_
Jack Wilson, Pit _6_
Michael Young, Tex ___

Had John McDonald qualified (needed 500 innings as of mid-Sept), he would have been the easy #1 pick among the Fans.

Seeing how this is the current Fielding Bible thread, I'll have to say that I never think of Adrian Beltre the same way since SABR.

Of that group, Keppinger is the one I see as clearly inferior to Jeter. He's not really a shortstop anyway, and if some team insisted that he was, and stuck him out there every day for 13 years, his defensive statistics would be worse than Jeter's. Young is about the same as Jeter, Renteria has slipped, Peralta and Drew might be better defenders than Jeter right now but I doubt they are good enough to stick at the position very long. I couldn't rank DJ any higher than 20th on that list, and probably I'd put him 26th.

Of that list, Jeter ranked 18th according to the Fans, in a group of players from 16th to 22nd. The "clearly inferior" fielders (according to Fans) were:

Jeff Keppinger Cin 23
Julio Lugo Bos 24
Jhonny Peralta Cle 25
Y. Betancourt Sea 26
Edgar Renteria Det 27

Y. Betancourt Sea 26

The fans rate him lower? That seems tainted. Every fan I have ever heard talk about him is that there's no way he's not a great fielder.

The fans loved Betencourt when he first came up, but they've really turned on him. Has he put on a lot of punds the last 3 years or something?

The fans rate him lower? That seems tainted. Every fan I have ever heard talk about him is that there's no way he's not a great fielder.

The USS Mariner crew think he has slipped badly, and is below average defensively at this point.

The fans who are likely to know about and participate in Tango's poll are ones that are familiar with advanced fielding metrics. As such, I think they are likely to allow those stats to influence their opinions. This is why I don't think the poll is a good check on the fielding metrics.

The USS Mariner crew think he has slipped badly, and is below average defensively at this point.

Yes, but they are certainly tainted - they see the data, and likely reconcile their view to it.

I'm glad, but I think there is a real bias there.

Or what Darren said. There are points of disagreement, so I like the poll, but there are places where it goes awry (just like advanced fielding metrics).

Darren: the fans are guys here and at SB Nation and other team blogs. Also, they evaluate players at 7 specific traits, and are not asked for a final overall evaluation. As an example, they may know how much the stats hate Ichiro, but they don't care when it comes to evaluating his speed and hands. That said, everything has bias. That's not a reason to disregard something, but it is something that you should add to the uncertainty level.

As for Betancourt, that is a case-study unto itself. He was ranked by the Fans as one of the top 3 SS since he's come up, except in 2008, where he took an enormous tumble. It is an almost unprecedented shift in perception, even worse than Chuck Blockhead I would guess. Personally, and without any evidence, I'm guessing it has to do with some personal matters regarding the guys he was involved with in coming to America. But, that's just a WAG.

Darren: the fans are guys here and at SB Nation and other team blogs.

Yes, that's who I'm talking about.

That said, everything has bias. That's not a reason to disregard something, but it is something that you should add to the uncertainty level.

I'm not arguing it should be disregarded.

I didn't mean to suggest you were, but lots of readers think that way: "Oh, bias? Forgetaboutit." I wanted to highlight that bias does not mean "tainted" in such a way that we can't apply a certain amount of regression.

In any case, I really don't think there is much bias. They vote for Omar Vizquel, regardless of what the stats have or have not been telling them. They love Evan Longoria, and, as a rookie, there were no stats for them to tell them that. He is neck-and-neck with Beltre and Rolen. There is a halo effect (it took until last year for them to turn on Junior).

Anyway, just another piece to the puzzle.

If I had 9 Babe Ruth clones, I'm pretty sure starting all 9 of them and accepting the defensive damage would be the right answer.

Wasn't Ruth left-handed? In which case I wouldn't play him at third, short, or second no matter how good he was. As a conservative estimate I'd bet he'd be around -150 runs at short. In addition to the horrible range a good chunk of the balls he got to would still be infield hits. A left handed ozzie smith would be a horrible defensive shortstop. Completely impossible.

Gaelan, we talked about this on my blog, so you'll probably enjoy that thread. For those who don't want to RTFA, our best guess is that being LH would cost you some 40 plays per year (jump down to post 33). Not "impossible", as a LH Ozzie is still better than Frank Thomas, which you would call, what "impossible + 1"?

A good fielder can pass as a lefty infielder, it's happened as recently as the mid-80's (Don Mattingly). But combine lefthandedness with being a big, lumbering slugger who shouldn't play shortstop in the first place, and maybe even Ruth's bat won't play at shortstop.

With 9 Ruth's, I'd probably try him at 2nd or 3rd, get a real fielder for the other position (probably 3B since Ruth the pitcher is a lefty) and definitely get a real fielder at short.

Then I'd take my 2 extra Ruths and use them as pinch hitters for the fielders, as they rest in between starts on the 3 day rotation.

I can tell you first hand, Vizquel was not good last year, defensively (the rest goes w/o saying). If anything, he was the beneficiary of a very error-conservative home scorer. I mean, I had Little League moms who don't score that horribly.

That was interesting though I still think it would be more. In my view every bang-bang play that right now is an out would become a hit with a left-handed shortstop. So take any shortstop, count how many bang-bang plays he makes--that's how many extra hits he would allow. I figure there is close to a play like that a game though I'll admit I'm just making that number up.

AROM Posted: November 04, 2008 at 11:56 AM (#3002582)
The fans loved Betencourt when he first came up, but they've really turned on him. Has he put on a lot of punds the last 3 years or something?

Well, Mariners fans on Lookout Landing were complaining about him being fat this past season.

In my view every bang-bang play that right now is an out would become a hit with a left-handed shortstop. So take any shortstop, count how many bang-bang plays he makes--that's how many extra hits he would allow. I figure there is close to a play like that a game though I'll admit I'm just making that number up.

What percentage of those bang-bang plays is the SS going at 100% speed? Many bang-bang plays look to be made with the speed of the runner very much taken into consideration (I am not going to even hazard a guess as to what % as it would be something pulled straight out of my ass). A SS who sees somebody glacial at the plate is probably going to relax a bit, take their time fielding the ball, then follow that with a leisurely throw to 1st - giving the play the appearance of being close (assuming of course the runner did not rape the sanctity of the game and violate his contract a la Manny "The Loafing-Malcontent-Loafer" Ramirez).

edit: wow, rape and ass make it through?

A good fielder can pass as a lefty infielder, it's happened as recently as the mid-80's (Don Mattingly).

Third base is different than SS or (especially) 2B. Still, I doubt a left-handed Ozzie Smith would have been horrible.

standuptriple: I had fifty Giants "first hand" followers who, as a group, think that Vizquel was one of the best fielding SS in the league. Your input, while valuable, would only be worth 2% of the sample. This doesn't mean you are wrong, but it does mean that you are more alone than other equally hardcore Giants fans.

So, the opinion of any single person (you or me or Chris' recounting of his Mariners friends) is really almost worthless, and at the same time, is very valuable when combined with other singularly worthless opinions.

So, the opinion of any single person (you or me or Chris' recounting of his Mariners friends) is really almost worthless, and at the same time, is very valuable when combined with other singularly worthless opinions.

Always remember that you are 100% unique...just like everyone else.

Tango, I get your point. I was at Vizquel's first game back last year and I saw 3 errors in one inning (not all by him) and was amazed that only one appeared on the scoreboard. Take it with a grain of salt.

#57 is a very good point.

"If he puts a 100 OPS+ up the next two years, his Yankee career needs to end."

I think 100 OPS+ at SS is something most teams would like.
The Yankees seem blind to his fielding and want him to retire as a Yankee.

re: 9 Babe Ruths--
if I could take any player and clone him to make a starting lineup, the best answer is absurdly, ridiculously easy, isn't it?

They guy with a career .762 OWP, which means the team scores 8 runs / game. With plus defense at likely 7 of the 8 positions, you could run out a mediocre pitching staff, produce an ERA of 5.50 witout even trying, and win 100+ games.

I'm not sure why you think the Flying Dutchman wouldn't have given plus defense behind the plate too.

"watched video from every major league game, and had recorded every ball off the bat by the direction in which it was hit (the vector) the type of hit (groundball, flyball, line-drive, popup, mob hit, etc.) and by how hard the ball was hit (softly hit, medium, hard hit"

wow. what a stud. say there are 2,400 regular season games. say he watches an edited version, and can on average use just 15 minutes a game for viewing and registering his information. that's 75 8-hour works days.

that's without lunch or breaks, but heck, the guy is special, right?

let's hope he get's his vectors and assessments right. i mean, what if the guy did all the work, but never figured out the difference between soft and hard?