Beyond the numbers
Posted by: Chad Jennings - Posted in Misc on Jan 21, 2010 
Print This Post
| 
Email This Post
My sister has a Ph.D in biological chemistry. She got it from a little, no-name school called MIT. The work she does is so advanced that I literally can’t explain it. There is some sort of protein involved (I think) and she works in a lab (I’m pretty sure) and her results are broken into charts and graphs (I’ve seen them but never understood them).
My sister likes baseball, and she knows the sport pretty well, but she’s not a “baseball person.” She doesn’t follow it day-to-day, and her impression of a “baseball person” is someone like me, who prefers to use a calculator to add 4 + 2 (just to be on the safe side).
Some time last year, I sent my sister a Baseball Prospectus article about the development of advanced statistics. Her response was: “Baseball people do this?”
Yes, they do, and the development of advanced statistics has changed the way we look at baseball. Not so long ago, even a fairly routine stat like on-base percentage was not a part of the general baseball dialogue. Now we’re seeing OPS+ and VORP in the national media. Delving into a player’s splits is commonplace, as it should be.
But baseball — and sports in general — would be thoroughly uninteresting if not for the fact that stats occasionally mean nothing. Jose Veras was pretty bad last year, but he did pitch those three brilliant innings against Oakland the night Melky Cabrera hit his walk-off against Dan Giese. I once watched Jim Rushford, a minor league journeyman, hit a spring training home run against the great Mariano Rivera. In his guest post this morning, Yair mentioned the postseason struggles of two very good closers, Billy Wagner and Joe Nathan (though I forget to include the links in his post).
Statistics are key to our understanding of baseball, and the development of better and more advanced statistics does nothing but improve our understanding and appreciation of the game and its players. But the numbers can never tell us everything, and that’s the fun part of watching the game itself.
someone like me, who prefers to use a calculator to add 4 + 2 (just to be on the safe side).
**************************
That sounds like me. Math was never my strong suit. To this day I have no idea how I ended up passing the math courses I needed.
Agreed. I think more people were agreeing than disagreeing in the last thread.
There is something to be said for “clutchiness.” Just not as much as some people will have you believe.
There is definitely something to be said for sabermetrics. Just not as much as some people will have you believe.
As usual, the answer is somewhere in the middle.
The last paragraph of the post sums the subject up well.
“Ray won’t that quality show up in the stats though?
For example, Derrick Coleman had world class talent. Everyone thought he’d be an all time great basketball player. He ended up being good but he never had the desire to be great. His attitude and personality showed up in his statsheet. Talent was off the charts but his lack of drive held back the results.”
Patrick,
That’s exactly my point. What makes great people great is not their talent, but their desire and I don’t think it can be measured.
Someone gets it. Besides me, I mean.
Vin,
Exactly. I also agree with Chad.
I have owned minor league teams in my career and have been around the game most of my life. I’ve seen players who can’t miss, miss and I’ve seen guys in A Ball I didn’t think could get out of their own way (like Derek Jeter and Roy Halladay) becomes HOF players.
I am new to the advanced statistical analysis to the game.
Some of it, I find fascinating. Some of it, like just about every non-proprietary team defensive metric, I find to be nonsense.
Overall, I do think it gives people greater understanding into the game.
I don’t however believe it will ever replace the human element.
Vin Scully’s quote re: use of stats, as shown by murphydog in the last thread, pretty much sums up my feeling on the subject.
Doesn’t the saying go “it’s why they play the games”?
Well put, Chad. That last paragraph is something that everyone ought to agree upon, no matter his/her statistical inclination.
But Ray, some people have great desire and still never become great players.
Or, some players, like Tim Duncan for example, becomes great players even though they would rather do something else with their lives. They just happen to be good at basketball, in Duncan’s case.
I think stats are very important, for all the obvious reasons. I’ll admit, I do have some reservations about the defensive stats these days, but on the whole, you have to have stats. However, when it comes to evaluating talent, I still think actually watching a player play is most important. You can watch a few Yankee games and conclude that Jeter is a special player, and Gardner is pretty much one-dimensional. You can watch any Mets game when Santana isn’t pitching and Wright is resting to know their roster is a mess. Again, stats are important, but I think actually watching a game and using your amazing powers of observations is better.
Great post, couldn’t agree with you more.
Sabermetrics is the latest version of a model to predict something and to measure it as well. In the old days we called it modelling or copying something that works. But with every model the data has to fit the model, not the model to fit the data. Also, one has to know how to apply it correctly and even more important when it doesn’t apply. In statistics, there are basic tests done on the data to see if it applies. In sabermetrics, there is the same requirement. But as fans, we don’t want to be bothered with what applies & what doesn’t, we want to apply our data for the conclusion we desire at the moment. That is where statistics get dangerous.
My Grad course in stats loved to tell the story of how people who worked on the plutonium project for the bomb at Hanford during WWII were statistically prone to die by being hit by a train. In essence that data was worthless for predicting the future.
One thing, though. Once upon a time (as recently as a couple of years ago), Jeter was the rally guy. He either got it going or kept it going. Then the hand & legs things kicked in and he had a tough season hitting into a lot of double plays. But looking at his overall career, Jeter’s had the opportunities and has taken advantage of enough of them and at certain, critical moments that have contributed to his reputation.
You can (and people have) nitpick or poke holes, but the fact remains that Jeter does have the reputation.
–
I don’t think clutch really exists, or if it does its negligible. I’d rather have the best player on the team up to the plate in any important situation, than say, wish for Melky to be there because this one time i saw him hit a super clutch single!
You remember Jeter as a rally starter because the narrative that the media and fans have created for Jeter is that he is a clutch, rally starting, game ending, winner. You forget every time Jeter grounded out on the first pitch, or whatever.
I bet you Jeter has started many rallies, he usually gets on base 40% of the time, so chances are he has been in a large number of rallies in his career. He also gets out 60% of the time, so thats probably more rallies ended or never begun.
The thing with clutch is that we often just decide that a player is clutch when we happen to see an AT BAT we place large importance on, or see some highlights, or an announcer says like “This guy always comes up with a big hit
” shortly before he happens to come up with said big hit. This ignores all the times the announcer says that and the guy gets out “Wow good pitch by so and so, its hard to get out player X!”
I always think for 99% of things, there is a logical reason why something has happened. David Ortiz hits a lot of home runs, and in the end his average late and close and with RISP ends up being alot like his career averages. He hits a lot of home runs, therefore he will probably hit a few home runs in big spots.
Is it fair to say that Melky is clutch? His career OPS with RISP is .003 away from his career OPS. Maybe he is just consistent? And all the times he gets out in the 9th or with RISP or whenever are obscured by those walk offs, because you love to see Melky running around smiling, hugging Cano and A-rod, and what have you.
I think ‘clutch hits’ are fine things to designate after the fact, but I never look at a 9th inning rally hoping that Melky comes up. I always want our best hitters up. Because if Melky or other lesser ‘clutch’ players were really so clutch, they’d be better ball players. If you say ‘Well Melky only hits .271 late and close, but all his hits are usually big ones…’ you’re beginning to move the goalposts as to what defines clutch. Is Melky deciding when its a ‘big enough’ spot to get a hit? Who determines that?
I don’t like the whole clutch thing because it is entirely subjective, and many of my favorite players (A-rod) get dogged for not being clutch unfairly, even when they perform, because the goalposts get moved.
BTW, Chad.
At first I was perplexed by your follow-ups to the guest posts. (you spotlight stealer j/k).
But, this one makes me appreciate your methods. Thinking back on many of your other posts, it’s obvious that you’re following the dialogue of the blog (the pulse if you will) and keeping the flow going with thoughtful research and references.
Feel free to throw a changeup once in a while to keep us honest, but great job so far.
SJ,
I agree that not every player who desires to be great becomes great. You have to have a combination of talent and desire to be great.
I don’t agree that their are great players who would rather be doing something else however. I believe Tim Duncan works extremely hard at being the player that he is, otherwise he wouldn’t be as good as he is.
It’s all about balance.
Statistics are well and good, but they don’t tell the story of why the home run Alex Rodriguez hit on October 9th (I think) was that much more important than the one he hit on August 4th 2007.
You need both.
ditmars1929
January 21st, 2010 at 12:44 pm
There is nothing wrong with stats!! LOL! The application of stats like sabermetrics is where the questions begin. If stats weren’t important, then they wouldn’t keep score. As SJ says, sometimes one has to look beyond the stats or beyond the scounting report. Evaluations are based on something in between.
Thanks m.
This is the greatest blog on the planet.
Your post and Yuri’s post articulate why I am worried about the 2010 team. While Cashman’s Sabermetric case for the aquisitions of Granderson, Johnson and Vasquez makes sense, it fails to take into account the intangibles that Damon and Matsui added. I am sure that the 3 new players will mostly perform as expected, but do any of them have the abilty to sieze the moment the way Damon did in the WS or the off the bench “clutch” attributes that Matsui demonstrated all season? In some ways these moves strike as a return to the old ways of just aquiring the players with the best numbers without as much regard for how the fit in the overall puzzle. I hope I am proven incorrect.
Chad,
NP.
BTW, what does the ‘T’ stand for? I got ‘Missouri’ and ‘Institute’, but I’m stumped on the last part.
Your sister sounds really smart. My son is in economics, but I have a feeling he hides a lot of the number stuff from us regular folks. Just like bio research results and baseball stats, a lot of it is on a “need to know” basis.
Ray, I’m not sure you understood my post. Of course I think stats are important. I said that right up front. My point was that, while extremely helpful, stats should not take the place of actually scouting a player with your own eyes. You need them both.
OMG MIT! OMOGMOGOGMOGOGMOMGOOOMGGG
Jerkface,
Gotcha. You’re doing the baseball version of “the sky isn’t blue”
Back to the heart and works hard deal. I don’t think any professional basketball or baseball player would still be employed if they didn’t work hard. Even the talented ones can only ride their talent so far. Conversely, hard work can only carry you so far, not everyone can elevate themself to greatness.
I’m getting to the Blog a little late today; had to do some work this morning.
Anyway, the last 2 post from Yair and Chad are well written and great reads.
Being that I’m an engineer, the stats can be intriguing but there is a lot to the fact that some guys are winners and some are not.
If you look at a guy like Andy Pettite’s stats last few years you may say that he is merely a just above average pitcher. But the guy WINS when it counts most.
I was able to say away from commenting about Johnny Damon yesterday, but as it relates to today’s topic, I’ve got to comment. Johnny is a proven winner and had come through as much as anyone over the last 8 years spent with the Sox and Yankees. JD will be missed but I believe the Yankees will do just fine without him.
I think we should use statistics the same way a drunk uses a lamp post – for support, not illumination.
In other words, I don’t believe that you have to go by pure statistics vs. the old what you see with your own eyes approach – but I think a combination thereof is important.
For example – statistically Derek Jeter is a borderline hall of fame player. Combine those statistics though with what we have seen him do over the course of his career – the intangibles, and not only is he a hall of famer, but he’s a first ballot one at that.
“It’s all about balance.
Statistics are well and good, but they don’t tell the story of why the home run Alex Rodriguez hit on October 9th (I think) was that much more important than the one he hit on August 4th 2007.
You need both”
——————————
in a nutshell.
How do you know they don’t until they are put into that situation?
Given Arod’s and CC’s lack of recent post-season success, did you predict either guy would dominate as they did in the post-season?
You can’t overpay for “intangibles”.
This team had to get younger and needed another innings eating, quality starting pitcher. To do so, and operate within a budget, you have to make tough decisions.
Curtis Granderson had a great year when the Tigers made their WS run. He has shown he can play on the big stage.
I wouldn’t worry too much about Granderson.
I also wouldn’t worry too much about Javy. Too many emotional fans make a big deal out of one game.
Nick Johnson? Its pretty simple. If he is healthy, he will hit and get on base since he has done so his entire career when in good health.
Ray,
Tim Duncan would have rather been a competitive swimmer than basketball player. He has no real love for the game.
He likes it, he doesn’t live and breathe it like MJ and Kobe for example.
Some guys are just naturally gifted to play their respective sports and succeed absent a burning desire or will.
Jerkface, could not have said it better myself. Clutch is a myth, but it’s a myth that makes for good drama. Same with the myth that pitchers can control where batters hit the ball. We’d all like to think they have that skill, but beyond walks, strikeouts, and HRs, there’s not much else they can do.
In some ways these moves strike as a return to the old ways of just aquiring the players with the best numbers without as much regard for how the fit in the overall puzzle. I hope I am proven incorrect
___
The old way was signing the best prospects without a thought to fitting with the team, not trading for younger players. If this was the old way, we’d have Holliday in LF, Lackey in the rotation, and we would have paid damon and matsui 15 M each for 4 more years.
This way is better. Matsui may have a great year, he may not. There is just as much chance his knees go this year. Damon is a different story. He should have taken the 2/14M contract the yankees offered.
Outfielders
Who’s out there? A mother lode of options. You’ve got righty hitters Jermaine Dye, Reed Johnson, Rocco Baldelli, Xavier Nady and Marcus Thames, lefties Johnny Damon, Rick Ankiel and Garret Anderson, and switch-hitter Randy Winn. Jim Edmonds, looking to make a comeback at age 39, and Eric Byrnes, just designated for assignment by Arizona, are also available.
Most of these guys have warts on them. Nady and Ankiel are coming off injuries, and Baldelli’s durability is always a question. Dye slugged .297 after the All-Star break and has regressed defensively, and Winn batted .158 from the right side to go with .292 from the left. But with the possible exception of Edmonds and Anderson — whose name hasn’t appeared anywhere in speculation this winter — they’re all likely to land jobs somewhere.
Who’s still looking? The Yankees need a left fielder. At this point, it’s either a return engagement by Damon at a reduced price, or Baldelli, Johnson or Nady sharing time with Brett Gardner. Rest assured that Brian Cashman will do something.
The Cubs want a righty bat off the bench, and they’ve talked to Nady and Dye. The Cardinals, Mariners, Nationals and Reds could use some depth, and the Mets might try to do something to hold the fort while Carlos Beltran rehabs from knee surgery.
Toronto’s outfield consists of Vernon Wells in center, Travis Snider in left, Jose Bautista in right and non-roster invitees Joey Gathright and Jeremy Reed, but GM Alex Anthopoulos says that adding an outfielder is “not a real priority.”
If Ankiel and Nady are still around in February, don’t be surprised if the Royals jump into the fray. Both those players — and Thames — would fill GM Dayton Moore’s desire to add some pop to the roster.
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/.....ng9/100121
I made up a stat in 2007. Following Arod’s season vs. Ortiz in the MVP race.
Arod finished at 524. Ortiz at 484.
I call it TBN.
The Big Number.
Send me 10$ and I’ll give you the “formula”
Playing the game and watching the game is fun.
Stats are just an accumulation of information on how anyone or any team did in the past. How good or bad a player is at any aspect of the game usually shows up somewhere in the stats.
Coaches, GM’s, players all try their best to use that to their advantage. But despite all a player’s abilities and all the probabilities one can come up with, you still never know what’s going to happen next.
Teams like the ’08 Rays can make the world series. And the ’87 Twins (with only 85 regular season wins) can win the world series. And the ’96 Yanks can win over Atlanta. And the 87-win ’00 Yanks can win it all. And the ’03 Yanks can come back against Boston the last game of the ALCS to make the world series. And then there’s that little 4-game debacle that happened at the end of the ’04 ALCS between the same two teams.
Hey it’s not always good news.
Playing the game and watching the game is fun.
“Same with the myth that pitchers can control where batters hit the ball. We’d all like to think they have that skill, but beyond walks, strikeouts, and HRs, there’s not much else they can do.”
So it’s just by random chance that guys like Brandon Webb, Roy Halladay and Chien-ming Wang (when healthy) generate more ground balls then other pitchers?
They have more control over ground ball vs. fly ball, but not where those hits go. They can’t aim contact at the infielders. More balls in play = more hits. Halladay and Webb are great pitchers because they strike people out, don’t walk a lot, and keep balls in the park.
MLB is negotiating to have a regular season series between the Marlins and Mets play in San Juan. Maybe it’s an elaborate ruse to switch some of the Mets players for some of the Puerto Rico national team.
Pitchers can do certain things to try and force players to hit the ball to a certain area, but command/control/hitter’s actual swing attempt can all mess with the intended result.
m, it’s an elaborate move to spare Mets fans from having to watch them. What a joke of a franchise. Thank the Good Lord for making me a Yankee fan.
m, it’s an elaborate move to spare Mets fans from having to watch them. What a joke of a franchise. Thank the Good Lord for making me a Yankee fan.
Chad, I’m still on the part about your sister having a PhD in biochem from MIT.
Wow. I bow to her. I am always in awe of people who can do things that I can only dream about doing (that would be many people in the world.) Biochem at MIT, PhD no less, is right up there.
On a less important note, ha ha, I’m with the crew that says there’s something to be said about watching the game! That perspective is sometimes shunned on this forum by the “prove it” crowd but I know that mel has said from time to time that she knows what she sees, and that’s a perspective I both respect and admire.
And, another potential right handed hitting outfielder comes up on the svree. Last night Preston Wilson says he wants to play again. Today center fielder/corner outfielder Greg Golson was Designated For Assignment by Texas. He’s 24 years old and a 2004 1st round pick by Philadelphia. Some power and good speed. I’d prefer NYY looks at him over some of the other options. He was traded to Texas last year for John Mayberry.
ditmars,
lol. They’re certainly having a rough go of it. I know that Randolph lost the team, but Manuel is not the answer imo. He’s like the parent who tries to be their kid’s BFF. That usually doesn’t work out too well.
Hah! Who woulda thought Chuck lands a dream job like Yankees beat writer…and he’s still the black sheep loser of the family!
Jesse,
The way you worded your original statement was off base then. Pitchers can effect where a ball is hit. If you jam a right handed hitter inside the guy is either going to foul it off or pull it to the left side. If you keep throwing fastballs outside and up the guy is going to foul it off to the right or go opposite field. Throw a sinker and more times than not it will be a ground ball. A well placed change-up after harder pitches usually induces a pop-up.
Good pitchers with control of their stuff can absolutely effect how and where a ball is hit.
comes up on the svree
Svree is Southeastern Georgia for screen.
“MLB is negotiating to have a regular season series between the Marlins and Mets play in San Juan.”
That’s cool. Good road trip if you can swing it.
I’d also love to see Santo Domingo get some games in the future. And of course some day…Havana.
stats are great, but if people don’t look past them to find the reason certain things happened, they can be blinding.
trisha,
lol. Don’t single me out. My eyes aren’t as experienced as others. But for the most part, I think I can discern between what’s valid or not when I’m listening to broadcasters or reading up on baseball.
Chip
January 21st, 2010 at 1:02 pm
I think we should use statistics the same way a drunk uses a lamp post – for support, not illumination.
————————————————————
It amazes me how you continually think up with these pithy little sayings.
m
January 21st, 2010 at 1:17 pm
MLB is negotiating to have a regular season series between the Marlins and Mets play in San Juan. Maybe it’s an elaborate ruse to switch some of the Mets players for some of the Puerto Rico national team.
————————————————————
It’s just a ploy for David Wright to get his 2010 home run numbers into double figures.
m -
Yeah, those Mets are having a rough go of it. But better them than us. We need what?…perhaps a left fielder and maybe some bench depth. Mets need an entire depth of a roster. Man, they suck. And yes, I have a seven year old. Trying to be his friend is definitely not a good idea.
I would like to see the Yankees bring back Willie in some capacity, however.
Patrick,
What I tried to say was that pitchers only really have control over whether a ball is put in play or not (that excludes HRs). Once a ball is hit in play, whether or not it becomes a hit is almost totally up to chance.
This affects our good friend Javier Vazquez, since his career FIP is much lower than what we would expect his career ERA. Just bad luck or something else?
It amazes me how you continually think up with these pithy little sayings.
–
G. K. Chesterson came up with that. Like in 1900, when you were born.
mel, I happen to trust your baseball savvy. I think you manage to be objective and also to hold your own in the face of opposition.
In any event, I learned a big lesson about trusting one’s eyes when televised Yankee baseball was finally available in my area. Before that I was stuck with radio broadcasts, and I would sit and listen and gripe! That’s because it’s easy to listen to stats being spat out and to get pulled into their unidimensional meaning! Having had the “luxury” of being able to watch every game now, I have learned to trust my own eyes and not get pulled into some stat heads notion of good and bad. One of my biggest fights with former posters from the NY Times forum was with some of them summarily writing off the Rays – how things change! – and saying that they stunk, all based on WL. I, on the other hand, would watch the Rays games and notice how very good their offense was, as well as their starting pitching, and then watch their pen hand away game after game after game.
Another fight was with someone who knew that Robby Cano didn’t have top-flight fielding skills! I knew what the heck my eyes were showing me, but one guy in particular absolutely dismissed anything I had to say about Robby’s fielding.
I trust my eyes. Stats are helpful, but without looking beyond them you can easily end up with 2 plus 2 equaling 5.
What is up mi amigos.
Speaking of 80′s
Which one of these movies that are coming out this year from an 80′s movie will be the biggest hit?
Nightmare on Elm Street
Tron
Clash of the Titans
Alice in Wonderland(not sure how old this one is)
Baseball is a game with a large quantity of information contained within it. It is at the same time both simple and complex. The acts are simple but the outcomes are varied.
As such, anything that can help to sift through this information, and help identify baseball’s salient aspects, is useful.
Staistics can do this, and so can experienced observation.
They might even be two sides of the same coin so to speak.
I do not see why people have to be wedded to only one point of view when both contribute to the analysis.
They are complimentary pieces not mutually exclusive ones.
“Another fight was with someone who knew that Robby Cano didn’t have top-flight fielding skills! I knew what the heck my eyes were showing me, but one guy in particular absolutely dismissed anything I had to say about Robby’s fielding.”
———————————–
Well IDK your side of the argument, but Cano is not an elite defensive 2B or even very close right now.
“Well IDK your side of the argument, but Cano is not an elite defensive 2B or even very close right now.”
You’re going to catch it from the Robby partisens around here…
Jerkface
January 21st, 2010 at 1:41 pm
It amazes me how you continually think up with these pithy little sayings.
–
G. K. Chesterson came up with that. Like in 1900, when you were born.
————————————————————
The last name is Chesterton. No, I don’t think he did.
He played elite level defense last year.
He had a 2 week period in August where his defense slumped.
Aside from that, he played great defense in 2009.
Tom B
January 21st, 2010 at 1:26 pm
stats are great, but if people don’t look past them to find the reason certain things happened, they can be blinding.
——————————-
This seems to be the theme of many posts, but it does not really make much sense.
As long as you have a large enough sample, it does not really matter how you arrive at the statistics in front of you. All that matters is what Player X did and based on that what you expect him to do in the future.
Statistics absolutely should be used solely as support. They should be front and center. They tell you exactly what happened and that is all that matters, when talking about winning baseball games.
Everything else just helps you understand how we arrived at the numbers we have in front of us. “Clutch” with RISP just helps you understand the statistics. All those things are secondary. To say, they are just the “icing on the cake”
“I don’t like the whole clutch thing because it is entirely subjective,”
are you sure that isn’t because the patron saint of sabermetrics, bill james, said that first.are you really thinking for yourself?
there is way too much dogma to sabermetrics and the the idea of clutch not existing is a key tenet to the religion.
it seems that one prerequisite to be involved in sabermetric is not really being that good in the thing the person is supposed to be an expert in. james himself has little statistical analysis education. i think he had one class in college in statistics.
people like will carrol are sabermetric injury experts, but will carrol has no sports medicine or medical degree.
i have no problem with stats. i have a problem with people who think they are good with stats being in charge.
with one qualifier, i totally believe that anyone who has spent their life playing the game at the amateur and pro levels knows more about the game than a stat geek who has never played the game and who only watches from a distance.
the one qualifier to me is an equal intelligence level of the people being judged on their baseball knowledge. sabermetrically inclined people tend to perceive baseball lifers as dumb or of average intelligence.
that’s an elitist attitude that couldn’t be more wrong. the average mlb player is probably of average intelligence, but there are absolutely people in the game who have very high IQ’s.
when you take a high IQ ex-player you have someone who will know more about the game than some financial/statistical analyst type who has never been around the game.
people can argue all they want about who knows most about the game, but it really can be decided on the field. teams that have gone extremely into sabermetrics haven’t set the world on fire at all. teams like the twins who use sabermetrics very little if at all are doing quite well .
personally i have zero trouble understanding the sabermetric stats that i’ve taken the time to look at, and i can honestly say that i have learned nothing that i didn’t already know about the game.
personally i think a lot of the sabermetric people given their intelligence should be doing something more productive with their time like will carroll actually going to med school like his dad and making some real contributions to the world.
i don’t think the game has improved even one bit because of sabermetrics.
i said it yesterday that it’s great for people who haven’t been around the game much and who have a high mathematical aptitude.
i do think truths about the game can be expressed mathematically , but if you already know the game, the knowledge is redundant.
and often in the complexity of the sabermetric world common sense goes out the window and you get some very strange baseball philosophies that really don’t work.
sabermetrics also seems much more about business and assigning dollar value to players rather than contributing to baseball knowledge of the game itself.
i understand that someone who has spent his whole life playing the game is not likely to have the business skills it takes to run a modern mlb team, but to have the mba type be in charge of the baseball side of the game is as silly as having someone who has no experience in business running the business side.
“Statistics absolutely should be used solely as support.”
Don’t you mean just the opposite of that?
“He played elite level defense last year.
He had a 2 week period in August where his defense slumped.
Aside from that, he played great defense in 2009.”
————————–
I have to disagree. Cano is a good defender, but he has a long way to go to be considered elite on the defensive side.
He is far from guys like Utley and Pedroia at manning his position.
ESPN has an article of the top 10 quarterbacks.
1.Johnny U. 1a.Joe M. 3.Otto M. 4.John E. 5.Brett F. 6.Dan M. 7.Tom B. 8.Peyton M. 9.Terry B. 10.Bart S.
Manning #8, Brady 7?
My take
1.Joe M. 2.John E. 3.Dan M. 4.Peyton M. 5.Johnny U. 6.Otto. G. 7.Bart S. 8.Bret F. 9.Terry B. 10.Tom B.
Thoughts?
“Statistics absolutely should be used solely as support.”
Don’t you mean just the opposite of that?
———————–
Yeah typo. Sorry.
Should *not*
I agree with SJ and I think the problem is that it comes so easy to Robby that people tend to think his fielding is no big deal, where little Dusty feels the need to fly all over the field to do what Robby does by sticking his glove out, and that makes Dusty better than Robby.
By the way, I pointed it out to the person in question when Robby first came up. I would say there can be no question that Robby has shown himself to be a great defender as compared to when he first came up – but what I am saying is that my eyes showed me that the kid was loaded with ability, skill and potential. Maybe that wouldn’t have come through with only stats. That’s the whole point.
By the way 2, I think Cano is an awesome-fielding 2B.
He played better defense than Pedroia last year.
Covered more ground, turned the DP better, and has a better arm.
He just didn’t hit the ground and dirty his uniform as much as Pedroia last year.
Utley is an elite defender who had throwing problems the second half of last year.
Cano is easily in their catagory, or at least he was in 2009, as a defender.
Whether he can keep his concentration levels up and continue to improve, is a seperate issue.
However, for most of 2009, he was an elite defender, regardless of what UZR may say.
cano defensively?
i think he’s better than pedroia.
the one who’s underachieving is alex at third base.
with his athleticism, he should make more plays.
it’s like he’s still learning the position.
SOS – You are dramatically underrating Tom Brady. He is much higher than 10.
Anyone want Anthony Claggett back? He was just released by the Bucs. Along with Steven Jackson a few days ago.
This is vital. The Yankees need to be able to evaluate their own prospects. Especially so as the farm gets deeper and the roster crunch gets crunchier. It will be interesting to see how the Granderson and Vazquez trades work out – did the Yankees properly evaluate the prospects of Jackson, Coke, Dunn and Vizcaino?
randy-
Sometime when you are in Barnes and Nobles or someplace like that pick up a paperback called “The Drunkard’s Walk: How Randomness Rules Our Lives”. I won’t say the experience will be like when Balboa climbed that peak in Darien and discovered that America wasn’t Asia after all, but it might change your mind about the possibilities of statistics.
And even if it doesn’t, the book is a fun read.
SJ44
January 21st, 2010 at 2:01 pm
He played elite level defense last year.
He had a 2 week period in August where his defense slumped.
Aside from that, he played great defense in 2009.
————————————————————
For whatever reason, he has a sreak like that every year. In 2008, he had two streaks of 40+ games without errors and in between, he had a 3 error game against the Mets and 6 error in that week (13 on the season). Not sure if it’s because he loses concentration when he slumps with the bat, or, the other way around. He makes some unreal plays, especially with his throws. He very seldom makes an off-line throw, whether it’s an error or not. Usually dead center on the bag and chest high.
Randy I ( The Original Tin Cup )…..You put it right out there for all to understand rather clearly…..You nailed it….
Cano does turn the DP better then anyone, but I really do not understand how you could say he has as good or better range then those guys.
This is where Pedroia’s reputation with Yankee fans hurt him. It is not a crime to say they guy is a great 2b. Just because he gets he jersey dirty and all that stuff is not the reason he is a great 2b. Pedroia has a ton of range to both his left and right.
Cano is significantly slower then those guys moving laterally and a lot more balls get past him. He has potential and the talent to get to that level, but I thought it was pretty obvious he was not there yet.
Cano is a very good defender and has room to get even better. I’ve said it several times here but with a little better approach at the plate and a little better concentration in the field he could win an MVP.
If Peyton wins the Super bowl this year then he’s getting awfully close to being #1 already and by the time he retires I think there may be no arguement that he was the best ever.
I am continually surprised at how resistant some people are to advanced metrics. They enhance, rather than detract from, one’s the enjoyment of the game.
Simon,
Last Christmas I made this small book for my father, basically a collection of the stories he always tells. I was pretty proud of the gift. Something creative, unique. A one-of-a-kind present.
That same Christmas, my sister gave dad her full dissertation, a massive collection of all her research in stunning detail, elegantly bound into a huge coffee-table sized book. It was amazing.
Point is, you’re absolutely right. I landed a pretty great gig, but my sister casts a pretty large shadow.
He goes to his right, and makes the throw across his body, better than any second baseman in the game right now.
He covers an enormous amount of ground going to his right.
He doesn’t have to cover as much ground to his left with Tex at first.
However, Tex plays certain hitters more toward the line, Robbie has improved going to his left. He does however, make most of his errors going to his left.
Going to his right? Pedroia isn’t in the same league as Cano in that area. Only Orlando Hudson (in his heyday) and Utley cover as much ground going to their right as Cano.
GB7–Golson is an Austin area guy who used to hit where my son did. Fabulous athlete and a good kid. I always hoped he would make it. Worth a shot, I agree.
Not getting into Cano in particular, but people should remember that if a player has a UZR close to zero doesn’t mean that player is bad defensively. In fact, it means that player is average defensively compared to others at his position in the majors, which means that in fact that player is pretty good defensively.
It’s a relative, not absolute, scale.
Cano is diving more now. I like that. I’ve said on more than one occasion that Cano’s growth chart as a player has been steady and still going. Getting better all the time and far from done. Sky’s the limit, and I didn’t think that after his first couple of years.
================================================
SJ,
Pedroia’s defense suffered because the infield at Fenway is so bad.
(just kidding, but I swear I heard that on a national broadcast)
Rich in NJ….It’s not so much a point of resistance as it is the point of the over evalution of the metrics, as though it’s gospel and it’s not….
# mick January 21st, 2010 at 11:19 am
Most baseball fans could care less about the fancy statistics that have become a cottage industry. Feel free to pursue this scientific endeavour but know that it will never become an integral part of the game.
# Jerkface January 21st, 2010 at 11:26 am
but know that it will never become an integral part of the game.
–
People with this attitude are in for a surprise
————————————————————-
How did baseball survive before this age of sabremetrics. I am a college graduate and understand the scientific breakdown but when it comes to watching a game I could care less. It is for our enjoyment , if someone likes to analyze every player to determine his worth, so be it. I prefer to sit back and enjoy what I see, it’s enough for me. Most of these “scientists” seem like elite snobs to me. Just the way I see it, sue me Dexter.
Gotta agree with SJ here on Cano’s defense. Don’t see any way you can argue Pedroia is better going to his right than Cano. Maybe he’s slightly better going to his left, but definitely not going to his right. Cano is probably the best in the game going to his right nowadays. Only Utley is close.
austinmac
January 21st, 2010 at 2:24 pm
GB7–Golson is an Austin area guy who used to hit where my son did. Fabulous athlete and a good kid. I always hoped he would make it. Worth a shot, I agree.
————————————————————
He’s certainly worth a lower level type pitcher. 2004s overall #21 pick. he’s been buried in two organizations. he’s better that most of NYYs upper level outfielders and the fact that he has a large number of games in center is a plus. Never had the knockout years, but, nothing that was brutal, either, except maybe 2006. His main problem seems to be those ugly strikeout totals and Cano-like walk totals.
Pedroia is much better defensively than Cano. It’s not even that close.
Cano is not bad, but Pedroia is really an excellent defender.
http://mlb.mlb.com/media/video.....id=6354001
Range.
mick-I see what you’re saying but remember that scouts and General Mangers have this as their career. Their livelihood depends on them figuring out which players are better than others. It is imperative they keep up with the cutting edge in sabermetrics or they risk being left behind.
Rich in NJ
January 21st, 2010 at 2:19 pm
I am continually surprised at how resistant some people are to advanced metrics. They enhance, rather than detract from, one’s the enjoyment of the game.
I completely agree Rich. I think most people who incorporate sabermetrics into their baseball hobby do so because they love the game, and the people who play it, so much that they don’t want to stop at watching the game. It is my understanding that these people watch as many games as traditional fans, but they also like to study the statistical side of the game to better appreciate what they see each night. For whatever reason, many people who don’t enjoy these metrics assume that those who do have made a trade-off between watching the game and studying the numbers…which I believe is very rarely true. Anyone who cares enough to be discussing/debating this topic is probably pretty obsessed with baseball…just because someone else views the game differently doesn’t mean they get any less enjoyment from it.
He’s not “much better than Cano”.
Defined how?
Arm: Cano’s is much better.
Turning the DP: Cano is better.
Going to his right: Cano is better.
Going to his left: Pedroia is better.
Getting his uniform dirty: Pedroia is much better.
Nobody is saying Pedroia is a bad defensive player. He isn’t.
However, Robbie doesn’t have to take a back seat to him and Pedroia is “much better” than Cano at the position.
According to MLBTR another ex Yankee farmhand has been designated, Anthony Claggett.
“Cano is probably the best in the game going to his right nowadays. Only Utley is close.”
rodg12-
Just curious, how many times a year do you watch Placido Polanco or Clint Barnes play? Or Felipe Lopez or Ian Kinstler? Or Brandon Phillips? Or Utley for that matter? I can’t watch them play that often myself.
Pedroia I manage to watch about 20 times a year, but not enough for me to completely judge him. You must watch him a lot more, I guess.
GB7–He can definately play center but the walk and strike out numbers are not good. He would be, in my opinion, one of the Yankee top outfielders at the higher levels. That area is awfully shallow, but I hear Erica may have a suggestion.
ditmars1929
January 21st, 2010 at 12:56 pm
I’m sorry! I do agree with you!
I may start accepting some of the new BS stats when somebody can tell me who has the ML record for WAR, UZR/150 or ISO…without looking it up. Perhaps, even after these stats are added to the HOF plaques.
Can anyone remember the last time a player who wasn’t suppossed to be good became good??
Using Gardner as an example, everyone statistically convinced he will be average or less than.
Anyone ever shook off those interpretations and been good/ very good when it wasn’t expected?
How many players would be good or great if given a chance at the bigs?
Cervelli hopefully will continue his hitting trend from last yr.. He showed zero hitting prior..
I agree, Cano had an elite year defensively last year. Stat guys, keep in mind that UZR is useless unless used in a 3 year or more sample. Just because Cano’s UZR last year wasn’t that good doesn’t mean he wasn’t good in the field. I think a point can be made for the fact that him and Teixeira are so good they could be encroaching on each other’s zones thus decreasing each other’s zone rating.
I watched all of the games last year and there were very few times when I thought Cano should have gotten a ball and quite a number of plays where I said “wow what a great play”.
And finally, there is no way you are going to convince me that Pedroia was better in the field in 2009 than Cano. That’s just absurd. It’s like saying Ellsbury had a great year in the field in 2009. He made it look good because he’s diving all over the place but he really wasn’t that good.
Pedroia “isn’t” much better.
Sorry for the typo.
I am someone who watches 4-6 games a night on my Extra Innings Package.
Phillips are Barmes aren’t good defenders. Phillips especially is more an offensive threat than defensive threat.
Kinsler is a third baseman playing second. I have no idea why the Rangers keep him at second.
Lopez is more a utility guy than second baseman right now.
A guy who belongs in the conversation is Aaron Hill. He’s a much better defender than he is given credit for, IMO.
Polanco was a terrific defensive second baseman. Better than Cano and Pedroia, IMO. He is now playing third for the Phillies.
UZR over the past three years for both players (you’re supposed to use UZR over three years of data):
Cano: 11.3 in 07′, -8.0 in 08′, -5.2 in 09.
Pedroia: 3.6 in 07′, 10.5 in 08′, 9.8 in 09′
Averaged out for our three year sample:
Cano UZR: 1.6
Pedroia UZR: 8
I think it’s safe to say Pedroia’s better, unless you don’t want to accept the objective analysis because your “eyes” tell you differently…
austinmac
January 21st, 2010 at 2:43 pm
GB7–He can definately play center but the walk and strike out numbers are not good. He would be, in my opinion, one of the Yankee top outfielders at the higher levels. That area is awfully shallow, but I hear Erica may have a suggestion.
————————————————————
Do you think that when Erica has a daughter, she’ll be touting Johnny Damon’s Jr’s virtues or that JD Jr becomes Erica’s cub?
We are talking about 2009 not the last 3 years.
Anyone that watched most of the Yankee games last year can tell you that Cano was leaps and bounds better in 2009 than he was in 2008 or 2007.
That being said, Cano is pretty good defensively. But he’s not as good or better than Pedroia. Not even close.
I think Cano is certainly as good as Pedroia and probably better than Pedroia overall. Pedroia has to work harder and do a lot more diving probably because he’s so small.
But that’s the beauty of life and of the game we love. “Because I said so” only takes the day when your parents say it. Otherwise we are all voicing opinions, some of which we hold more strongly than others.
That said, I can’t imagine anyone thinking Robby isn’t a great 2B. Seriously. I hate to fall back on baseball experts – and certainly they can disagree – but just take a listen to Hall of Fame 2B Joe Morgan wax poetic about Robby Cano before you decide to write him off at 2B or delude yourselves into thinking he isn’t a great fielding 2B.
wave your hat-
thanks. bookmarked it.
rich in nj-
i’d be disappointed if no one on the blog was well versed in statistical analysis. i think it raises the level of the blog.
what i’m saying is that yes it can reveal truths, but if you already know that truth it isn’t that useful.
where i object is when some advocates of sabermetrics act like they are reinventing the wheel. i also object to opinions like clutch not existing when that kind of statement has nothing to do with statistics but is rather the personal belief of the person saying it.
if you go back to bill james original statement about clutch it’s really embarrassing. he goes on and on about if clutch existed it would mean those people would be better than regular people like him. and they’re not , so clutch doesn’t exist.
it was weird and sounded like he was still ticked off at being picked last for his sandlot games as a kid.
so to be clear, i’m saying sabermetrics is worthwhile , but more worthwhile to some people than others.
i especially like to read someone on the blog like CB who actually understands that sabermetrics isn’t necessarily advanced statistical analysis .
Cano was much better than he was in 08′, but he had a better defensive year in 07′.
are you sure that isn’t because the patron saint of sabermetrics, bill james, said that first.are you really thinking for yourself?
there is way too much dogma to sabermetrics and the the idea of clutch not existing is a key tenet to the religion.
–
Why do you think clutch exists? And if it does exist, why are ‘clutch’ players not clutch all the time? ALl the visual and statistical evidence points to clutch not existing. Kobe Bryant has a bunch of game winning shots, you’d probably want the basketball in his hands with the game on the line, but he also takes far more shots at the end of a game that most players, and has a ton of misses.
Derek Jeter is one of the finest hitters in the game now and forever. He is good because he is good, not because he is clutch. He has played on great teams that win a lot of ballgames, and been a part of great offenses. He gets on base and hits for a high average. He happens to also get on base and hit for a high average in almost every situation possible.
Its not clutch, he is just a good player with few weaknesses.
The problem with clutch is that it only works when you decide it does. “Jeter hit the game winning hit, he is clutch” (ignores past 20 games that month where Jeter did not get the game winning hit or start a rally) Were those games less important? Who decides when its ‘clutch’ time.
The yankees once scored 5 runs to stun the opposing team, I think it was the Orioles. A-rod hit the game winning walk off HR, you could say it was clutch. But Josh Phelps started everything with a HR. If the Yankees had not won, would anyone say Josh Phelps was clutch? Even after they won, no one is saying that was a clutch hit by Josh Phelps. No one even remembers or likes Josh Phelps. Without him the Yankees dont win that game. In RETROSPECT the hit was “clutch”, but at the time no one would want Josh Phelps at the plate in that situation.
Jeter’s stats for his career in every situation tracked by baseball-reference tells me that he is remarkably consistent in his game. Thats not clutch. That is being a great player. Similiarly, stats tell me that Josh Phelps is not very good at baseball, at least not consistently, but he has more than 1 game winning hit or rally starting hit in his career. IT does not mean he is clutch.
Patrick,
Great point. UZR lost me last year when at one point they had Tex and Cano as “below average” defenders and folks actually defended the finding.
I had a chance to hear a hysterical, expletive laden Jim Leyland after one Yankee-Tiger game at the Stadium last summer.
A reporter asked him about Cano and Tex defensively and how UZR considered them “below average” and Leyland went off! LOL
He ripped the system and call the people who invented it “idiots” if they thought those two guys were below average defenders. It was pretty funny seeing get all worked up about it.
Damon is leaning towards striking any deal with the Yankees, he is not ready to retire.
“I think a point can be made for the fact that him and Teixeira are so good they could be encroaching on each other’s zones thus decreasing each other’s zone rating.”
UZR now controls for that, I believe.
“i especially like to read someone on the blog like CB who actually understands that sabermetrics isn’t necessarily advanced statistical analysis .”
Yeah if you show sabermetrics to a statistics professor he/she would probably laugh at most of them. A lot of the new stats are statistically flawed in a big way.
As someone with a PhD in computational biology (I study biological complexity) I would say that statistics describe patterns and, therefore generate what we call expectations (i.e., what we expect to find, or see happen, in the sense of what the most likely outcome is) as well as probabilities of different outcomes. No one that understands how they work would ever say that they tell you what will or should happen.
Therefore, one conclusions of statistical analyses is that very often the outcome will not match the expected outcome.
For example, if you flip a coin 100 times, your expected outcome is 50 heads and 50 tails. But you expect to get exactly 50 heads and 50 tails only 8% of the time (i.e., 92 percent of the time you do not get the most likely outcome).
So as a statistical scientist, I adore the move in baseball to use good probability and statistical models. They do what I would want someone to do from the point of view as a statistician. I love OPS+ and the even more complex and derived statistics (e.g., stuff at fangraphs). I also love stuff like Leonard Mlodinow’s analysis of Joe Dimaggio’s hitting streak.
I think it’s safe to say Pedroia’s better, unless you don’t want to accept the objective analysis because your “eyes” tell you differently…
So I guess Ryan Howard > Mark Teixeira defensively because UZR says so?
Before you delude youselves trusting our objective opinions about him try looking at what actually occurred.
Remember statistics are just events reduced to numbers. It’s just a recording of how many times each player made a certain play in a certain spot.
I love how SJ throws a little dig at Pedroia commenting twice on how much he get’s his uniform dirty.
In all seriousness, just because Pedroia makes some plays that look spectacular doesn’t make him a better defender, and doesn’t help the argument that he’s better than Cano.
Bottom line, there are times that you could position Cano and Pedroia in the same spot on the field, hit the exact same grounhd ball, and get 2 roads to the same destination.
Cano might get a better jump and only have to lean over to snatch the ball, then not even break stride and casually flip the ball back across his body to get a runner out. The same exact ball hit to Pedroia may require a full length dive followed by a dramatic frantic throw towards first.
Cano gets slighted sometimes because he’s so good he makes plays look easier than they are. You could argue that Pedroia sometimes make plays look more spectacular than they really are. This also encourages the “lazy” comments from the uninformed Yankee fan thrown at Cano, which IMO are completely unwarranted.
Anyone that has read my posts knows I’m 100% pro-Cano. The RISP slight really gets blown way out of proportion. The guy is a gem, a rare combination of offensive skills combined with excellent defense at a premium position.
For a guy who hits so low in the lineup, some of his offensive numbers are simply staggering.
Carl-Yes!
UZR isn’t objective analysis. Some people in baseball think its the most flawed metric going right now.
Just because you believe in it doesn’t mean its an accurate metric.
Teams wouldn’t be spending the money they are spending to come up with their own internal defensive metric systems if UZR was so accurate.
These are organizations that layoff 20,000 per year employees to save money. They don’t like spending 250,000-1,000,000 to develop and operate a new system if a more accurate (and free) one is available.
You are wedded to an inaccurate metric.
Wow things get off topic really fast here.
Re: Cano – everyone here has seen him play, we all know he’s got a tremendous arm. But really, other than that, he doesn’t have many superior defensive assets – he isn’t quick, a lot of balls get under his glove to both sides (not errors, but simply not getting to the ball). He’s as talented a hitter as any other 2B out there, but he only has one plus tool as a defender. He is essentially Jeter at second base. Doesn’t make too many errors, is able to make a couple plays that not a ton of guys make because his arm is so strong, and lets a lot of balls get by him because his range, compared to other 2Bs, is not that good. Luckily, there is some room for improvement, since he does seem to reach a lot of balls that still get under his glove, but in general, it will always be his hitting that makes him valuable at 2B.
” I think a point can be made for the fact that him and Teixeira are so good they could be encroaching on each other’s zones thus decreasing each other’s zone rating.”
patrick-
why would that happen? does teixeira taking a ball out of cano’s zone make it appear cano didn’t get to a ball?
There is something to be gained from understanding the role science has played in modern society when it comes to understanding how intangibles are poo-poo’d by seamheads. It was a time called “The Enlightenment.”
In the battle between rationalism and religion, that which is not observable or measurable or explainable does not exist. It is written off to superstition, ignorance, chance, imagination or that most magnificent of all mental illnesses (sarcasm alert) religion. Thus, Reason is the only source for true authority.
Those of us who see intangibles in Jeter despite those awful defensive metrics are therefore pitied for our slavish devotion to the metaphysical, and condemned for our rejection of reason. Faith, however, is still chosen by some. See, e.g., Bull Durham; Annie Savoy’s “I believe in the Church of Baseball” soliloquy.
Consider yourselves “Enlightened.”
“why would that happen? does teixeira taking a ball out of cano’s zone make it appear cano didn’t get to a ball?”
I thought so but Wave says UZR now corrects for that occurence.
SJ44-I have looked up UZR and read articles from the creator of UZR. I know it’s flaws (it doesn’t do 1b well, so for that matter I take that back from before, Tex might be better than Howard), but over a three year range, with that big of a gap, I’d say it’s no mean stretch to say that Pedroia is a good bit better defensively than Cano.
Patrick, that’s my understanding at least.
“UZR now controls for that, I believe.”
I responded to this once but it got caught in the filter. Here’s my second attempt.
I can still rationalize that UZR doesn’t tell the whole story for Cano and Tex.
First of all, it’s now widely accepted that UZR is useless for 1B. So we can throw out Tex’s UZR.
Secondly, for anyone paying attention it was obvious that Robbie Cano was a lot better defensively in 2009 than he was in 2008. If you accept that he has learned to be a better defender and will be that going forward it’s unfair to lump his 2008 and 2007 numbers in with 2009. And since UZR is only useful in 3+ year samples, we shouldn’t even look at his UZR period.
There
miggs – While that’s obviously a scenario any of us could envision, the simple fact is this: Pedroia makes more outs in the field than Cano does. It’s certainly true that cano does sometimes make plays look easier than they are, and pedroia makes them look harder, but nobody (at least, nobody credible) is arguing about cano being lazy and pedroia not, or saying that cano is worse defensively because he doesn’t put as much effort into making the outs he makes. They say he is worse defensively because more balls get by him than get by pedroia. If you pay a little more attention when you watch the games you’ll see balls trickle under his glove quite a bit more than you may have realized. These are the plays – where it seems like it was simply out of his reach, and not his fault – that make cano a worse fielder. What is out of his reach is not out of good 2Bs’ reach.
I’d like to know what the fielding bible has to say about Robbie. I believe the +/- numbers for 2009 were published somewhere, does anyone have them that can tell me how Cano did ?
New post
Not that I don’t find this thrilling – but according to the Bergen Record Johnny Damon is considering retirement since he can’t get a contract offer that he likes.
We are talking about 2009. Not a 3 year average.
In 2009, Robbie Cano was an elite defensive second baseman.
Anybody who bothered watching the game would have a hard time disputing that.
Anyone devoted to a flawed metric would.
Patrick: first of all, there’s no way that the “encroaching” theory is true – no player is discredited if another player fields the ball. UZR is a record of balls that DO fall in or get through, not those that don’t. And it is compiled by actual human beings who watch every play, and would not discredit cano because Tex fielded a ball that may have been in his “zone”, even if the out was not made.
Secondly, while it seems reasonable that cano has been improving defensively, one could make the same argument about pedroia. And when people say UZR is only useful in 3-year samples, they mean simply that you can only project a player defensively based on 3 years of data. That doesn’t change the fact that in 2009, Pedroia did a better job getting to balls than cano did. And honestly it really doesn’t matter. I’ll take Cano’s offensive upside over pedroia’s better defense any day of the week and twice on sundays.
and, in keeping with Chad’s report from a couple of days ago that the Yankees could bring back Steven Jackson if they wanted – they could also bring back Anthony Claggett – he was designated for assignment by the Pirates to make room for Octavio Dotel.
The Pirates, if nothing else, will have a lot of pieces to trade away this summer to competing teams. They’ve brought in a bunch of good relievers and guys (like Bobby Crosby) that a team could look at as bench help for the stretch run.
“So as a statistical scientist, I adore the move in baseball to use good probability and statistical models.”
paco dooley-
when i read your post nothing in it sounds wrong to me . i get a very different feeling when reading some sabermetric writings.
for example, when bill james does something like the Pythagorean theorem for predicting expected wins and losses i find that interesting and useful, but when he says something about “clutch” existing or not it seems he’s just taking a personal position on something and looking for stats to back up a previously existing position.
to me that’s not statistical analysis but something else.
Patrick-
I wasn’t taking a position on UZR or Cano one way or the other. Just stating my understanding of what UZR does and doesn’t do in a couple of particulars.
Like a lot of people here I watch Cano all the time, in person a lot and on TV more of course. I think he’s good, but not elite. Just my opinion, if others disagree I have no problem with that.
UZR compares him to other second basemen, which is UZR’s plus in my opinion as I can’t watch every second baseman play every day the way I can Cano. I always suspect I am biased towards players I root for and see every day, so that’s another plus I see in UZR. In Cano’s case, UZR’s ratings generally conform to what I subjectively think of Cano’s abilities so it doesn’t disturb me that much I guess.
My totally unscientific opinion is that people tend to like UZR when it confirms their opinions, and don’t like it so much when it doesn’t.
So you’re saying damn what objective analysis tells me, depsite the fact that Cano has been inferior to Pedroia for the past three seasons, that you’re a Yankee fan and biased, and that defensive metrics this season support the conclsuions reached the previous two, Cano is as good or better than Pedroia because our eyes tll you so.
Yeah, sure, okay.
pete
January 21st, 2010 at 2:54 pm
LOL! Very funny!! Cano on the other hand gets to balls higher in the sky than Peds who constantly lets balls ove 6’0″ high pass him by!! If you want to play games we can. I’ve seen them both play. Peds is very good, but Cano is better IMO. UZR, notwithstanding, Cano has more range, a better glove & a better arm. Cano is also much faster than Peds. Just because someone glides while the other is chopping, doesn’t mean the chopper is faster.
Perhaps Peds looks so bad turning the DP, because he is short and has random numbers of poor SS to deal with. But Cano looks like he was born to turn the DP. The Yankee infielders 1B thru 3B are as good a combo as there is in the game.
It is laughable to think of Ryan Howard being a statistical leader in UZR over Tex!! But that is just my eyes speaking here!! LOL!
SJ44 – i watched every game last year. I watched a heck of a lot of balls squeeze by cano that i’d seen many another 2B make a play on. Cano’s got a great arm for a 2B and occasionally makes impressive looking plays, but it’s generally only because he had to make a long throw that most 2Bs wouldn’t have made. He got much better going to his left this year than he’d been in years past, but he still stinks at getting his glove on the ground when going to his right, and because of this, a lot of balls get hit by him. These are recorded by those who watch the games and record every ball in play, categorize it, and then compile it into the “flawed statistic” that is UZR. And yes, UZR is flawed – it does nothing for catchers, and tells only part of the story for 1B. But it’s a tremendously useful stat for SS, 2B, and CF. Anyone who thinks Cano was an “elite” defensive 2B last year simply hasn’t spent enough time watching elite defensive 2Bs like Cesar Izturis or Chase Utley. These guys are quicker, position themselves better, take better routes, and inarguably make more plays than cano. That said, cano is still an elite 2B. But in much the same way that Jeter has always been an elite SS. Because the dude can hit WAY better than most 2Bs can, even in the current era, where 2B is a much better offensive position than it has historically been.
While I typically take my own counsel, for good or bad, over anyone else’s here because I don’t consider anyone to corner the market on baseball expertise here, I will say there are certain poster I will listen to more than others. With all due respect, Wait, you hyperventilated all last season about the “incredible” Suxers and the kind of season they were going to have and you continually counseled us that we were underestimating the Suxers.
Needless to say, I don’t necessarily think we do life the same way or look at things through the same “objective” eyes. It doesn’t surprise me that you think Pedroia is superior to Cano. I’m sure you believe it. Suffice it to say I don’t agree.
“Past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results.”
Keeps baseball (and Wall St.) interesting.
“It is laughable to think of Ryan Howard being a statistical leader in UZR over Tex!! But that is just my eyes speaking here!! LOL!”
2 things:
1. You are correct. It is just your eyes making this conclusion. However:
2. UZR is not the best indicator of 1b for a couple of reasons, particularly that it doesn’t measure how good the 1b is at scooping out throws, so with that flaw taken into mind, Tex might be better than Howard.
You believe Howard is a better defensive player than Tex? You must because UZR says so.
If you believe that, and can’t see how flawed the metric is, I can’t help you.
trisha-No, I did not. Not at all. What I kept saying is that the Sox were not to be taken lightly.
For a point, yes, I did think we’d make the wildcard-but now because at one time I thought that, statistical analysis I use isn’t valid?
I still don’t think the Sox, who are very good, should be taken lightly.
For the record, by eyes, Cano is better. I might even say a good deal better. However, I have a subjective way of looking at it. So I look to statistics, which report what happens with no bias. Suffice to say that the statistics tell me that I’m wrong.
SJ-Why is it flawed, then?
BTW, if you read my comments, I said he might not be.
For the record no, you can’t help me. I wasn’t asking for help.
“And it is compiled by actual human beings who watch every play, and would not discredit cano because Tex fielded a ball that may have been in his “zone”, even if the out was not made.”
pete-
has anyone done the stats on what percentage of the people who watch are yankee fans and who are anti yankee or red sox fans?
i always said this was a problem of dewan’s fielding bible. the ones who judge plays already likely don’t like jeter. dewan himself is ridiculously biased against jeter. he goes out of his way to talk about him in his books way more than any other player.
so i do believe the objectivity of the people watching the plays is an issue.
if this is true ,dewan’s system could be wrong with jeter because of bias , but not wrong with other players when no bias was involved.
cano may suffer the same fate.
Here’s the thing: I’m NOT using my “objective” eyes. I’m using the eyes of people who’s job it is to report whether or not a player fielded a ball in a certain spot.
Wait till we do it all over Again
January 21st, 2010 at 3:14 pm
I posted my comment before I read the flawed metric theory for 1B. Probably flawed for DH’s too. I’m still trying to figure out how Ozzie would have done under UZR. LOL!
Ray -
I won’t argue that pedroia is better at turning the DP because it is obviously not true. I haven’t seen enough 2Bs play enough games for this to hold too much weight, but i’ve never seen a better double-play turner than Cano. Ever. But UZR has absolutely nothing to do with that. Nobody said it was an all-encompassing metric for defense at any position (though it is pretty close for CF). It is just an empirical measurement of RANGE. Cano’s range is worse than pedroia’s. Period. And while i agree that cano is faster, I think that is only true in longer distances. The man is NOT quick, and when dealing with hard-hit grounders, that tends to hold more weight. Pedroia, on the other hand, is exceptionally quick, making up for a lack of top speed. Cano has a better arm than Pedroia. Cano turns the DP better. Cano is also (IMO) better at catching fly balls over his head. What cano is not better at than pedroia, not by a long shot, is fielding ground balls hit to his right. And in the end, that ends up making quite a bit more difference than Cano’s defensive advantages do. In the end, more runs score because of Cano’s defense than Pedroia’s. Period.
Because everyone knows, Ozzie was no Lugo!!!
So why is UZR wrong?
I’m more than wiling to be convinced. If you can give me prof that UZR, over any length of time, is wrong then I will admit it.
pete-I agree completely.
Well then we better start taking into account weather conditions. Players who are in wetter weather and who do not play in a dome should be fielding balls worse than those who play in better weather and in a dome. And then those in the northeast without a dome but who play in typically wetter climes should have some adjusted fielding stat because they will be facing teams in their locale rather than those who have the luxury of a dome or drier weather.
And how about field conditions per se? How about a team that has a notoriously poorly groomed infield? And play in wet weather and in the northeast as opposed to warmer climes? Adjustment for that?
Thus the problem with who should be in a certain spot at a certain time. That’s where stats can be misleading.
trisha-Absolutely, but NY and Boston don’t have that problem. Besides, stats could be adjusted for such a thing.
pete
January 21st, 2010 at 3:19 pm
I like you! LOL! Peds is a very good player and I enjoy the fact that Cano who was so discredited by most Yankee fans prior to last season is being compared to Peds, whom I reiterate is very good. That said, I’ve sen and played with some great SS & 2B over the years. Cano is in the conversation at 2B and he has a higher window to get better than Peds. Peds has to take an extra ½ step to be where Cano’s arms are. I have not studied UZR, but I am an EE with a minor in Math & Nuclear who works in probaility and statistics all the time. Data is the key. Data can easily be skewed and misinterpreted. Even collecting the data is difficult.
Personally, I would take Cano over Peds on both offense and defense!
Wait, but the problem is that they’re not. So to purely look at stats becomes problemmatic. That’s why you need to also believe what your eyes tell you and look for reasons that might skew the stats, if there are any. They have to exist side by side.
I will say again though, seriously, that Joe Morgan thinks that Robby walks on water. I do tend to pay attention to the experts in the field. But in my behalf, I was enamored with Robby’s fielding as soon as I started to watch him. I think there is something to be said for the fact that it really does come easy to him and therefore he doesn’t look like he’s doing spectacular things, which in reality he is.
I will agree that Robby can lose his focus. Thankfully he finds it again!
trisha-We’re on our way there.
Anyway, even if certain parks, and weather, can skew statistics, I looked at a three year sample size intentionally. It is large enough for you to get past a few of the variables.
One day, they will solve the conundrum of fielding statistics completely.
Right now there are a few variables, true. But the gap between Pedroia and Cano, range wise, is so large I think we can safely conclude that Cano is not as good or better defensively than Pedroia.
Wait, and here’s the problem again. Has Pedroia been playing injured? There was a whole period of time when Robby was playing with an injured hand and I remember him being genuinely hurt because he been accused of being lazy during that period of time. He played every game, and he obviously wasn’t as sharp as he was when he was playing at full strength. To look at stats and not take something like that into consideration turns out to be very misleading.
Same thing with Jeter. The guy will play hurt rather than not play. We all know that. Does it affect his playing? Absolutely. Do his stats reflect it without giving an asterisked explanation? Absolutely.
A problem likely without a good answer. I am very big on factoring in everything that you can/should and then reaching a conclusion. And time and again pure stats and nothing else can really screw you up there!
trisha-Even if they were injured, one was defending better than the other. That’s like saying “Jeter over three years has been worse than Pujols…BUT he played injured!” Well, yes, and that made a difference…but he’s still worse than Pujols.
Wait, another problem is that another group of us is safely concluding that Robby is superior to Pedroia. See what I mean?
Are you an accountant (can’t remember if you said you were.) I think there are other things that factor into what varying individuals consider worthy reasoning. I’m going to make perhaps a leap here (?) and say that people who are more attuned to the hard sciences would favor stats over those liberal arts types like myself who are more right-brained and therefore more into the communicative way of life!
Sorry if I’m not being articulate here. I am attempting to multitask by working out and posting at the same time. Not so easy!
Talk to you later.
I must say I just like watching and playing baseball. All this analysis and over analysis seems to take the fun out of it for me. I can appreciate stats because they have always been part of the game. But all this stat psychobabble is beyond me. I don’t understand why it is fun. I just love the game.
trisha-But they have no EVIDENCE to back it up. I’m not saying Pedroia is better than Cano, I’m saying that there’s actual quantitative proof that points that way.
(Nope, not an accountant BTW)
I have a MS in biological chemistry from UNC, I too work with proteins. I need a job, tell her to help me!