Players are skeptical about Adam Jones' defensive metrics

[Frobby]

Quote

 

“I feel like it can be skewed at times, because there are some guys who don’t fare well with all those [numbers] and I know they’re better outfielders than what these certain metrics say they are,” says Kevin Kiermaier of the Rays, who became aware of DRS when it was constantly pointed out to him in 2015 that his total was soaring to a record. “So, some of the stuff, I don’t really buy into too much, and I don’t know how I feel about it, to be honest. Some things can be accurate, but other parts, you say, how is Adam Jones not in the top five center fielders in baseball? I watch him play 19 times a year, and I think he’s a stud. It just doesn’t make me a firm believer in all the research and the data that’s provided.”

Jones is an interesting case because, when asked about the best defensive outfielders he sees, Boston’s Jackie Bradley Jr. – no slouch himself – names the Orioles’ stalwart first. It’s not a case of recency bias, either, because at the time he’s asked the question, it has been been nearly a month since the Red Sox last saw Baltimore.

* * *

It does, however, go both ways. Take the case of Jones and his four Gold Gloves. Jones tallied a -10 DRS in 2016, and ranked 15th in FanGraphs’ defensive rating among 17 qualifying center fielders. The advanced stats haven’t always been friendly to Jones, which points to an overall conflict between analytics and observation, but the fact that the 2016 numbers showed a dramatic slip should raise a red flag. Jones turned 31 in August, and the suggestion that he’s lost a step would come from not only his fielding numbers slipping, but the fact that he’s basically stopped stealing bases and has, over the past few years, taken far fewer extra bases as a runner.

Jones has been a really good center fielder in his career. Gold Gloves are notorious as an indicator, but you don’t win four of them by accident. There comes a point, though, when a player can be established in hearts and minds as something different from what he is becoming or has become in the actual field of play. That’s where statistics can have a kind of utility that an eye test for outfielders will have a harder time catching, because of all the variables that go into outfield play. At the same time, it cuts the other way.

 

 

Quote

 

http://www.hardballtimes.com/players-and-coaches-skepticism-of-defensive-metrics/

[Frobby]

Apologies for the empty quote box.    I couldn't figure out how to get rid of it.  

[wildcard]

37 minutes ago, Frobby said:

 

http://www.hardballtimes.com/players-and-coaches-skepticism-of-defensive-metrics/

Some writers seem to feel that Adams, is Adam, is Adam all the time on defense.  When in fact healthy Adam may be a Gold Glover but he plays so hard that he gets injured.   Injured Adam is still on the field giving his best but his range is not as good.  He also has gotten a little wiser and will pick his spots when to dives for the balls and when to bust it running to first when he is dealing with an injury.  He always plays hard, hard as his body will allow.  So Super Adam is not always available.  Some time we just get really good Adam which is  all he has to give.

[wildcard]

Just now, wildcard said:

Some writers seem to feel that Adams, is Adam, is Adam all the time on defense.  When in fact Healthy Adam may be a Gold Glover but he plays so hard that he gets injured.   Injured Adam is still on the field giving his best but his range is not as good.  He also has gotten a little wiser and will pick his spots when to dives for the balls and when to bust it running to first when he is dealing with an injury.  He always plays hard, hard as his body will allow.  So Super Adam is not always available.  Some time we just get Really Good Adam which is  all he has to give.

 

[Redskins Rick]

Billy RIpken said pretty much the same thing about Jones on one of his visits to 105.7.

Billy said, the key to these situations is what opposing players say.

[esmd]

Good find.  I still think he's in the top half of CFers in MLB.  That's my personal opinion.  And I think the fact that he so often plays hurt contributes to his defensive metrics being low.  I also think Kiermaier makes a good point in that the metrics, though valuable, aren't perfect.  That said, Adam is 31, and it's natural to think he may have lost a 1/2 step.  I think a move to RF or LF (depending on personnel) is certainly in his near future.  I'd do it now if they could find a good defensive CFer (maybe one that gets on base at least at a .330 clip and could hit leadoff?  Please?  Pretty please?).  I think right now Adam would be one of the best defensive corner OFers in the game if he made the move.

[DrungoHazewood]

Adam Jones is a stud, he's in the top ~50 center fielders in the world out of millions of people who play baseball.

Kevin Kiermaier is certainly entitled to his opinion, but expecting any kind of fidelity out of 19 games of subjective observation is silly.  I expect that kind of judgment to be about as accurate as someone observing a few weeks of games without any access to hitting stats and then ranking the players by batting ability.

[waroriole]

3 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Adam Jones is a stud, he's in the top ~50 center fielders in the world out of millions of people who play baseball.

Kevin Kiermaier is certainly entitled to his opinion, but expecting any kind of fidelity out of 19 games of subjective observation is silly.  I expect that kind of judgment to be about as accurate as someone observing a few weeks of games without any access to hitting stats and then ranking the players by batting ability.

Does the fact that Keirmaier is one of only a handful of people currently doing what Jones does, hold any sway? Not trying to dismiss a numbers argument, but I think we can get caught up in them too much at times. A peer, and one of the best, probably sees a lot of things that stat trackers don't. 

[DrungoHazewood]

4 minutes ago, esmd said:

I also think Kiermaier makes a good point in that the metrics, though valuable, aren't perfect.

Why is that a good point?  No metric is perfect.  A yardstick is a flawed, imperfect way to measure your height.  A cesium clock, although it only loses a second every billion years or so, is imperfect.

No one should let imperfection get in the way of making use of good metrics.  This imperfection in defensive metrics seems to be an excuse to throw out systematic approaches and fall back on even more flawed subjective observations.

 

 

[waroriole]

1 minute ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Why is that a good point?  No metric is perfect.  A yardstick is a flawed, imperfect way to measure your height.  A cesium clock, although it only loses a second every billion years or so, is imperfect.

No one should let imperfection get in the way of making use of good metrics.  This imperfection in defensive metrics seems to be an excuse to throw out systematic approaches and fall back on even more flawed subjective observations.

 

 

Isn't peer opinion an important tool? 

[DrungoHazewood]

1 minute ago, waroriole said:

Does the fact that Keirmaier is one of only a handful of people currently doing what Jones does, hold any sway? Not trying to dismiss a numbers argument, but I think we can get caught up in them too much at times. A peer, and one of the best, probably sees a lot of things that stat trackers don't. 

Very little if any sway.  At best Kiermaier sees Jones play 11% of the season, he misses almost 90%.  And he's not even focused on Adam Jones; when he's in the dugout he's doing any number of other things besides tracking exactly what Adam Jones is doing.  When he's batting he's probably not even aware of what Jones is doing.  

I trust Tango's fan survey metrics more than Kevin Kiermaier.

[DrungoHazewood]

1 minute ago, waroriole said:

Isn't peer opinion an important tool? 

The sum of the opinions of all of his peers might be one of many inputs to the process.  By itself Kiermaier's opinion is little better than your opinion or mine.

[Ruzious]

9 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Adam Jones is a stud, he's in the top ~50 center fielders in the world out of millions of people who play baseball.

Kevin Kiermaier is certainly entitled to his opinion, but expecting any kind of fidelity out of 19 games of subjective observation is silly.  I expect that kind of judgment to be about as accurate as someone observing a few weeks of games without any access to hitting stats and then ranking the players by batting ability.

I disagree with that19 games comment and would go as far to say that any decent baseball person should be able to get a good basis for judgment on the quality of a CFer after watching him for 19 full games in a season.  

[mdbdotcom]

To my eye test, Adam hasn't looked the same since his injury in mid-2015. A lot of balls went over his head last season. It looks to me that he needs to start playing deeper or move to right field. He simply wasn't one of the best center fielders in the game last season, as he had been in previous years.

[weams]

1 hour ago, Frobby said:

 

http://www.hardballtimes.com/players-and-coaches-skepticism-of-defensive-metrics/

My opinion has been elegantly explained. Thanks.