The 1B Predicament

[moonslav59]

5 hours ago, TedYazPapiMookie said:

Let me enlighten you since your comments are so extreme and you lack the counter argument that makes it discussion rather than a rant.

Fielding percentage is a binary decision.  The player is either out or safe.  There is either an error or no error.

I am a bit confused why that wasn't understood but if it helps I will repeat things I've written.

Also, you wrote surely there is more to it than that.  I refer you to the lengthy discussions I have provided related to the very topic you are suggesting I haven't addressed.

Lastly, your first unfounded harsh criticism about Player A NOT being a better fielder than player B suggests you can't distinguish between better athleticm and worse judement than actual fielding skills.  If you are a player that catches every ball hit to you (that might have been a comparison in another message from you) they have done everything you can hope for on the opportunities provided them.  Perfection can't be improved on.  The athletic player who makes the errors on the wider range balls lacks baseball acumen like Devers.  He's over-extending himself and attempting plays that aren't in his range because if they were he should have gotten an out.  In your example where he gets to 20 extra balls and makes errors on 10 of them it's clear he gets credit with fielding percentage when he makes the plays but since his range is defined by what he can get to his 10 errors get counted against him for not being effective in his range.  Frankly, if these are such extraordinary attempts I still argue the score keepers would not ding him with an error and they would declare them hits just like they were for the other player.  Thus, fielding percentage is accurate.

I'm not saying the extra errors were cause by getting to extremely difficult balls. Many of these great-ranged SSs make errors on the balls hit to them, and yes, the score keeper rarely gives an error on a difficult play, unless he throws it away and the defender takes an extra base. Maybe a select few are called on some mildly difficult ones that the statue never even touches.

Why you assume defense is only about making no mistakes, even if you are a statue baffles my mind. You don't answer the points made and offer no evidence or data to support your claim, You just repeat defining what Fldg % is, like we don't know, and that it is all there is to defense.

You are wrong on so many levels, it's no longer worth the debate. 

[harmony]

The FanGraphs primer on measuring defense:

https://library.fangraphs.com/defense/

[Maxbialystock]

11 hours ago, TedYazPapiMookie said:

1 - Nobody makes that many plays in a year, so the example is a gross exaggeration 

2 - I have yet to see a formula for calculating the numbers you are proposing and how they are handled.  I believe it's because EVERYTHING in the metric world is BLACK BOXED.  There is a system that is not allowed access to that does all the calculations and fans are supposed to believe it to be accurate.  I don't

3 - The differences in plays executed at a single position like SS does not very by the athleticism alone.  The plays vary because of the pitching staff and where the balls are hit.  No two years, no two weeks and no two days are alike because the distance to the ball is completely unpredictable.  Historical averages are best guess predictors but that doesn't make them a fact.  So deriving performance estimates from history is like predicting rain from yesterday's weather, it's completely bogus.

4 - The idea that a player has a range is fictional.  He has a history that might suggest a distance but that history is an average and it reflects the uncontrollable chances that have happened in the past.  You have no idea if his limit is his historical average.  The next year he could have balls hit on average 10 feet farther away and successfully handle them.  Did he suddenly get better or did he simply get balls hit farther from him while still within his new range?  Who is to say that his new average is any more correct.  He could increase it by another 5 feet the next year making ALL his evaluations in the past WRONG.  How is that better than fielding percentage which provides the percentage of the time that a player is successful regardless of the distance?

Metrics fans grew up on video games and love simulation.  I fully understand why some baseball fans take the easy road and just ACCEPT metrics rather than challenging them for being inaccurate.  I like fielding percentage because it's about the team's success regardless of the player.  Metrics were calculated to change the focus to the player and how to answer the apples versus oranges dilemma.  Unfortunately, it falls short so fans who grew up with simulation prefer it to real stats.  They prefer making everything about the individual not the team.  So a BLACK BOX solution that hands them irrefutable data without actually proving it is their choice and to support it they bad mouth team-oriented statistics that focus on the success of the team not the individual. 

I think we have beaten this topic to depth.  Metrics people simply stick with what they grew up on.  I hope someday some of them start challenging the actual data provided from places like statcast.  I can go to a baseball reference site and see the fielding percentage and know how it was calculated.  On that same page to indulge the newbie baseball fans it has metrics and there is no way to calculate those numbers to prove that they are correct.  Doesn't that bother you?  It bothers me.  That's why I am always seeking people who ACTUALLY know how to calculate all the metric numbers frequently used by fans.  Funny, I haven't met ONE yet!  I just meet people who have theories and can't explain the actual formulas and why they represent reality.  It's probably because they don't.

Ok, let's put this BS to bed right now.  Go to espn or wherever you can find MLB team stats.  Now look at the team fielding stats and be prepared for a shock.  The very best fielding percentage in MLB right now is a gorgeous, wonderful 99%.  However, the no good lowdown last place team has a fielding percentage of 98%.  That's right.  Between the best and the worst is 1%  in fielding percentage.  

It is therefore essential to know how well a given player (or team) is handling the tough plays.  

 

[TedYazPapiMookie]

2 hours ago, Maxbialystock said:

Ok, let's put this BS to bed right now.  Go to espn or wherever you can find MLB team stats.  Now look at the team fielding stats and be prepared for a shock.  The very best fielding percentage in MLB right now is a gorgeous, wonderful 99%.  However, the no good lowdown last place team has a fielding percentage of 98%.  That's right.  Between the best and the worst is 1%  in fielding percentage.  

It is therefore essential to know how well a given player (or team) is handling the tough plays.  

 

I'm sure you realize that's an illogical comparison but for the sake of putting this to bed lets end on a fabricated comparison that's irrelevant so it truly represents metrics.  Thank you. 

[TedYazPapiMookie]

3 hours ago, harmony said:

The FanGraphs primer on measuring defense:

https://library.fangraphs.com/defense/

Maybe you didn't see it but I already debunked that link many responses ago.  Pointed out the mistakes line for line and how the theory was nothing but incorrect baseball concepts.  Key words ... incorrect normalization techniques that are meaningless, erroneous assumptions that don't represent facts and simulating retro activity to further attempt to define individual play to attempt to resolve apples to oranges situations.

With such a hostile group, I've already said I agree to disagree.  The irony is that there is still no definition of all the components of just ONE black box metric.  Not sure why nobody knows ONE off the top of their head yet you are convinced they are right.  Hahaha. 

Seems like a big disconnect to me.   Again, no need to keep beating a dead horse.  Let it go.

[TedYazPapiMookie]

6 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

I'm not saying the extra errors were cause by getting to extremely difficult balls. Many of these great-ranged SSs make errors on the balls hit to them, and yes, the score keeper rarely gives an error on a difficult play, unless he throws it away and the defender takes an extra base. Maybe a select few are called on some mildly difficult ones that the statue never even touches.

Why you assume defense is only about making no mistakes, even if you are a statue baffles my mind. You don't answer the points made and offer no evidence or data to support your claim, You just repeat defining what Fldg % is, like we don't know, and that it is all there is to defense.

You are wrong on so many levels, it's no longer worth the debate. 

I have agreed several times now that this discussion is not worthwhile.  Also, I'm still waiting for the ONE metric fully defined to the nth level.  A stat like Fielding % is very straight forward and I've stated it too often according to you, yet I have not received ONE defensive metric detailed with assumptions, calculations, constants and variables.  I've asked for that many times now.

Your comment that I said that fielding % is all there is to defense is an interpretation of what I wrote and not representative of what I said.  Fielding percentage is the rate of success in the all important area of stopping the offense from getting baserunners.  Every play has a binary result;  Success or failure to get the batter out.  No normalization techniques are used, no complex formula is used, no need to simulate past events are used, no counting on a company to provide an uncertified set of data that shows the fan the nth level of detail of each formula and the exceptions that are created to make the formula work. 

I like fielding percentage more.  It doesn't pretend to solve the "apples to oranges" issue when comparing players it just records the facts of each binary result.  It shows a rate of success in an untampered form.  It's not perfect but it's factual.

[Bellhorn04]

I think it might be interesting to see what the correlation strength between fielding pct. and advanced defensive ratings is.

[notin]

28 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

I think it might be interesting to see what the correlation strength between fielding pct. and advanced defensive ratings is.

The Red Sox are 29th in fielding percentage, 12th in DRS, and 18th in OAA…

[Bellhorn04]

2 minutes ago, notin said:

The Red Six are 29th in fielding percentage, 12th in DRS, and 18th in OAA…

Thank you.  That certainly suggests the Sox defense, while not great, is much better than their fielding pct.

[moonslav59]

34 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Thank you.  That certainly suggests the Sox defense, while not great, is much better than their fielding pct.

Nope: none of Rafaela's spectacular plays count. Story's range counts for zero. Forget catcher defense, entirely, despite it being about or more important than SS D. Bregman is on pace for 16 errors and Devers made 12, last year. We should be 29th. Thus spoke TYPMathustra.

9 statues making every play hit right at him is the best defense that can possibly be. There is zero room for argument, since the metrics were officially debunked, line-by line, by the foremost authority of the subject.

[notin]

41 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Thank you.  That certainly suggests the Sox defense, while not great, is much better than their fielding pct.

Team fielding percentage is very misleading.

Three example scenarios, what is the team fielding percentage?

1. Three groundballs to SS.  First two result in outs but the SS boots the third.

2. Pitcher strikes out 3 hitters.

3. Runner on first (walk).  First batter hits a groundball to SS, they get the putout at 2b, but the second baseman throws it away and the runner is safe at first.  Next two batters hit routine groundballs resulting in outs.

The answer should be .667, no fielding percentage, and .667.  But they’re not; they’re .800, 1.000 and 1.000…

[Bellhorn04]

2 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

Nope: none of Rafaela's spectacular plays count. Story's range counts for zero. Forget catcher defense, entirely, despite it being about or more important than SS D. Bregman is on pace for 16 errors and Devers made 12, last year. We should be 29th. Thus spoke TYPMathustra.

9 statues making every play hit right at him is the best defense that can possibly be. There is zero room for argument, since the metrics were officially debunked, line-by line, by the foremost authority of the subject.

A sarcasm-meter-busting post if ever there was LOL

[notin]

9 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

Nope: none of Rafaela's spectacular plays count. Story's range counts for zero. Forget catcher defense, entirely, despite it being about or more important than SS D. Bregman is on pace for 16 errors and Devers made 12, last year. We should be 29th. Thus spoke TYPMathustra.

9 statues making every play hit right at him is the best defense that can possibly be. There is zero room for argument, since the metrics were officially debunked, line-by line, by the foremost authority of the subject.

Very loose definition of debunking.  Not so sure acknowledging they exist but expressing distaste qualifies.  By that logic, I’ve debunked split pea soup and “How I Met Your Mother”…

[illinoisredsox]

20 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

Nope: none of Rafaela's spectacular plays count. Story's range counts for zero. Forget catcher defense, entirely, despite it being about or more important than SS D. Bregman is on pace for 16 errors and Devers made 12, last year. We should be 29th. Thus spoke TYPMathustra.

9 statues making every play hit right at him is the best defense that can possibly be. There is zero room for argument, since the metrics were officially debunked, line-by line, by the foremost authority of the subject.

Moon, you left out the Fenway Green sarcasm font.

[notin]

58 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Thank you.  That certainly suggests the Sox defense, while not great, is much better than their fielding pct.

Fun facts about team fielding percentage:

Dropped third strikes actually help team fielding percentage.

Ground outs to first base can hurt team fielding percentage if the pitcher is not involved…

[illinoisredsox]

14 minutes ago, notin said:

Fun facts about team fielding percentage:

Dropped third strikes actually help team fielding percentage.

Ground outs to first base can hurt team fielding percentage if the pitcher is not involved…

Now to be fair, the dropped third strike only helps if the first baseman is involved.

[moonslav59]

20 minutes ago, illinoisredsox said:

Moon, you left out the Fenway Green sarcasm font.

I woulda, if I coulda.

[notin]

50 minutes ago, illinoisredsox said:

Now to be fair, the dropped third strike only helps if the first baseman is involved.

True.

Strikeouts in general also help because put outs are recorded with almost no chance of an error.

I suppose an error could be charged on a dropped third strike resulting in an overthrow at first base.  I’m sure it’s happened but that’s some rare air there…

[harmony]

This forum welcomes newcomers all the time.

Why is one newcomer more disruptive than the others?

It is the fringe view? The tone of the post? A combination of both?

[moonslav59]

2 minutes ago, harmony said:

This forum welcomes newcomers all the time.

Why is one newcomer more disruptive than the others?

It is the fringe view? The tone of the post? A combination of both?

Fringe views are welcome, as are all non-troll posters.

Gotta expect push back with positions like that and saying things like "I already debunked that, before," like maybe  there is no need to debate it anymore.

[drewski6]

On 5/19/2025 at 1:32 PM, notin said:

I didn’t like Devers original response, and still don’t.  But I don’t hear anything about Cora trying to move him to 1b.  So DH is his role for now.

Getting Yoshida into the lineup over Abraham Toro makes all the sense in the world, but it’s clearly not in the Sox immediate plans. Yoshida isn’t even DHing in Worcester yet; no way they bring him right up to Boston. 
 

Reports earlier this week had Campbell working out at 1b.  If Campbell is moving to 1b, this issue is dead.  The fallout is obvious - Toro down (or out), Mayer up.  The only question becomes does Mayer play 2nd or does Story move there?

I only disagree thats the "only question" - heres another: what do we do with yoshida when/if he heals

[drewski6]

oh crap, didnt realize i responded to something that due to the direction of this thread, feels irrelevant and ancient history

but then again, maybe not such a bad thing as I was tiring of reading about flding % vs range

[Bellhorn04]

24 minutes ago, harmony said:

This forum welcomes newcomers all the time.

Why is one newcomer more disruptive than the others?

It is the fringe view? The tone of the post? A combination of both?

It's the combination of taking a position that's difficult to support and being very argumentative about it.  But it's all baseball talk, so plenty of latitude should be given.  The new poster is getting ganged up on a bit and we don't really want that.  So let's all chill on this a little.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

1 hour ago, notin said:

Fun facts about team fielding percentage:

Dropped third strikes actually help team fielding percentage.

Ground outs to first base can hurt team fielding percentage if the pitcher is not involved…

The best defense for this roster of Red Sox is Crochet striking out the side.

But how is fielding% affected by "Kingles"? (a Kingle is a swinging Strike 3 on a pitch so nasty it bounces beyond the reach of the catcher and all the way to backstop, allowing the batter to safely reach first base).

[mvp 78]

11 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

oh crap, didnt realize i responded to something that due to the direction of this thread, feels irrelevant and ancient history

but then again, maybe not such a bad thing as I was tiring of reading about flding % vs range

You're good. We never stay on track with a topic anyway, unless it's something really annoying like fielding percentage for some unknown reason...

[mvp 78]

4 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

It's the combination of taking a position that's difficult to support and being very argumentative about it.  But it's all baseball talk, so plenty of latitude should be given.  The new poster is getting ganged up on a bit and we don't really want that.  So let's all chill on this a little.

Wholeheartedly agree and have said as much previously.

[TheSplinteredSplendor]

16 hours ago, Maxbialystock said:

Ok, let's put this BS to bed right now.  Go to espn or wherever you can find MLB team stats.  Now look at the team fielding stats and be prepared for a shock.  The very best fielding percentage in MLB right now is a gorgeous, wonderful 99%.  However, the no good lowdown last place team has a fielding percentage of 98%.  That's right.  Between the best and the worst is 1%  in fielding percentage.  

It is therefore essential to know how well a given player (or team) is handling the tough plays.  

 

I can't respond to your post on the other 1B thread since bellhorn blocked me from responding on that thread because he likes to name-call but doesn't like to be responded to in kind.. So I will respond to your post here.

7 hours ago, TheSplinteredSplendor said:

Not if he continues to slash .190/.266/.302 as he has in his last 30 games.

A fair point.  

However, the title of article is wrong because Casas was having a horrible season when he was injured.  His DWAR after just 28 games was -0.6, and his OPS was .580.    Seriously, how hard can it be to replace those numbers?  

I sincerely doubt the idea is to replace casas' .580 OPS, I would think the idea is to get much better.

But either way, campbell's .568 OPS over his last 30 games is not even replacing casas' numbers, it's even worse.

[cp176]

So Campbell was brought up to play second base.  He gets a few days off due to the fact that he is struggling at the plate.  When he comes back, he goes to center field.  Once again, I don’t get the move.  He should be at first base yesterday and Mayer should be playing either second or short.  Something different has to be tried.  

[mvp 78]

1 hour ago, cp176 said:

So Campbell was brought up to play second base.  He gets a few days off due to the fact that he is struggling at the plate.  When he comes back, he goes to center field.  Once again, I don’t get the move.  He should be at first base yesterday and Mayer should be playing either second or short.  Something different has to be tried.  

I don't think he should be thrown into first base. He's barely even practiced there. While we jokingly say it's easy to play, it would be a bad decision to throw him out there without him really being ready for it. He at least had MiLB/college experience in CF.

[Old Red]

28 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

I don't think he should be thrown into first base. He's barely even practiced there. While we jokingly say it's easy to play, it would be a bad decision to throw him out there without him really being ready for it. He at least had MiLB/college experience in CF.

Casas went down on May 2nd. There has been No urgency whatsoever to fix the problem at 1B just like in past years.