Jump to content

Defense?


El Gordo

Recommended Posts

Jay Gibbons played RF for the O's from 2002-2007. In all but 2 seasons his UZR home splits were as good or better than his away splits. How did he manage it?

He really only had 1 full year in RF and he was about 2 runs worse in OPACY than away in range. Just not enough data there. We'd really have to know how the other teams/players do there and we don't have that info. Maybe a slower guy like Gibbons is affected less than a faster guy like Nick. UZR has been playing around with their adjustemtns for awhile. Maybe that has something to do with it. Again, the bottom line is I just don't think there is enough data.

Now, what about Fenway/Crawford? Do you think Crawford's decline was due to playing the wall or more about the methodolgy and difficulty of scoring Fenway Park? Ellsbury has some interesting sss data there in LF/CF.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 138
  • Created
  • Last Reply
He really only had 1 full year in RF and he was about 2 runs worse in OPACY than away in range. Just not enough data there. We'd really have to know how the other teams/players do there and we don't have that info. Maybe a slower guy like Gibbons is affected less than a faster guy like Nick. UZR has been playing around with their adjustemtns for awhile. Maybe that has something to do with it. Again, the bottom line is I just don't think there is enough data.

Now, what about Fenway/Crawford? Do you think Crawford's decline was due to playing the wall or more about the methodolgy and difficulty of scoring Fenway Park? Ellsbury has some interesting sss data there in LF/CF.

In OPACY I don't see the issue. Nick is good at playing balls off the wall in RF and limiting advance. UZR and FB don't penalize for these balls. The RF corner doesn't seem to give him much trouble compared to other fielders. The main issue I can see is he doesn't get to balls in front of him as he should, balls in the gap, or balls down the line. That has nothing to do with park factors, IMO.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In OPACY I don't see the issue. Nick is good at playing balls off the wall in RF and limiting advance. UZR and FB don't penalize for these balls. The RF corner doesn't seem to give him much trouble compared to other fielders. The main issue I can see is he doesn't get to balls in front of him as he should, balls in the gap, or balls down the line. That has nothing to do with park factors, IMO.

FB only adjusts for balls that hit the wall. That's it. That's not good enough. There are obvious issues with that. What about a ball that hits at the base of the wall? They are penalized for that. In another park a guy gets that ball because he's running full speed where Nick has to slow down for fear of hitting the wall. Look at the foul lines. OPACY has practically zero in RF. Other parks are much bigger. Same issue. Guys in another park can run faster for that same ball without having to worry about running into the wall or stands. The grass at OPACY might even have something to do with it. I am not disagreeing with some/much of your analysis. I actually see a lot of what you see. You just don't have enough data to make an informed decision on this one. Neither do I.

I have no idea how UZR makes park adjustments, but to say park factors don't matter because of what you see is almost as bad as somebody saying they think he's good/bad because of what they see. You really don't know and you don't have enough data to make an intelligent enough decision about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In OPACY I don't see the issue. Nick is good at playing balls off the wall in RF and limiting advance. UZR and FB don't penalize for these balls. The RF corner doesn't seem to give him much trouble compared to other fielders. The main issue I can see is he doesn't get to balls in front of him as he should, balls in the gap, or balls down the line. That has nothing to do with park factors, IMO.

He also gets no credit for any balls played off the wall, which hurts him if he plays the carom well.

Jay also played one of his seasons in a year where OPACY's outfield configuration was drastically different (they pushed the walls back in '02 or '03 I believe).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He also gets no credit for any balls played off the wall, which hurts him if he plays the carom well.

It does appear to reward Nick (and Jones) for limiting advance (arm component) though.

Jay also played one of his seasons in a year where OPACY's outfield configuration was drastically different (they pushed the walls back in '02 or '03 I believe

That's an interesting one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So yoy think Reynolds isbeing grossly mischaracte ized here? Which others are blatantly wrong, IYO. Remember these are numbers fo positiions and not individual players. Andino has played some SS and 3B and Reimold has played some RF. Pie played some CF as well as LF, BRob and Adams have played some 2B, and Davis has been playing 3B for the last month.

No no. Like I said, I have ZERO idea or understanding of how these numbers are put together. All I'm saying is that Reynolds didn't look bad at all to me at first base, especially after seeing him be a complete butcher at third. I was pleasantly surprised is all I'm saying, but was also surprised by the low first base number for him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Without considering the relative competiton, you have no basis to make that assumption.
Sure I do I watched them both play. What's really funny is there really isn't enough data to assume the park has anything to do with Jones and Markakis' poor numbers there. But people seem to be bending over backwards to come up with mystery factors to justify their favorite players limitations.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE=El Gordo;2584232]Sure I do I watched them both play.

Interesting, you've resorted to the same logic that you routinely deride. By my recollection, I'm gonna say that Nick was faster and better than Jay Gibbons in the OF in all respects and that would be easily proved if you were able to neutralize the competition. Looking at the respective competition each had in RF should tell you that if common sense isn't enough. So, I a disagree. More importantly, I disagree with your logic as it's simply flawed.

What's really funny is there really isn't enough data to assume the park has anything to do with Jones and Markakis' poor numbers there. But people seem to be bending over backwards to come up with mystery factors to justify their favorite players limitations.

What's more funny is that you think you have the answers with insufficient data, avoid adressing the points I (and probably others) have made to you, and deflect relavent counterpoints and concerns as rationalizations.

Oh, I forgot your arrogant and disparaging comments, like we should just "get over" the fact that Jay Gibbons was better skilled than Markakis in RF.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting, you've resorted to the same logic that you routinely deride. By my recollection, I'm gonna say that Nick was faster and better than Jay Gibbons in the OF and would be easily proved if you were able to neutralize the competition. Looking at the respective competition each had in RF should tell you that if common sense isn't enough. So, I a disagree. More importantly, I disagree with your logic as it's simply flawed.

What's more funny is that you think you have the answers with insufficient data, avoid adressing the points I (and probably others) have made to you, and deflect relavent counterpoints and concerns as rationalizations.

Oh, I forgot your arrogant and disparaging comments, like we should just "get over" the fact that Jay Gibbons was better skilled than Markakis in RF.

Why don't you present the hard data about the negative park factors at OPACY. All I have seen from you is surmise. I am saying that looking at a few years of home away splits for two players doesn't demonstrate anything. In the absence of any data showing extreme park effects, and anecdotal data that other players had no such difficulties, the UZR numbers for Jones and Markakis are fairly accurate.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why don't you present the hard data about the negative park factors at OPACY. .

Because I don't have the data and I doubt it's available. Pretty sure I adressed that about 10 times already.

All I have seen from you is surmise

So your explanations with respect Nick's defensive splits aren't surmise? Answer the questions/concerns I posed to you about adjusting for flyballs that are only hit off the wall in OPACY with respect to RF as not being good enough. Answer the question I posed to you about Crawford's defense in the past defense in LF at Fenway Park this year. Acknowledge the problems associated with adjustments and loss of accuracy.

.

In the absence of any data showing extreme park effects, and anecdotal data that other players had no such difficulties, the UZR numbers for Jones and Markakis are fairly accurate

With respect to Jones they are probably more accurate. The range issues with Nick are more problematic. There is some compelling evidence that OPACY appears to depress range to some extent and enhance the arm component.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because I don't have the data and I doubt it's available. Pretty sure I adressed that about 10 times already.

So your explanations with respect Nick's defensive splits aren't surmise? Answer the questions/concerns I posed to you about adjusting for flyballs that are only hit off the wall in OPACY with respect to RF as not being good enough. Answer the question I posed to you about Crawford's defense in the past defense in LF at Fenway Park this year.

.

With with respect to Jones they are probably more accurate. The range issues with Nick are more problematic. There is some compelling evidence that OPACY appears to depress range to some extent and enhance the arm component.

The issue here is the accuracy of Nick and AJ's defensive metrics. Fans of these players point to their home way splits as evidence to doubt the validity of all defensive metrics, which I find absurd. In the absence of any hard data showing negative park effects, I see no reason to doubt their defensive metrics. I don't need to answer your surmise with my own, in order to proove these numbers accurate. I offered a possible explanation for Nick's difficulties. It doesn't matter what the reasons could be (I'm pretty sure it's not the grass) the fact is, Marakais is a below average RF.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The issue here is the accuracy of Nick and AJ's defensive metrics. Fans of these players point to their home way splits as evidence to doubt the validity of all defensive metrics, which I find absurd. In the absence of any hard data showing negative park effects, I see no reason to doubt their defensive metrics. I don't need to answer your surmise with my own, in order to proove these numbers accurate. I offered a possible explanation for Nick's difficulties. It doesn't matter what the reasons could be (I'm pretty sure it's not the grass) the fact is, Marakais is a below average RF.

Sounds like you're not going to take the time adress my issues after I've taken the time and courtesy to address yours. That makes us done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...