|
|
|
|
Baseball Primer Newsblog— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Or as Sir Forman FB’ed…“Yankees fans are going to kill me for this article, but the numbers are the numbers.”
To explain the chart, Ryan Howard allowed 1.4 fewer runs than the average first baseman because of his defense, while Mark Teixeira allowed 2.4 runs more. This flies in the face of widely held perceptions of the two players — Teixeira is a multiple Gold Glove winner and Howard is, well, not. Howard has improved drastically this year and Teixeira has regressed from previous high levels. Three runs’ difference is small, and Teixeira was much better than Howard last year, so I’m going to chalk this season’s performance up to random variation and an off year for Teixeira defensively (just as off years happen with the bat, they happen with the glove too). About the throwing, the Phillies were second to last with only 12 first baseman assists to second base (the Cardinals led with 38), but the Yankees managed only two more with 14.
Derek Jeter had one of his best defensive years. Nearly every other season of his career he has been below average, often the worst in the league. (I’m not going to discuss Jeter’s defense here or in the comments, but I would refer you to Derek Jeter vs. the Baseball Researchers at Slate for a good rundown.) The three other Phillies infielders range from outstanding (Chase Utley) to good (Jimmy Rollins and Pedro Feliz). The two other Yankees, Robinson Cano and Alex Rodriguez, are both below average.
Over All
All over the field, the Phillies have significant advantages defensively. Unlike in the American League Championship Series, the Yankees will not be able to count on defensive lapses helping them out.
|
Bookmarks
You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.
Hot Topics
Newsblog: Matschulat: Did I Miss The "Paul Konerko Is So Overrated OMG" Bandwagon? (28 - 5:47am, May 26)Last: SnowboyNewsblog: T.R. Sullivan: Of Frank Robinson, Milt Pappas and Jim Palmer (9 - 5:29am, May 26)Last: bjhankeNewsblog: HP: Baseball is leaving the human factor behind (59 - 5:24am, May 26)Last: bjhankeNewsblog: Bud Selig -- No need for more MLB replay for now - ESPN (87 - 3:55am, May 26)Last: Athletic Supporter leads the nation in driftersNewsblog: OT: NBA Monthly Thread, May 2012 (1834 - 3:06am, May 26)Last: SpiveyNewsblog: Himrich’s Top Ten Target Field Foods (8 - 2:43am, May 26)Last: Long John McCaine Mutiny on the Bounty (scott)Newsblog: Boston.com: Curt Schilling’s 38 Studios lays off all staff (119 - 1:28am, May 26)Last: Swedish ChefNewsblog: Wilmoth: Nate McLouth Designated For Assignment (12 - 12:25am, May 26)Last: TriponHall of Merit: Most Meritorious Player: 1973 Discussion (15 - 12:13am, May 26)Last: DanGNewsblog: The Hall of Very Good: Former Cards Slugger Critical of "LaRussa's Regime" (4 - 11:26pm, May 25)Last: cardsfanboyNewsblog: CSN to host ‘Phillies at the Beach’ on Memorial Day (18 - 11:25pm, May 25)Last: Fielder's the first baseman, Felder is the fielderHall of Merit: Most Meritorious Player: 1972 Ballot (28 - 11:25pm, May 25)Last: lieiamSox Therapy: A Winning Ballclub? (20 - 11:24pm, May 25)Last: DanNewsblog: TBO: Nerdy Rays head north (17 - 10:07pm, May 25)Last: PreservedFishNewsblog: Dodgers want to host NHL's Winter Classic (22 - 9:38pm, May 25)Last: Cris E
|
|
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.
But could they carry Gary Glover's pie? That's the question!
Other than Burnett, I'm not sure they could. . .
I believe this is quite overblown. He got hurried on the first. The second was one of the worse throws you can imagine. He bounced the next one to first (overcompensating, I surmise) and then he was fine on the rest of his throws.
That said, I do think that he has something nagging him. He just doesn't look right at bat. I fear that he's going to have a quick and steep decline as his body fails him more often. Upgrading their backup MI for next year should be up on Ruben Amaro's list.
Didn't happen.
EVEN IF Howard had the best defensive year of his life and Tex his worst, Howard did not "allow fewer runs" than Tex.
Watch both of them, just watch them, watch the plays that each makes (or doesn't).
The point is that somebody already did.
But Jesus, Teixeira wasn't missing anything within any first baseman's range. His reaction time is quick, he has a great reach and soft hands (saved Jeter a good dozen errors with those), and was making downright spectacular plays at the rate of about five a week. If Ryan Howard was "better" than the Teixeira I saw , he must have been Keith Hernandez's twin brother. With all due respect to Sean, either those numbers are clearly off or Tex has the worst positioning skills of any first baseman in history.
I don't have any problem with the idea that the Phillies have far better outfield defense than New York. But I don't see how the Yanks can feel bad at all about the right side of their infield.
Cano six runs saved and Utley 11
I would have gone with plus/minus in the article except for it being behind a pay wall.
The point is that somebody already did.
Who was the "somebody?" Clearly it had to be more than one person.
How did they "watch?" Did they watch every game live? Or did they run through the videos of every play?
And if more than one person was watching, did they switch teams in midseason? IOW, did the person doing the evaluating watch a critical number of games for both Tex and Howard?
If that wasn't the case, and if you had one person tracking Tex and another tracking Howard, how did you eliminate the subjectivity factor?
Sorry to be rude about this, but when you're taking an ordinary at best (by nearly everyone's previous opinion) first baseman and placing him above a first baseman who's been making spectacular plays all year---and doesn't botch the routine ones, either---you have to wonder about the rigor of the methodology.
Maybe I'm misinterpreting the numbers but balls fielded Teix 272 vs Howard 337? Maybe Howard's historic worse fielding required him to play further back, and thus field more batted balls. Or Teix better range prompted him to move closer and take more chances. Or maybe Howard just fielded 60 or so more bunts due to NL style play.
The article also says the number don't take into account a number of other things that may prop Teix's number up, such as scoops at first base, turning double plays, relay throws, etc. Like how Teix nabbed Abreu in Game 3 at second base. Woohoo Teix!
I'm pretty sure this isn't counted in any of these defensive metrics. The first basemen numbers here are all about fielding grounders (and line drives and pop-ups), not about digging out throws in the dirt, right?
By a long shot. He shed 20 lbs. and surprise, under that bulk is an athlete. Not the most athleteiest athlete ever, but an athlete nonetheless. He worked hard with Pete McKanin before Spring Training on technique.
Not to say I believe he fields better than Tex but Howard was good this year.
But the 500 lb. elephant in the room is the danger to mankind that is Ryan Howard throwing a baseball. He has no idea where it is going to go. He is terrible on pickoffs -- he takes forever to get the ball out of his glove, does that slingshotty thing with his arm and at that point it's almost useless to throw because the runner is into his slide already. (Slight hyperbole, I grant you.)
According to article, not even infielders fielding pop ups.
I'm pretty sure this isn't counted in any of these defensive metrics. The first basemen numbers here are all about fielding grounders (and line drives and pop-ups), not about digging out throws in the dirt, right?
Good question, but anyone who watched the Yanks on a daily basis this year knows that much (though hardly all) of Jeter's defensive improvement was due to Teixeira's ability to dig out or reach balls that in the Giambi era might easily have gone as wild throws.
I think the point is that it is a misconception that advanced defensive stats are based upon watching the games. It is true that there is someone watching the game however they are just coders. Someone else interprets the code using statistical analysis. The numbers are a result of statistical analysis and statistical analysis is not watching the game.
The problem isn't with the analysis it is with the source data. In an attempt to make this data objective they end up making it wrong.
STATS has two people watching each game live and I think one other watching on tv. They obviously have each game on video, so they can go back and review it. The fielders play home and road games, so they get graded in other parks, though I suppose there could be a conspiracy among the 60 or so scorers to bump up particular players.
STATS charges tens of thousands of dollars for this data, they aren't going to do this without creating a rigorous system.
BIS the plus/minus numbers have a similar methodology, though I think most of their analysis comes from film analysis.
Also, no one is raising Howard to Tex's perceived level. The methods say Tex is average at best and so is Howard.
On the total balls fielded, the difference is in bunts fielded in the NL, but note that Howard still turned more plays into outs.
On the Abreu play, I'm guessing 25 first baseman in the majors would have made the exact same play. Trailing the runner is the standard play there. I've seen Howard do it myself.
BTW, I was mightily impressed with Kendry Morales in the ALCS games, his throwing was incredible for a first baseman.
I wonder a little bit if Teixeira is getting bumped by the Yankees fans due to who he is replacing. Damon, Giambi and Posada do not set an exactly high bar for fielding prowess.
No offense, but I don't think you can know this from watching the Yankees on TV. As has been discussed in many quarters, guys making "spectacular" plays are often not the best fielders, as the best guys make stuff look easy.
How do they do that from the East River? /Sterling
One other data point.
Ryan Howard, 8 of 9 SB, 4 Triples and 11 GIDP
Mark Teixeira, 2 of 2 SB, 3 Triples and 13 GIDP
Now present your evidence that Teixeira is quicker/more agile/faster than Howard.
He is inconsistent, sometimes he is quite good, and he has the tools to be an above average 2B, but sometimes, it's like he's just not paying attention and he's a beat or too late starting his move to the ball.
Yes I know, but lets' say that Howard really did handle a higher % of balls batted into an objectively created "zone" than Tex did.
1: An inordinate # must have been easy balls right at Howard, and an inordinate # must have been very hard to handle balls hit at the edge of the Zone when Tex was fielding.
2: What about assists to other bases, handling bounced throws, that kind of thing?
IOW what I'm saying is that if you had swapped Tex and Howard's opps, then Tex would have done better with the Phillies than Howard did, and Howard would have done worse with the Yankees than Tex did.
This year was the first time I got a real good look at Tex, and I was surprised, he is very mobile and he make splays that Howard simply does not.
Basically Howard having a higher UZR ior RZR (or whatever :-) in 2009 than Tex is like when a guy wins a batting title, or an ERA title due to a really anomalous BABIP.
I certainly agree with that.
But Jesus, Teixeira wasn't missing anything within any first baseman's range.
No offense, but I don't think you can know this from watching the Yankees on TV. As has been discussed in many quarters, guys making "spectacular" plays are often not the best fielders, as the best guys make stuff look easy.
And no offense, but with the multitude of camera angles and replays on TV, I think it's safe to say that you can pick up a hell of a lot from watching a game on TV that goes beyond what you can either see live, or infer from numbers. And yes, I know that there are players who make the routine play look spectacular, but the Teixeira of 2009 was not the Jeter of 2007. He wasn't covering up a lack of range with acrobatic skills---slow reaction times are quite easy to notice on a panoramic replay, and he wasn't demonstrating that.
This data is on Baseball-Reference.com. They were both very poor at this.
Certainly possible, but not the likeliest reason, IMO.
Not enough of a refuge from the battering over at NYTimes?
I'm with you, especially with regards to post Giambi. I'm thankful for competent 1B defense.
I don't have Extra Innings or YES, but if this is accurate, they are showing a lot more stuff, including panoramic replays, than FOX or ESPN or TBS is.
Also, remember these systems, AFAIK, DO include a guy watching a TV feed. As Forman says:
STATS has two people watching each game live and I think one other watching on tv. They obviously have each game on video, so they can go back and review it.
***
Now, JPWF may be right and you might be as well. But while there is perhaps some noise in the data, it is not like it is being pulled out of someone's ass.
I, for one, do not think I can do better on the basis of watching the games I watch. However if someone were to pay me 100K so I could afford the time to watch the condensed versions of every game I feel confident that the written down accumulations of my individual judgements would be more accurate.
If someone were to pay me 200K so I could hire someone smart and with good judgment to watch the games too, it would be even better.
MGL says you need three years of data to get reliable numbers. I think I could get reliable numbers in half a year for regular players.
Well, in Tex's case that "handful" was more like about 140 games. If Howard is now a better first baseman than Tex, then it's entirely due to Howard's dramatic improvement.
One other data point.
Ryan Howard, 8 of 9 SB, 4 Triples and 11 GIDP
Mark Teixeira, 2 of 2 SB, 3 Triples and 13 GIDP
Now present your evidence that Teixeira is quicker/more agile/faster than Howard.
Yes, Sean, and Brooks Robinson (2 stolen bases, 4 triples and 17 GIDPs per 162) couldn't possibly have had a quick reaction time to line drives or other hard hit ball. And by one of those standards, Mr. Jeter (23 SB a year) is clearly a defensive wizard.
Quite true. The best defensive player I saw on Scranton/WB was Ramiro Pena. I never saw him dive to make a play but every time a ball was hit not exactly up the middle, he made the play squared up and standing.
I was asking questions about the methodology, not making accusations. But there are all kinds of variables in fielding statistics that aren't there in offensive stats.
And I'm not sure what you're saying about FOX, ESPN or TBS, since they frequently replay great plays from many different perspectives, especially when it also involves baserunners. Of course the observation of this wouldn't be nearly as systematic as from a professional, but again, I'm simply asking what the methodology was, and what factors it does and doesn't take into account. And if it doesn't (for example) factor in balls scooped out of the dirt, that's clearly something that's missing.
Howard bats left, left handed batters have more triples in general.
Tex switch hits, all 3 of his triples came batting left.
WRT DPs:
1: Tex put the ball in play 178 times with a runner on first) 13 DPs
2: Howard put the ball in play 133 times with a runner on first: 11 DPs
(Their GB/FB ratios were actually the same in 2009)
So a Howard ball in play with a runner on first is slightly more likely to result in a DP than Tex's...
BTW I'm not a Yankee fan, I'm a Met fan, and my standard for 1Bs is Keith Hernandez, not Jason Giambi...
Also, as you are well aware Primer is not a Luddite site, and I'm sure than the current zone ratings coming out are light years better than than defensive stats that were out 15 years ago, but you know, sometimes, just maybe do to a combination of pitching staffs, weather and whatnot, someone's zone rating one year might be like a Colorado Rockies' slugging percentage in 2000...
But here you have to distinguish between the reaction of a pure fanboy (who often throws "character" into the mix) and a person who watches lots of games with a critical eye. And there are (for instance) plenty of observant Yankee fans, here and elsewhere, who knew that Derek Jeter's defensive reputation among casual fans was wildly overrated---watching 140 games a year, it wasn't exactly hard to notice where Pastadivingjeter got his handle---but who have seen no such telling flaw in Teixeira.
No, but it is a good place to talk about movies, indie rock, the NBA, Libertarianism, and how to wipe your ass.
I wonder if there is a "Richie Ashburn/Granny Hamner" thing going on with this. James wrote about that in one of his books.
Andy, no denying you can pick up a lot watching games that the numbers miss, but I'm sure you'll agree you could say that last phrase in reverse as well - that our eyes miss things too, and beyond that, can cause confirmation bias (I KNOW Teixiera is good defensively, and the great plays he makes reinforce this in my mind). A similar thing happened with Red Sox fans and Ellsbury this year.
Now, I know you've been around the block and back again and know all this, but that fact remains you're just a guy on the internet (not a scout or something as far as I know), and so you're going to need more than "but I watched the games!" if you want to convince people that Teixiera was actually a much better defensive player this year than his numbers say around here (or at least for me, and clearly a few others as well).
Which is a better way of putting what I've been trying to express.
As for his helping out other infielders, seems to me a first cut way to look at this (since the Yankee infield aside from 1B has been pretty stable) is infielder throwing errors. This year the Yankees had 18. 4 fewer than last year, but one more than 2007. No evidence of anything important here.
The Phillies had 12 infield throwing errors this year so if Howard's lack of agility is costing them, it's not costing a lot.
14 in 2008, so any gains from increased agility (due to Howard's weight loss) are hard to spot. 19 in 2007 -- the difference is 10 more throwing errors from third (against no throwing errors from short). (Feliz throws a lot better than Dobbs, Helms and Nunez -- surprised?)
Again, first tell me what those numbers are measuring and what they aren't, so I can at least know what I'm supposed to critique.
And BTW, since you're certainly correct that I'm "not a scout," what is the scouting consensus on Howard's and Texeira's defensive abilities?
I think Joe means you're old.
So's your Mom.
(Ah, the classics...)
You can get a pretty good sense of a player's rep looking at the strat ratings. Tex will certainly be a 1. Howard can hope for a 3.
Chris Dial wrote a pretty good explanation of how the data is gathered. And scored games for Stats for some time.
Of course, the followup question will be, "How much of the scouting consensus on 2009 performance is based on 2009 observation, and how much on prior consensus?" I expect the answer will be, "The latter is significant," in which case it's hard to judge the relevance of the consensus.
I've now just looked at Tex's and Howard's respective range factors, and AFAICT, they show both Tex and Howard to be clearly well above average. Which only reinforces what I wrote in #34. It's not that I've been overrating Tex so much as I've been underrating Howard---a point I'm glad to admit.
But jeez, where did I get this erroneous impression of Howard? Mostly from the comments here about him on various BTF threads! Maybe they were so steamed about those MVP votes that they took it out on him in more ways than one.
Howard was 7% this year (149 opp), 8% for his career.
Neither is broken down for balls in play. IOW includes walks and HBP. Tex walks more, but I doubt it actually moves things from "no evidence here that Tex is faster".
No offense Sean (and no comment on STATS at all as I have no opinion on the quality of their data) but I expect this to be the funniest thing I read today.
A big part of it is probably from pictures of him, and his offensive stat line - he looks (and hits) almost exactly like the stereotype of the giant lumbering 1B (in the Cecil Fielder mode). Everything about him (apart from the fielding statistics) just screams "Bad fielder," so most of us just end up assuming that he's a bad fielder.
Oh, I'm well aware of that, but IIRC there were a lot of references to Howard's fielding ability---all wildly off the mark if you can go by range factor numbers---that went well beyond comparisons to St. Albert.
EDIT: Anyway, it's been educational, and I'm sure I'll find much more new fft when I get back later.
Andy, observationally, he WAS bad, although his numbers always looked better than he did. To my non-scouty eyes, it looked like he picked up his intensity last August (2008) -- maybe U.Charlie said something to him in that Charlie way that clicked. Howard shed weight and worked on his D before Spring Training this year -- to my eyes it's a dramatic difference in his range and sure-handedness with ground balls. And if I can really open myself up for ridicule, he looks more confident*. There, I said it.
*Except when he has to throw to another base.
People here typically dismiss a lot of what scouts and coaches say about defensive ability as being too subjective. But why the confidence that lightly-trained, poorly-paid (assumptions, I grant you) coders are more accurate? Having video available for review could help make the STATS data more accurate, but how often do they actually check it? Only if the coder is unsure? 20% random review? 100% review of certain games? Do the coders get graded? How? How often? Are they ever fired for poor performance? There are a lot of reasons any business wouldn't publicize its internal procedures, but not knowing more about the procedures leaves considerable doubt as to how reliable the data really is. Seems to me defensive stats fluctuate more than offensive ones - has anyone checked? I think there is a long way to go before defensive stats have the same degree of objectivity and usefulness as is currently the case for offensive stats.
Can't speak to the standards today, but I think the vast majority of plays will be easy to score from a results oriented POV and murder from a range oriented POV.
Ryan Howard looks sorta like Frank Thomas, and Mark Teixeira kinda reminds people of Don Mattingly.
Yeesh. That's nutty, buddy. Teix ain't no Don Mattingly with the glove.
Chris Dial -- who's as big a proponent in PBP defensive metrics as there is -- observed years ago that Rey Ordonez's ZR numbers were probably being made worse by Bobby Valentine's love of the shift. Could be. We don't have fielder positioning and thus can't judge range. All we can do is get an estimate of balls that could reasonably be expected to be the responsibility of the fielder in question plus the number of those converted into outs.
We know Fenway makes a simple PBP based ranking of a Boston LF look worse because it takes what would be a routine 1-1 in most any other park and converts it either to a 0-0 or 0-1 (with a double charged to the fielder in DA for instance)
And BTW, since you're certainly correct that I'm "not a scout," what is the scouting consensus on Howard's and Texeira's defensive abilities?
Don't necessarily disagree with you that the numbers may be off there, and your critique of what those numbers actually mean is totally valid. I'm a huge skeptic of defensive stats in general, at least for one year at a time. And I'm perfectly happy to buy other arguments you have about Tex's defense, including the ones you've expressed on this thread - just that you saying so wasn't enough for me and seemed to be part of the issue. That's all.
Ryan Howard has ridiculously high error numbers for a first baseman - 64 in 4-1/2 seasons, including 19 in 2008 (14 this year). By comparison, Teixeira had 4 errors this year, 5 last year, and 35 in his 7 MLB seasons.
One of the problems with a lot of these defensive metrics is they get oversold. In the article in question, Sean wrote "Ryan Howard allowed 1.4 fewer runs than the average first baseman because of his defense, while Mark Teixeira allowed 2.4 runs more," and that isn't accurate. What he should have written was "Ryan Howard allowed 1.4 fewer runs than the average first baseman because of the things we can readily measure in his defense, while Mark Teixeira allowed 2.4 runs more. The things we didn't measure would change these numbers some."
Quite a high % of those are throwing errors.
Was that before or after Dewan sold the company?
Absolutely true. They aren't that accurate, and 4 runs is well within the range of error.
I really think that the best that we can conclude from this is that Howard's D is underrated - not that he's better than Teixeira.
-- MWE
If you ask me, or ask MGL, this question:
"Which is a better indicator of his performance in 2009: his UZR in 2009 or his UZR for his career?"
I will presume that MGL will answer the latter, and I will wholeheartedly answer the latter. I know, it sounds ridiculous.
This has everything to do with the lack of parameters necessary enough to distinguish a play between being a .92 out play and a .97 out play. Now, you may think "well, a .05 outs per play error... big deal". Well, if you have 400 such plays, you've got 20 runs. And that's the difference between the best fielder and an average one. More reasonably, we have say a .10 outs per play error on half the plays. You still get the same problem.
It's not as big as that. It's close to what Ron is saying (measurement error of 5 to 10 runs). But, that's the problem.
Teix is one of the best fielding 1B in baseball. That's what the Fans consistently say on my site every year. If UZR misses that, then that's one of its misses. It's going to be wrong 20% of the time. Teix is one of those misses.
The Fans also were blind to Junior for the longest while. They finally accepted his lack of range years after UZR saw the lack in range. The Fans are going to be wrong 20% of the time too.
As for precision, can we clarify that people are saying 1.4 for informational purposes, not precision.
There used to be a USENET guy who refused to use the third decimal point for BA/OBP/SLG. He *too* was a crackpot.
This analogy doesn't work because if guy A has more hits than guy B we know that he in fact had more hits. This is unequivocably not true with the case of defensive stats.
The truism that guys have bad and good defensive seasons just like offensive seasons is false.
(And for your Jeter lovers/haters, the Fans on my surveys always had Jeter around the average-ish mark every year.)
Jeter's ERR stayed about the same 08-09.
Cano's improved from -1.6 to -0.7.
Arod actually got worse from +3.1 to +2.1
This number includes infielder fielding errors as well as throwing errors, and possible some "throw & catch" errors get assigned to the IFs range number (as a BIP that was fielded but not successfully converted into an out).
From what I can tell (and as a long time stat head detractor of JT Snow, it's always been relevant to me) that there is simply not a great differential effect on runs allowed due to 1B scooping.
Would love to hear some evidence on this.
You are correct.
In hitting, you have a record of outcomes (hits, walks, HR, outs) and a record of opportunities (plate appearance).
In fielding, you have a record of outcomes (outs), but NO record of opportunities. This has to be estimated by UZR. For every ball in play, it tries to figure out the "expected outs" for that play for that position. This is a source of error. And anyone who has a fielding system will admit to this potential source of error.
This is a false representation of what is involved in defensive stats. Defensive stats do not tell us that Guy A turns more balls into outs than Guy B. Defensive stats estimate that Guy A turns more balls into outs than Guy B. The core counting offensive stats, by contrast, are not estimates.
[Edit] Or what Tango said.
Regardless of whether or not you think the defensive stats are correct, presently you are arguing that a worse defensive player cannot have a better defensive season than a good defensive player. that was my analogy, and it holds.
RC is an estimate, yes. If you are asking me if Ibanez "created" 95 or 102 or 89 runs, then, yes, it's plausible that he could have done any of those three (as an illustration).
I don't know if I buy that. Teixeira is in his 20s, barely, but he also just came over in a huge FA contract, and he came with a reputation that was seriously talked up.
Jeter's ERR stayed about the same 08-09.
Cano's improved from -1.6 to -0.7.
Arod actually got worse from +3.1 to +2.1
But you're holding opportunities constant, which may or may not be true. Teixeira may have converted more throws to outs without a decrease in errors b/c there were more errant throw.
Particularly, with a good defensive 1B, fielders may be more likely to throw off balance, or rush their throws more, knowing he will bail them out. With a bad 1B, they'll just eat the ball, or take more time to make a good throw. The result wouldn't be more errors, it would be more infield hits.
Also, Giambi was a good scooper too. His issues were range and throwing, not hands.
We have some ability to estimate difficulty of chances but no reason to be particularly confident either of our estimate or of the chance that they will even out. And we probably have a first order approximation of park effects.
That said, my take on defensive stats is that they're certainly good enough that people who have a problem with the results should be able to point to the specific reason why a player's numbers are "wrong".
Ineffective positioning? Could be and don't care. Unexpected number of tough plays? Could be. Might be able to tease that out from the ball in play distributions. Park effects? Possible, but I'd expect the person offering this up to give me a reason to consider it.
And as I've noted, there's a certain amount of talking past each other in that "range" and "effectiveness in turning balls in play into outs" aren't the same thing -- though they likely have a pretty fair correlation.
I can understand the reasoning, but I'm not comfortable with that solution, because if Tango believes that then he could have told you on april 1st that Tex had a better defensive season than Howard did, before they ever played a game. And there isn't much either player could do over the course of the season to change that, unless Howard outplayed Tex to an extreme degree such that he passed him in career UZR.
), then we are in agreement.
Out of curiosity, do you track the city of origin (or the city of fandom) for people who fill out ballots for the fan survey? I'm just wondering, since I believe that one of your minimum requirements for filling out a ballot is to have seen the player play in a minimum of 10 games, which would heavily bias the applicants to those residing in a player's home city, and whether you've had any issues with fans of certain teams overly influencing the survey results for specific players.
I'm sure I could probably find most of that information on the fan survey site, but I've never filled out a ballot myself, since I don't see many games in person anymore, and am often distracted when watching on TV.
What we don't know is whether or not guy A fields more balls and more has more outs than B would have if B had been playing in his place. We don't know if A had more opportunities (though the various Zone Ratings try to answer that), we don't know the quality of there respective opportunities- was one guy getting scads of easy to field grounders, and the other guy getting harder hit balls away from him... (And people are trying to address that)
We know how many PAs a batter had, we know how often he was intentionally walked, we know how many men were on base in front of him, we know how many outs he made, how many total bases he made. etc etc.
With fielders we KNOW some of these things, we don't know everything, Balls in Zone would be the approximation of PAs, but not all Balls in Zone are created equal.
[Edit] Or what Tango said.
You guys are too fast for me
That is correct. Absent visual observation, and unless you had an extreme result like you are noting, you'd have no choice but to say, by the numbers, that Tex had the better year in 2009, and saying that on April 1. Such is the impact of the measurement error being discussed.
Right, the home-team bias pretty much is the same across the board (so it cancels out).
My first reaction to this was to wonder how much Bernie Madoff charged for his services.
It's just psychoanalysis, but I really doubt that this is true -- that either players consciously consider what they're going to do (decision is way too fast/instinctive) or that the quality of the 1B is encoded into their instincts. Players have a sense of when the ball needs to get to 1B, and they try to take as much time as possible without going over (and, I must say, they're very very good at this -- it's extremely rare either to see a hurried throw when the fielder had plenty of time, or someone set themselves only to have the throw be late.)
Tex ranked high every year.
2004:
2005:
2006: (number 1)
2007: (number 5)
2008: (number 4)
2009: (number 3)
So, I don't buy that it's a Yankee thing. That's 4 teams of fans who say the same thing.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main