Random Thought Thread

[DrungoHazewood]

13 hours ago, Moose Milligan said:

Good point.  I am not sure how they compile advanced defensive metrics for guys that played 100+ years ago and no tape exists.  Maybe @DrungoHazewood can shine some light on the subject.

Prior to play-by-play metrics (basically the last 20 years) they retroactively figure out defensive numbers from available box scores and fielding records.  They can at least partially compensate for a lot of things that skew traditional numbers, especially opportunities.  They'll take into account stuff like the ratio of team OF putouts to infield chances to estimate GB/FB ratios, and look at the handedness makeup of pitching staffs to try to adjust for L/R bias in direction of balls hit, and look at K rates to adjust for balls in play for the team.  It's a lot better than unadjusted fielding percentages or range factor, but not like having Statcast, obviously.

I believe that the old methods are necessarily conservative in their estimates, so the standard deviation of fielding runs is lower than with today's estimates. I don't know exact figures, but eyeballing defensive runs single season marks in bb-ref it looks like a disproportionate share are since 2000.  Of the top 25, 12 are since 2000.  If you assume a flat distribution of talent vs peers that should be more like five or six.  I'd also expect a bias in favor of earlier seasons given the ever-shrinking gap between best and worst, but there are only a handful of seasons prior to WWII in the top 50.

Anyway... I think the retroactively figured stats are pretty decent, but you have to keep in mind that there's a bit of a change in standards around 2000.  I wouldn't state with any certainty that Rabbitt Maranville was better or worse (compared to his peers) than Andrelton Simmons.  I'd just say both of them look like they're really good.

[DrungoHazewood]

14 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

Look at where Simmons is at only seven years in.

 

14 hours ago, Moose Milligan said:

More amazed that it's only 7 years in for that guy.  Feels like he's been around forever for some reason.  

But yeah, he can take #1 for sure if he stays healthy.

Sometimes a great defender will keep being a great defender into his 30s.  But the #2 guy through age 28 is Andruw Jones, who had 89% of his career defensive value through age 28.  And only nine of the top 50 seasons on bb-ref's list are from players over the age of 30.

Remember Franklin Guiterrez?  From 24-26 he averaged +25 runs per 150 games.  Since then he's at -10.  Rey Ordonez was +60 through age 28, -5 afterwards.  Adam Everett was +107 (or +25 per 150 games) through 30, +6 per 150 afterwards.

[Moose Milligan]

31 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Prior to play-by-play metrics (basically the last 20 years) they retroactively figure out defensive numbers from available box scores and fielding records.  They can at least partially compensate for a lot of things that skew traditional numbers, especially opportunities.  They'll take into account stuff like the ratio of team OF putouts to infield chances to estimate GB/FB ratios, and look at the handedness makeup of pitching staffs to try to adjust for L/R bias in direction of balls hit, and look at K rates to adjust for balls in play for the team.  It's a lot better than unadjusted fielding percentages or range factor, but not like having Statcast, obviously.

I believe that the old methods are necessarily conservative in their estimates, so the standard deviation of fielding runs is lower than with today's estimates. I don't know exact figures, but eyeballing defensive runs single season marks in bb-ref it looks like a disproportionate share are since 2000.  Of the top 25, 12 are since 2000.  If you assume a flat distribution of talent vs peers that should be more like five or six.  I'd also expect a bias in favor of earlier seasons given the ever-shrinking gap between best and worst, but there are only a handful of seasons prior to WWII in the top 50.

Anyway... I think the retroactively figured stats are pretty decent, but you have to keep in mind that there's a bit of a change in standards around 2000.  I wouldn't state with any certainty that Rabbitt Maranville was better or worse (compared to his peers) than Andrelton Simmons.  I'd just say both of them look like they're really good.

Really good explanation, thank you.

[Ruzious]

On 10/12/2018 at 10:04 AM, Moose Milligan said:

Talking to a buddy of mine who's got a bit of an interest in baseball.  He was asking me about the Astros, I was explaining to him how good their starting rotation is and he asked, "So...do the Orioles have anyone in their rotation that could be in the Astros rotation?"

No, the O's rotation is just spinning their wheels.  

[Ruzious]

17 hours ago, SteveA said:

I had often heard Rabbit Maranville cited as a poster boy for being an undeserving HOFer.   Maybe that isn't the case now that there are some objective defensive numbers out there and he rates so highly.

And Luis Aparicio was #6.  When Brooks used to do color commentary, he would sometimes make a point of mentioning how great a defensive player he thought Aparicio was - going as far to say he was the best SS he ever played with. 

[Moose Milligan]

I hope Pop and Flaa make the team at some point so we can make some Pop Flaa jokes.

[OsFanSinceThe80s]

On 2/11/2019 at 11:14 AM, Ruzious said:

No, the O's rotation is just spinning their wheels.  

Well isn’t that the point to get the spin rates of the O’s pitching staff up?  

[Frobby]

56 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

I hope Pop and Flaa make the team at some point so we can make some Pop Flaa jokes.

Flaa didn’t do himself any favors today — not that he was in consideration anyway.    

[Moose Milligan]

Not Orioles related but...color commentary guys on broadcasts with no ties to the team has always struck me as being weird.

I just turned on the Angels/A's game and Mark Gubicza is doing the color commentary for the Angels broadcast team.  I remember him from his days as a Kansas City Royal.  Looked up his stats, he finished his career in Anaheim in 1997 with two games pitched and a 25.07 ERA.  So he's got the smallest of ties to the team but I'm pretty sure most everyone remembers him from his days in KC.

Other ones that come to mind:  when the Orioles had Buck Martinez doing the color commentary for 5 or 6 years, despite having no tie to this franchise. 

Ken Singleton, Yankees broadcasts.  No ties there whatsoever.  

Hawk Harrelson, while not a color commentator, is a former player and has no ties to the White Sox from his playing days.  Go figure, the biggest homer behind the mic also has no ties to the team he calls games for/roots for.

 

[scOtt]

Random thought... saw some pretty girls today in the stands in NY. But they look like Jabba the Hutt with oozing, running sores and boils, fat blob of crap,  when they have Yankee gear on.

[OsFanSinceThe80s]

8 minutes ago, scOtt said:

Random thought... saw some pretty girls today in the stands in NY. But they look like Jabba the Hutt with oozing, running sores and boils, fat blob of crap,  when they have Yankee gear on.

Pink hat nation Sox fans are even worse. Amazing how they didn’t exist before 2004. 

[scOtt]

11 minutes ago, OsFanSinceThe80s said:

Pink hat nation Sox fans are even worse. Amazing how they didn’t exist before 2004. 

I thought of THOSE.... in the cause of expediency, and me not going on for paragraph after paragraph after paragraph..... I ignored pink hat boston ishheads... pretty as they might be otherwise.

[scOtt]

I like games against Texas, Houston, LA, LAAofA, even Atlanta. LOTS of really pretty girls theresabouts!

[scOtt]

I wish they all could be Baltimore-a girls!

[scOtt]

5 minutes ago, scOtt said:

I wish they all could be Baltimore-a girls!

Because I have responsibilities on this board...