Jump to content

For which position do you believe defensive metrics are most reliable?


Most reliable defensive metrics?  

2 members have voted

  1. 1. Most reliable defensive metrics?

    • First Base
    • Second Base
    • Third Base
    • Shortstop
    • Left Field
    • Center Field
    • Right Field

Recommended Posts

I think it's pretty well established that defensive metrics for catchers are fairly iffy at this point, or at least are the least polished of the metrics for position players. My question to you all is this: for which of the 7 other fielder positions are defensive metrics the MOST reliable for the sake of comparing fielders among their peers? If you like, you can post a full set of rankings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


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

  • Posts

    • That's pretty cool.  I'm sure you remember the game against the Senators when he hit grand slams in back to back innings in 1970. 
    • Yeah I think it is more of just the time of year, and just having him focus on what he needs to focus on. They probably learned a lesson from Cowser that there is little need for him to focus attention to defense when they just need his bat.
    • Means' 3.1 K/9 isn't going to be sustained anymore than his .135 BABIP is. 
    • I think that's right, except I'm not convinced that Kjerstad (I keep wanting to add a "t" at the end of his name) will be better than Santander next year, at least in home games. I think Santander is pretty good in a small RF like Camden Yards, and I haven't seen Kjerstad's arm enough to think he'll throw as well or better than Tony. 
    • Speaking of late games, I remember that Frank Robinson hit his 500th homer in a game that was too late for the box score to be in the paper.  So, at the end of the week, I rode my bike 6-7 miles round trip to the local drug store to buy The Sporting News so I could have that box score.  
    • How about some love for Baseball Weekly from the early 90's?
    • So in the above 8 pages, I think we have established that it is harder, but possible, to succeed with a below average K rate. I think we can also agree that Means has a track record of success as an above average (but not elite) pitcher (3.75 ERA, 122 ERA+) with below average K rate (7.6). Not to belabor this further, but the real question to ask (which I think Sports Guy may be getting at) is whether Means' current 3.1 K/9 is concerning. The more important comparison is not to league average, but to Means' own career norms. Especially because he is coming off TJ, a big change in K/9 could indicate a major dropoff or change in stuff.  My feeling with his second start was that he looked pretty bad despite allowing few runs. Last night from what I saw the eye test matched the results. I doubt he will succeed if he continues with 3.1 K/9, but I think if he pitches the way he did last night he will get more K's. Overall, very comfortable with him as a playoff starter and a middle rotation guy heading into next year, but have to be concerned in view of his TJ.
  • Popular Contributors

  • Popular Now

  • Create New...