Roberto Alomar and fielding

[Hallas]

So, this whole Robbie Alomar spat got me thinking about his defense. Anecdotally he was one of the best 2B defensively ever to play. Having seen him play with both the Jays and the O's, I'm inclined to agree with this.

Yet Baseball Prospectus has him barely above average over his career (40 runs over average over the course of a 16 year career) and I seem to recall that most other metrics have him at slightly to extremely below average.

Is there any new data to indicate that the fielding metrics were off? A google search surmised that a lack of understanding of the effects of Astroturf may have caused his range-oriented metrics to appear lower than his true fielding ability. Any other ideas?

[Baltimoron]

Is there any new data to indicate that the fielding metrics were off?

Has there ever been any to suggest BP's numbers aren't off?

Any other ideas?

Go to this article a click on the link "for the past 21 seasons" under "1987 through 2007." Its a zone based system, not sure if that's what you were alluding to or not but it one of the better estimates of fielding from this time.

Alomar was stud at 2b in Bmore and not horrible in Toronto, and likely better with the turf factored in. He was pretty good in SD.

But he fell off a cliff in his early 30s and was pretty much horrible defensively after leaving the Os.

So yeah, he was a really good secondbaseman and then he turned into a really bad secondbaseman. But he was such a force at the plate it was all good in Cleveland. But not so much thereafter.

[Baltimoron]

Ok, so maybe he isn't regarded as doing so well in 2003/2004 in Toronto by the stats, but he was good with SD and in Bmore and not bad elsewhere in Toronto. Plus the turf factor.

But Robbie won all those gold gloves, which influences the way people perceived his defense. And as we know, if you have a big bat you can win a gold glove.

But we was real bad at D after Bmore.