Hitting vs. Fielding by lineup players

[Maxbialystock]

I have a simple theory that somewhere between 75% and 90% of a team's defense is embedded in its pitching, exclusive of the quality of the infielders and outfielders. How else explain that 12 or 13 of the 25 man rosters on every MLB team are pitchers and that pitchers routinely command the top salaries in MLB?

 

I would therefore argue that lineup players hitting is on average at least three times as important as their fielding.

 

But I'm more than willing to debate and/or talked out of either notiong.

[Kimmi]

I do not know what the exact percentages are, but I very much disagree with you that most of the team's defense is independent of the quality of fielders. This is why ERA is not a very good stat, and why the need for DIPS arose.

 

I also disagree that hitting is at least 3 times as important as fielding. Preventing a run is just as important as scoring a run. A pitcher cannot prevent runs on his own.

[Jasonbay44]

Bad defense can hurt a team, just as much as good hitting can help a team.

[Slasher9]

Maxbialystock have you ever watched an independent league game?

There are literally players on every team in MLB that are in the show just for their defensive prowess.

Pitching + defense = parades

[fxkatt]

Great defense makes good pitchers very good, and weaker pitchers good; it also demoralizes a lot of opposing hitters. The only question is does a poor defensive player hit enough to make up for his errors? If he does, pitchers just have to suck up the errors/weak defense.... and put up with a higher ERA but probably not fewer wins.

[Bellhorn04]

You can actually find some of the answers to this with WAR. That's what it's good for!

 

As much as I hate to say it, Exhibit A for why offense has considerably more value than defense is our old buddy DJ.

 

Jeter was ringing up WAR's of 3 and 4 even when he was the worst defensive shortstop in baseball.

 

For his career he ended up with oWAR of 96.3 and dWAR of -8.3.

[SoxnCycles]

I do not know what the exact percentages are, but I very much disagree with you that most of the team's defense is independent of the quality of fielders. This is why ERA is not a very good stat, and why the need for DIPS arose.

 

I also disagree that hitting is at least 3 times as important as fielding. Preventing a run is just as important as scoring a run. A pitcher cannot prevent runs on his own.

 

You've certainly come to the right place for DIPS.

[Maxbialystock]

Let's understand something. A fielder with a .980 fielding percentage is normal, routine. Moreover, a slug like JDM who is routinely excoriated on talksox for his incredibly poor defense, actually makes some good plays now and then and usually makes the routine plays. And the worst third baseman, Devers, in the entire history of MLB, who leads the known universe in errors right now with I think 10, has a fielding % of .917. And we are furious he is so lacking in skill. But we sure like his hitting when he is right.

 

Last night was a textbook in how a pitcher can shut down an opposing batting orders--in this case, the Sox, who recently have been on a tear but last night were putty, hitting meek ground balls and easy fly balls. Davis did make a nice flip to the pitcher on that grounder to the right, but the best defensive play of the game was probably JDM who got credit for the out when the Orioles fan interfered.

 

The point is, routine defense is pretty effective with very good pitching and almost everyone in MLB can play routine defense.

 

Meanwhile, great pitching is hard to come by and comes at a price. Meanwhile, any Sox fan with half a brain knows that we got off to a slow start this year because of lousy pitching, primarily the rotation, which even a world class defense with gold gloves at every position could not have prevented.

[Maxbialystock]

Following up on the .980 fielding percentage. A batting average of .300 approaches nirvana and pretty much guarantees a hefty salary for that hitter. Thus, if you field 98%, you're only doing what's expected, and if you hit 30%, you are made for life to borrow of mafia movie experession.

 

I am not against great fielding because it is the poetry of the game which consists mostly of the prose of batter facing pitcher, which can sometimes get tiresome. What I am saying is that great fielding in my opinion only makes a difference at the margins and that what wins games is good pitching and good hitting, just as losing games is the result of bad pitching and bad hitting.

 

I might add that I think the way WAR is computed reflects the above reality.

[Bellhorn04]

I vaguely remember seeing an article which claimed that the formula for winning baseball games is like this:

 

Pitching 50%

Offense 40%

Fielding 10%

[oldtimer]

Following up on the .980 fielding percentage. A batting average of .300 approaches nirvana and pretty much guarantees a hefty salary for that hitter. Thus, if you field 98%, you're only doing what's expected, and if you hit 30%, you are made for life to borrow of mafia movie experession.

 

I am not against great fielding because it is the poetry of the game which consists mostly of the prose of batter facing pitcher, which can sometimes get tiresome. What I am saying is that great fielding in my opinion only makes a difference at the margins and that what wins games is good pitching and good hitting, just as losing games is the result of bad pitching and bad hitting.

 

I might add that I think the way WAR is computed reflects the above reality.

 

It's clear that you can't defend a ball driven out of the park. It's also clear that you can't win if you don't score any runs. So very good or great pitching can limit the best offense and is worth paying for. Great offenses are those that can expose so so pitching and pile up the runs. Great defense makes itself most known when teams are well matched in pitchig and offense, where a single great play can preserve the game or lack thereof can fritter it away.

[Bellhorn04]

It's clear that you can't defend a ball driven out of the park. It's also clear that you can't win if you don't score any runs. So very good or great pitching can limit the best offense and is worth paying for. Great offenses are those that can expose so so pitching and pile up the runs. Great defense makes itself most known when teams are well matched in pitchig and offense, where a single great play can preserve the game or lack thereof can fritter it away.

 

Agreed, I think that's bang on.

[moonslav59]

I vaguely remember seeing an article which claimed that the formula for winning baseball games is like this:

 

Pitching 50%

Offense 40%

Fielding 10%

 

I'd say pitching + defense has to equal 50%, just as hitting + base running should equal 50%.

 

I'd say ...

 

Pitching 40%

Defense 10%

 

Hitting 46%

Base Running 4%

 

Great defense can change an average pitcher to a good one, a good one to a great one, and a bad one to a decent one, especially at the catcher, SS, 2B and CF positions.

 

Off the top of my head, I'd rank defensive positions as such:

 

22% Catcher

22% SS

14% 2B

14% CF

8% 3B

7% RF (maybe more in Fenway)

6% LF

6% 1B

1% P

[notin]

I'd say pitching + defense has to equal 50%, just as hitting + base running should equal 50%.

 

I'd say ...

 

Pitching 40%

Defense 10%

 

Hitting 46%

Base Running 4%

 

Great defense can change an average pitcher to a good one, a good one to a great one, and a bad one to a decent one, especially at the catcher, SS, 2B and CF positions.

 

Off the top of my head, I'd rank defensive positions as such:

 

22% Catcher

22% SS

14% 2B

14% CF

8% 3B

7% RF (maybe more in Fenway)

6% LF

6% 1B

1% P

 

 

I might think CF to be more important than 2b or SS. With the offensive focus now on launch angle, one would expect fly balls to increase and ground balls to decrease in average velocity...

[cp176]

I vaguely remember seeing an article which claimed that the formula for winning baseball games is like this:

 

Pitching 50%

Offense 40%

Fielding 10%

 

My guess is that this is pretty accurate.

[Maxbialystock]

I'd say pitching + defense has to equal 50%, just as hitting + base running should equal 50%.

 

I'd say ...

 

Pitching 40%

Defense 10%

 

Hitting 46%

Base Running 4%

 

Great defense can change an average pitcher to a good one, a good one to a great one, and a bad one to a decent one, especially at the catcher, SS, 2B and CF positions.

 

Off the top of my head, I'd rank defensive positions as such:

 

22% Catcher

22% SS

14% 2B

14% CF

8% 3B

7% RF (maybe more in Fenway)

6% LF

6% 1B

1% P

 

I'm fine with pitching being 40% and defense being 10%, but disagree emphatically that idea that defense can have that transformational effect on the pitching.

[moonslav59]

I might think CF to be more important than 2b or SS. With the offensive focus now on launch angle, one would expect fly balls to increase and ground balls to decrease in average velocity...

 

I disagree.

 

Let's compare total tough plays by positions between the SOx positions from 2017-2019:

 

1% to 40%

112 3B

76 SS

73 2B

64 RF

50 CF

 

 

40% to 90%

156 3B

100 SS

73 2B

54 RF

44 CF

 

90-100%

871 SS

729 3B

698 2B

697 CF

683 RF

 

Even if you don't count the massive amount of routine balls hit to the SS position, there are more tough plays hit there as well.

 

2018 MLB Numbers

 

1-40%/ 40-90%/ 90-100% Position

2245/536/1276 C

1390/1872/10533 3B

1372/1664/13527 SS

1129/1326/12562 2B

883/791/11207 CF

823/858/8757 RF

714/801/8366 LF

596/1087/7922 1B

 

Surprisingly, 3B looks tougher than given credit for.

[moonslav59]

I'm fine with pitching being 40% and defense being 10%, but disagree emphatically that idea that defense can have that transformational effect on the pitching.

 

Just look at one defensive player: the catcher. He, alone, can have a huge influence.

 

If you put the best defensive team vs the worst defensive team, I think you'd see a very big difference in any pitcher's numbers-- probably over or near a run in ERA.

[notin]

Just look at one defensive player: the catcher. He, alone, can have a huge influence.

 

If you put the best defensive team vs the worst defensive team, I think you'd see a very big difference in any pitcher's numbers-- probably over or near a run in ERA.

 

 

So about 20 ER over the course of 180IP? That’s about 2 runs for every 3 starts. I’m not sure if I find that believable or not. I suppose it’s not unreasonable...

[moonslav59]

So about 20 ER over the course of 180IP? That’s about 2 runs for every 3 starts. I’m not sure if I find that believable or not. I suppose it’s not unreasonable...

 

It's probably top end, but there is a big difference between the best fielding team and the worst. Maybe 0.50 on an ERA might be more like it, and then there are the unearned runs that impact a game, too. So, maybe 1 run counting unearned and earned. Is that better?

[Slasher9]

I'm fine with pitching being 40% and defense being 10%, but disagree emphatically that idea that defense can have that transformational effect on the pitching.

 

do you believe in the mental aspect of baseball? or do you believe success/failure is 100% physical?

[moonslav59]

Last year, the CWS and Reds had 74 unearned runs- the most in MLB. The Astros had 31.

 

I know earned vs unearned runs are somewhat subjective, but that's a difference of 43 runs right there. That's about 0.25 runs per game, if taken at face value. My guess is defense plays at least an equal role in earned runs scored or not scored, so it must be at least a half run difference.

[moonslav59]

do you believe in the mental aspect of baseball? or do you believe success/failure is 100% physical?

 

It's 50 percent half mental.

[Maxbialystock]

do you believe in the mental aspect of baseball? or do you believe success/failure is 100% physical?

 

Of course the mental aspect of the game is important, but it's also hard to measure. I'm always astounded that MLB players can stay focused for 162 games, playing 6 games a week for six months, each game lasting over 3 hours, much of which are consumed by bs mannerisms by pitchers and hitters.

[Maxbialystock]

I disagree.

 

Let's compare total tough plays by positions between the SOx positions from 2017-2019:

 

1% to 40%

112 3B

76 SS

73 2B

64 RF

50 CF

 

 

40% to 90%

156 3B

100 SS

73 2B

54 RF

44 CF

 

90-100%

871 SS

729 3B

698 2B

697 CF

683 RF

 

Even if you don't count the massive amount of routine balls hit to the SS position, there are more tough plays hit there as well.

 

2018 MLB Numbers

 

1-40%/ 40-90%/ 90-100% Position

2245/536/1276 C

1390/1872/10533 3B

1372/1664/13527 SS

1129/1326/12562 2B

883/791/11207 CF

823/858/8757 RF

714/801/8366 LF

596/1087/7922 1B

 

Surprisingly, 3B looks tougher than given credit for.

 

I don't understand those numbers/percentages.

[notin]

It's probably top end, but there is a big difference between the best fielding team and the worst. Maybe 0.50 on an ERA might be more like it, and then there are the unearned runs that impact a game, too. So, maybe 1 run counting unearned and earned. Is that better?

 

 

Like I said, not sure.

 

We’re talking about earned runs, so errors are not a factor. It’s all about defensive plays not made. So it’s tough to get a grasp on...

[vegasbob]

The recent trends in shift positioning has probably added some incremental weight to defense, while enhancing pitching stats . Hard hit ground balls or linedrives that used to be routine hits are now regular outs. Ask JBJr, when he does hit the ball. As noted above , contemporary defenses can make an average pitcher appear more effective than he actually deserves. How many games so far has Devers errors actually changed ? Did his misplay bother Brasier so much that the HR was allowed ?

 

A key defensive factor on team or individually is range. W quick defender will convert more of his chances , but may also incur a few more errors because he got to the ball, off balance or after a chase that lesser fielders couldn't make. Effective speed on foot (not a timed 40 yd dash) is a critical talent on offense and defense . Pitchers should want defenders behind them who can run. The Red Sox curent outfield is highly effective because Betts, Beni and Bradley can get to the ball more often than others .

 

The slick 'rocketball" and launch angle trend have made the HR a more significant part of the offense, where one hit is game changing in terms of score. . Josh Smith's one significant mistake last night was a single swing that won the entire game.

 

The one overweight factor for pitching is that every single action in the game is initiated by throwing the ball in the vicinity of home plate. Nothing happens without that catalyst. From there the effectiveness of the pitch is subject to many factors (location, movement, velocity, bat contact point, umpire calls , catcher framing/blocking) . Good to great pitching will almost always overcome hitters ability to reach base more than 25% of the time as seen in last night's game .

 

In regards to Moon's allocation of percentage ranking of positions, I would allow a little more to 1B (say 10%)and 3B , (say 12%) based on the perception that there are more hard hit balls down the lines which can more likely become doubles that hard grounders or line drives in the SS/2B vicinity. Also these two fielders must cover varying amounts of foul grounds and impediments like walls, dugouts and inebriated spectators than the other infielders chasing spinning foul balls.

[dgalehouse]

Another factor is the increasing number of strikeouts in the game these days .

[Slasher9]

Of course the mental aspect of the game is important, but it's also hard to measure. I'm always astounded that MLB players can stay focused for 162 games, playing 6 games a week for six months, each game lasting over 3 hours, much of which are consumed by bs mannerisms by pitchers and hitters.

 

so would a more confident pitcher actually pitch better?

i can see it in my 13u pitchers when my best C is in the game they rarely shake off the deuce with men on base...i wonder if that changes outcomes???

[moonslav59]

I don't understand those numbers/percentages.

 

1-40% are plays rarely made. "Tough outs," defensively. 60-90% are plays most defenders make. 90-100% are played every defender should make all the time.