Should Jackie Bradley Jr be traded?

[Kimmi]

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?

 

The idea that a stat having 'too many moving parts' means that it can't be a good stat doesn't make any sense to me. The goal is to try to get as comprehensive an assessment of a player as possible. A simple stat like 'Errors' is not going to do that.

 

Some simple stats like Errors and Wins are way more flawed than UZR or WAR, IMO.

[Kimmi]

"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.

 

Well said Emp.

[Kimmi]

There is very likely more subjectivity in a 'strikeout' or a 'walk' than there is in UZR.

[Spudboy]

there is very likely more subjectivity in a 'strikeout' or a 'walk' than there is in uzr.

 

robo umps!!!!1!1!1!1!

[OH FOY]

Baseball is an interesting game, where you can win it by making an out. A negative play. Is that in WAR?

Batter hustles down to 1st to beat out DP, while runner scores from 3rd. Stuff like that.

For me as I got older I slowed down on that stats, and just watch the game. So may things that Stats don't show.

Edited June 3, 2017 by OH FOY!

[Kimmi]

Baseball is an interesting game, where you can win it by making an out. A negative play. Is that in WAR?

Batter hustles down to 1st to beat out DP, while runner scores from 3rd. Stuff like that.

For me as I got older I slowed down on that stats, and just watch the game. So may things that Stats don't show.

 

There are a lot of things that don't show up in the stats. One can never work off of stats alone, and no one is suggesting that anyone could or should.

 

As far as the batter hustling down to 1st to beat out the DP, that does show up in the base running stats, which is a component of WAR.

[notin]

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.

 

So in your eyes "comprehensive" is a bad thing?

 

If you want a flaw with advanced metrics, its much simpler. Most fans have no idea how to interpret them.

 

For example, say Bogaerts is ninth in the AL in UZR. Too many say things like " That's got to be wrong. I watch every game. Xander does this. Xander does that. He never does the other thing. UZR must be flawed!"

 

And they miss the obvious reason.

Xander might be ninth not because of what he does. But because 8 other shortstops do it better. ..

[moonslav59]

And they miss the obvious reason.

Xander might be ninth not because of what he does. But because 8 other shortstops do it better...

 

I admit, I have watch almost no MLB games not involving the Sox over the 50 years I've followed baseball. I have watched some Astros games recently, but no where near the amount of Sox games.

 

That being said, I know I have seen plays made by visiting SSs that I've never seen Bogey make. It's not just one here or there either. It's enough for me to know Bogey is not even close to being the best defensive SS in MLB.

 

I like UZR/150, and I think it is much more accurate than me or any other fan watching mostly just Sox games and looking at Flg% and RF/9 like the old days to try and determine what ranking our defenders should have in the pecking order.

 

Most posters know I was a big Iggy fan and have always highly valued, perhaps too much, SS defense. I was one of those posters suggesting we move and keep Bogey at 3B. Maybe I'm still biased against his defense, but I did admit he progressed more than I thought he would a couple of years ago aafter his decent 2015 defensive season. Now, I'm not so sure about his "progression". I felt he took a slight step backwards last year, on defense, and he hasn't shown any growth this year. The UZR/150 supports my opinion, but we no longer have an Iggy in our system, so I see no reason to move him off SS for the foreseeable future.

 

Right now, Bogey ranks 18th out of 29 in UZR and 15th out of 29 in UZR/150 at barley a plus (+0.7). Look, I'm thrilled to have an average fielding SS who is hitting over .330, but that doesn't mean I'm not disappointed that his defense seemed to stop improving after 2015.

 

Bogey's UZR and UZR/150 at SS since 2014:

 

Year UZR UZR/150

2014 -2.7 -3.7

2015 +1.0 +0.9

2016 -2.9 -2.8

2017 -0.1 +0.7

 

What gets me most is his range numbers, although they look better this year than past years:

2014: -2.3

2015: -4.6

2016: -3.5

2017: -0.8

[S5Dewey]

So in your eyes "comprehensive" is a bad thing?

 

If you want a flaw with advanced metrics, its much simpler. Most fans have no idea how to interpret them.

 

For example, say Bogaerts is ninth in the AL in UZR. Too many say things like " That's got to be wrong. I watch every game. Xander does this. Xander does that. He never does the other thing. UZR must be flawed!"

 

And they miss the obvious reason.

Xander might be ninth not because of what he does. But because 8 other shortstops do it better. ..

 

Well.. Am I now defending myself against things I didn't say?

 

I didn't say that comprehensive is a bad thing. I just believe that "comprehensive" can be used as a metaphor for "unduly complicated".

 

Next..

I've also never said that Bogaerts is not the 9th best (defensive) SS in the league. IMHO there are a lot of SS's who are better than he is defensively. IMHO he's one of the best SS's in the league when his offensive and defensive skills are combined.

 

This is going to be a long easier discussion to have if you don't keep throwing red herrings into the conversation.

[OH FOY]

These 2 out RBI's are impressing me.

[moonslav59]

OPS now .767 and climbing.

[notin]

Well.. Am I now defending myself against things I didn't say?

 

I didn't say that comprehensive is a bad thing. I just believe that "comprehensive" can be used as a metaphor for "unduly complicated".

 

Next..

I've also never said that Bogaerts is not the 9th best (defensive) SS in the league. IMHO there are a lot of SS's who are better than he is defensively. IMHO he's one of the best SS's in the league when his offensive and defensive skills are combined.

 

This is going to be a long easier discussion to have if you don't keep throwing red herrings into the conversation.

 

The Bogaerts thing was merely an example of how people misunderstand advanced metrics. I opened with a statement about one of the problems with advanced metrics is that people don't understand them. And then I said "FOR EXAMPLE" to actually notify people I was making an example. Seriously. I should not have had to explain that.

 

 

And this "I didn't say that comprehensive is a bad thing. I just believe that "comprehensive" can be used as a metaphor for "unduly complicated"." You exact words. Copied. Pasted. Underlined.

 

Seriously? If you are implying "Comprehensive" is a metaphor (when I think you mean "synonym) for "unduly complicated, but somehow you are simultaneously saying that doesn't mean it's a bad thing!?!!? In the same sentence?!?!!?

 

When you use your lines about things having too many parts being more likely to break down, those "too many moving parts" are exactly the factors that make it more comprehensive. In fact, now you have been touting "KISS" as the logic in determining a defensive metric. Well, keeping it simple does make it far less comprehensive by definition of the word. And please do not tell me that you have a simple method that is more comprehensive, as the words "simple" and "comprehensive" are actually antonyms.

[sk7326]

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

 

it does - but does it account for it quite enough - (anecdotally) it has seemed hard for a LF to score well

[sk7326]

Baseball is an interesting game, where you can win it by making an out. A negative play. Is that in WAR?

Batter hustles down to 1st to beat out DP, while runner scores from 3rd. Stuff like that.

For me as I got older I slowed down on that stats, and just watch the game. So may things that Stats don't show.

 

Baserunning shows up in WAR. Now, negative plays for the most part are negative plays. Hitting the ball to the right side is something you can look for - but you'd rather get on base in all but a very select number of cases

[sk7326]

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.

 

There are no do-it-all stats, and why should there be? WAR is an attempt to measure everything a baseball player does ... now doing that is HARD, so it makes sense that fangraphs and baseball reference use different inputs - some of this stuff is hard to measure, so you do the best you can. So - to an above point, yes - it means that:

 

1. There is some significant margin of error. I would never use a 0.3 win difference in WAR to say Player A had a better season than Player B. But a 2 win difference is more meaningful.

2. It is a counting stat - so often it reward durability - which should be rewarded

3. I tend to be a little more suspicious of WAR built on the back of defensive parts. We know those metrics have a higher range of error than the offensive stuff. It doesn't mean it is false - but I think measuring run creation is more solid than run prevention (non-pitching)

4. I tend to use WAR - in terms of saying who is the MVP for instance - to get the list of nominees. Then you go into more detailed stuff.

[S5Dewey]

 

Seriously? If you are implying "Comprehensive" is a metaphor (when I think you mean "synonym) for "unduly complicated, but somehow you are simultaneously saying that doesn't mean it's a bad thing!?!!? In the same sentence?!?!!?

 

 

You're right. Where was my Thesauraus when I needed it?? Ugh.

[S5Dewey]

You're right. Where was my Thesauraus when I needed it?? Ugh.

 

Would someone please help me? I don't need someone who wants to be "on my ass". Does this board have an 'Ignore" function?

[moonslav59]

There are no do-it-all stats, and why should there be? WAR is an attempt to measure everything a baseball player does ... now doing that is HARD, so it makes sense that fangraphs and baseball reference use different inputs - some of this stuff is hard to measure, so you do the best you can. So - to an above point, yes - it means that:

 

1. There is some significant margin of error. I would never use a 0.3 win difference in WAR to say Player A had a better season than Player B. But a 2 win difference is more meaningful.

2. It is a counting stat - so often it reward durability - which should be rewarded

3. I tend to be a little more suspicious of WAR built on the back of defensive parts. We know those metrics have a higher range of error than the offensive stuff. It doesn't mean it is false - but I think measuring run creation is more solid than run prevention (non-pitching)

4. I tend to use WAR - in terms of saying who is the MVP for instance - to get the list of nominees. Then you go into more detailed stuff.

 

I've also used the argument that asks anyone to choose one other stat that does a better job at ranking the best to the 10th or 20th best. Put the two lists side-by-side and see which one better measures the best overall players in MLB. WAR always wins- hands down.

 

There might be a difference of opinion between #5 and #6 or even a #3 vs a #6, but the ordering blows away any other single stat.

 

The thought of trying to come up with a single number to judge everything is fraught with challenges and complexities and imperfections, but it's a noble effort and I applaud the efforts to fine tune and improve the methodology and results.

[a700hitter]

Would someone please help me? I don't need someone who wants to be "on my ass". Does this board have an 'Ignore" function?

Yes, there is an ignore feature. And he is worthy of its use. He doesn't look to discuss the Red Sox. He looks to argue and often quite obnoxiously.

[S5Dewey]

Yes, there is an ignore feature. And he is worthy of its use. He doesn't look to discuss the Red Sox. He looks to argue and often quite obnoxiously.

 

Thanks. I'll go exploring to find it and change my online experience for the better.

[a700hitter]

Thanks. I'll go exploring to find it and change my online experience for the better.

Under Forum Actions, go to General Settings. On the left hand side of the page go to Edit Ignore and add the offender's Username.

[Slasher9]

i hate days off. especially when JBj is hot at the dish....

[S5Dewey]

Under Forum Actions, go to General Settings. On the left hand side of the page go to Edit Ignore and add the offender's Username.

 

Got it! Thank you!

[Kimmi]

There are no do-it-all stats, and why should there be? WAR is an attempt to measure everything a baseball player does ... now doing that is HARD, so it makes sense that fangraphs and baseball reference use different inputs - some of this stuff is hard to measure, so you do the best you can. So - to an above point, yes - it means that:

 

1. There is some significant margin of error. I would never use a 0.3 win difference in WAR to say Player A had a better season than Player B. But a 2 win difference is more meaningful.

2. It is a counting stat - so often it reward durability - which should be rewarded

3. I tend to be a little more suspicious of WAR built on the back of defensive parts. We know those metrics have a higher range of error than the offensive stuff. It doesn't mean it is false - but I think measuring run creation is more solid than run prevention (non-pitching)

4. I tend to use WAR - in terms of saying who is the MVP for instance - to get the list of nominees. Then you go into more detailed stuff.

 

Good points made sk.

 

As has always been the case, one should never take a single stat as gospel. As I said, if I had to choose one stat by which to assess a player, it would be WAR, but I understand that limiting myself to just WAR, or any other single stat, will not give me the complete picture.

[Kimmi]

Also, I have no issues with Notin.

[moonslav59]

notin is one of my favorite posters.

[SCM33]

All stats are stats.

Water is wet.

 

OPS now .767 and climbing.

Yup. Let him hit.

 

JBJ is not going to be the guy who had a 30 game or whatever hitting streak and hit 20+ homeruns last year.

 

Best case, .250BA .330OB%, 15HR, 60RBI with an average OPS. He is not a superstar offensive player.........but up the middle with Vazquez, Xander ,Pedey and JBJ is as solid as they come. The problem is that we are not getting the typical offensive production from typical offensive positions.....1B, 3B and DH.

[a700hitter]

notin is one of my favorite posters.

Feel free to vote for him in the TS Annual Awards.

[S5Dewey]

Also, I have no issues with Notin.

 

Yes. That's because he's not, to use his words "on your ass".

Enjoy. I chose not to.

[harmony]

Would someone please help me? I don't need someone who wants to be "on my ass". Does this board have an 'Ignore" function?

I sometimes sense that a certain poster is "on my ass" but I accept that as the price of my participation on a public forum.

 

Best regards.