The annual Jackie Bradley Jr thread (2019 Edition)

[moonslav59]

Per B-R: 'dWAR prior to 2003 is based on total zone rating developed by Sean Smith of BaseballProjection.com'.

 

What was that system based on?

 

Is it comparable to UZR/150, DRS and the current dWAR metrics?

[S5Dewey]

What was that system based on?

 

Is it comparable to UZR/150, DRS and the current dWAR metrics?

 

And did they have "trained observers" looking at every play of every inning of every game and determining range, etc?

[moonslav59]

I never have had any problem with oWAR because as you say it's based on stats. Those stats don't create a perfect picture of who that player is/was but they're certainly close and reasonable. However, dWAR is a horse of another color as demonstrated by Lynn's minus WAR values.

 

Like you, I don't know how dWAR was calculated before the total zone system was set up, but it's apparent that BR is passing the pre-zone system off as being as accurate as the post-establishment of the system.

 

I'm not even disputing that Lynn was a great CF'er. I'm just asking people in our age group who we're supposed to believe - dWAR, or our own lyin' eyes?

 

It's appearing more and more to me that dWAR is extremely valuable in determining the defensive worth of a player as long as that player's worth coincides with what we already believe.

 

Well, take into account that we barely saw Lynn play after he left Boston. He was injured a lot, and as we know, Lynn played injured, unlike guys like Ellsbury and JD Drew.

 

While I think +2.3 while with Boston looks low, the system back then was probably not as good as the one we have now, and all systems have flaws. Lynn had Dewey in RF, who maybe took some plays away from him or allowed him to shade more towards LF than RF. The short wall in LF may have taken a few "playable" balls away. Who knows. I'm not sure anyone is strongly defending the pre-2003 system, and most of us current WAR users admit it is flawed but not beyond usefulness.

[moonslav59]

And did they have "trained observers" looking at every play of every inning of every game and determining range, etc?

 

I doubt like the level we have now.

[Bellhorn04]

And did they have "trained observers" looking at every play of every inning of every game and determining range, etc?

 

No observers, there would only be the numbers to work with. I can only surmise that it was based on fielding chances and comparisons to league averages.

[notin]

I never have had any problem with oWAR because as you say it's based on stats. Those stats don't create a perfect picture of who that player is/was but they're certainly close and reasonable. However, dWAR is a horse of another color as demonstrated by Lynn's minus WAR values.

 

Like you, I don't know how dWAR was calculated before the total zone system was set up, but it's apparent that BR is passing the pre-zone system off as being as accurate as the post-establishment of the system.

 

I'm not even disputing that Lynn was a great CF'er. I'm just asking people in our age group who we're supposed to believe - dWAR, or our own lyin' eyes?

 

It's appearing more and more to me that dWAR is extremely valuable in determining the defensive worth of a player as long as that player's worth coincides with what we already believe.

 

 

It’s not that dWAR has to confirm pre-existing beliefs. Like most stats in baseball, it’s just difficult when comparing players whose careers started so far apart.

 

The baseline for a lot advanced metrics on both sides of the ball is the league average. In this case, people are taking numbers compared to league average center fielders from the 70s and 80s and comparing them to numbers based on center fielders from the 2010s. It’s actually a big deal. MLB has gone through periods where defense was valued differently by varying managers and GMs, which is why players like Tony Armas and Alfonso Soriano have played CF.

 

Lynn did have some stellar defensive contemporaries, like (the tail end of the career of) Paul Blair, Rick Manning, Andre Dawson and Cesar Geronimo. But also a lot of Chet Lemon/Gorman Thomas types who would be corner OFs today, but played CF because they could hit and played for teams that valued the offense.

 

Bradley has a lot of stellar defensive contemporaries as well, because the focus on defensive metrics has created a league with more players playing CF who might have been relegated to reserve duty in the 1980s, like Kiermaier and Pillar...

[moonslav59]

No observers, there would only be the numbers to work with. I can only surmise that it was based on fielding chances and comparisons to league averages.

 

Yes, like RF/9, which is severely flawed, since some teams had high K-rates and/or low fly ball rates. Teams with spacious OFs got more chances.

[cp176]

The only point of comparison is with their fielding.

 

hmm - pretty sure I got that Bell - Sincerely hope that no one on the planet thinks that there is any real comparison between these two from anything other than a defensive perspective. Like I said, it has been a few years and maybe I "misremember" but I recall Lynn looking pretty damn good out there.

[Bellhorn04]

hmm - pretty sure I got that Bell - Sincerely hope that no one on the planet thinks that there is any real comparison between these two from anything other than a defensive perspective.

 

What you said was "any comparison with Freddie during his tenure in Boston makes me chuckle".

[moonslav59]

hmm - pretty sure I got that Bell - Sincerely hope that no one on the planet thinks that there is any real comparison between these two from anything other than a defensive perspective. Like I said, it has been a few years and maybe I "misremember" but I recall Lynn looking pretty damn good out there.

 

Eyes can be deceiving, but not by that much, but I'll say it again, dWAR has Lynn as a +2.3 while with Boston- the time we all saw him play and remember him as being damn good on defense.

[S5Dewey]

It’s not that dWAR has to confirm pre-existing beliefs. Like most stats in baseball, it’s just difficult when comparing players whose careers started so far apart.

 

But I thought that was the purpose of WAR - to compare one player against another. Maybe we should dismiss any dWAR value of a player who played before 1990. Of course that means that we have no way to compare Mookie to Evans because Evan's pre-1980 dWAR is a bogus value, just as is Ted Williams' and Mickey Mantle's dWAR.

 

[speaking of Evans, did you know that in spite of all the raving we do about Evans' defense he only had five seasons when his dWAR was better than that of a Replacement Player?]

 

The baseline for a lot advanced metrics on both sides of the ball is the league average.

 

Then that in itself brings dWAR into question since it uses the advanced metrics that rely on league averages and eventually compares result with a Replacement Player. Apples and Oranges.

 

Look, I know that there are some here who have so little faith in their own judgement that then need numbers to hang their hats on and they're wiling to ignore their own eyes and opinions, but doesn't it ever reach a point where those people are willing to say that maybe, just maybe, there are some significant flaws in WAR, especially dWAR?

 

 

 

Was Evans really defensively worse than a replacement player for 15 of his 20 seasons?

Was Lynn really only 1/3 of a game more valuable defensively than a replacement player each year he was in Boston?

Is JBJ really currently worse defensively than a replacement player?? Again, not the league average CF'er, but a Replacement Player???

Edited May 14, 2019 by S5Dewey

[S5Dewey]

Eyes can be deceiving, but not by that much, but I'll say it again, dWAR has Lynn as a +2.3 while with Boston- the time we all saw him play and remember him as being damn good on defense.

 

So which do you believe, do you believe that he was 1/3 of a win per year better than a replacement player, or that "he was damn good on defense"?

 

I don't mean to be a jerk about this but you can't have it both ways and I'm trying to make a point here.

Edited May 14, 2019 by S5Dewey

[Slasher9]

the "observer" looking at every play is kind of silly.

JBj is the best defensive CF in MLB right now.

JBj is easily the best defensive CF the Boston Red Sox have ever had.

just watch his first step on contact - on contact- every single play.

[notin]

Was Evans really defensively worse than a replacement player for 15 of his 20 seasons?

Was Lynn really only 1/3 of a game more valuable defensively than a replacement player each year he was in Boston?

Is JBJ really currently worse defensively than a replacement player?? Again, not the league average CF'er, but a Replacement Player???

 

 

One issue with defensive metrics - and any other subjective defensive evaluation technique - is they rely on opportunity. If a player makes fewer plays, he isn’t as valuable defensively.

 

A really big factor in Bradley’s defensive metrics this year is he hasn’t made as many plays as most MLB center fielders. And a big part of the reason appears to be Betts, who helps take a huge chunk of right-center field flyballs that Austin Meadows and Avisail Garcia don’t get to (which is why Kiermaier makes more plays).

 

This isn’t a flaw in defensive metrics. Eye test can’t tell you how good a CF is on plays he doesn’t make either. But instead is it brings in an extra level of evaluation. For example, as long as the Sox have Betts, do they really need a CF with Bradley’s defensive skill set? If they moved Benintendi to CF or acquired a less range-oriented CF like Joc Pederson, would there be a significant difference? Sure they would miss out on Bradley’s highlight reel plays, but what is the actual big picture impact on defense?

[Slasher9]

but what is the actual big picture impact on defense?

 

this one is easy. parade vs not a parade

[notin]

the "observer" looking at every play is kind of silly.

JBj is the best defensive CF in MLB right now.

JBj is easily the best defensive CF the Boston Red Sox have ever had.

just watch his first step on contact - on contact- every single play.

 

 

What camera angle do you have access to that shows his first step on contact? Mine is on the hitter until the director switches me over to the outfielder, whose typically either already in motion or where he (thinks he) needs to be.

 

Unless you’re being sarcastic...

[notin]

this one is easy. parade vs not a parade

 

Well, in the case of Bradley, he did win the ALCS MVP. But not for his defense. His timely hitting was a bigger factor.

 

But the subject of debate is his defense vs his defensive metrics. Not his timely hitting...

[Slasher9]

What camera angle do you have access to that shows his first step on contact? Mine is on the hitter until the director switches me over to the outfielder, whose typically either already in motion or where he (thinks he) needs to be.

 

Unless you’re being sarcastic...

 

not sarcastic at all. everytime he makes a good catch and they show it from the hitters angle from contact. he takes the correct first step immediately on contact. every single time. use tonights game and i am sure you will see a few different times where you can see his first step on contact on some replays.

[Slasher9]

Well, in the case of Bradley, he did win the ALCS MVP. But not for his defense. His timely hitting was a bigger factor.

 

But the subject of debate is his defense vs his defensive metrics. Not his timely hitting...

 

oh, i wasnt referring about his ALCS. i am referring to my forever statement that pitching + defense = parades. hitting is fun but very rarely does it equate to a parade. i will take his elite defense over an average fielder that can rake. IMO.

[notin]

oh, i wasnt referring about his ALCS. i am referring to my forever statement that pitching + defense = parades. hitting is fun but very rarely does it equate to a parade. i will take his elite defense over an average fielder that can rake. IMO.

 

 

We’ve all seen hitting lead to a parade as well. We won two rings with defensive grab bag Manny Ramirez playing the field. And one of those teams had defensive clusterf*** Julio Lugo at shortstop.

 

I do think outfield defense is becoming paramount. It’s a launch angle game right now with increases in flyballs and strikeouts.

 

But whether or not Bradley-Betts is better than Benintendi-Betts isn’t the question. (Or another lesser than Bradley defender in CF.) The question is, is that type of drop in CF defense still sufficient? Especially in the wake of Bradley’s non-existent offense.

 

This isn’t the NFL, where you can gameplan around elite defenders. Hitters aren’t avoiding Bradley. But he isn’t as involved defensively as many CFs, and it looks like it’s because of the guys at the corners.

[mvp 78]

this one is easy. parade vs not a parade

 

Did he win that trophy because of his fielding or because he lucked into a few bad pitches?

[mvp 78]

the "observer" looking at every play is kind of silly.

JBj is the best defensive CF in MLB right now.

JBj is easily the best defensive CF the Boston Red Sox have ever had.

just watch his first step on contact - on contact- every single play.

 

He probably isn't THE BEST CF in MLB right now. He's most likely top 5 though.

 

He's the best Sox CF in my lifetime though. Hard to compare him to Dom Dimaggio since I wasn't born then.

[Bellhorn04]

Did he win that trophy because of his fielding or because he lucked into a few bad pitches?

 

Lucked into a few bad pitches. It actually says that right on the trophy. Says the same on Steve Pearce's WS MVP, in fact.

[mvp 78]

Lucked into a few bad pitches. It actually says that right on the trophy. Says the same on Steve Pearce's WS MVP, in fact.

 

Won the ALCS MVP with a .200 batting average vs won the WS MVP with a .333 batting average. Pearce's OPS was 600 points higher than JBJ's too. JBJ had as many k's as hits in that series. In the WS, Pearce didn't k once.

 

That's just a bad faith argument from you.

[notin]

Did he win that trophy because of his fielding or because he lucked into a few bad pitches?

 

It would be ridiculous to think he was the only Sox hitter to luck into a few bad pitches. He was the MVP because he made those opportunities count...

[Bellhorn04]

Won the ALCS MVP with a .200 batting average vs won the WS MVP with a .333 batting average. Pearce's OPS was 600 points higher than JBJ's too. JBJ had as many k's as hits in that series. In the WS, Pearce didn't k once.

 

That's just a bad faith argument from you.

 

Pearce didn't even have a hit in the first 3 games.

 

Anyway I was only joking. I hope you were too.

[mvp 78]

Pearce didn't even have a hit in the first 3 games.

 

Anyway I was only joking. I hope you were too.

 

They should have traded him on 10/18/18 when his value peaked!

 

At least he had a better Championship Series than the NLCS MVP who only OPS'd a freakin' 591. Puig should have won it.

[Slasher9]

Did he win that trophy because of his fielding or because he lucked into a few bad pitches?

 

see #919

[dgalehouse]

And did they have "trained observers" looking at every play of every inning of every game and determining range, etc?

 

The dedicated folks from the UZR branch of the WAR department were able to dig up long lost footage of every single game that Fred Lynn ever played . They worked tirelessly for months watching every single play of those games . Their findings should never be questioned.

[S5Dewey]

One issue with defensive metrics - and any other subjective defensive evaluation technique - is they rely on opportunity. If a player makes fewer plays, he isn’t as valuable defensively.

 

If this is true then the Sox need to hang onto him at least until Mookie's future is decided because if Mookie signs elsewhere we're going to need all of those defensive plays to his left that Mookie is robbing him of now.

 

If the "Dump JBJ" movement succeeds and Mookie walks our outfield will go from being outstanding (maybe the best in baseball) to being less than mediocre.

Edited May 14, 2019 by S5Dewey