Old school stats vs. new school stats

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

    Re: Old school stats vs. new school stats

    In response to SonicsMonksLyresVicars' comment:


    I imagine it's available given that UZR "compares the event that actually happened (hit/out/error) to data on similarly hit balls in the past to determine how much better or worse the fielder did than the "average" player."



    In other words, it remains an abstraction and no specific plays that affected outcomes will be identified.  And I can keep asking for games that Jeter's defence lost and nobody will ever be able to answer me.

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

    Re: Old school stats vs. new school stats

    In response to georom4's comment:

    In response to SonicsMonksLyresVicars' comment:

     

    In response to georom4's comment:

     

    Im going to stick with <flush>

    the first thing i learned in statistics class is that if you cant control all factors that influence the said activity, then your measurement  is not valid...

    is the wind being measured? the sunny field? the wet, heavy air? the velocity of the ball hit? are all ballparks the same size? do all players have the same reflexes (wouldnt that make as much sense as tracking their positioning?)  the variables are endless which makes UZR moot...

    Remember, this is the stat that said Cameron was a better center fielder than Elllsbury...why would anyone even consider this stat useful?

    Using your eyes is a much more accurate way of judging a fielder....your brain is the greatest computer ever created and it is quite capable of judging a ball player defensivily

     

     




    Geo, that makes no sense at all.  What baseball activities have completely controllable variables and therefore are, in your eyes, valid?

     

      • BA? - nope, sun in the batter's eyes
      • HR? - nope, wind can carry or hold back a fly ball
      • Any pitching activity? - nope, pitcher could have a hangnail

     

    • Any batting activity? - nope, batter could have a hangover

     

    A good statistic should minimise the noise around the measurement of a specific activity.  That's why an individual's runs, RBIs and wins are such poor statistics....they are team activities (other than a home run) and come nowhere near isolating an individual's performance.   

    No one is claiming UZR or any statistic is perfect....only "anti-stat" people like you are claiming that "pro-stat" people are making that claim!   It clearly has some validity....just look at the top and bottom of the UZR list posted earlier and compare it to your and most people's observation.  How do you propose to evaluate the range of all MLB SSs when you only watch most of them on television a handful of times over a season?  

     

     

     



    i agree with both you and Notin that ANY stat can be incomplete....but the worst of the lot have to be defensive stats - they do not monitor production as batting stats do...im simply saying you are better off taking a holistic view of defense than relying on any metric....there is such a thing as a Triple crown winner - are you really comparing UZR to HRs? RBI's? BA?

     

    Its funny that the argument that UZR proponents use is that errors are not a good stat to guage defense...really?


    I came across an article in 2010 about UZR and it was quite funny that Sox players like Youk and Cameron had no idea what theirs were...they didnt even take it seriously....then of course the article jumped the shark by saying this is why cameron has to play centerfield...But it also ended with francona and the theo saying that they have their own ddefensive metrics that they rely on/not uzr (they didnt specify) and that a 7th inning defensive replacement would not be based on uzr...



    Part of why UZR has yet to take hold is that it's very creator has already stated that it has to be weighted in 3 year cycles. When one seasons worth of data is considered a small sample. Even the most ardent supporters of the system can't emphatically state that UZR should be the gold standard for how to measure defensive metrics. 

    So we're left with incomplete means to truly value defense and the gold glove. the standard for defensive excellence continues to be a popularity contest vs going to the best defensive player at each position. 

    As for whether errors are or are not a good measure of defensive excellence. A case could be made that not all errors are alike and the circumstances of the game dictate the risk reward of an infielder trying to make a play vs eating the ball. This is where the eye test is the best measure And it also is where having a quality first baseman can mean the difference between throwing the ball and eating it. If you have a first baseman that's adept at picking the ball you're more likely to let it fly knowing that if you get it anywhere near the bag that he'll make the play. Conversely if he has hands of stone, your lack of confidence in him making the play can cause an infielder to try to make the perfect throw and could be the difference between making the out and not...every 10th of a second = about three strides. 

    Great defensive players rarely make mental errors which are the ones that to me are the most aggregous. They also make the routine play look routine. If your SS as an example has sure hands and during the coarse of a season makes the routine play 99 times out of 100 with one mental error accounting for the error I would think we'd all take that. During the coarse of a season how many times does a SS have to make the do or die play and of those what's his pct of success vs making an error? If you subtract the do or die errors from a players total errors taking into account how many of those were balls he should have eaten vs trying to make the play. I think you could arrive at a better statistical value on errors.

    While range is an important tangible for measuring a SS and most of the all time greats Ozzie, Apparicio, Belanger and Vizquel due to having the lateral quickness got to allot of balls that mere humans had to dive for. range alone is not the penultimate measure. If you don 't have the arm and the footwork to make a strong and accurate throw after fielding the ball it's moot. David Eckstein had very good range, but a water pistole for an arm. He made himself into a ML SS by perfecting a quick release.  He was also very good at turning the DP and made the routine play look routine. 

    In the end one has to take the total sum of the parts to arrive at the proper evaluation of a players defensive ability. The SS is the guy that's responsible for more than just fielding ground balls and throwing it to first. So when evaluating who's the best of the best. It's not that tough, but to arrive at how best to evaluate Jeter's impact on the entire defense is where UZR IMHO falls short. The intangible of leadership can't be measured. 

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: Old school stats vs. new school stats

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    Since Jeter became the starting SS in 1996 the Yankees have made the playoffs 16 out of 17 years and won about 60% of their games.  So it would seem to indicate that his defence has had very little negative impact on the team.

    Here's one: are there any specific games the Yankees lost because of Jeter's poor defence?  If so which ones?

    That's one of the challenges of these new stats.  Where are the specific plays that matter?  Without them it's just a mass of abstract numbers.

     



    I was thinking this as well. I can't ever remember him making a "bad" defensive play in the clutch (although I've seen good, i.e, the flip play, one of the greatest plays in BB history, and if he doesn't make that play, they don't go to the WS), but I'm sure this has happened.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: Old school stats vs. new school stats

    In response to donrd4's comment:

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

     

    I love baseball stats but man, do they create a lot of confusion and controversy.  The old school vs. new school battle rages on.  Some people think stats like a pitcher's won-lost record and a hitter's RBI total are meaningless.  New school stats like WAR and UZR, of course, are mocked viciously by the old school people.

    I try to take in all the stats and make sense of them.  I grew up with baseball cards and Yaz's Triple Crown in 1967 and Denny McLain's 31 wins and Gibson's 1.12 ERA in 1968.  I thought those numbers were spectacular at the time and I still do.  Nolan Ryan's 383 strikeouts in 1973-insane!

    And I still relate heavily to the standard numbers.  When we signed Manny Ramirez you bet I was juiced to get a guy who had 165 RBI in 147 games in 1999.

    As for the new ones, I sort of understand what numbers like WAR and UZR are trying to measure.  Then there are the ones like FIP % and ones that look like hieroglyphics that I have no clue about.

    Now what I really wanna know is: is Derek Jeter really a terrible shortstop?  That still surprises me and seems to be one of the classic conundrums of old vs. new. 

     



    How many years has Jeter been playing short? It would take a real stupid person to say that Derek Jeter is a terrible shortstop..What the heck is wrong with people who judge people just because they don't like him or the teams they play for.? Would Jeter be a better shortstop if he played 18 years for Sox?  If you are a profesional in any sport and someone who is sitting in front of a computer and trys to tell everyone how terrible that player is ,really needs his head examined. Get a life and stop being jealous......

     



    There is some truth to this  + 1/2

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

    Re: Old school stats vs. new school stats

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    In response to SonicsMonksLyresVicars' comment:

     


    I imagine it's available given that UZR "compares the event that actually happened (hit/out/error) to data on similarly hit balls in the past to determine how much better or worse the fielder did than the "average" player."


    In other words, it remains an abstraction and no specific plays that affected outcomes will be identified.  And I can keep asking for games that Jeter's defence lost and nobody will ever be able to answer me.




    If every hit/out/error is compared to similarly hit balls in the past how is it abstract?  It's not abstract just because you haven't seen the data. 

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

    Re: Old school stats vs. new school stats

    In response to SonicsMonksLyresVicars' comment:

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

     

    In response to SonicsMonksLyresVicars' comment:

     


    I imagine it's available given that UZR "compares the event that actually happened (hit/out/error) to data on similarly hit balls in the past to determine how much better or worse the fielder did than the "average" player."


    In other words, it remains an abstraction and no specific plays that affected outcomes will be identified.  And I can keep asking for games that Jeter's defence lost and nobody will ever be able to answer me.

     




    If every hit/out/error is compared to similarly hit balls in the past how is it abstract?  It's not abstract just because you haven't seen the data. 

     



    It is if you don't trust the data and can't substantiate it's accuracy. Ultimate zone rating certainly is a useful measure of defensive range. It's not however an all inclusive measure of a players defensive ability....Does it account for the SS ability to properly line up the defense on cuts? Does it account for the SS ability to cover the bag on steals, pick the ball in the dirt and make the tag?

    My greater point is that each position on the field has a bucket list of responsibilities. Specific to the position they have on the field and where the ball is hit or thrown. When evaluating infielders or outfielders affixing a value on each of the components in terms of importance is where the stat heads and the old school guard are at odds...

    Derek Jeter is a very good defensive player that lacks the range of the top SS in the game. Jason Bay was a very good defensive leftfielder in Fenway, but lacked the range to be a great defensive leftfielder in Yankee stadium. By that I mean he always was in the right position when backing up plays to third, hit the cut and caught every ball he could get to given his athleticism.  Move him to right and his arm and range would both be seen as liabilities...however he would still hit the cut and be in proper position when backing up plays and catch every ball that he could get to. 

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

    Re: Old school stats vs. new school stats

    In response to Beantowne's comment:

    In response to SonicsMonksLyresVicars' comment:

     

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

     

    In response to SonicsMonksLyresVicars' comment:

     well said....


    I imagine it's available given that UZR "compares the event that actually happened (hit/out/error) to data on similarly hit balls in the past to determine how much better or worse the fielder did than the "average" player."


    In other words, it remains an abstraction and no specific plays that affected outcomes will be identified.  And I can keep asking for games that Jeter's defence lost and nobody will ever be able to answer me.

     




    If every hit/out/error is compared to similarly hit balls in the past how is it abstract?  It's not abstract just because you haven't seen the data. 

     

     



    It is if you don't trust the data and can't substantiate it's accuracy. Ultimate zone rating certainly is a useful measure of defensive range. It's not however an all inclusive measure of a players defensive ability....Does it account for the SS ability to properly line up the defense on cuts? Does it account for the SS ability to cover the bag on steals, pick the ball in the dirt and make the tag?

     

    My greater point is that each position on the field has a bucket list of responsibilities. Specific to the position they have on the field and where the ball is hit or thrown. When evaluating infielders or outfielders affixing a value on each of the components in terms of importance is where the stat heads and the old school guard are at odds...

    Derek Jeter is a very good defensive player that lacks the range of the top SS in the game. Jason Bay was a very good defensive leftfielder in Fenway, but lacked the range to be a great defensive leftfielder in Yankee stadium. By that I mean he always was in the right position when backing up plays to third, hit the cut and caught every ball he could get to given his athleticism.  Move him to right and his arm and range would both be seen as liabilities...however he would still hit the cut and be in proper position when backing up plays and catch every ball that he could get to. 




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

    Re: Old school stats vs. new school stats

    In response to Beantowne's comment:



    It is if you don't trust the data and can't substantiate it's accuracy. Ultimate zone rating certainly is a useful measure of defensive range. It's not however an all inclusive measure of a players defensive ability....Does it account for the SS ability to properly line up the defense on cuts? Does it account for the SS ability to cover the bag on steals, pick the ball in the dirt and make the tag?

    My greater point is that each position on the field has a bucket list of responsibilities. Specific to the position they have on the field and where the ball is hit or thrown. When evaluating infielders or outfielders affixing a value on each of the components in terms of importance is where the stat heads and the old school guard are at odds...

    Derek Jeter is a very good defensive player that lacks the range of the top SS in the game. Jason Bay was a very good defensive leftfielder in Fenway, but lacked the range to be a great defensive leftfielder in Yankee stadium. By that I mean he always was in the right position when backing up plays to third, hit the cut and caught every ball he could get to given his athleticism.  Move him to right and his arm and range would both be seen as liabilities...however he would still hit the cut and be in proper position when backing up plays and catch every ball that he could get to. 



    If a person does not understand algebra, does that make algebra abstract?

    I am not arguing that UZR is a perfect tool, I am arguing that it is a tool that should not be dismissed out of hand particularly by someone that does not understand it.  I agree with most of your points!

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

    Re: Old school stats vs. new school stats

    1) I have never said it is impossible to win without a great fielding SS. I do think we have a better chance at winning with a .220 Iggy rather than a .280 hobbled Drew.

    2) My philosophy is that a great ranged SS goes a long way to helping a team win, but of course no one player, let alone one portion of a players total package is the difference maker.

    today you said it was important

    others have said it's very important

    Important is not equal to 100% essential.

    3) The fact that the Yankess one one WS in the decade of jeter's statue like defense does not shoot any holes in my philosophy or position.

    U R the one who brought up WS

     

    Wrong. I responded to what was implied by another poster.

     

    and then didn't bring any SS that have won more ws to the table


    I asked you which SS had more wins

    I don't care how many SSs have more or less rings over the last decade than Jeter, so if you care- you do the research.

    4) Range is way more important at the SS position than making 5-10 less errors than most other SSs (and even the amount of his errors are in question due to the Yankee score-keeper giving their hero free passes for years and years).

    bad enough you couldn't agree that jeter puts a hole in the theory

     

    I don't agree with nonsense.

    even worse U couldn't agree with no problem with the he has worse range stuff

    but not buying the worse defensively stuff

     

    Again I don't agree with the nonsense that if Jete makes 5-10 more plays on balls hit right at him than the average SS, it makes up for the fact that he misses 80-120 plays that other SSs make over a season. 

    He remains one of the worst 3 fielding 3 SSs of the last deacde based on his horrible range, and that is just the plain truth.

    but now U R playing the the 'he gets the home town calls' card

    how weak is that

    who doesn't get the home town call

    other than when a sox pitcher whines to the official scorer

    I said it was a tiny fraction of my position. I could be wrong here, but from my observations the yankee scorekeeper was one of the biggest "homers" out of all scorekeepers, but again, even if he was the least homer, it makes no difference on the fact that Jete rots as a fielder.

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

    Re: Old school stats vs. new school stats

    In response to tom-uk's comment:

    no problem with the he has worse range stuff

    but not buying  the worse defensively stuff



    Zac, You are a fair poster IMO, but I think you are missing something on this one.  

    Jeter is sure handed, he comes straight in well and he makes plays in the outfield well.  Even with all those positives he has been a terrible liability in the field for a long time because he allows a large amount of hits b/c of his poor range.

    The same numbers that show he makes way less plays than he should, show that Cano made more than Pedroia last year.

    2012  Range Factor,  Total Chances,  Games:

    Ped          4.59              625               139  

    Cano       4.82              726               154

    Aviles      4.68              591               128

    Jeter      3.76               506              135

    ESPN DWAR had him as the worst fielding player at SS or 3B in MLB.

    [/QUOTE]

    RF/9 is a useful tool, but should never be used in isolation (not saying you were doing this here UK.)

    UZR/150 at 2B in 2012:

    1) Ellis  16.1

    2) Barney  15.1

    3) Pedey   10.8

    6) Cano   9.2

    UZR/150 places Pedey in front of Cano, so one might assume that Cano had more balls hit to his zone than Pedey and that is part of the reason he made more plays. However, if we look closer at the fangraphs numbers, this appears to not be the case...

    RangeR factor (the range portion of UZR):

    1) Infante  11.9

    3) Cano        7.0

    11) Pedey    2.0

    Based on these numbers, I will agree that Cano had much better range than Pedey last year. I'm actually a bit surprised at Pedey's 11th place finish, since by my observations, I'd rank him near the top in range. This is a prime example on why one can not always trust one's own observations as compared to other players one barely sees play.

    In Pedey's defense, UZR is recommended to be used in larger sample sizes of about 3 or more years. If we look at the 3 year RngR avg (2010-2012):

    1) Phillips   20.2

    4) Pedey     17.4

    14) Cano      -6.0

     

    Jeter has a terrible RF/9, UZR/150, RngR factors and just about every other defensive stat or metric, except for Fldg%- the "old traditional stat" of choice.

     

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

    Re: Old school stats vs. new school stats

     it makes no difference on the fact that Jete rots as a fielder.

     

    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++

     

    On the horizontal range issue (mostly to his left, he's a little better to his right, in part due to that plant & jump throw), which is a big (but not total)  factor, yes he does.

    I also expect him to be far worse this yr; he'll be 39, and recovering from a major injury. 

    39 yr olds in general should not be playing 150+ games a year at SS. For example, Yount & Ripken were out of there years before that. Vizquel, Smith & Aparicio did it pretty well (in less games), albeit with compromised range.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Beantowne. Show Beantowne's posts

    Re: Old school stats vs. new school stats

    In response to SonicsMonksLyresVicars' comment:

    In response to Beantowne's comment:

     



    It is if you don't trust the data and can't substantiate it's accuracy. Ultimate zone rating certainly is a useful measure of defensive range. It's not however an all inclusive measure of a players defensive ability....Does it account for the SS ability to properly line up the defense on cuts? Does it account for the SS ability to cover the bag on steals, pick the ball in the dirt and make the tag?

    My greater point is that each position on the field has a bucket list of responsibilities. Specific to the position they have on the field and where the ball is hit or thrown. When evaluating infielders or outfielders affixing a value on each of the components in terms of importance is where the stat heads and the old school guard are at odds...

    Derek Jeter is a very good defensive player that lacks the range of the top SS in the game. Jason Bay was a very good defensive leftfielder in Fenway, but lacked the range to be a great defensive leftfielder in Yankee stadium. By that I mean he always was in the right position when backing up plays to third, hit the cut and caught every ball he could get to given his athleticism.  Move him to right and his arm and range would both be seen as liabilities...however he would still hit the cut and be in proper position when backing up plays and catch every ball that he could get to. 

     



    If a person does not understand algebra, does that make algebra abstract?

     

    I am not arguing that UZR is a perfect tool, I am arguing that it is a tool that should not be dismissed out of hand particularly by someone that does not understand it.  I agree with most of your points!



    My understanding is that Bill James himself refers to his work in the abstract. The literal definition of abstract is difficult to understand. If viewed through the prisims of simplistic statistic UZR is certainly difficult to understand. whether it is or is not difficult to understand, that's not a debate of which i have any interest in partaking in. I'll leave that to those of you that want to debate the functional merits of all of the sabre metrics stats...I'm an old school eye test guy that likes some of new aged stat. That can be if used in concert with time honored good old fashion scouting very beneficial in identifiy key attributes of players and how to best utilize their skills...if a guy has good plate discipline but also has the ability to hit a round ball with a round bat squarely. There's a good chance he'll find himself on the field cause at the end of the day...starting at about the 13 years old, if you hit you play. Defense while valuable it's not something that is valued at any level higher than a players ability to hit.

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

    Re: Old school stats vs. new school stats

    How many years has Jeter been playing short? It would take a real stupid person to say that Derek Jeter is a terrible shortstop..

    A terrible fielding SS. He is one of the best offensive SSs of our generation. He has great leadership qualities. 

    What the heck is wrong with people who judge people just because they don't like him or the teams they play for.?

    You are assuming our motives. I have given many a Yankee player his due. (As I just did with Jete's attributes). Want more? Mo is the best closer the game has ever had by leaps and bounds. CC is a great starter- one of the best. Grandy has been one of the best offensive OF'ers since he became a Yankee.

    Would Jeter be a better shortstop if he played 18 years for Sox? 

    No, I'd have been arguing to move him to 2B or 3B about 10 years ago.

    Plus, it's not like our SSs have been even average fielders over the last decade either. If you have followed my posts, I have been even more critical of Lowrie, Renteria, Lugo (post injury), Green, Scoot, Aviles and now Drew as fielding SSs. What team do (did) they play for? Not the Yanks.

    If you are a profesional in any sport and someone who is sitting in front of a computer and trys to tell everyone how terrible that player is ,really needs his head examined. Get a life and stop being jealous......

    I watch every play of every Sox game -- many of them live and then later on replay. I also go to many non-Sox games here in Houston. I watch the Sox play on the road several times a year. 

    I am not jealous about anything. 

     

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

    Re: Old school stats vs. new school stats

    In response to nhsteven's comment:

    I was thinking this as well. I can't ever remember him making a "bad"defensive play in the clutch (although I've seen good, i.e, the flip play, one of the greatest plays in BB history, and if he doesn't make that play, they don't go to the WS), but I'm sure this has happened.



    Most of the times, I bet the fans don't even realize when he has made a bad defensive play.  It's not that he actually made a bad play, but more so that he failed to make a play at all.  No error is assigned, and most fans just take it as a hit by the opposition.

    Sometimes his plays look spectacular, but are they really?  A player with poor range can make a routine play seem spectacular, whereas a great defender with good range and agility will make the tough plays look routine.

    Costing a team runs defensively does not just mean making a bad play in the clutch.  If Jeter allows a groundball hit that the average SS would have turned into an out, he is indirectly costing his team runs. 

    Maybe a run scores on that play.  Maybe a run scores two batters later.  Maybe no runs score but the pitcher has to throw 20 extra pitches.  How many repercussions can that have, not just in that game but possibly in the next day's game?  Maybe no runs score that inning but it turns the line up over so that the big bats get an extra AB later in the game and drive in the game winning run.

    It's hard to quantify, because we're not talking necessarily talking about a bad play that results directly in a Yankee loss.  However, Jeter, on average, has cost his team about 1.5 games a season because of his defense.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: Old school stats vs. new school stats

    In response to RedSoxKimmi's comment:

     

    In response to nhsteven's comment:

     

    I was thinking this as well. I can't ever remember him making a "bad"defensive play in the clutch (although I've seen good, i.e, the flip play, one of the greatest plays in BB history, and if he doesn't make that play, they don't go to the WS), but I'm sure this has happened.

     



    Most of the times, I bet the fans don't even realize when he has made a bad defensive play.  It's not that he actually made a bad play, but more so that he failed to make a play at all.  No error is assigned, and most fans just take it as a hit by the opposition.

     

    Sometimes his plays look spectacular, but are they really?  A player with poor range can make a routine play seem spectacular, whereas a great defender with good range and agility will make the tough plays look routine.

    Costing a team runs defensively does not just mean making a bad play in the clutch.  If Jeter allows a groundball hit that the average SS would have turned into an out, he is indirectly costing his team runs. 

    Maybe a run scores on that play.  Maybe a run scores two batters later.  Maybe no runs score but the pitcher has to throw 20 extra pitches.  How many repercussions can that have, not just in that game but possibly in the next day's game?  Maybe no runs score that inning but it turns the line up over so that the big bats get an extra AB later in the game and drive in the game winning run.

    It's hard to quantify, because we're not talking necessarily talking about a bad play that results directly in a Yankee loss.  However, Jeter, on average, has cost his team about 1.5 games a season because of his defense.

     



    Although less obvious, I was including the balls that "get through".

     A sure handed fielder with the speed of Usain Bolt wouldn't have made the "flip" play; or the relay throw in the '99 NYY Red Sox POs.

    While what you say is true to an extent, he partly makes up for with his play around second base, rare mental mistakes, alertness, vertical play, arm, and sure hands. Speaking of sure hands, when the NYY won the WS in 2009, the entire infield made a record setting (lowest #) 15 errors. You don't think that wasn't a factor?

    Regardless, the 15 games a season is beyond ridiculous. For example, for those who care about such stats, Babe Ruth's best WAR wasn't even +15! (It was 13.7)

    Is Derek Jeter, a future 1st ballot HOFer, in the negative, and by defense alone, WORSE than Babe Ruth's best season? 

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

    Re: Old school stats vs. new school stats

    In response to RedSoxKimmi's comment:

     

    It's hard to quantify, because we're not talking necessarily talking about a bad play that results directly in a Yankee loss.  However, Jeter, on average, has cost his team about 1.5 games a season because of his defense.

     



    It's the specific bad plays (not scored as errors) that we need identified.  If a log of these plays was readily available then UZR would be much more transparent for the average fan.

     

    We'll probably get that kind of data eventually.  But it'll be after Jeter retires. :-)

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Beantowne. Show Beantowne's posts

    Re: Old school stats vs. new school stats

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    In response to tom-uk's comment:

     

    no problem with the he has worse range stuff

    but not buying  the worse defensively stuff

     



    Zac, You are a fair poster IMO, but I think you are missing something on this one.  

     

    Jeter is sure handed, he comes straight in well and he makes plays in the outfield well.  Even with all those positives he has been a terrible liability in the field for a long time because he allows a large amount of hits b/c of his poor range.

    The same numbers that show he makes way less plays than he should, show that Cano made more than Pedroia last year.

    2012  Range Factor,  Total Chances,  Games:

    Ped          4.59              625               139  

    Cano       4.82              726               154

    Aviles      4.68              591               128

    Jeter      3.76               506              135

    ESPN DWAR had him as the worst fielding player at SS or 3B in MLB.



    RF/9 is a useful tool, but should never be used in isolation (not saying you were doing this here UK.)

    UZR/150 at 2B in 2012:

    1) Ellis  16.1

    2) Barney  15.1

    3) Pedey   10.8

    6) Cano   9.2

    UZR/150 places Pedey in front of Cano, so one might assume that Cano had more balls hit to his zone than Pedey and that is part of the reason he made more plays. However, if we look closer at the fangraphs numbers, this appears to not be the case...

    RangeR factor (the range portion of UZR):

    1) Infante  11.9

    3) Cano        7.0

    11) Pedey    2.0

    Based on these numbers, I will agree that Cano had much better range than Pedey last year. I'm actually a bit surprised at Pedey's 11th place finish, since by my observations, I'd rank him near the top in range. This is a prime example on why one can not always trust one's own observations as compared to other players one barely sees play.

    In Pedey's defense, UZR is recommended to be used in larger sample sizes of about 3 or more years. If we look at the 3 year RngR avg (2010-2012):

    1) Phillips   20.2

    4) Pedey     17.4

    14) Cano      -6.0

     

    Jeter has a terrible RF/9, UZR/150, RngR factors and just about every other defensive stat or metric, except for Fldg%- the "old traditional stat" of choice.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Moon,

    how good is Jeter turning the double play?

    how good is Jeter at feeding the ball to second...

    how good is Jeter at setting up for the cut, then making a strong an accurate throw..to the base...

    if you evaluate his arm which of the throws from SS can't he make...

    how good is Jeter's ability to drop step and make a play on the shallow fly ball or pop ups.

    how often do you ever see him out of position on double cuts...

    how good is he on charging the ball and making an accurate throw to first On the run...

    how adept is he at receiving the throw and apply the tag at second...

    how often is he out of position based on the scouting reports...

    how often does he get a bad read off the bat.

    all of these are tangibles of playing the SS position. All of them are part of what makes for a good defensive player...range is certainly important and I don't think anyone one would underscore its importance, but it's not IMHO what separates the best from the least...it's merely a statistical measure that is greatly influenced by a players athleticism...Cano is far more athletic then Pedrioa And as such has the physical ability to get to more balls. Coco Crisp is more athletic than Frank Howard..

    My greater point is that what comprises a good defensive player is more then there ability to get to more balls...

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

    Re: Old school stats vs. new school stats

    In response to Beantowne's comment:

     

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    In response to tom-uk's comment:

     

    no problem with the he has worse range stuff

    but not buying  the worse defensively stuff

     



    Zac, You are a fair poster IMO, but I think you are missing something on this one.  

     

    Jeter is sure handed, he comes straight in well and he makes plays in the outfield well.  Even with all those positives he has been a terrible liability in the field for a long time because he allows a large amount of hits b/c of his poor range.

    The same numbers that show he makes way less plays than he should, show that Cano made more than Pedroia last year.

    2012  Range Factor,  Total Chances,  Games:

    Ped          4.59              625               139  

    Cano       4.82              726               154

    Aviles      4.68              591               128

    Jeter      3.76               506              135

    ESPN DWAR had him as the worst fielding player at SS or 3B in MLB.

     



    RF/9 is a useful tool, but should never be used in isolation (not saying you were doing this here UK.)

     

    UZR/150 at 2B in 2012:

    1) Ellis  16.1

    2) Barney  15.1

    3) Pedey   10.8

    6) Cano   9.2

    UZR/150 places Pedey in front of Cano, so one might assume that Cano had more balls hit to his zone than Pedey and that is part of the reason he made more plays. However, if we look closer at the fangraphs numbers, this appears to not be the case...

    RangeR factor (the range portion of UZR):

    1) Infante  11.9

    3) Cano        7.0

    11) Pedey    2.0

    Based on these numbers, I will agree that Cano had much better range than Pedey last year. I'm actually a bit surprised at Pedey's 11th place finish, since by my observations, I'd rank him near the top in range. This is a prime example on why one can not always trust one's own observations as compared to other players one barely sees play.

    In Pedey's defense, UZR is recommended to be used in larger sample sizes of about 3 or more years. If we look at the 3 year RngR avg (2010-2012):

    1) Phillips   20.2

    4) Pedey     17.4

    14) Cano      -6.0

     

    Jeter has a terrible RF/9, UZR/150, RngR factors and just about every other defensive stat or metric, except for Fldg%- the "old traditional stat" of choice.

     

     



    Moon,

     

    how good is Jeter turning the double play?

    how good is Jeter at feeding the ball to second...

    how good is Jeter at setting up for the cut, then making a strong an accurate throw..to the base...

    if you evaluate his arm which of the throws from SS can't he make...

    how good is Jeter's ability to drop step and make a play on the shallow fly ball or pop ups.

    how often do you ever see him out of position on double cuts...

    how good is he on charging the ball and making an accurate throw to first On the run...

    how adept is he at receiving the throw and apply the tag at second...

    how often is he out of position based on the scouting reports...

    how often does he get a bad read off the bat.

    all of these are tangibles of playing the SS position. All of them are part of what makes for a good defensive player...range is certainly important and I don't think anyone one would underscore its importance, but it's not IMHO what separates the best from the least...it's merely a statistical measure that is greatly influenced by a players athleticism...Cano is far more athletic then Pedrioa And as such has the physical ability to get to more balls. Coco Crisp is more athletic than Frank Howard..

    My greater point is that what comprises a good defensive player is more then there ability to get to more balls...

    [/QUOTE]

    +1

    You said it better than I could; but, you're good at this; much better than me.

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

    Re: Old school stats vs. new school stats

    I was thinking this as well. I can't ever remember him making a "bad" defensive play in the clutch (although I've seen good, i.e, the flip play, one of the greatest plays in BB history, and if he doesn't make that play, they don't go to the WS), but I'm sure this has happened.

    We sometimes don't remember or even recognize plays not made that other great-ranged SSs might have made easily or otherwise.

    Jete rarely botches plays right to him. He does have a great relay arm both in strength and accuracy. He does have great leadership qualities. But, all of these combined, in my opinion, do n.ot come close to outweighing his horrible range.

    Over the last 3 years combined, Jeter has made 1,465 total plays (PO+A) in 3537 innings at SS.

    Others:

    B Ryan  1,777 in 3359  (1871 pro-rated to 3537 innings that Jete had) +395

    A Ram   2,083 in 4151  (1774 vs Jete)  +298

    Andrus 1944 in 3885   (1770)  +294

    Penning 1726 in 3382  (1805) +329

    Peralta  1377 in 2915   (1670) +205

    Y.Esco  1823 in 3551   (1816) +340

    Hardy     1826 in 3430  (1883) +407

    Aybar     1778 in 3631  (1732) +256

    Reyes    1722 in 3669  (1660) +195

    A Esco  1912 in 3918   (1726) +250

    Desmond 1743 in 3665  (1682) +217

    S Castro  1961 in 3875  (1789) +313

    Rollins  1384 in 3315 (1476)  +11

    Jeter        1465 in 3537

    Jeter is in last place out fo qualifying SSs over the last 3 years.

    Here are the play differentials per season:

    B Ryan   +132

    A Ram     +100

    Andrus   +98

    Penning  +110

    Peralta   +68

    Y.Esco   +113

    Hardy      +136

    Aybar      +85

    Reyes     +65

    A Esco    +83

    Desmond +72

    S Castro  +104

    Rollins   +4

    If these SSs played the same innings as jeter over the last 3 years, this is how many more plays they'd have made per season that Jeter. 

    It is not a stretch to say that there are SSs making 80-120 more plays over a season than Jeter. Yes, there are other factors involved, and these numbers aren't absolute numbers uneffected by other influences, but the sample size is large and the UZR Range factor numbers backs up the evidence that Jeter just doesn't get to as many balls hit in his area than other SSs.

     A lot more!

     

     

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

    Re: Old school stats vs. new school stats

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    I was thinking this as well. I can't ever remember him making a "bad" defensive play in the clutch (although I've seen good, i.e, the flip play, one of the greatest plays in BB history, and if he doesn't make that play, they don't go to the WS), but I'm sure this has happened.

    We sometimes don't remember or even recognize plays not made that other great-ranged SSs might have made easily or otherwise.

    Jete rarely botches plays right to him. He does have a great relay arm both in strength and accuracy. He does have great leadership qualities. But, all of these combined, in my opinion, do n.ot come close to outweighing his horrible range.

    Over the last 3 years combined, Jeter has made 1,465 total plays (PO+A) in 3537 innings at SS.

    Others:

    B Ryan  1,777 in 3359  (1871 pro-rated to 3537 innings that Jete had) +395

    A Ram   2,083 in 4151  (1774 vs Jete)  +298

    Andrus 1944 in 3885   (1770)  +294

    Penning 1726 in 3382  (1805) +329

    Peralta  1377 in 2915   (1670) +205

    Y.Esco  1823 in 3551   (1816) +340

    Hardy     1826 in 3430  (1883) +407

    Aybar     1778 in 3631  (1732) +256

    Reyes    1722 in 3669  (1660) +195

    A Esco  1912 in 3918   (1726) +250

    Desmond 1743 in 3665  (1682) +217

    S Castro  1961 in 3875  (1789) +313

    Rollins  1384 in 3315 (1476)  +11

    Jeter        1465 in 3537

    Jeter is in last place out fo qualifying SSs over the last 3 years.

    Here are the play differentials per season:

    B Ryan   +132

    A Ram     +100

    Andrus   +98

    Penning  +110

    Peralta   +68

    Y.Esco   +113

    Hardy      +136

    Aybar      +85

    Reyes     +65

    A Esco    +83

    Desmond +72

    S Castro  +104

    Rollins   +4

    If these SSs played the same innings as jeter over the last 3 years, this is how many more plays they'd have made per season that Jeter. 

    It is not a stretch to say that there are SSs making 80-120 more plays over a season than Jeter. Yes, there are other factors involved, and these numbers aren't absolute numbers uneffected by other influences, but the sample size is large and the UZR Range factor numbers backs up the evidence that Jeter just doesn't get to as many balls hit in his area than other SSs.

     A lot more!

     

     



    did you also factor into the math that Jeter plays in Yankee stadium...where as a rule players try to go the other way, and most teams try to stack thier lineups with left handed bats...which could also account for the amount of chances. Also in terms of the number of balls that he failed to get to how many of them resulted in a run scoring? I'm not debating his range vs others because again if you simply access his athleticism vs say Ryan in Seattle it's a no brainer...Jeter was never and will never be in the class of Pokey Reese. Just not sure that I buy your contention that whips lack of range negates every other of his attributes...that not even s considering what he does with the bat.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: Old school stats vs. new school stats

    I'm not disputing those #s; I admit they make a compelling case, and there's no doubt his range is statuesque; but I still feel to some degree it's cherry picking, and not considering of and/or giving proper weight to all facets, which includes the ballpark. And in 2009, despite these issues (ARod included), I would have not traded that infield on the defensive side of the ball for any other group.

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

    Re: Old school stats vs. new school stats

    In response to nhsteven's comment:

    Although less obvious, I was including the balls that "get through".

    A sure handed fielder with the speed of Usain Bolt wouldn't have made the "flip" play; or the relay throw in the '99 NYY Red Sox POs.

    While what you say is true to an extent, he partly makes up for with his play around second base, rare mental mistakes, and sure hands. Speaking of sure hands, when the NYY won the WS, the entire infield made a record setting (lowest #) 15 errors. You don't think that wasn't a factor?

    Regardless, the 15 games a season is beyond ridiculous. For example, for those who care about such stats, Babe Ruth's best WAR wasn't even +15! (It was 13.7)

    Is Derek Jeter, a future 1st ballot HOFer, in the negative, and by defense alone, WORSE than Babe Ruth's best season?




    I agree that Jeter partly makes up for his lack of range in other areas. UZR does give him credit for that. For an infielder, UZR has 3 components - double play runs (and I think Yankees fans might be surprised that Jeter rates slightly below average in that category), range runs (which is his obvious weakness), and error runs (in which he scores very well).

    I would also give Jeter credit for the intangibles that he brings to the field, which UZR obviously does not account for.

    And I believe you missed the decimal point on my 1.5 games per season. I agree, 15 games a season for one player would be absurd! 1.5 games is still significant, IMO.

     

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: Old school stats vs. new school stats

    In response to RedSoxKimmi's comment:

    In response to nhsteven's comment:

     

    I was thinking this as well. I can't ever remember him making a "bad"defensive play in the clutch (although I've seen good, i.e, the flip play, one of the greatest plays in BB history, and if he doesn't make that play, they don't go to the WS), but I'm sure this has happened.

     



    Most of the times, I bet the fans don't even realize when he has made a bad defensive play.  It's not that he actually made a bad play, but more so that he failed to make a play at all.  No error is assigned, and most fans just take it as a hit by the opposition.

     

    Sometimes his plays look spectacular, but are they really?  A player with poor range can make a routine play seem spectacular, whereas a great defender with good range and agility will make the tough plays look routine.

    Costing a team runs defensively does not just mean making a bad play in the clutch.  If Jeter allows a groundball hit that the average SS would have turned into an out, he is indirectly costing his team runs. 

    Maybe a run scores on that play.  Maybe a run scores two batters later.  Maybe no runs score but the pitcher has to throw 20 extra pitches.  How many repercussions can that have, not just in that game but possibly in the next day's game?  Maybe no runs score that inning but it turns the line up over so that the big bats get an extra AB later in the game and drive in the game winning run.

    It's hard to quantify, because we're not talking necessarily talking about a bad play that results directly in a Yankee loss.  However, Jeter, on average, has cost his team about 1.5 games a season because of his defense.



    Its not just the run that a play not made costs his team: its the failure to make the out. This can lead to multiple runs. It does not take UZR or RF9 to see that Jeter can make the routine plays that are within his limited range but struggles with balls hit in a place good fielding SS make routinely. All you have to do is watch him play.

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

    Re: Old school stats vs. new school stats

    In response to RedSoxKimmi's comment:

     

    In response to nhsteven's comment:

     

    Although less obvious, I was including the balls that "get through".

    A sure handed fielder with the speed of Usain Bolt wouldn't have made the "flip" play; or the relay throw in the '99 NYY Red Sox POs.

    While what you say is true to an extent, he partly makes up for with his play around second base, rare mental mistakes, and sure hands. Speaking of sure hands, when the NYY won the WS, the entire infield made a record setting (lowest #) 15 errors. You don't think that wasn't a factor?

    Regardless, the 15 games a season is beyond ridiculous. For example, for those who care about such stats, Babe Ruth's best WAR wasn't even +15! (It was 13.7)

    Is Derek Jeter, a future 1st ballot HOFer, in the negative, and by defense alone, WORSE than Babe Ruth's best season?

     




     

    I agree that Jeter partly makes up for his lack of range in other areas. UZR does give him credit for that. For an infielder, UZR has 3 components - double play runs (and I think Yankees fans might be surprised that Jeter rates slightly below average in that category), range runs (which is his obvious weakness), and error runs (in which he scores very well).

    I would also give Jeter credit for the intangibles that he brings to the field, which UZR obviously does not account for.

    And I believe you missed the decimal point on my 1.5 games per season. I agree, 15 games a season for one player would be absurd! 1.5 games is still significant, IMO.

     

     



    You're right, I did. My bad. And now I'm more apt to agree with you. 1.5 games due to his defensive liability sounds about right.

     

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

    Re: Old school stats vs. new school stats

    In response to Beantowne's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    I was thinking this as well. I can't ever remember him making a "bad" defensive play in the clutch (although I've seen good, i.e, the flip play, one of the greatest plays in BB history, and if he doesn't make that play, they don't go to the WS), but I'm sure this has happened.

    We sometimes don't remember or even recognize plays not made that other great-ranged SSs might have made easily or otherwise.

    Jete rarely botches plays right to him. He does have a great relay arm both in strength and accuracy. He does have great leadership qualities. But, all of these combined, in my opinion, do n.ot come close to outweighing his horrible range.

    Over the last 3 years combined, Jeter has made 1,465 total plays (PO+A) in 3537 innings at SS.

    Others:

    B Ryan  1,777 in 3359  (1871 pro-rated to 3537 innings that Jete had) +395

    A Ram   2,083 in 4151  (1774 vs Jete)  +298

    Andrus 1944 in 3885   (1770)  +294

    Penning 1726 in 3382  (1805) +329

    Peralta  1377 in 2915   (1670) +205

    Y.Esco  1823 in 3551   (1816) +340

    Hardy     1826 in 3430  (1883) +407

    Aybar     1778 in 3631  (1732) +256

    Reyes    1722 in 3669  (1660) +195

    A Esco  1912 in 3918   (1726) +250

    Desmond 1743 in 3665  (1682) +217

    S Castro  1961 in 3875  (1789) +313

    Rollins  1384 in 3315 (1476)  +11

    Jeter        1465 in 3537

    Jeter is in last place out fo qualifying SSs over the last 3 years.

    Here are the play differentials per season:

    B Ryan   +132

    A Ram     +100

    Andrus   +98

    Penning  +110

    Peralta   +68

    Y.Esco   +113

    Hardy      +136

    Aybar      +85

    Reyes     +65

    A Esco    +83

    Desmond +72

    S Castro  +104

    Rollins   +4

    If these SSs played the same innings as jeter over the last 3 years, this is how many more plays they'd have made per season that Jeter. 

    It is not a stretch to say that there are SSs making 80-120 more plays over a season than Jeter. Yes, there are other factors involved, and these numbers aren't absolute numbers uneffected by other influences, but the sample size is large and the UZR Range factor numbers backs up the evidence that Jeter just doesn't get to as many balls hit in his area than other SSs.

     A lot more!

     

     

     



    did you also factor into the math that Jeter plays in Yankee stadium...where as a rule players try to go the other way, and most teams try to stack thier lineups with left handed bats...which could also account for the amount of chances. Also in terms of the number of balls that he failed to get to how many of them resulted in a run scoring? I'm not debating his range vs others because again if you simply access his athleticism vs say Ryan in Seattle it's a no brainer...Jeter was never and will never be in the class of Pokey Reese. Just not sure that I buy your contention that whips lack of range negates every other of his attributes...that not even s considering what he does with the bat.

     




    Yes, Brendan Ryan is fabulous.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share