notin

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?

A couple important distinction- Range Factor, despite its name, doesn’t measure range. It measures how many players a player makes per game regardless of how easy or difficult they are. It can be heavily influenced by pitchers and park, as well. An infielder with more groundball pitchers on his team is likely to have a higher range factor than a similar player on a staff loaded with strikeout and flyball pitchers. I don’t know why they chose the name Range Factor, but it’s no more a measure of range than slugging percentage is a percentage or batting average is an average. It’s false to say dWAR doesn’t incorporate errors. It absolutely does. It just doesn’t use them as the sole method of determining defense. Stats like DRS, UZR and OAA do not treat all groundballs and flyballs equally like fielding percentage does. It adds or subtracts points on each play based on degree of difficulty. So if a player makes a catch on a ball where players in his position are only successful 10% of the time, he is awarded 0.90 points. If he fails, he loses 0.10 points. Not every play is treated equal. Because they’re not all equal anywhere except in fielding pct. Fielding percentage only takes into account balls the player can touch (per Rule 9.12, an error is only charged if the player touches the ball with few exceptions, like grounders between his legs). And doesn’t take into consideration how easy or difficult any play not made is. No metrics incorporate hustle or motivation on their own. They’re all batted ball vs play made, and each play has its own intrinsic degree of difficulty. These metrics also have adjustments for position, because not every position is as easy to field as any other one. It’s easier to play LF than it is to play SS. But most left fielders will have much higher fielding percentages than most shortstops. Does that mean left fielders are better fielders than shortstops?

What exactly did Breslow say to “paint Devers as an unworthy teammate”? Are you sure you’re not embellishing this a bit?

So you’re righting off range because sometimes it doesn’t lead to outs? Please tell me I’m reading that incorrectly. Please. Because it obviously does lead to more outs. Im perfectly happy engaging with you on this subject, but honestly, you raise more questions than answers. Nothing you write makes me think you grasp metrics , their purpose, or their usage. But I do agree on one point - they’re not stats, which are a historical record of specific events. But when you say stuff like “range doesn’t matter if a ball hit farther out doesn’t generate an out”, it raises way more questions than answers. First one being the obvious “ok, well what about when it DOES lead to an out?” Doesn’t range matter then? And the notion of posting about how you dissected some metric and found it to be pure fiction, but when asked say “do the work yourself.” Obviously my first thought is that do that, I’ll be the only one of us that did it. (And if I did, I would share. Done it before.) So right now, I want a serious conversation. Not some guy who throws around unsupported garbage buried in long sentences and can name Cal Ripken. Despite this seemingly like an insulting task it isn’t meant to be but I need you to define fielding percentage. Because you and I are clearly not using the same definition. And I don’t doubt mine…

That tracks. I also would have accepted “a million miles away”…

Yep. Supposedly Cora wants him to throw, but how far down is he in the OF depth charts anyway?

It would make sense if he wanted to get Yoshida into the lineup over Abraham Toro. I can support that. And outside of Abraham Toro himself, who wouldn’t?

The statement about range not mattering if the rate of success falls off doesn’t make sense. More range still means more chances, which means more outs, even if it does mean more errors. In fact, every single point you try to make about metrics being wrong applies much better to fielding percentage. The statement about players like Jeter, Dever being Teflon as a reason to not use metrics is actually a really good argument against fielding percentage, which only concerns itself with errors. Metrics take many other factors into account. What metric did you dissect and what were the findings? Can’t just drop stuff like that and think people should accept it. I expect every metric to have flaws. I also think in most cases, those flaws are less significant than the glaring ones in fielding percentage, including the ones you inadvertently reminded me of in this treatise…

I’m not as convinced of Breslow’s dedication to Yoshida as you clearly are. But there’s nothing wrong with trying to get your best lineup together. If Aaron Judge can move to CF to get Alex Verdugo into the lineup I see nothing wrong with Devers moving to accommodate Yoshida, especially since, unlike Judge’s move, this one is covering for an injury. No one would be asking Devers to move again if Casas didn’t get hurt…

Unless you thought he would play like last year…

First you need to tell me what percentage you think aren’t borderline… ;)

Interesting. Multiple people have cited the Sox lead MLB in errors. Not one has mentioned they lead MLB in putouts…

No one is saying errors are a good thing. But errors are lousy way to judge defense. I think a higher percentage than you realize are borderline calls, disputed or not…

I agree. It’s not necessarily one flaw. But it is possible one flaw severely masks another, and given how we attribute every hit to the pitcher, defense is a very possible culprit…

Being measured against average isnt the same as being measured against the scorer’s interpretation of the ability of an average player to make a play…

It’s not a dumb argument. The point is errors are overrated as a defensive stat, but that’s not some defense of the Sox, well, defense. As I said earlier, most metrics probably corroborate they’re not good defensively. And the bottom line is, errors or not, plays aren’t being made. Maybe pitching isnt thr Sox problem at all? Maybe the inability of their defense to make outs on balls put in play is. If the latter is true, upgrades to the rotation and pen won’t fix much, will they?

They are for now. Fair and foul balls are also defined as umpire discretion. But if you read rule 9.12 about errors, the standard it’s weighed against isnt defined as rigidly as a foul line or even as theoretically as a strike zone. It’s measured against the abilities of an average player - what exactly is that!

The goal of a fielder is to make an out. But in your world, the goal of a fielder is to not make an error, even if it means not trying. Now my turn - what does batting average measure?

He still has a chance to be better than Jeter Downs or Stan Papi…

Or both if Cabrera muffs a grounder off the bat of Ortiz…

The problem with Team Errors is the rule book defines them as attributable to a single player. Should they exist? Absolutely. Especially for plays like I described, which happen almost daily in MLB. (And happen daily on days the White Sox play.) Another “team error” you see a lot in games pitched by Eduardo Rodríguez is “runner safe on routine grounder because pitcher didn’t cover first.” How is FAILING to cover the base not an error?

Plus it used to be, if you scored a play E6, the scorer got a phone call mid game from an angry Orlando Cabrera…

Oh no! My baseball acumen was challenged by a random person on the Internet! Not my fault you like fielding percentage, but it’s a useless stat. If it was worthwhile, no one would have bothered with other fielding metrics. But fielding percentage has some massive, gaping flaws that no one takes it seriously. That’s not my fault and not yours. But that doesn’t change the facts…

Just once I’d like to see you type “I think I’ll get some data on that.” https://www.spotrac.com/mlb/rankings/player/_/year/2025/sort/cap_total Per sportrac, there are 174 active contracts in MLB of $10,000,000 AAV or more. Think all 174 are starting? I got as far as number 4 and found that not to be true. There are multiple players out of action for multiple reasons, including benched, injured, “injured”, suspended, being Marcus Stroman, etc. Frankly I’d rather the Sox bench the expensive non-performer than play him and hope he justifies his salary one day…

They are and always have been opinions. In fact, the MLB rule book defines them as opinions. Not to mention, plenty of “obvious errors” are and have always been ruled as hits. Take your standard pop up that lands between 3 fielders untouched, an almost daily occurs in MLB. Fielding percentage calls this a hit. But is it harder to catch a pop fly than make a throw to first base from 10 feet behind the third base bag without sailing it or bouncing it?