A Realistic View at 2020: Part I

[Elktonnick]

I've addressed the flaws the metrics have dozens of time.

 

Look you believe what you want, but if you even think he was a top 15 SS (out of 30), I'm sorry, I've lost all respect for you.

 

I think he was the worst or possibly up to 3rd worst. I wouldn't argue with anyone who said he was 5th worst.

 

I'm not basing all this on metrics. The metrics backed up my observations and the observations of many other people, including our resident Yankee fan.

 

I'd say I have more evidence backing my position than you, but cling to your GG argument all you want. Can you at least admit he was never in the top tier (50%) on defense? (Not that I need you to do so.)

 

This whole "played the game" crap is worse than any crap you read on metrics. BTW, I didn't know Peter Gammons, among others on the F.B. was a sabermetric guy.

 

I will admit he wasn't the best but neither was he the worst of his era. BTW Peter Gammons while a HOF still never played the game but here is what he has written about Jeter "

https://www.espn.com/gammons/s/2001/0212/1079272.html

 

 

How good is Jeter, really?

 

Mailbag: Feb. 12

 

 

The consistent excellence of Yankees SS Derek Jeter -- at the plate and in the field, in the regular season and in the postseason -- puts him in elite company.

Q: I have just read the Jayson Stark and Rob Neyer columns about Derek Jeter and whether he's in the same class with Alex Rodriguez and Nomar Garciaparra. Both of their arguments were pretty strong. What's your opinion: is Jeter in the same class as them? -- Derek Kanarek, New Brunswick, N.J.

PWG: First of all, range factor is a phony stat. It will tell you that Roberto Alomar is a mediocre second baseman, and he's the best I've ever seen. It doesn't take into consideration instinct. Jeter is the most consistent of the three making the tough play, and he makes the double play -- starting and finishing -- the best. Offensively, he has yet to jump into their class -- partially because he had some injury problems last year, partially because hitting second he controls that inside-out swing and doesn't let go. If you watch him take BP, if he lets it fly, he has tremendous power, and I would not be surprised if he hit 30 homers. I say this each October: the best thing about watching the postseason is watching Jeter play every day for 15-20 games so I go home each winter realizing how great he really is. No stat sheet shows that

 

NOW DOES THAT SOUND LIKE SOMETHING THAT SOMEONE WHO THOUGHT JETER WAS THE WORST DEFENSIVE SS OF HIS ERA WOULD WRITE IN A COLUMN I THINK NOT

Edited November 11, 2019 by Elktonnick

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

Evans, Lynn and Rick Miller are obvious picks. Yaz for 4th choice? The only other OFs who played much back then were Juan Beniquez and Bernie Carbo. Of those two I’d have to go with Beniquez. I’m also guessing that Miller and Beniquez won theirs with other teams.

 

Great job all around. Yaz was actually the first baseman on that '75 team, but moved back to left for the postseason when Rice got hit by a pitch and broke his wrist. When reporters asked the old man, 36 at the time, if he was up for the task, #8 said, "I can play left in my sleep." Yaz stayed awake throughout October and played great in the sweep vs. the A's; there wasn't an MVP award yet for the ALCS or Captain Carl would've won easy. Two years later he played LF full time (Rice was DH), made zero errors all season and won his 7th Gold Glove.

 

Lynn was the only Red Sox player to actually win the Gold in '75, then won 3 more, all with Boston. Evans won 8 GGs, his first in '76 when he hit .242. Beniquez won a GG in '77 as a Texas Ranger.

 

Rick Miller was maybe the best fly-catcher of them all (I adopted his leg-first sliding snag of pop-ups, pocket-up style). He also shagged Carlton Fisk's sister (in matrimony), won Gold as an Angel in '78, and was replaced in center three years later by... Lynn. Miller returned to Boston in the Rick Burleson trade and became the Sox regular CF, replacing... Fred Lynn.

[cp176]

I just made up an example with easy numbers to relate to, but every year some SSs do make 100 or more plays than others- same SS- year after year.

 

Would a 40 more plays example be better? But, he makes 10 more errors? Sure, those high range players exist.

 

I personally don't care for these types of examples. Using embellished data to prove hypothetical points doesn't work for me. Kind of obvious I think that some shortstops have better range than others and some make more plays than others. Once again, I value consistency very much. I can live with a ss with average range who makes the plays hit in his range on a regular basis. There are also plenty of players I guess who look good because they get to balls others can't but still prove to be average fielders. It is not all about range. In all honesty, I believe in the use of whatever is available to make a team better with respect to data but an overuse makes the game cumbersome and much less interesting to me.

[moonslav59]

I personally don't care for these types of examples. Using embellished data to prove hypothetical points doesn't work for me. Kind of obvious I think that some shortstops have better range than others and some make more plays than others. Once again, I value consistency very much. I can live with a ss with average range who makes the plays hit in his range on a regular basis. There are also plenty of players I guess who look good because they get to balls others can't but still prove to be average fielders. It is not all about range. In all honesty, I believe in the use of whatever is available to make a team better with respect to data but an overuse makes the game cumbersome and much less interesting to me.

 

How are simple plays made "embelished?"

 

I never said it was all about range. Surely, making the plays most SSs make at a better rate has real value. My example I presented took that into account.

[moonslav59]

I will admit he wasn't the best but neither was he the worst of his era. BTW Peter Gammons while a HOF still never played the game but here is what he has written about Jeter "

https://www.espn.com/gammons/s/2001/0212/1079272.html

 

 

How good is Jeter, really?

 

Mailbag: Feb. 12

 

 

The consistent excellence of Yankees SS Derek Jeter -- at the plate and in the field, in the regular season and in the postseason -- puts him in elite company.

Q: I have just read the Jayson Stark and Rob Neyer columns about Derek Jeter and whether he's in the same class with Alex Rodriguez and Nomar Garciaparra. Both of their arguments were pretty strong. What's your opinion: is Jeter in the same class as them? -- Derek Kanarek, New Brunswick, N.J.

PWG: First of all, range factor is a phony stat. It will tell you that Roberto Alomar is a mediocre second baseman, and he's the best I've ever seen. It doesn't take into consideration instinct. Jeter is the most consistent of the three making the tough play, and he makes the double play -- starting and finishing -- the best. Offensively, he has yet to jump into their class -- partially because he had some injury problems last year, partially because hitting second he controls that inside-out swing and doesn't let go. If you watch him take BP, if he lets it fly, he has tremendous power, and I would not be surprised if he hit 30 homers. I say this each October: the best thing about watching the postseason is watching Jeter play every day for 15-20 games so I go home each winter realizing how great he really is. No stat sheet shows that

 

NOW DOES THAT SOUND LIKE SOMETHING THAT SOMEONE WHO THOUGHT JETER WAS THE WORST DEFENSIVE SS OF HIS ERA WOULD WRITE IN A COLUMN I THINK NOT

 

Oh, now you respect a guy from the Fielding Bible when it suits you.

 

I doubt Gammons ever picked him in his top 10, but I guess he could have been, since a few rare times Jete did get 1-3 points.

 

I never said Gammons felt he was one of the worst. I used the FB to discredit the GG voting and show he never finished above #13 in their voting and more times than not got no votes- meaning he was below #16-23, since they only listed players who got votes.

 

BTW, range does take into account instinct.

 

So, am I to understand you might place him in the middle 33% of a 3 tier ranking? You won't answer my 50-50 question.

 

You make fun of my "on the field more than anyone else,so that's what moves him fro 3-5th worst to worst," but I bet you have no problem with guys making the HOF just out of longevity and compiling big numbers because they played 22 seasons. Jeter sucked on D for over 11 years. He might have been close to the average mark the other seasons. I guess I'm not allowed to use the cumulative defense but others are.

 

I'm fine, if you disagree, but don't say I have no evidence to back up my position. Don't say all I'm using is metrics. I thought Jeter sucked on D before I even heard of UZR, DRS and dWAR. It was based on my observations in games played vs the Sox and a few other games, plus discussions I've had with Sox and Yankee fans over the last 2 decades. I've never heard one person say he deserved the GG. Some Yankee fans felt he was a plus on D, but not great.

 

It's funny how you bash my position, but at least I take a position. What's yours?

 

Is he a top 15 defensive SS over his time period or bottom 15? When you answer, why not give me some reasons why, instead of just claiming 5 GGs over and over and quoting texts that discredit metrics, when we all know they are flawed, yet dozens of knowledgeable baseball people respect them and use them often. I could find some for you, but you could find them too, if you wanted to do it.

 

The guy sucked on D. He made the plays hit within 5 feet of him in any direction. That does not make him plus. Most SS do that and then some.

[moonslav59]

There is no one who officially determines where on the grid the ball lands which is the key data point for determining UZR or DRS The only official determining anything is an umpire who says it is fair of foul. Once again quoting from fangraphs as reported in the KC Star in May 2019 “We don’t know exactly where each fielder was stationed, we certainly don’t know the exact location of the batted ball to the nearest square inch on the field, and we definitely don’t know how long the ball was in the air or on the ground. In reality, it might have been an easy ball to catch or it might have been a difficult one to catch, or somewhere in between.

So unless something has changed since in the past six months what I said is accurate. Even if it it has changed since then, it certainly was true from 2002 until 2014 when Jeter was playing. But hey like I said you should address your quibble to the Kansas City Star. After all I am just repeating what they wrote so your beef isn't with me. it is with them

 

Man, you are so full of crap, I can smell it from Texas.

 

 

You obviously know more than trained and calibrated experts, why? Because, apparently, you "played the game."

 

(Note: so did I.)

[notin]

There is no one who officially determines where on the grid the ball lands which is the key data point for determining UZR or DRS The only official determining anything is an umpire who says it is fair of foul. Once again quoting from fangraphs as reported in the KC Star in May 2019 “We don’t know exactly where each fielder was stationed, we certainly don’t know the exact location of the batted ball to the nearest square inch on the field, and we definitely don’t know how long the ball was in the air or on the ground. In reality, it might have been an easy ball to catch or it might have been a difficult one to catch, or somewhere in between.

So unless something has changed since in the past six months what I said is accurate. Even if it it has changed since then, it certainly was true from 2002 until 2014 when Jeter was playing. But hey like I said you should address your quibble to the Kansas City Star. After all I am just repeating what they wrote so your beef isn't with me. it is with them

 

 

No.

 

It’s with the rationale that “a hit is a hit” because the official scorer says so, and “a strike is a strike because the umpire says so” and those are ironclad consistencies. But defensive metrics are in question because you don’t know how tough a play was to make? But all strikes not created equal, yet are called the same.

 

Sorry but to call it acceptable over another equally questionable type of call because someone else makes it as weak. I hope you would never accept that type of logic in a debate (and as you were trained in debate, your former coach might also).

 

And to accept official scorers on hit/out calls is probably the most egregious exception here. These guys are very far from consistent with each other.

 

But if you’re comfortable with that level of double standard, not much can be done. As long as no one makes statements you disagree with, like about Jeter. By the way, I also asked a simple question that really ends the debate about him and you either balked or missed it. If Jeter wasn’t the worst defensive shortstop of his era, who was?

[moonslav59]

No.

 

It’s with the rationale that “a hit is a hit” because the official scorer says so, and “a strike is a strike because the umpire says so” and those are ironclad consistencies. But defensive metrics are in question because you don’t know how tough a play was to make? But all strikes not created equal, yet are called the same.

 

Sorry but to call it acceptable over another equally questionable type of call because someone else makes it as weak. I hope you would never accept that type of logic in a debate (and as you were trained in debate, your former coach might also).

 

And to accept official scorers on hit/out calls is probably the most egregious exception here. These guys are very far from consistent with each other.

 

But if you’re comfortable with that level of double standard, not much can be done. As long as no one makes statements you disagree with, like about Jeter. By the way, I also asked a simple question that really ends the debate about him and you either balked or missed it. If Jeter wasn’t the worst defensive shortstop of his era, who was?

 

Jeter is "not the best or the worst." I guess it's easy to defend he's somewhere between #2 and #29.

 

I seriously doubt this guy's debate team won any debates.

[Elktonnick]

It’s with the rationale that “a hit is a hit” because the official scorer says so, and “a strike is a strike because the umpire says so” and those are ironclad consistencies. But defensive metrics are in question because you don’t know how tough a play was to make? But all strikes not created equal, yet are called the same.

 

Sorry but to call it acceptable over another equally questionable type of call because someone else makes it as weak. I hope you would never accept that type of logic in a debate (and as you were trained in debate, your former coach might also).

 

And to accept official scorers on hit/out calls is probably the most egregious exception here. These guys are very far from consistent with each other.

 

But if you’re comfortable with that level of double standard, not much can be done. As long as no one makes statements you disagree with, like about Jeter. By the way, I also asked a simple question that really ends the debate about him and you either balked or missed it. If Jeter wasn’t the worst defensive shortstop of his era, who was?

 

Some one else. I only have to prove he wasn't

[jacksonianmarch]

Not sure why we’re discussing the merits of a Yankee player who hasn’t played in 5 years and is gonna enter Cooperstown in July on a realistic view of 2020 thread.

 

Just read an article on Yahoo about Bloom and his job ahead. The Sox got 36 starts in place of Eovaldi, Price and Sale. The starters were 3-15 with a 6.79ERA. Now that possibility exists again with your killer three being so oft injured, but now Porcello is a FA. They’re postulating the Sox may need 10 at least viable starters in 2020 especially with the health issues of the three above.

[Elktonnick]

Oh, now you respect a guy from the Fielding Bible when it suits you.

 

I doubt Gammons ever picked him in his top 10, but I guess he could have been, since a few rare times Jete did get 1-3 points.

 

I never said Gammons felt he was one of the worst. I used the FB to discredit the GG voting and show he never finished above #13 in their voting and more times than not got no votes- meaning he was below #16-23, since they only listed players who got votes.

 

BTW, range does take into account instinct.

 

So, am I to understand you might place him in the middle 33% of a 3 tier ranking? You won't answer my 50-50 question.

 

You make fun of my "on the field more than anyone else,so that's what moves him fro 3-5th worst to worst," but I bet you have no problem with guys making the HOF just out of longevity and compiling big numbers because they played 22 seasons. Jeter sucked on D for over 11 years. He might have been close to the average mark the other seasons. I guess I'm not allowed to use the cumulative defense but others are.

 

I'm fine, if you disagree, but don't say I have no evidence to back up my positiwasn'ti notice you completely overlooked what Hammond wrote't say all I'm using is metrics. I thought Jeter sucked on D before I even heard of UZR, DRS and dWAR. It was based on my observations in games played vs the Sox and a few other games, plus discussions I've had with Sox and Yankee fans over the last 2 decades. I've never heard one person say he deserved the GG. Some Yankee fans felt he was a plus on D, but not great.

 

It's funny how you bash my position, but at least I take a position. What's yours?

 

Is he a top 15 defensive SS over his time period or bottom 15? When you answer, why not give me some reasons why, instead of just claiming 5 GGs over and over and quoting texts that discredit metrics, when we all know they are flawed, yet dozens of knowledgeable baseball people respect them and use them often. I could find some for you, but you could find them too, if you wanted to do it.

 

The guy sucked on D. He made the plays hit within 5 feet of him in any direction. That does not make him plus. Most SS do that and then some.

 

I notice you completely ignore what Gammons actuallywrote only to embark on ad hominem attacks. You brought up Gammons not I but hey I get your style now when the facts do not agree with your conjecture.

[notin]

Some one else. I only have to prove he wasn't

 

 

Or say “Hanley.” Which would be easier because you didn’t prove he wasn’t.

[Elktonnick]

Or say “Hanley.” Which would be easier because you didn’t prove he wasn’t.

 

Hey I was not the one who went so far out on the limb by claiming Jeter was the worst that I couldn't get back.

[Elktonnick]

Jeter is "not the best or the worst." I guess it's easy to defend he's somewhere between #2 and #29.

 

I seriously doubt this guy's debate team won any debates.

Actually we did pretty well that I won a debate scholarship to Emerson. I did not take it because I get a scholarship elsewhere. But thank you for bringing it up. I may still have the trophy if the wife hasn' t thrown it out.

[kenmeister]

Not sure why we’re discussing the merits of a Yankee player who hasn’t played in 5 years and is gonna enter Cooperstown in July on a realistic view of 2020 thread.

 

Just read an article on Yahoo about Bloom and his job ahead. The Sox got 36 starts in place of Eovaldi, Price and Sale. The starters were 3-15 with a 6.79ERA. Now that possibility exists again with your killer three being so oft injured, but now Porcello is a FA. They’re postulating the Sox may need 10 at least viable starters in 2020 especially with the health issues of the three above.

 

It's a shame that Johnson & Velazquez didn't pan out.

[Bellhorn04]

I will admit he wasn't the best but neither was he the worst of his era. BTW Peter Gammons while a HOF still never played the game but here is what he has written about Jeter "

https://www.espn.com/gammons/s/2001/0212/1079272.html

 

 

How good is Jeter, really?

 

Mailbag: Feb. 12

 

 

The consistent excellence of Yankees SS Derek Jeter -- at the plate and in the field, in the regular season and in the postseason -- puts him in elite company.

Q: I have just read the Jayson Stark and Rob Neyer columns about Derek Jeter and whether he's in the same class with Alex Rodriguez and Nomar Garciaparra. Both of their arguments were pretty strong. What's your opinion: is Jeter in the same class as them? -- Derek Kanarek, New Brunswick, N.J.

PWG: First of all, range factor is a phony stat. It will tell you that Roberto Alomar is a mediocre second baseman, and he's the best I've ever seen. It doesn't take into consideration instinct. Jeter is the most consistent of the three making the tough play, and he makes the double play -- starting and finishing -- the best. Offensively, he has yet to jump into their class -- partially because he had some injury problems last year, partially because hitting second he controls that inside-out swing and doesn't let go. If you watch him take BP, if he lets it fly, he has tremendous power, and I would not be surprised if he hit 30 homers. I say this each October: the best thing about watching the postseason is watching Jeter play every day for 15-20 games so I go home each winter realizing how great he really is. No stat sheet shows that

 

NOW DOES THAT SOUND LIKE SOMETHING THAT SOMEONE WHO THOUGHT JETER WAS THE WORST DEFENSIVE SS OF HIS ERA WOULD WRITE IN A COLUMN I THINK NOT

 

This was written by Gammons in February, 2001.

[Noles_1335]

One can really tell its the off-season.... you guys have spent an entire day talking about a Yankee...

[moonslav59]

I notice you completely ignore what Gammons actuallywrote only to embark on ad hominem attacks. You brought up Gammons not I but hey I get your style now when the facts do not agree with your conjecture.

 

I brought up Gammons, because you wrongly claimed everyone on the Fielding Bible was a sabermetrics guy, but hey your style of presenting false facts is obvious.

[Bellhorn04]

One can really tell its the off-season.... you guys have spent an entire day talking about a Yankee...

 

A Yankee and defensive metrics.

[S5Dewey]

 

Sorry but to call it acceptable over another equally questionable type of call because someone else makes it as weak. I hope you would never accept that type of logic in a debate (and as you were trained in debate, your former coach might also).

 

Do you mean like... calling the eye test questionable in favor of defensive metrics when both of them have admitted flaws?

[moonslav59]

Actually we did pretty well that I won a debate scholarship to Emerson. I did not take it because I get a scholarship elsewhere. But thank you for bringing it up. I may still have the trophy if the wife hasn' t thrown it out.

 

Now, I know you're lying.

[moonslav59]

This was written by Gammons in February, 2001.

 

LOL. Too funny to even respond to this.

[moonslav59]

Do you mean like... calling the eye test questionable in favor of defensive metrics when both of them have admitted flaws?

 

How about combining the two? Jeter's defense sucks on both accounts.

 

Plus, UZR is done bye the "eye test" by people who are trained and calibrated. We can all agree it is still flawed, but they, combined, watch every play of every game, something our eye test can never match.

[Bellhorn04]

Do you mean like... calling the eye test questionable in favor of defensive metrics when both of them have admitted flaws?

 

Eye test = eyes. Defensive metrics = eyes + technology.

 

Defensive metrics may have flaws, but they have to be better than eyes alone.

[S5Dewey]

Not sure why we’re discussing the merits of a Yankee player who hasn’t played in 5 years and is gonna enter Cooperstown in July on a realistic view of 2020 thread.

 

I'm not sure why we're discussing anything to do with the Yankees or any Yankees player in the TalkSox forum anyway, but we seem to have devoted pages to it. Don't the Yankees have their own thread here?

 

https://www.talksox.com/forum/forums/36-Damn-Yankees

[S5Dewey]

Eye test = eyes. Defensive metrics = eyes + technology.

 

Defensive metrics may have flaws, but they have to be better than eyes alone.

 

Ahh.. the old "lesser of two evils" argument!

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

It's a shame that Johnson & Velazquez didn't pan out.

 

Steven Wright and all his issues also put them in a bind before last season even began. I think they were hoping he'd be the swingman with All-Star stuff, with spot starts and long relief, and you could sense the pitching staff, at least, was not happy with his suspension. When an accountable guy like Porcello makes comments (answering reporter questions about it), you know it's a portent.

[S5Dewey]

How about combining the two? Jeter's defense sucks on both accounts.

 

Plus, UZR is done bye the "eye test" by people who are trained and calibrated. We can all agree it is still flawed, but they, combined, watch every play of every game, something our eye test can never match.

 

I find this position hard to swallow. The same people do NOT watch every play of every game. There just aren't hours enough in the day to do that. Since Notin has already established that everyone has a bias one cannot simply assume that all these trained people are seeing things the same way.

[Bellhorn04]

Ahh.. the old "lesser of two evils" argument!

 

If you want to put it that it way, sure.

[Elktonnick]

This was written by Gammons in February, 2001.

 

So. I was not the one who brought up Gammons name. Gammons clearly thought Jeter was better at that time.