Gunnar Henderson 2023

[Malike]

2 hours ago, Tony-OH said:

That's a little extreme. Errors do tell you how consistent a fielder is. Not all fielders commit more errors because they get to more balls. Some are just bad fielders so I would not call errors a "trash" statistic. Is it the only statistic you should look at defensively, nope, but a player who makes a lot of errors regardless o how many balls they get too can be troublesome.

Saying that, I don't believe errors have been a big problem for Gunnar this year. Considering he's bounced back and forth between SS and 3B, I think he's done a pretty good job. He just made a bad error in a key part of the game yesterday. It happens.

As was pointed out in this thread, Mateo has thrown away several routine plays late in games and he's the team's best defensive SS overall. Sometime errors happen at the worse time where they are clearly magnified.

 

 

Yeah, I was being hyperbolic when I called it a trash stat. I was just implying that errors or fielding percentage, like Ben points out every night aren't really good ways to tell how good a player or team is defensively.

[spiritof66]

Many have said that Gunnar's error cost us the game. I don't agree. I'm not picking nits, at least I don't think I am. I think that saying a play like Gunnar's (and it was a really terrible play at a very bad time) cost the game misunderstands the way games are won and lost.

If the Orioles had scored two runs in the bottom of the ninth, you wouldn't say that Gunnar's error cost us the game.  You can say that it did only at the end of the game, and when you do that you're ignoring everything else that happened before and after Gunnar's play that contributed to the loss: not scoring in the bottom of the ninth inning, not being able to do much against a mediocre starter, not scoring with the bases loaded and no outs, Adley pausing before starting for home on Hayes' ground ball, O'Hearn's failue to come off the bag to keep Gunnar's throw on the field. All those were important plays in leading to the loss.

The way I look at it -- and I am aware that I look at a lot of things differently from the way some other people look at them -- most baseball games are decided by a number of pitches, at bats, baserunning decisions, and defensive plays over the course of a game. Maybe that was appreciated more before there were highlight videos that focus on a key play or two and before the brief run of GWRBIs as an official statistic. But nothing has changed. A single pitch, swing, hit, fielding gem or error doesn't decide a game.  From my perspective, the only play that decides a game is the rare one that moves a team that is headed to defeat to a walk-off victory, and even that is debatable because the plays that led up to that game-winner also contributed. 

Maybe others are using "cost us the game" as a shorthand for "played a big role in leading to the loss," and this is just semantics. But I don't see any signs of that. 

[Can_of_corn]

2 minutes ago, spiritof66 said:

Many have said that Gunnar's error cost us the game. I don't agree. I'm not picking nits, at least I don't think I am. I think that saying a play like Gunnar's (and it was a really terrible play at a very bad time) cost the game misunderstands the way games are won and lost.

 

The Hays DP lowered the team's odds of winning more than the Gunnar play did.

[Sports Guy]

One play has never cost a team a game. It’s silly to ever say that.

[spiritof66]

2 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

The Hays DP lowered the team's odds of winning more than the Gunnar play did.

I wasn't thinking of it until now, but Bill James used to point out repeatedly (and I'm probably mis-remembering it) that when a team wins a game 7-4 a three-run homer in a scoreless third inning is just as valuable as a three-run homer in the ninth inning that breaks the tie. 

[Osornot]

From what I have seen of Gunnar Henderson he is probably more PO'd at the play than any of the hyperbole on here.   I believe he made the (unfortunate) effort thinking it was a good move for a flash of a second.  

[AlbNYfan]

22 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

One play has never cost a team a game. It’s silly to ever say that.

Unless it's Mountcastle.

[dystopia]

1 minute ago, AlbNYfan said:

Unless it's Mountcastle.

Or McKenna

[Aristotelian]

35 minutes ago, spiritof66 said:

Many have said that Gunnar's error cost us the game. I don't agree. I'm not picking nits, at least I don't think I am. I think that saying a play like Gunnar's (and it was a really terrible play at a very bad time) cost the game misunderstands the way games are won and lost.

If the Orioles had scored two runs in the bottom of the ninth, you wouldn't say that Gunnar's error cost us the game.  You can say that it did only at the end of the game, and when you do that you're ignoring everything else that happened before and after Gunnar's play that contributed to the loss: not scoring in the bottom of the ninth inning, not being able to do much against a mediocre starter, not scoring with the bases loaded and no outs, Adley pausing before starting for home on Hayes' ground ball, O'Hearn's failue to come off the bag to keep Gunnar's throw on the field. All those were important plays in leading to the loss.

The way I look at it -- and I am aware that I look at a lot of things differently from the way some other people look at them -- most baseball games are decided by a number of pitches, at bats, baserunning decisions, and defensive plays over the course of a game. Maybe that was appreciated more before there were highlight videos that focus on a key play or two and before the brief run of GWRBIs as an official statistic. But nothing has changed. A single pitch, swing, hit, fielding gem or error doesn't decide a game.  From my perspective, the only play that decides a game is the rare one that moves a team that is headed to defeat to a walk-off victory, and even that is debatable because the plays that led up to that game-winner also contributed. 

Maybe others are using "cost us the game" as a shorthand for "played a big role in leading to the loss," and this is just semantics. But I don't see any signs of that. 

That is a philosophical way of looking at it, and it's not wrong. However, that single play made a huge difference in our Win Probability. We were right at 50% to win going into the 9th. As soon as Gunnar made the error that dropped us to 33%, going from coin flip to big underdogs. Gunnar's error was the single biggest play (in terms of WPA) aside from O'Hearn's homer. 

[Sports Guy]

1 minute ago, Aristotelian said:

That is a philosophical way of looking at it, and it's not wrong. However, that single play made a huge difference in our Win Probability. We were right at 50% to win going into the 9th. As soon as Gunnar made the error that dropped us to 33%, going from coin flip to big underdogs. Gunnar's error was the single biggest play (in terms of WPA) aside from O'Hearn's homer. 

That’s because of how the game played out.

Lots of other plays would have swung the game as well

[Can_of_corn]

8 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

That is a philosophical way of looking at it, and it's not wrong. However, that single play made a huge difference in our Win Probability. We were right at 50% to win going into the 9th. As soon as Gunnar made the error that dropped us to 33%, going from coin flip to big underdogs. Gunnar's error was the single biggest play (in terms of WPA) aside from O'Hearn's homer. 

I'm pretty sure that the Hays DP was -22%.

[Aristotelian]

14 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I'm pretty sure that the Hays DP was -22%.

Good catch. So Hays lost us the game! (Just kidding).

Interestingly, the ground ball that advanced the runner after Gunnar's error was also a big play in terms of WPA (-14%). So even though Gunnar's was big, there were plenty of other big plays leading to the outcome. The difference between those two plays and Gunnar's is that Gunnar's resulted from a mistake. 

[spiritof66]

21 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I'm pretty sure that the Hays DP was -22%.

If you had me wired me up with a contraption that gauged my optimism about the otcome, Hays' DP was more like -40%.

[Frobby]

3 hours ago, Aristotelian said:

That is a philosophical way of looking at it, and it's not wrong. However, that single play made a huge difference in our Win Probability. We were right at 50% to win going into the 9th. As soon as Gunnar made the error that dropped us to 33%, going from coin flip to big underdogs. Gunnar's error was the single biggest play (in terms of WPA) aside from O'Hearn's homer. 

What would be the win probability it it had just been a single?   The change in WP wasn’t solely due to the error, it was partially due to the runner reaching base.  

[Aristotelian]

21 minutes ago, Frobby said:

What would be the win probability it it had just been a single?   The change in WP wasn’t solely due to the error, it was partially due to the runner reaching base.  

I believe he should have made that play even if it was scored an error so most of that WPA falls on him. Good defenders routinely take away plays that would be scored hits. Ultimately I agree it is unfair to say Gunnar singlehandedly cost us the game but it was a big play that he should be expected to make.