Jump to content

Adam Jones voted 2d best defensive outfielder in the AL by AL Managers


wildcard

Recommended Posts

Agreed on the last point. Not certain about the "accurate evaluations" about players, I think it's more about building relationships with those involved in MLB when it comes to becoming a manager than it is about anything else. And I don't think that's a bad thing - the job is about managing people as much as it's about anything else.

But evaluating players? That's for scouts, algorithms, and GMs.

Well, it certainly isn't foremost among their duties, but it's certainly among them.

I mean, who do you trust to evaluate defensive ability more: 15 AL managers or 15 guys on a baseball message board, two of whom have a BP subscription?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 108
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Well, it certainly isn't foremost among their duties, but it's certainly among them.

I mean, who do you trust to evaluate defensive ability more: 15 AL managers or 15 guys on a baseball message board, two of whom have a BP subscription?

Do I have to choose? In all seriousness I do appreciate Jones' ability, I just doubt the relevance of these measures of player worth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean, who do you trust to evaluate defensive ability more: 15 AL managers or 15 guys on a baseball message board, two of whom have a BP subscription?

I dunno. I might choose 15 random guys on a message board two of whom have a BP subscription. I bet we could easily find 15 guys on here who will come up with a more deserving 2013 Gold Glove Winner List than the managers will.

- Manager's votes are based off of very short sample sizes of 5-19 games per year that they get to see other team's players.

- They seem to be pre-disposed to voting for a 5+ year veteran over someone who is new to the league simply because, well, he is a veteran.

- They seem to be pre-disposed to simply voting for the guy who won it last year.

- And based on who they pick they seem to have zero regard for defensive metrics or worse yet they don't take the process seriously enough to even bother looking them up.

How else can we explain Jeter winning the award when baseball writers, statisticians, hardcore analysts, general baseball fans, and even fans of the New York Yankees knew it was a joke? They pull these kinds of shenanigans every year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dunno. I might choose 15 random guys on a message board two of whom have a BP subscription. I bet we could easily find 15 guys on here who will come up with a more deserving 2013 Gold Glove Winner List than the managers will.

- Manager's votes are based off of very short sample sizes of 5-19 games per year that they get to see other team's players.

- They seem to be pre-disposed to voting for a 5+ year veteran over someone who is new to the league simply because, well, he is a veteran.

- They seem to be pre-disposed to simply voting for the guy who won it last year.

- And based on who they pick they seem to have zero regard for defensive metrics or worse yet they don't take the process seriously enough to even bother looking them up.

How else can we explain Jeter winning the award when baseball writers, statisticians, hardcore analysts, general baseball fans, and even fans of the New York Yankees knew it was a joke? They pull these kinds of shenanigans every year.

I hope (but have little confidence) that the new SABR-sourced metric and some other slight reforms over the past few years will make the Gold Gloves and that process a bit more grounded in reality. Even the best voting pool can be led astray by a bad process, and the GG's prior open plurality system with no vetting of candidates or even a list of eligibles invited abysmal results.

The managers aren't idiots, they're fairly bright guys on average. But if they're not tuned into modern metrics there's no way they have a basis to form a reliable and accurate assessment of all the defensive players in the league.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, they don't.

But I'll say this: They sure as hell do get to be managers by making accurate evaluations of players, part of which is defensive ability.

And statistics might not be able to accurately evaluate defense. It's possible.

Well, we know that subjective observation can't consistently, accurately evaluate defense. So the numbers don't have a real high bar to clear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dunno. I might choose 15 random guys on a message board two of whom have a BP subscription. I bet we could easily find 15 guys on here who will come up with a more deserving 2013 Gold Glove Winner List than the managers will.

- Manager's votes are based off of very short sample sizes of 5-19 games per year that they get to see other team's players.

And guys on a message board watch 100 games a year of all the teams in the majors? I think not. I'd be willing to be that major league managers watch, and have watched more baseball, with a far more discerning eye than 99.9% of us here.

- They seem to be pre-disposed to voting for a 5+ year veteran over someone who is new to the league simply because, well, he is a veteran.

There is some truth to this. But as we've been told over and over again, it takes a few years for defensive stats to stabalize to become meaningful, so maybe they're just doing the same thing- wanting to see if performance is repeatable.

- They seem to be pre-disposed to simply voting for the guy who won it last year.

Some truth to this. See above.

- And based on who they pick they seem to have zero regard for defensive metrics or worse yet they don't take the process seriously enough to even bother looking them up.

Just because they have zero regard for defensive metrics, or even bother to look them up (well, the ones available to the public at large, which we know they hold in little regard) doesn't mean the stats are right.

How else can we explain Jeter winning the award when baseball writers, statisticians, hardcore analysts, general baseball fans, and even fans of the New York Yankees knew it was a joke? They pull these kinds of shenanigans every year.

How else can we explain Carlos Lee putting up one of the greatest seasons ever in his first season at first base? Or Lowrie posting insane UZR numbers last year?

For all the "ridiculousness" we see in the subjective manager's polls, we see far more in the stats imo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, we know that subjective observation can't consistently, accurately evaluate defense. So the numbers don't have a real high bar to clear.

We know it's subjective. We know it isn't perfect.

That doesn't mean it isn't useful.

And that doesn't mean that stats surpass it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And guys on a message board watch 100 games a year of all the teams in the majors? I think not. I'd be willing to be that major league managers watch, and have watched more baseball, with a far more discerning eye than 99.9% of us here.

There is some truth to this. But as we've been told over and over again, it takes a few years for defensive stats to stabalize to become meaningful, so maybe they're just doing the same thing- wanting to see if performance is repeatable.

Some truth to this. See above.

Just because they have zero regard for defensive metrics, or even bother to look them up (well, the ones available to the public at large, which we know they hold in little regard) doesn't mean the stats are right.

How else can we explain Carlos Lee putting up one of the greatest seasons ever in his first season at first base? Or Lowrie posting insane UZR numbers last year?

For all the "ridiculousness" we see in the subjective manager's polls, we see far more in the stats imo.

My biggest issue with the newer defensive metrics is the propensity for many who use them to just sort of point to the numbers spit out as a tangible, real thing rather than getting to the actual play that drives that number (I.e. some of the noise in the metrics you point to).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed on the last point. Not certain about the "accurate evaluations" about players, I think it's more about building relationships with those involved in MLB when it comes to becoming a manager than it is about anything else. And I don't think that's a bad thing - the job is about managing people as much as it's about anything else.

But evaluating players? That's for scouts, algorithms, and GMs.

Anyone who does not understand that one of Buck's main functions is evaluating players is not paying attention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone who does not understand that one of Buck's main functions is evaluating players in not paying attention.

Yes, and we know that Buck was right that Hardy was the best number 2 hitter all last year, Taylor Tegarden is a fine backup catcher who would be starting for many teams if not for his injury issues and Brian Roberts doesn't need a late inning defensive replacement.

How can anyone not understand that Buck is an openly and brutally honest evaluator of talent regardless of his personal relationships with his players. Pretty unfathomable really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But evaluating players? That's for scouts, algorithms, and GMs.

Exactly and when I see a group of professional scouts or a scouting rating system evaluate Jones as one of the best defensive CF's in the Majors, I'll pay attention to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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




  • Posts

    • Cool, nice work there.   So? Are we owed a large market? Does DC not deserve their own team? Should the fans of Baltimore just become Redskins fans and not tried to get their own team when the Colts left?  (sorry to bring up football again but come on, that fits). I laid it all out a couple months ago, MLB has more teams bringing home the hunk of metal than other sports since 2000.  The competitive balance is fine.  It's harder?  Yea?  OK it's harder.
    • The Cowboys have an owner with deep pockets. I agree 100% … There is some cap manipulation that happens. At the end of the day they have a $255 million limit they are required to operate under. The Dodgers, Yankees, Red Sox, etc can decide each year how much they want to add to the luxury tax fund as opposed to not being able to fit a potential move under the cap. Here are the 2024 payrolls for the NFL and MLB   https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/mlb/2024/04/03/mlb-team-payrolls-2024-highest-lowest-mets/73139425007/ Highest $305 million vs $60 million  https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/cap/_/year/2024/sort/cap_maximum_space Highest $259.5 million vs $217 million these numbers will likely get tighter once they make additions before the trade deadline.  If you can’t see the difference I’m just wasting my time. The biggest driving force in MLB beyond the ability of some to spend lavishly is the tv markets. The club controls so much of their tv revenue that it’s an unfair game. The moved that created the Orioles didn’t have much of an effect on the Senators tv market which was likely nonexistent then. Plus MLB is allowing contract manipulation like Othani’s contract. Instead of $700 divided by length 10 years, Somehow he only counts as like $46 million which is laughable. Plus they are paying $85 million in luxury tax fees in 2024.    The Orioles were a large market team when the Expos moved to DC. They could afford to spend with the Yankees, Red Sox , and Blue Jays. Could the Orioles afford to pay $85 million in luxury tax fees? Could the Yankees? I know the answer to both.  What grounds ? Who cares ? The impact was astronomical …It made it very difficult to compete in the AL East without tank a thon! It split their tv market in half. Obviously MLB papered over that long enough to get an agreement done.    They turned a large market team into 2 small/mid market teams. The Orioles and Nationals payrolls combined place them only 11th in baseball. Obviously they could afford to spend more. But it’s doubtful either will ever be top 10 for more than a season  or two as they try to hang onto a window.     
    • Thanks for the detailed explanation of all of the issues.  Sounds like a mess.
    • Yeah the amenities are pretty outdated at the yard and they seem to do nothing year over year to improve them. The touchscreens have been banged on to death to the point they barely function, so you can't accurately fill out your order at the kiosks, and they don't have a way for the people behind the counter to ring you up at many of the food places. The sound is low to non-existent in certain sections of the club level, like around 218. Seems like there should be speakers that reach there but they might have been damaged by rain, etc. and they are too lazy to fix them. If you go to a game that's even slightly busy, you will wait forever to get into the bathroom, and the sink will be an absolute mess with no soap or paper towels. It's even worse on the club level where they have one sink that's right by the door. Nearby businesses don't care, either. The Hilton parking garage reeks of decay, pot and human waste. They don't turn on the air circulation fans, even if cars are waiting for an hour and a half to exit from P3, filling up the air with carbon monoxide. They only let you enter the stadium with one 20 oz bottle of water. It's so expensive to buy a drink or water in the stadium, but with all the salty food, 20 oz of water isn't enough, especially on a hot day. Vegetarian food options are poor to none, other than things like chips, fries, hot pretzels and the occasional pizza. Vida Taco is better, but at an inconvenient location for many seats. The doors on the club level are not accessible. They're anti-accessible. Big, heavy doors you have to go through to get to/from the escalators, and big, heavy doors to get to your seats, none of them automatic (or even with the option to be automatic with a button press). Makes it hard to carry food out to your seats even if not handicapped. The furniture in the lounges on the club level seem designed to allow as few people as possible to sit down. Not great when we have so many rain delays during the season. Should put more, smaller chairs in and allow more of the club level ticket holders to have a seat while waiting for thunderstorms to pass. They keep a lot of the entrance/exit gates closed except for playoff/sellout games, which means people have to slowly "mooooo" all the way down Eutaw St to get to parking. They are too cheap to staff all the gates, so they make people exit by the warehouse, even though it would be a lot more convenient for many fans to open all the gates. Taking Light Rail would be super convenient, except that if there's at least 20k fans in attendance, it's common to have to wait 90-120 minutes to be able to board a non-full train heading toward Glen Burnie. A few trains might come by, but they are already full, or fill up fast when folks walk up to the Convention Center stop to pre-empt the folks trying to board at Camden Station. None of the garages in the area are set up to require pre-payment on entry (reservation, or give them your card / digital payment at the entrance till). If they were, emptying out the garage would be very quick, as they wouldn't need to ticket anyone on the way out: if you can't get in without paying, you can always just leave without having to stop and scan your phone or put a ticket in the machine. They shut down the Sports Legends Museum at Camden Station in 2015 because the Maryland Stadium Authority was too greedy. That place was a fun distraction if you were in the area when a game wasn't about to start, like if you show up super early on Opening Day or a playoff day. Superbook's restaurant on Eutaw is a huge downgrade from Dempsey's in terms of menu and service quality. Dempsey's used to be well-staffed, you could reserve a table online, and they had all kinds of great selection for every diet. Superbook seems like just another bar serving the same swill that the rest of the park serves, with extremely minimal and low-quality food. For that matter, most of the food at the stadium is very low quality these days. A lot of things we used to love are made to a lower standard now if they are served at all. These are gripes about the stadium and the area that haven't changed my entire adult life. Going to an O's game requires one to tolerate many small inconveniences and several major inconveniences, any number of which could easily be fixed by the relevant authorities if they gave a damn about the people who pay to come see the team play. You would think a mid-market team would be able to afford to invest in the fan experience. You would think the city and partnering organizations like garages, the Stadium Authority and MTA would at least try to do their part to make the experience enjoyable and free of kinks. You would think they would put some thought into handling the "growing pains" of the fanbase due to recent renewed interest after the dark years. Instead, all we get is the same indifference and the same annoyances year in and year out. The whole area is overdue for a revamp. Not sure if $600 mil will get it done, but at least it's a start. Hopefully they can start to patch up some of the many holes in the fan experience. If you're not going to invest in Burnes, at least make it so paying customers have an easier, more enjoyable time getting to/from the stadium and having some food while we're there.
    • Elias has only been in rebuild mode with the O's so there's not much to speculate on there.  Houston, where he spent his formative years, doesn't seem to like to be on the hook for more than a couple of big long-term contracts at any given time.  I can see that as being Elias' choice as well, albeit with a lower overall cost - Houston runs a big payroll.  But it's all guesswork.  I really don't know. If Elias takes the 2025 payroll to $150 million it will creep up to $200 million or so by 2028 just from keeping the core together.  That's where I start to wonder about sustainability due to market size, economic forces, etc., etc., etc... If it were up to me, I would add a couple of free agents this offseason even if the contracts were longer than ideal and be conservative about extensions elsewhere until the prospects establish themselves a little better.  I think there's a competitive opportunity that the team is already into that's worth exploiting. I think ownership is very happy to have Elias on board and they're not inclined to force him to do anything.  I also think Rubenstein's demonstrated business prowess is great enough to assume that he has had plenty enough time to come to a mutual understanding with Elias as to goals.
    • We need a RH O’hearn…in addition to Westburg. At least 3 batters that will push up the pitch count and cause damage in the top 5 of the lineup.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...