Latest in fielding metrics

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from hill55. Show hill55's posts

    Latest in fielding metrics

    The latest in fielding metrics technology was presented this morning at a "Sports Analytics" conference in Boston:

    http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/mlbam-announces-new-data-stream-the-future-is-almost-here/

    The video is cool.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from SonicsMonksLyresVicars. Show SonicsMonksLyresVicars's posts

    Re: Latest in fielding metrics

    Thanks Hill, great stuff.  Advanced fielding metrics are a microcosm of the entire trad vs. "sabre" debate...what's left of it, anyway.

    Most fans now accept how poor some traditional stats are at evaluating performance e.g. a pitcher's wins, hitters' batting average, runs, RBIs.

    OPS has become a widely used and accepted measure of a batter's performance. OPS+, ERA+, etc. too even though they are hardly in the vanguard.

    But fielding metrics are in their infancy, rough and not very reliable IMO over one season especially, and will always require some objective judgement. But that doesn't mean one should close their ears and mind to possible advances in analytics, but accept the current limitations and use it as part of their evaluation.

     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from georom4. Show georom4's posts

    Re: Latest in fielding metrics

    fielding metrics <flush>

    Stephen Drew is proof that it is nonsense....use your eyes and your knowledge of the game (if you have any) but please dont spout this idiocy...

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedSoxKimmi. Show RedSoxKimmi's posts

    Re: Latest in fielding metrics

    Awesome!  The video is cool, Hill.

    Defensive metrics are not without flaws.  Then again, your traditional offensive stats are not without flaws either.

    The misconception by too many is that these metrics are not valid because they are flawed.  That is simply not true.

     

     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from georom4. Show georom4's posts

    Re: Latest in fielding metrics

    In response to crowtrobot's comment:

    In response to JoseLaguna's comment:

     

    How true that fielding metrics are still crude. The metrics a few years ago said that Ellsbury was an average outfielder. Others in the forum were totally convinced that Jake got bad jumps on the ball and ran a crooked path also. They must have had a better TV monitor than I did. Regardless Ellsbury was the prime FA pick this offseason and will be rolling in the dollars for a long time. It appears that the Steinbrenners and Cashman thought  more of him than this forum did.

     



    Can you imagine what this forum thinks of you, Pike? You don't want to know, S H.

     



    absolutely...i argued from day 1 that ells was special because of his ability to GET TO balls and not let them drop in front of him....somehow his speed and abilities to make outs from hits was undermined by these moronic metrics... once again i was totally right about ells' worth and his penchant for making teams better....measure that on UZR....<flush2x> for turd size

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from SpacemanEephus. Show SpacemanEephus's posts

    Re: Latest in fielding metrics

    In response to georom4's comment:

    In response to crowtrobot's comment:

     

    In response to JoseLaguna's comment:

     

    How true that fielding metrics are still crude. The metrics a few years ago said that Ellsbury was an average outfielder. Others in the forum were totally convinced that Jake got bad jumps on the ball and ran a crooked path also. They must have had a better TV monitor than I did. Regardless Ellsbury was the prime FA pick this offseason and will be rolling in the dollars for a long time. It appears that the Steinbrenners and Cashman thought  more of him than this forum did.

     

     



    Can you imagine what this forum thinks of you, Pike? You don't want to know, S H.

     

     



    absolutely...i argued from day 1 that ells was special because of his ability to GET TO balls and not let them drop in front of him....somehow his speed and abilities to make outs from hits was undermined by these moronic metrics... once again i was totally right about ells' worth and his penchant for making teams better....measure that on UZR....<flush2x> for turd size



    The fact that he has other-worldly-transformative speed, is a top-flight hitter, makes incredible plays in the outfield look easy, and has power potential (hence Yankees backing up Brinx truck to his house) does not mean that he doesn't let balls drop in front of him that he could get to or does not get bad reads on balls.  I don't use UZR or any defensive metric to determine this.  I have been watching him do it for years.  I am not dismissing Ells here.  I loved him and defended him against all the idiots constantly.  But, why can't we see players without painting them entirely good or entirely bad?  

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from slasher9. Show slasher9's posts

    Re: Latest in fielding metrics

    maybe EE overpaid for him because:  Red Sox are reigning WS champions. 

    not because some forum members bashed him or defended him.

    maybe there was another secret bidder that was about to offere $250MM so the EE had to sign him quick.  or not.

    maybe sometimes the bashers were right and maybe sometimes the defenders were right.

    maybe JE has pictures of cashman doing inappropriate things with [fill in the blank] and the EE had no choice but to show him the $$$

    maybe JE will be missed in boston.  life went on after damon left.  maybe he wont be missed.

     

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from slasher9. Show slasher9's posts

    Re: Latest in fielding metrics

    oh, i almost forgot - thanks Hill.  very interesting stuff.

    metrics will win out over the eye test eventually.  eveything is math.  and math is everything.

     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from notin. Show notin's posts

    Re: Latest in fielding metrics

    In response to JoseLaguna's comment:

    How true that fielding metrics are still crude. The metrics a few years ago said that Ellsbury was an average outfielder. Others in the forum were totally convinced that Jake got bad jumps on the ball and ran a crooked path also. They must have had a better TV monitor than I did. Regardless Ellsbury was the prime FA pick this offseason and will be rolling in the dollars for a long time. It appears that the Steinbrenners and Cashman thought  more of him than this forum did.




    Maybe because unlike the critics of defensive metrics, the Steinbrenners actually looked them up rather than going on nothing but message board innuendo?

     

    In 6+ years in Boston,  Ellsbury posted the following UZR/150 metrics: 21.6, 14.3, -10, 20.7, 16.1, 9.8, 12.9.    With the exception of the -10  in 2009, Ellsbury did score extremely well on defensive metrics.  Since that bad year in 2009, Ellsbury has an aggregate UZR/150 of 35.9, good for fifth in MLB over that span for all centerfielders with at least 2,000 innings in the field.  He trails only Carlos Gomez, Michael Bourn, Peter Bourjos and Denard Span in this regard.   So where all does all this “Defensive metrics don’t work because Ellsbury didn’t do well on them” stuff come from?  One bad season 5 years ago?

     

    I am beginning to think most of the critics of defensive metrics eschew them based on what they want the metrics to say, rather than looking them up and seeing they agree with the “eye test” more often than not…

     

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from tom-uk. Show tom-uk's posts

    Re: Latest in fielding metrics

    In response to JoseLaguna's comment:

     

    How true that fielding metrics are still crude. The metrics a few years ago said that Ellsbury was an average outfielder. Others in the forum were totally convinced that Jake got bad jumps on the ball and ran a crooked path also. They must have had a better TV monitor than I did. Regardless Ellsbury was the prime FA pick this offseason and will be rolling in the dollars for a long time. It appears that the Steinbrenners and Cashman thought  more of him than this forum did.

     



    Jerry Remystarted the Ells bad jump talk from the booth.  

     

    http://sports.espn.go.com/boston/mlb/news/story?id=4798852

    Boston Red Sox manager Terry Francona informed Jacoby Ellsbury recently that he will be playing left field, with newcomer Mike Cameron in center, Red Sox general manager Theo Epstein confirmed on Wednesday."Jacoby Ellsbury is a very good center fielder who is going to be a great center fielder,'' Epstein said in confirming remarks Francona made to the Providence Journal. "It doesn't have anything to do with how he plays center field. We're happy with his center field defense.

    "It's more to do with Cameron's experience, and Ellsbury's ability to play a dynamic left field. This is not necessarily a permanent arrangement, or a long-term arrangement. But we think Cameron is still an elite center fielder ... and that's the best way to go for now.''

    Maybe it wasn't just a "board" creation.

    Get a life, Pike.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Flapjack07. Show Flapjack07's posts

    Re: Latest in fielding metrics

    I forgot about how the Yankees giving someone a huge contract is proof that player has no flaws whatsoever. We had better be really worried about Tanaka...based on what they're paying him, he is pretty much guaranteed to be a stud.

     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from georom4. Show georom4's posts

    Re: Latest in fielding metrics

    Ellsbury was so good in CF that Notin thought Cameron was a better choice at age 68 to play the position. How much water did you carry for Cameron the fraud? (remember how he was a great guy and then was kicked off his last squad for abusing a flight attendent?) At least Carl Crawford didnt abuse civilians even when they slurred him. THis management and this board consistently underestimated Ells defensive skills because of these inane metrics - stop trying to change history now Notin.

     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from SpacemanEephus. Show SpacemanEephus's posts

    Re: Latest in fielding metrics

    In response to georom4's comment:

    Ellsbury was so good in CF that Notin thought Cameron was a better choice at age 68 to play the position. How much water did you carry for Cameron the fraud? (remember how he was a great guy and then was kicked off his last squad for abusing a flight attendent?) At least Carl Crawford didnt abuse civilians even when they slurred him. THis management and this board consistently underestimated Ells defensive skills because of these inane metrics - stop trying to change history now Notin.



    Ever the oversimplifier eh Georom?  I agree that many underrated Ellsbury's D.  He is a top flight centerfielder and anyway would be happy to have him out there, D alone - in a vacuum - not even factoring in his bat.  But, he is not without his flaws.  Tracking issues for which he has learned to overcompensate for and lay up on balls he should get to?  Check.  Candy arm unbecoming of a centerfielder?  check.  Nothing in baseball is black and white Georom, no matter how obstusely you insist.

     
  21. This post has been removed.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from notin. Show notin's posts

    Re: Latest in fielding metrics

    In response to georom4's comment:

    Ellsbury was so good in CF that Notin thought Cameron was a better choice at age 68 to play the position. How much water did you carry for Cameron the fraud? (remember how he was a great guy and then was kicked off his last squad for abusing a flight attendent?) At least Carl Crawford didnt abuse civilians even when they slurred him. THis management and this board consistently underestimated Ells defensive skills because of these inane metrics - stop trying to change history now Notin.




    Changing history by citing his published metrics?  That makes very, very little sense.

     

    While some questioned his defense, we all know who headlined that.   And I am pretty sure the logic behind the Cameron signing was never released to you personally, so I’m not entirely sure how you know why it was done. 

     

    Now, my opinion was that I did like the Cameron signing at the time because for a couple of reasons.  First, it fit into my usual position of not liking the long term deals given to 30+ players.  That off-season, the Cameron was the third best outfielder on the market and was far, far more likely to accept a short term deal than either Jason Bay or Matt Holliday.   And neither of them did.

     

    I also liked the idea of moving Ellsbury to LF for reasons completely unrelated to defense.  And I made numerous posts buried deep in the BDC archives about how many CF types improved significantly offensively by moving to LF, a position that requires less physical effort to play.  Some names I mentioned back then included Scott Podsednik and Coco Crisp as two primary examples, and I hoped for similar improvement from Ellsbury.   I’m sure your memory recalls that perfectly.  Right?    I was not a “Cameron over Ellsbury” guy as much as I was a “Cameron over Bay” guy.   And while Cameron did very little in Boston, which deal turned out to be worse – him or Bay?

     

    Another contributor to my Cameron support was an article I read at the time by Dave Cameron (no relation) on Fangraphs.com on why it would be smarter for a team to sign Mike Cameron over Bay.  And while his article was oriented around defense, it was not the defense of Ellsbury that he was discussing, but rather the defense of Bay and Mike Cameron.  In fact, he did not mention Ellsbury once in the article.  Here is the link:  http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/bay-vs-cameron/

     

    If you read it, he does use defensive metrics, but does also discuss the pros and cons for those who eschew defensive metrics.  In fact, he does that even if you do not read it.

     

    I think a lot of fans completely failed to understand why Cameron was signed.   Cameron did not replace Ellsbury.  It looked to me like he was put there to augment him and help the overall defense of the outfield.    This is hardly the only time the Sox have signed a stellar defensive outfielder, with two other prime examples being Carl Crawford and Shane Victorino.

     

    In fact, if anyone was signed to replace Ellsbury, it was probably Crawford, who, prior to signing with Boston, did possess the skillset to replace Ellsbury as a leadoff hitter.  It was probably getting more and more obvious to the front office that Ellsbury was not going to take an extension, and they made a move to replace get a new leadoff hitter when they had an opportunity…

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from notin. Show notin's posts

    Re: Latest in fielding metrics

    Really?  So no bad players ever signed before sabermetrics?

     

     

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from notin. Show notin's posts

    Re: Latest in fielding metrics

    In response to FajitaT's comment:

    But who really cares? If Elles was a good or great CF why worry about his not being at the top of some metric? 

    Cameron was terrible and washed up before the signing... I don't need metrics to tell me otherwise. Crawford skill wise could have been a good move but couple that with the extravagant contract and there was no way he should have ben signed - even if he performed better.

     

    The fact people get all stat-batty is the reason bad players get signed




    Actually, bad contracts come from fans demanding big name all star players, like Adrian Gonzalez and Carl Crawford.

     

    Good signing like Napoli, Victorino, Uehara, etc.  come frm advanced metrics.  Remember how happy you were when Napoli signed?  Who made thi board happier - AGon and Crawford or Victorino and Uehara?

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Latest in fielding metrics

    UZR does not project how good a fielder will be.

    Cameron scored a -27.6 that year with Boston.

    Do you anti-metric geeks agree with that assessment or not?

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share