Should Jackie Bradley Jr be traded?

[moonslav59]

But all those other eyes are objective!!!!!!

 

The main point is that the "other eyes" watch every CF'er in every game, while our eyes just watch JBJ and whoever the CF'er in the games vs the Sox and maybe a couple handfuls of other games.

[greenwell]

On top of everything brought up here his offensive numbers aren't all that bad anymore. His average is down, but everything else is not far below ML average for a CF.

[S5Dewey]

....And this is where it all falls apart for me.

 

It's been my experience that the more variables there are in something the more likely it is to yield an inaccurate result. Now we're taking several people's cumulative opinions - each of whom may have different opinions - and treating it as if it's Gospel.

 

Even WAR has a disclaimer saying (and I'm paraphrasing here) "We know this probably isn't accurate, but it's 'somewhere near'", but defensive metrics don't even have that!

 

So what is the margin of error for WAR or defensive metrics? Is it 10%?, 20%, 25%?

[sk7326]

....And this is where it all falls apart for me.

 

It's been my experience that the more variables there are in something the more likely it is to yield an inaccurate result. Now we're taking several people's cumulative opinions - each of whom may have different opinions - and treating it as if it's Gospel.

 

Even WAR has a disclaimer saying (and I'm paraphrasing here) "We know this probably isn't accurate, but it's 'somewhere near'", but defensive metrics don't even have that!

 

So what is the margin of error for WAR or defensive metrics? Is it 10%?, 20%, 25%?

 

Given that bWAR and fWAR use different defensive metrics - but have pretty close replacement player definitions and offensive measurement definitions ... a spread there is probably your best estimator.

[Kimmi]

You cannot trust your " eye test ". You have to go by UZR , which is essentially someone else's " eye test ".

 

But UZR really isn't an 'eye test'. It is calculated in a much more objective way.

 

There is some subjectivity involved, but the bias and subjectivity are eliminated as much as possible. There is certainly a lot less subjectivity and bias in UZR than there is in someone's eye test.

[Kimmi]

On top of everything brought up here his offensive numbers aren't all that bad anymore. His average is down, but everything else is not far below ML average for a CF.

 

Jackie has raised his OPS just over 200 points in a little over 2 weeks.

[Kimmi]

This makes sense.

 

I wonder how ballpark factors effect rankings. Especially those with turf.

 

Park factors are taken into account.

[sk7326]

Park factors are taken into account.

 

I do think there is evidence that odd-shaped outfields do impact UZR - Fenway LF for instance I think confounds the measurements a little bit. (there are just many fewer "out creation" chances with the monster)

[a700hitter]

you cannot trust your " eye test ". You have to go by uzr , which is essentially someone else's " eye test ".

lol!!!

[Jack Flap]

Jackie's OPS is up to .765 after last night. Since he spent several games on the bench early last month, it's .991 with 6 home runs.

 

Trade the bum!

[OH FOY]

Like that he is getting 2 out RBI's, trying to make contact. Good sign.

[mvp 78]

@redsoxstats

 

Best left on left OPS this year

1.267 Bradley Jr.

1.168 Justin Bour

1.102 Joey Votto

1.060 Brian McCann

1.032 Eric Thames

(min. 30 PA)

[Maxbialystock]

....And this is where it all falls apart for me.

 

It's been my experience that the more variables there are in something the more likely it is to yield an inaccurate result. Now we're taking several people's cumulative opinions - each of whom may have different opinions - and treating it as if it's Gospel.

 

Even WAR has a disclaimer saying (and I'm paraphrasing here) "We know this probably isn't accurate, but it's 'somewhere near'", but defensive metrics don't even have that!

 

So what is the margin of error for WAR or defensive metrics? Is it 10%?, 20%, 25%?

 

Whoa, Nellie. I like WAR a lot, but I also like the fact that I can confirm it by watching the players on our team, and right now JBJ--in my opinion--deserves 5th best WAR among all MLB centerfielders. We know that's about right because we can all see that he has very good range because he gets a great jump on the ball. He has an excellent arm. Plus my own secret formula--assists vs. errors--looks good: he has 3 assists and 0 errors. And his OPS right now is .765, not great, but not bad at all.

 

Betts has the 2d best WAR among all MLB rightfielders. Do I have to recite all the reasons why I think that's about right? Of course not.

 

Now I will also admit I have severe heartburn with Bogaerts DWAR, which is -0.6 and the worst of the 26 MLB "qualified" SS's, which I think means they've played the majority of their teams' games at SS. However, even with that execrable defensive rating, Bogie's War is 10th best among qualified SS's in MLB--not too shabby. Anyone want to where where Iglesias's .5 WAR puts him? 21st, that's where.

[mvp 78]

Whoa, Nellie. I like WAR a lot, but I also like the fact that I can confirm it by watching the players on our team, and right now JBJ--in my opinion--deserves 5th best WAR among all MLB centerfielders. We know that's about right because we can all see that he has very good range because he gets a great jump on the ball. He has an excellent arm. Plus my own secret formula--assists vs. errors--looks good: he has 3 assists and 0 errors. And his OPS right now is .765, not great, but not bad at all.

 

Betts has the 2d best WAR among all MLB rightfielders. Do I have to recite all the reasons why I think that's about right? Of course not.

 

Now I will also admit I have severe heartburn with Bogaerts DWAR, which is -0.6 and the worst of the 26 MLB "qualified" SS's, which I think means they've played the majority of their teams' games at SS. However, even with that execrable defensive rating, Bogie's War is 10th best among qualified SS's in MLB--not too shabby. Anyone want to where where Iglesias's .5 WAR puts him? 21st, that's where.

 

If we start up those Iggy arguments again, God help me......

[Kimmi]

Whoa, Nellie. I like WAR a lot, but I also like the fact that I can confirm it by watching the players on our team, and right now JBJ--in my opinion--deserves 5th best WAR among all MLB centerfielders. We know that's about right because we can all see that he has very good range because he gets a great jump on the ball. He has an excellent arm. Plus my own secret formula--assists vs. errors--looks good: he has 3 assists and 0 errors. And his OPS right now is .765, not great, but not bad at all.

 

Betts has the 2d best WAR among all MLB rightfielders. Do I have to recite all the reasons why I think that's about right? Of course not.

 

Now I will also admit I have severe heartburn with Bogaerts DWAR, which is -0.6 and the worst of the 26 MLB "qualified" SS's, which I think means they've played the majority of their teams' games at SS. However, even with that execrable defensive rating, Bogie's War is 10th best among qualified SS's in MLB--not too shabby. Anyone want to where where Iglesias's .5 WAR puts him? 21st, that's where.

 

The bottom line with WAR is that it works. It's not perfect, which is the case with any stat, but it's a very good stat and it works, warts and all.

[cp176]

Trading one of our only power hitters now would like kind of foolish methinks.

[Bellhorn04]

The bottom line with WAR is that it works. It's not perfect, which is the case with any stat, but it's a very good stat and it works, warts and all.

 

Or WARts and all.

[jad]

The bottom line with WAR is that it works. It's not perfect, which is the case with any stat, but it's a very good stat and it works, warts and all.

 

Well, all stats "work." Everything "works." It just depends on how you define what such things are supposed to do.

[mvp 78]

Every stat "works."

[notin]

I do think there is evidence that odd-shaped outfields do impact UZR - Fenway LF for instance I think confounds the measurements a little bit. (there are just many fewer "out creation" chances with the monster)

 

UZR does include park adjustments, including what is actually referred to as the "Manny Factor" that accommodates the left field wall...

[Bellhorn04]

Well, all stats "work." Everything "works." It just depends on how you define what such things are supposed to do.

 

WAR is supposed to be a composite stat that reflects the total value of the player.

[notin]

....And this is where it all falls apart for me.

 

It's been my experience that the more variables there are in something the more likely it is to yield an inaccurate result. Now we're taking several people's cumulative opinions - each of whom may have different opinions - and treating it as if it's Gospel.

 

Even WAR has a disclaimer saying (and I'm paraphrasing here) "We know this probably isn't accurate, but it's 'somewhere near'", but defensive metrics don't even have that!

 

So what is the margin of error for WAR or defensive metrics? Is it 10%?, 20%, 25%?

 

By that logic, the best defensive metric would be Defensive Efficiency, which is simply (Putouts/Balls in play). It doesn't get much simpler.

 

It's used for team defense, and it has very few variables. But it does break down when a team play 81 games per year in a ballpark with a 37 foot high wall in left field, since balls hit 36 feet high off the wall are considered in play with no out recorded. Does such a hit really mean there was inefficient defense?

 

Even errors aren't a good defensive stat. If a player doesn't get to very many balls, he makes fewer errors. Does this make him a good defensive player? Fielding percentage would say so.

 

Don't these very simple stats have far more flaws than UZR or DRS?

[jad]

All stats matter.

[Bellhorn04]

All stats matter.

 

But some stats are meaningful and some are, arguably, totally contrived - pitcher wins, losses and saves for example.

[Emp9]

"Nobody is going to convince me JBJ isn't one of baseballs best fielding CF'ers."

 

He IS great and that's all we need to be concerned about pertaining to the value he provides our team. We don't have to trade for or go out and sign someone from the FA market to get the kind of elite defense he provides. He's making plays only 17% of MLB CFers make. Period. Whether he's #1 or #3 or #5 in league, I won't argue too much about that. I know he's a top 5 CFer or better on any given night. I've seen enough from JBJ to know that if anything gets past him, I'm either blaming our pitcher or simply tipping my cap to the opposing batter.

[S5Dewey]

By that logic, the best defensive metric would be Defensive Efficiency, which is simply (Putouts/Balls in play). It doesn't get much simpler.

 

It's used for team defense, and it has very few variables. But it does break down when a team play 81 games per year in a ballpark with a 37 foot high wall in left field, since balls hit 36 feet high off the wall are considered in play with no out recorded. Does such a hit really mean there was inefficient defense?

 

Even errors aren't a good defensive stat. If a player doesn't get to very many balls, he makes fewer errors. Does this make him a good defensive player? Fielding percentage would say so.

 

Don't these very simple stats have far more flaws than UZR or DRS?

 

I woudn't say that there are more (or fewer) flaws in UZR or in the simpler stats. I would say that there are flaws in both but the flaws are different. My position remains that the more subjectivity and the more moving parts there are in any statistic the more chance there is that the stat is flawed.

[Spudboy]

"nobody is going to convince me jbj isn't one of baseballs best fielding cf'ers."

 

he is great and that's all we need to be concerned about pertaining to the value he provides our team. We don't have to trade for or go out and sign someone from the fa market to get the kind of elite defense he provides. He's making plays only 17% of mlb cfers make. Period. Whether he's #1 or #3 or #5 in league, i won't argue too much about that. I know he's a top 5 cfer or better on any given night. I've seen enough from jbj to know that if anything gets past him, i'm either blaming our pitcher or simply tipping my cap to the opposing batter.

 

boom.

[a700hitter]

All stats matter.

All stats are stats.

[Kimmi]

Or WARts and all.

 

Ha.

[Kimmi]

Well, all stats "work." Everything "works." It just depends on how you define what such things are supposed to do.

 

WAR does a very good job as a descriptive stat. Players WARs correlate very well to the team's wins.

 

If I have to choose one stat to tell me how good/bad a player has played, or how much a player has contributed to his team, I'm going with WAR.

 

WAR does not work as well as a predictive stat, but it works better than most others.