A Realistic View of 2023: Part II

[moonslav59]

They are absolutely not the same: A great pitching staff can prop up a bad defense, but not vice versa. You can't catch homers.

 

What about all the balls hit that are not HRs?

[mvp 78]

Didn't Cora talk about the kid maybe taking some reps at 2B? Maybe?

 

But why?

[Maxbialystock]

What about all the balls hit that are not HRs?

 

On the worst team, 98% of them are fielded correctly/adequately.

 

The challenge for hitters, which you blithely gloss over, is hitting a round ball with a round bat squarely--and even some/lots of those are fielded for outs. Hitting is way, way tougher than fielding and a batting average of .300 is way above average.

 

The challenge for pitchers is consistently (2/3 of the time) hitting that infinitesimal strike zone--preferably 66% of the time, preferably not in the middle of the strike zone (so inches count), and definitely with a tremendous effort including imparting spin on the ball. Starters do that maybe 90-100 times a game. Pitching is much, much harder than fielding.

 

And the challenge for fielders is simply to catch/field a ball with a massive glove, and to throw it to someone, but with nowhere near the accuracy of a pitcher. Thus are 98% of hit and thrown balls fielded correctly and thrown accurately enough.

[Bellhorn04]

And the challenge for fielders is simply to catch/field a ball with a massive glove, and to throw it to someone, but with nowhere near the accuracy of a pitcher. Thus are 98% of hit and thrown balls fielded correctly and thrown accurately enough.

 

Sounds simple enough, if you leave out the velocity the balls are hit with, the not always predictable bounces, and the miniscule amount of time the fielder has to catch and throw the ball.

[moonslav59]

On the worst team, 98% of them are fielded correctly/adequately.

 

The challenge for hitters, which you blithely gloss over, is hitting a round ball with a round bat squarely--and even some/lots of those are fielded for outs. Hitting is way, way tougher than fielding and a batting average of .300 is way above average.

 

The challenge for pitchers is consistently (2/3 of the time) hitting that infinitesimal strike zone--preferably 66% of the time, preferably not in the middle of the strike zone (so inches count), and definitely with a tremendous effort including imparting spin on the ball. Starters do that maybe 90-100 times a game. Pitching is much, much harder than fielding.

 

And the challenge for fielders is simply to catch/field a ball with a massive glove, and to throw it to someone, but with nowhere near the accuracy of a pitcher. Thus are 98% of hit and thrown balls fielded correctly and thrown accurately enough.

 

Where do I gloss over what you day I do.

 

OAA shows some of our closest competitors made 45-65 more outs on D than we did.

 

Again, that is no where near the influence pitching and hitting has on wins and losses, and I guess I need to repeat that 100 more times, so you’ll stop accusing me of glossing over what we agree on.

 

60 outs not made is like 60 more hits allowed by our pitching or 60 less hits by our batters. That is clearly enough to make a significant difference, yet you keep choosing to gloss over that effect.

 

Take away 60 hits from our offense and our BA goes from.264 to .251. that’s going from 3rd to 15th!

 

Who is glossing over things, here?

[dgalehouse]

Television gives you a different perspective of the game. When you are at the ballpark you get a better feel for the game. The difficulty of fielding a hard-hit ground ball in the hole and throwing to first to beat the runner. That is just one example. There are many. It is hard to really appreciate the game if you just watch on TV and never get to the ballpark. But with so many fans, that is very often the case today.

[Maxbialystock]

Sounds simple enough, if you leave out the velocity the balls are hit with, the not always predictable bounces, and the miniscule amount of time the fielder has to catch and throw the ball.

 

Agree with the velocity, but, when they are hit really hard, the infielders get a break in terms of hit or error--scorers usually say hit. Unpredictable bounces don't automatically become hits, but some of them do. Agree on the time between catching and throwing, but I think we can agree that's a big deal maybe 10-20% of the time. Also--and this is a a point that supports your view--a late throw is rarely called an error.

 

What I freely admit I've ignored is the issue of range. Some of the best infielders--I mean gold glove infielders-- can accrue more errors simply because of their greater range. I think that's less likely for an outfielder, but completely agree that the best outfielders have greater range because of their speed, but even more for their routes/anticipation.

[moonslav59]

Agree with the velocity, but, when they are hit really hard, the infielders get a break in terms of hit or error--scorers usually say hit. Unpredictable bounces don't automatically become hits, but some of them do. Agree on the time between catching and throwing, but I think we can agree that's a big deal maybe 10-20% of the time. Also--and this is a a point that supports your view--a late throw is rarely called an error.

 

What I freely admit I've ignored is the issue of range. Some of the best infielders--I mean gold glove infielders-- can accrue more errors simply because of their greater range. I think that's less likely for an outfielder, but completely agree that the best outfielders have greater range because of their speed, but even more for their routes/anticipation.

 

Some SSs make over 100 more plays than others in the same amount of innings.

 

Maybe some is due to playing behind more GB pitchers. Maybe some is superior range- making outs where most allow hits.

[notin]

Agree with the velocity, but, when they are hit really hard, the infielders get a break in terms of hit or error--scorers usually say hit. Unpredictable bounces don't automatically become hits, but some of them do. Agree on the time between catching and throwing, but I think we can agree that's a big deal maybe 10-20% of the time. Also--and this is a a point that supports your view--a late throw is rarely called an error.

 

What I freely admit I've ignored is the issue of range. Some of the best infielders--I mean gold glove infielders-- can accrue more errors simply because of their greater range. I think that's less likely for an outfielder, but completely agree that the best outfielders have greater range because of their speed, but even more for their routes/anticipation.

 

Defense isn’t about errors or having tough plays scored as hits. It’s about making outs…

[notin]

Agree with the velocity, but, when they are hit really hard, the infielders get a break in terms of hit or error--scorers usually say hit. Unpredictable bounces don't automatically become hits, but some of them do. Agree on the time between catching and throwing, but I think we can agree that's a big deal maybe 10-20% of the time. Also--and this is a a point that supports your view--a late throw is rarely called an error.

 

What I freely admit I've ignored is the issue of range. Some of the best infielders--I mean gold glove infielders-- can accrue more errors simply because of their greater range. I think that's less likely for an outfielder, but completely agree that the best outfielders have greater range because of their speed, but even more for their routes/anticipation.

 

Hypothetical scenario - 100 identical groundballs are hit to two different shortstops.

 

Shortstop A gets to 80 of them but makes every play he gets to.

 

Shortstop B gets to all 100 but makes 10 errors.

 

Who is the better defender?

[Deja Doh]

Hypothetical scenario - 100 identical groundballs are hit to two different shortstops.

 

Shortstop A gets to 80 of them but makes every play he gets to.

 

Shortstop B gets to all 100 but makes 10 errors.

 

Who is the better defender?

 

But what happens if the 20 balls missed by A don't result in a run scored? And the 10 errors by B results in 10 losses? That's the problem with WAR.

[Hugh2]

Hypothetical scenario - 100 identical groundballs are hit to two different shortstops.

 

Shortstop A gets to 80 of them but makes every play he gets to.

 

Shortstop B gets to all 100 but makes 10 errors.

 

Who is the better defender?

 

There going to be some people who will always chose 8, b cause they are think the pitcher will pitch better knowing they will never make an error.

 

This is of course wrong.

[Duran Is The Man]

Thanks, I going to Boothbay Harbor for three days, and chase those whales again, so keep up the good work, and don’t let the boys slide back to the Yankees while I’m gone.

 

i've done that myself. have fun.

[cp176]

They are absolutely not the same: A great pitching staff can prop up a bad defense, but not vice versa. You can't catch homers.

 

To me they are the same - run prevention = defense. You to yours - me to mine.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

Hypothetical scenario - 100 identical groundballs are hit to two different shortstops.

 

Shortstop A gets to 80 of them but makes every play he gets to.

 

Shortstop B gets to all 100 but makes 10 errors.

 

Who is the better defender?

 

More info needed: do the 20 grounders A misses go for singles? does B make every play he gets to beyond the 10 Es (so 90)? Are B's Es booted, dropped or through the legs -- accounting for one free base -- or do some include bad throws, allowing for two free bags?

[notin]

But what happens if the 20 balls missed by A don't result in a run scored? And the 10 errors by B results in 10 losses? That's the problem with WAR.

 

Let me see.

 

What happens if someone looks at one scenario at the most positive extreme, looks at the other scenario at the most negative extreme, and then blames a completely irrelevant metric? Is that the question?

 

If so, I guess my answer is I blame the schools…

[notin]

More info needed: do the 20 grounders A misses go for singles? does B make every play he gets to beyond the 10 Es (so 90)? Are B's Es booted, dropped or through the legs -- accounting for one free base -- or do some include bad throws, allowing for two free bags?

 

Ok

 

 

All hits go for one base. All errors got for two.

 

I would argue you didn’t really “need” more info…

[Bellhorn04]

Ok

 

 

All hits go for one base. All errors got for two.

 

I would argue you didn’t really “need” more info…

 

I had the same question as 5 Gloves, of course.

 

If all the errors are 2 bases, that makes the two scenarios identical in terms of total bases.

 

But the OBP is cut in half in Scenario B, so obviously you have to go with that.

[notin]

I had the same question as 5 Gloves, of course.

 

If all the errors are 2 bases, that makes the two scenarios identical in terms of total bases.

 

But the OBP is cut in half in Scenario B, so obviously you have to go with that.

 

Shortstop B gets 90 outs. That works too.

 

If you need to know runs and runner placement, I’d use the basic Runs Created formula (hits+walks)*total bases/PA. If you treat the two base errors like doubles, you still wind up with half as many runs created (2 to 4).

 

Shortstop B might make errors, but he’s far better than Shortstop A…

[moonslav59]

Defense isn’t about errors or having tough plays scored as hits. It’s about making outs…

 

Yup. And there is a vast differential between the best and average, and even more vast between the best and the worst.

 

OAA tries to capture that, and it shows our D has produced 45-65 less than our top 4 competitors.

 

60 outs is about a 20 point swing on a FT player's BA. Taking about that off our team BA. we'd move from 3rd to 15th in the rankings.

 

Last night was not the first time those who use only eyesight to make determinations saw our D flat out lose a game. Nothing else led to the loss more than our D.

 

That should happen 2-3 times a year, not 8-12.

[Bellhorn04]

Shortstop B gets 90 outs. That works too.

 

If you need to know runs and runner placement, I’d use the basic Runs Created formula (hits+walks)*total bases/PA. If you treat the two base errors like doubles, you still wind up with half as many runs created (2 to 4).

 

Shortstop B might make errors, but he’s far better than Shortstop A…

 

Yes, I'd call it a no-brainer.

[moonslav59]

Shortstop B gets 90 outs. That works too.

 

If you need to know runs and runner placement, I’d use the basic Runs Created formula (hits+walks)*total bases/PA. If you treat the two base errors like doubles, you still wind up with half as many runs created (2 to 4).

 

Shortstop B might make errors, but he’s far better than Shortstop A…

 

The real life example is that one SS may make 75-125 more plays than another and not 20.

[Bellhorn04]

The real life example is that one SS may make 75-125 more plays than another and not 20.

 

Over the course of a season, you mean. notin's example was a sample of 100 plays.

[notin]

The real life example is that one SS may make 75-125 more plays than another and not 20.

 

Not on 100 groundballs he won’t…

[moonslav59]

Not on 100 groundballs he won’t…

 

2022 Assists

417 Mateo in 1257 inn

407 Seager on 1259 inn

 

334 T Turner 9n 1387

326 JP Crawford in 1254

That year the differential was 91 between Mateo and CP. Mateo also made 19 more POs.

 

2021

436 I K-f in 1360

362 Bogey in 1169

337 Andrus in 1246

That's 99 more assists, but a few more innings (53 more POs!!!!) 152 more plays!

 

It happends every year

[moonslav59]

Over the course of a season, you mean. notin's example was a sample of 100 plays.

 

Yes, but stretch it out: 100v 80, 100vs 80 five times and it's 100 plays over a season on just grounders.

[Hugh2]

Let me see.

 

What happens if someone looks at one scenario at the most positive extreme, looks at the other scenario at the most negative extreme, and then blames a completely irrelevant metric? Is that the question?

 

If so, I guess my answer is I blame the schools…

 

I remember learning in school when evaluating a scenario like this that you always do so as a “all things considered”

 

What we happens to one sample size happens to the other, you’re isolating two variable to measure performance and come to a conclusion. Adding in uneven variables is just changing the question.

 

It’s like asking what’s 2+2 and then saying it can’t ever be 4 if you’re multiplying the solution by 10.

[Hugh2]

I think pitchers appreciate the guy who get to more balls and make more plays.

 

This was the Jeter vs. Garciaparra argument back in the day. Nomar would end up booting a few more balls than the captain, but at the end of the day we all know who the better short stop was in his prime. Prime Nomar was really really good (on all fronts)

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

2021

436 I K-f in 1360

362 Bogey in 1169

337 Andrus in 1246

That's 99 more assists, but a few more innings (53 more POs!!!!) 152 more plays!

 

It happends every year

 

Ya, but... in '21, IKF played for Texas -- which lost 102, with the third-worst runs allowed and ERA. Wonder how many of his extra assists were on relay throws, gunning out baserunners trying to advance?

[moonslav59]

I think pitchers appreciate the guy who get to more balls and make more plays.

 

This was the Jeter vs. Garciaparra argument back in the day. Nomar would end up booting a few more balls than the captain, but at the end of the day we all know who the better short stop was in his prime. Prime Nomar was really really good (on all fronts)

 

I'm not so convince Nomar was ever a big plus defender. He made those running, twirling plays from the hole that looked impressive, when I'm not so sure they were outs most SSs made look easier.

 

BTW, here are the plays made from 1997-2022:

ASS/PO= Plays (innings)

2582/1473= 4055 ARod in 7809 (.519 plays per inning)

2526/906= 3432 Vizquel in 7778 (.441/inning)

 

2301/1364= 3,665 Jeter in 8092 (.453 per inning/ .284 assists per inn.)

2132/1164= 3,295 Nomar in 6481 (.508 per inning/.329 per inn.)

Nomar did better per game, but not by all that much and way worse than the best.

 

I always said, ARod should not have changed positions for Jeter, a SS who had one of MLB's worst DRS numbers in history at SS.