Brandon Inge to Participate in Home Run Derby

[Oblong]

Jon Paul Morosi wrote a column a few weeks ago stating that Jeter's defense this year has improved quite a bit based on the metrics. FWIW.

[The Truman Show]

You need range to be a good fielder, especially at shortstop. Positioning can only get you so far because it's impossible to predict the randomness of every ball hit off the bat. Surehandedness is nice, but if you can't get to balls that most other shortstops are fielding, it doesn't do you any good.

[The Truman Show]

Originally Posted by Oblong

Jon Paul Morosi wrote a column a few weeks ago stating that Jeter's defense this year has improved quite a bit based on the metrics. FWIW.

It has. It's too early to tell if that's a statistical anomaly or an indication of legitimately better defensive play.

[sportz4life]

Originally Posted by Oblong

Jon Paul Morosi wrote a column a few weeks ago stating that Jeter's defense this year has improved quite a bit based on the metrics. FWIW.

I mentioned that..for the first time in many seasons Jeter is a neutral or slightly negative defensive player. That is a monstrous improvement.

[Mr. Bigglesworth]

Originally Posted by sportz4life

I mentioned that..for the first time in many seasons Jeter is a neutral or slightly negative defensive player. That is a monstrous improvement.

Yet probably isn't the equivalent of being 'good'.

[will the thrill]

Originally Posted by Mr. Bigglesworth

On the off chance that the colors do not indicate sarcasm, statistical evidence strongly suggests Derek Jeter has not been a good defensive shortstop relative to other MLB shortstops over his career, by any reasonable interpretation of the meaning good.

EDIT: I see S4L posted the same sentiment during the time I was writing this...

Yeah, i tried to highlight the good vs great and hoped it wouldn't be taken as sarcasm. Just the point of a fielder who plays his position and doesn't make 40 errors a year and is where he's supposed to be on every play is a good fielder. He's not great

[will the thrill]

Originally Posted by sportz4life

will except for this season, Jeter's defense as measured by every defensive metric, is poor. It's an inside joke throughout baseball and the SABR community..with the advent of the new system that MLB is testing in San Fransisco and will implement in every major leage park, measuring all defensive factors beginning in 2010. These are the kinds of arguments that will finally be put to rest.

I officially could care less about any metrics anyone came up with, baseball fielding has so many factors involved with who his hitting, how hard it's hit, how good/bad the pitching staff etc.. I've yet to be shown a metric that I thought told the story. In my opinion, a shortstops job in the field is to instill confidence in the rest of his fielders and his pitchers that when the time comes he's going to make the play they need. And Jeter does that.

[Mr. Bigglesworth]

Originally Posted by will the thrill

I officially could care less about any metrics anyone came up with, baseball fielding has so many factors involved with who his hitting, how hard it's hit, how good/bad the pitching staff etc.. I've yet to be shown a metric that I thought told the story. In my opinion, a shortstops job in the field is to instill confidence in the rest of his fielders and his pitchers that when the time comes he's going to make the play they need. And Jeter does that.

Or, in other words, you don't care what any numbers or analysis say, you believe Jeter to be good defensively, ergo he is.

And b/c it is a pet peeve of mine ... I believe the phrase is 'I couldn't care less' not 'I could care less'. If one could care less, it implies they care at least some.

[tiger337]

Originally Posted by will the thrill

I officially could care less about any metrics anyone came up with, baseball fielding has so many factors involved with who his hitting, how hard it's hit, how good/bad the pitching staff etc..

It's possible to measure those factors and the modern fielding metrics already consider some of those factors. You've already decided that no fielding metric is going to work no matter what factors are considered though. That doesn't make sense to me.

Originally Posted by will the thrill

In my opinion, a shortstops job in the field is to instill confidence in the rest of his fielders and his pitchers that when the time comes he's going to make the play they need. And Jeter does that.

A shortstop's primary job is to turn batted balls into outs and Jeter has not done that as well as most shortstops during his career. As far as making his teammates more confident, he may do that but what does that have to do with being a good fielder? He's probably a good teammate because so many players have say that he is. That doesn't make him a good fielder though. He's only a good fielder if he makes plays.

[tiger337]

Originally Posted by will the thrill

Jeter does play good defense, he knows the hitters, and gets himself in great position to make up for his lack of range. to be a good defensive player, you need great range, or great knowledge to position and play your position properly and not make a lot of mistakes. A great defensive player does both

The fielding metrics don't measure physical range. They measure how good a player is at turning batted balls into outs. One player might do that with great physical range. Another might do it with great positioning. Whatever way a player does it, the idea is to make plays. If Jeter is always in position but doesn't make plays, how is he helping his team with his fielding?

[will the thrill]

on a scale of 1-100 i care about 2, so i could care less...

So he's not a good fielder, but he's a good shortstop. All the SABR and numbers people like to completely rule out any kind of mental aspect of the game, when it's a very vital part of the game of baseball. If Jeter's teammates and Pitchers have confidence in him as a fielder and he makes enough plays to convince them of that, then he's doing something right.

I'm not saying that can never make a metric that works, I've just yet to see one and have one explained to me that can do it well enough to satisfy me. I play shortstop(yes in softball) and have had teammates who had more range and better fielding ability than me, but the team plays better when I'm there and not as well with the other guys. I've seen guys who can play their position with the best of them, but they don't do things that help the other 8 guys around them better throughout the course of the game. Everything weighs eaually

[will the thrill]

Originally Posted by tiger337

The fielding metrics don't measure physical range. They measure how good a player is at turning batted balls into outs. One player might do that with great physical range. Another might do it with great positioning. Whatever way a player does it, the idea is to make plays. If Jeter is always in position but doesn't make plays, how is he helping his team with his fielding?

So how do these fielding metrics determine which balls a player should catch?

[apabruce]

Will the Thrill, I am not a stathead but I read an analysis by Tom Tango called With or Without...Derek Jeter to be eye opening even to my dim eyes. It was in the 2008 Hardball Times Baseball Annual.

Tango compared the percentage of balls in play converted to outs by various shortstops over their careers since 1993. Jeter was near the bottom. Since one could argue that each shortstop sees a different mix of pitchers, he compared all the shortstops that played behind Roger Clemons, for example, and found Jeter near the bottom.

Then he compared all the pitchers Jeter played behind, and ran a comparison between how many balls were converted into outs when Jeter was their SS versus all other SS that played behind them. A few pitchers, notably Mariano Rivera, did better with Jeter, but most did worse.

He did many comparisons, isolating different pitchers or hitters, to see if there was bias in the stats against Jeter. He consistently found Jeter to be among the worst fielding shortstops in turning batted balls into outs.

Read it, and see what you think.

[Oblong]

Originally Posted by apabruce

Will the Thrill, I am not a stathead but I read an analysis by Tom Tango called With or Without...Derek Jeter to be eye opening even to my dim eyes. It was in the 2008 Hardball Times Baseball Annual.

Tango compared the percentage of balls in play converted to outs by various shortstops over their careers since 1993. Jeter was near the bottom. Since one could argue that each shortstop sees a different mix of pitchers, he compared all the shortstops that played behind Roger Clemons, for example, and found Jeter near the bottom.

Then he compared all the pitchers Jeter played behind, and ran a comparison between how many balls were converted into outs when Jeter was their SS versus all other SS that played behind them. A few pitchers, notably Mariano Rivera, did better with Jeter, but most did worse.

He did many comparisons, isolating different pitchers or hitters, to see if there was bias in the stats against Jeter. He consistently found Jeter to be among the worst fielding shortstops in turning batted balls into outs.

Read it, and see what you think.

What was great about that was the way he could isolate it based on whether there were guys on base, which guys were on base, etc.

So the argument Jeter could make is "Well with a base stealer on base I have to shadow up the middle because there might be a thrown down to second. Naturally that reduces my range towards 3B". So the author then looks and compares all the batted balls hit with that particular base stealer on 1B and compares what % the SS turned outs. Jeter at the bottom. "Maybe that particular pitcher doesn't give up a lot of ground balls?" Ok, so look at all the batted balls that pitcher gives up. What % did the SS convert into outs? Jeter near or at bottom. There was a trend. When you plugged the numbers, using specific players and specific results, not theory, Jeter was always near the bottom.

Either Jeter's a bad defensive SS or incredibly unlucky.

That article was one of the best in explaining how to measure this stuff.

I don't see how giving teammates "confidence" is better than a ground ball to LF that most other SS would have turned into outs.

[Mr. Bigglesworth]

Originally Posted by will the thrill

on a scale of 1-100 i care about 2, so i could care less...

So he's not a good fielder, but he's a good shortstop. All the SABR and numbers people like to completely rule out any kind of mental aspect of the game, when it's a very vital part of the game of baseball. If Jeter's teammates and Pitchers have confidence in him as a fielder and he makes enough plays to convince them of that, then he's doing something right.

How do you know Jeter instills confidence in his teammates?

Originally Posted by will the thrill

I'm not saying that can never make a metric that works, I've just yet to see one and have one explained to me that can do it well enough to satisfy me.

The fact you are not satisfied with any fielding metric seems like a pretty weak justification (to me) to completely dismiss all findings out of hand, especially when different fielding metrics / methodologies all arrive at roughly the same conclusion with regards to Derek Sanderson Jeter (i.e. he is not a particularly effective shortstop in terms of turning batted balls into outs).

Originally Posted by will the thrill

I play shortstop(yes in softball) and have had teammates who had more range and better fielding ability than me, but the team plays better when I'm there and not as well with the other guys. I've seen guys who can play their position with the best of them, but they don't do things that help the other 8 guys around them better throughout the course of the game. Everything weighs eaually

Some might think it smacks of arrogance that you presume your team plays better when you are in the line-up solely because of you and your self-proclaimed ability to instill confidence in others despite other people actually representing a more effective defensive shortstop option for the team.

I think it seems unlikely this is the proximate cause for improved play.

[tiger337]

Originally Posted by will the thrill

So how do these fielding metrics determine which balls a player should catch?

They have looked at every single play over several years and consider the following:

(1) exact location of batted ball (the field is divided into small zones).

(2) how hard the ball was hit.

(3) what type of ball - grounder, fly ball, line drive, pop up, fliner (in between fly ball and line drive)

(4) handedness of batter.

(5) handedness of pitcher

(6) how many outs there were

(7) which bases were occupied.

(8) ballpark

In the +/- system, each type of play as described above (e.g soft hit ground ball hit into the hole between short and third, etc) has a difficulty which is determined by how many times major league fielders convert that play into an out. For example, if that play was made 30% of the time, then a player gets a score of +.70 for making that play. If he doesn't make that play, he gets a -.30. All the scores on all the plays are summed for a player to get his +/- rating. The rating represents how many plays the player made above or below those an average player at his position would make.

[The Truman Show]

Jeter is a good shortstop because he's one of the best hitters in that position of all time. But how does "instilling confidence" do anyone any good if you give up way more hits?

[Oblong]

I played SS too, since we're comparing resumes.

[Oblong]

When I get up to bat sometimes I just have a great feeling that I'm going to put one out based on who our CF is. Even though he's over on the bench at that moment eating a cookie I get all warm and fuzzy inside.

[will the thrill]

Originally Posted by The Truman Show

Jeter is a good shortstop because he's one of the best hitters in that position of all time. But how does "instilling confidence" do anyone any good if you give up way more hits?

When I've played and been on teams, the shortstop is generally the "leader" on the field. The one who helps position his teammates around him, keeping them aware of the situations, hitters preferences etc.. I haven't found the article to see numbers of hits given up yet, but if it is "way more" than it doesn't make a difference, if it's 5-10% more, then confidence from your teammates, settling them down in pressure situations, and coming up with big plays when your team needs them make a big difference throughout the course of the game

[will the thrill]

Originally Posted by Oblong

When I get up to bat sometimes I just have a great feeling that I'm going to put one out based on who our CF is. Even though he's over on the bench at that moment eating a cookie I get all warm and fuzzy inside.

You guys must be right, baseball is completely statistical and not at all mental

[will the thrill]

Originally Posted by Mr. Bigglesworth

Some might think it smacks of arrogance that you presume your team plays better when you are in the line-up solely because of you and your self-proclaimed ability to instill confidence in others despite other people actually representing a more effective defensive shortstop option for the team.

I think it seems unlikely this is the proximate cause for improved play.

Some people call it arrogance/cockiness, I call it confidence. I can only go by wins and losses until some SABR guy comes along and analyzes my softball games for the past ten years and tells me I sucked and should have been playing firstbase all this time

[Oblong]

Originally Posted by will the thrill

You guys must be right, baseball is completely statistical and not at all mental

It's mental when you are playing the game but I've never felt better at the plate because a certain guy was playing a certain position. I'm focused on hitting the ball. In the field I'm focused on being ready for the ball when it's hit to me.

The Jeter lovers only remember the good plays. They forget things like the two GIDP in the 2007 ALDS against the Indians with 1 out and a man on first and third. That must have inspired a lot of confidence. Imagine if Arod had done it. They forget the countless ground balls that dribble into LF or up the middle for a base hit. On paper Jeter did nothing wrong. Base hit to LF. But he should have made the play. Of course don't expect the Rick Sutcliffe to point that out.

Baseball is an individual game disguised as a team sport. You don't hand the ball off or pass or have to worry about being in position for the other guy. It's you and the ball. People act like Jeter is a point guard or a quarterback.

[The Truman Show]

Originally Posted by will the thrill

When I've played and been on teams, the shortstop is generally the "leader" on the field. The one who helps position his teammates around him, keeping them aware of the situations, hitters preferences etc.. I haven't found the article to see numbers of hits given up yet, but if it is "way more" than it doesn't make a difference, if it's 5-10% more, then confidence from your teammates, settling them down in pressure situations, and coming up with big plays when your team needs them make a big difference throughout the course of the game

I don't think a SS's role on a softball team is at all relevant to his role on a ML ballclub. They're all professionals and have coaches and scouting to keep them aware of all that stuff. In amateur ball, the SS is always the best athlete on the team and would naturally be the leader. In MLB, everyone's a great athlete and leadership can come from anywhere on the field.

Besides, don't confuse "good defender" with "good player." Jeter is a terrific ballplayer and a (deservedly) soon-to-be first ballot hall of famer. But, he's still not good at defense.

[will the thrill]

Originally Posted by Oblong

It's mental when you are playing the game but I've never felt better at the plate because a certain guy was playing a certain position. I'm focused on hitting the ball. In the field I'm focused on being ready for the ball when it's hit to me.

The Jeter lovers only remember the good plays. They forget things like the two GIDP in the 2007 ALDS against the Indians with 1 out and a man on first and third. That must have inspired a lot of confidence. Imagine if Arod had done it. They forget the countless ground balls that dribble into LF or up the middle for a base hit. On paper Jeter did nothing wrong. Base hit to LF. But he should have made the play. Of course don't expect the Rick Sutcliffe to point that out.

By the way, not a Jeter lover at all, just don't buy it. Maybe one day i'll be convinced, but who knows.

[will the thrill]

Originally Posted by The Truman Show

I don't think a SS's role on a softball team is at all relevant to his role on a ML ballclub. They're all professionals and have coaches and scouting to keep them aware of all that stuff. In amateur ball, the SS is always the best athlete on the team and would naturally be the leader. In MLB, everyone's a great athlete and leadership can come from anywhere on the field.

Besides, don't confuse "good defender" with "good player." Jeter is a terrific ballplayer and a (deservedly) soon-to-be first ballot hall of famer. But, he's still not good at defense.

I still think the players opinion of jeter, especially the pitchers is more telling than a study done by a math guy. If Jeter was truly the worst shortstop, his pitchers would have been lined up at Torres door to get it switched so they weren't giving up 3 extra hits a game, not to mention the manager who wants to win ball games and watches every single play that happens during the year would want to switch that up. Even Leyland realized Maggs needed to be benched and it only took half a season.

[The Truman Show]

Originally Posted by will the thrill

I still think the players opinion of jeter, especially the pitchers is more telling than a study done by a math guy. If Jeter was truly the worst shortstop, his pitchers would have been lined up at Torres door to get it switched so they weren't giving up 3 extra hits a game, not to mention the manager who wants to win ball games and watches every single play that happens during the year would want to switch that up. Even Leyland realized Maggs needed to be benched and it only took half a season.

Players think everyone is the greatest, especially if the guy has been around for a while and does other things well. Eyewitness accounts are pretty much the most unreliable way to judge anything, and if Jeter is batting .340, getting clutch hits, making that flashy jump play (which a superior SS like Everett would've just fielded normally), and being a nice guy to everyone, do you honestly think the rest of the players are going to really pay attention to his range and then compare it to some other dude's range and say to themselves "oh man this guy really sucks after all." Range is also a very difficult thing to quantify with the naked eye. That's why the studies were done in the first place. And when you compare hard evidence with something as unreliable as visual impressions, it's really difficult to side with the visuals.

Baseball players on average really aren't known for their intelligence anyway. That's why most GMs, especially the successful ones, are "math guys" to some degree. Christ, there were players talking about how good Yuniesky Betancourt is when he got traded to the Royals; Betancourt is probably the worst starting ML shortstop in the game. But, Jose Guillen and Willie Bloomquist remember playing with him and thinking "oh, he made that flashy play, he must be good." They aren't going to the film to analyze YB in comparison to Tony Pena Jr. or anything when they make that determination.

[tiger337]

Originally Posted by will the thrill

I still think the players opinion of jeter, especially the pitchers is more telling than a study done by a math guy. If Jeter was truly the worst shortstop, his pitchers would have been lined up at Torres door to get it switched so they weren't giving up 3 extra hits a game, not to mention the manager who wants to win ball games and watches every single play that happens during the year would want to switch that up.

He doesn't allow three extra hits per game. It's a lot more subtle than that. In his very worst year, he allows one hit every five games compared to the average shortstop. That's still a lot but not enough where a manager is going to bench him. He helps his team enough with his hitting and base running and some other stuff where it's possible to carry his weak defense. Of course, the manager could switch him over to third or try him in the outfield or have him DH but he would need others to buy into it. The improved defense he would get from moving Jeter might not be worth the hassle of getting others to buy into the move.

[tiger337]

Originally Posted by will the thrill

I still think the players opinion of jeter, especially the pitchers is more telling than a study done by a math guy.

All teams have high powered statisticians on their payrolls to inform their decisions so I'm assuming they take their opinions seriously. I also want to hear a player's opinion but when a player is evaluating himself or his teammates, he is naturally going to be very biased. Statistics help to remove a lot of the bias.

[apabruce]

Originally Posted by Will the Thrill

I still think the players opinion of jeter, especially the pitchers is more telling than a study done by a math guy. If Jeter was truly the worst shortstop, his pitchers would have been lined up at Torres door to get it switched so they weren't giving up 3 extra hits a game, not to mention the manager who wants to win ball games and watches every single play that happens during the year would want to switch that up. Even Leyland realized Maggs needed to be benched and it only took half a season.

If I'm pitching I want Jeter in the lineup because his offensive production outweighs his fielding shortcomings. By the way, how do I know he's good at hitting? Probably because some math guy came up with the fact that Jeter gets hits with a higher frequency than Adam Everett.

[Mr. Bigglesworth]

Originally Posted by will the thrill

When I've played and been on teams, the shortstop is generally the "leader" on the field. The one who helps position his teammates around him, keeping them aware of the situations, hitters preferences etc.. I haven't found the article to see numbers of hits given up yet, but if it is "way more" than it doesn't make a difference, if it's 5-10% more, then confidence from your teammates, settling them down in pressure situations, and coming up with big plays when your team needs them make a big difference throughout the course of the game

What evidence is there that Jeter instills confidence in Phillip Hughes or Joba Chamberlain or Mark Teixeira or ARod or Posada?

Why are these professional athletes lacking confidence?

How much more confidence does Jeter instill relative to, say, Adam Everett?

[Mr. Bigglesworth]

Originally Posted by apabruce

If I'm pitching I want Jeter in the lineup because his offensive production outweighs his fielding shortcomings. By the way, how do I know he's good at hitting? Probably because some math guy came up with the fact that Jeter gets hits with a higher frequency than Adam Everett.

I'd trust Hideki Matsui over some stat guy to tell me that Jeter is better at hitting than Everett.

[The Truman Show]

Originally Posted by Mr. Bigglesworth

I'd trust Hideki Matsui over some stat guy to tell me that Jeter is better at hitting than Everett.

Hell, I'd trust Jeff Francoeur if he was telling me Jeter hit better than Everett.

[itsallgood8989]

Originally Posted by Oblong

I played SS too, since we're comparing resumes.

I've never played SS before, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express?!?

[The Truman Show]

Originally Posted by itsallgood8989

I've never played SS before, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express?!?

Nice

[Corky]

Originally Posted by Mr. Bigglesworth

I'd trust Hideki Matsui over some stat guy to tell me that Jeter is better at hitting than Everett.

You speak Japanese? I had no idea!

[will the thrill]

Originally Posted by Mr. Bigglesworth

What evidence is there that Jeter instills confidence in Phillip Hughes or Joba Chamberlain or Mark Teixeira or ARod or Posada?

Why are these professional athletes lacking confidence?

How much more confidence does Jeter instill relative to, say, Adam Everett?

The confidence isn't in themselves, it's in that they have confidence their teammate will make the play (even if a stat head says he doesn't) How much more confident are the tigers players if it's bases loaded in the ninth and Cabrera is up vs Ordonez being up? How much more confident is a tigers pitcher when Inge is playing third? that's the confidence I'm talking. I'm not at all saying these guys aren't confident in themselves, but in baseball confidence in your teammates to do what they are supposed to allows you to focus on yourself

[will the thrill]

Originally Posted by Mr. Bigglesworth

How much more confidence does Jeter instill relative to, say, Adam Everett?

No difference, that's the point. A fielding metric is going to tell you Everett is miles ahead of Jeter (at least thats what I hear) but Jeter is apparently good enough to the people who see him day in and day out that they believe he's just as good as Everett. When I've read any articles critisizing Jeter, they all come off like the test was done just to prove Jeter wasn't as good as people think, which to me skews the results because they went into it wanting certain results

[will the thrill]

Originally Posted by Corky

You speak Japanese? I had no idea!

I can say hi and thank you very much to Hidecki, but that's about all I got from watching "Mr. Baseball" the other day on HBO

[tiger337]

Originally Posted by will the thrill

The confidence isn't in themselves, it's in that they have confidence their teammate will make the play (even if a stat head says he doesn't) How much more confident are the tigers players if it's bases loaded in the ninth and Cabrera is up vs Ordonez being up? How much more confident is a tigers pitcher when Inge is playing third? that's the confidence I'm talking. I'm not at all saying these guys aren't confident in themselves, but in baseball confidence in your teammates to do what they are supposed to allows you to focus on yourself

The difference is that Inge makes plays and Jeter doesn't.