Gold Glove Infield?

[Keygans]

I really hope Westy and Gunnar’s bats continue to be good so they can win the GGs… .  

[spiritof66]

16 hours ago, Moose Milligan said:

Any chance we could have Mounty, Mateo, Gunnar and Westburg take home Gold Gloves at the end of this season?

I haven't looked closely at the competition, but having the highest ranking four IFers (1 point for first place, 2 for second, etc.,, then add up those numbers) might be attainable. To me, it's not that the Orioles have Gold Glove guys all over the place -- they don't -- but that there's high-quality defense at lots of positions, arguably all of them.

[Frobby]

13 hours ago, Philip said:

I think MC is going to get more competition from his teammates than from other first baseman, because it’s unlikely for all four to win.

 

However, I just checked, and defensively, Mountcastle is tied for 20th in first baseman OAA at -1( leader has 7) and 20th in runs prevented at 0( the leader has 5)

Buzzkiller!  

Rdrs (which feeds rWAR) has him at +4, tied for the AL lead.  

The Frobby eye test says he’s improved every year, yesterday’s miscue notwithstanding.  I’ll worry about his GG case at the end of the year when 162 games have been played.  

 

[HowAboutThat]

2 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Buzzkiller!  

Rdrs (which feeds rWAR) has him at +4, tied for the AL lead.  

The Frobby eye test says he’s improved every year, yesterday’s miscue notwithstanding.  I’ll worry about his GG case at the end of the year when 162 games have been played.  

 

rWAR is Fangraphs, right? I was using baseball Savant. I don’t know which calculation is more accurate, but I was surprised that the Oriole players I checked were pretty much all middle of the pack(Gunnar at SS was highest O at 7th, and the list I consulted didn’t include catcher defense)with Christian Walker the outstanding first baseman.

I like MC and I don’t want anyone thinking I’m down on him. Im actually quite happy with how he’s playing.

My overall point is that when the opposing managers make their votes, they are more likely to vote for Gunnar, Westburg, and AR first, and miss MC.

We’ll see, I guess.

[interloper]

10 minutes ago, Frobby said:

yesterday’s miscue notwithstanding

That was such a weird play. It was like he got caught daydreaming or something. That's a ball he almost always gets a glove on, but his attempt was like a foot short. Odd. 

[Frobby]

3 minutes ago, Philip said:

rWAR is Fangraphs, right? I was using baseball Savant. I don’t know which calculation is more accurate, but I was surprised that the Oriole players I checked were pretty much all middle of the pack(Gunnar at SS was highest O at 7th, and the list I consulted didn’t include catcher defense)with Christian Walker the outstanding first baseman.

I like MC and I don’t want anyone thinking I’m down on him. Im actually quite happy with how he’s playing.

My overall point is that when the opposing managers make their votes, they are more likely to vote for Gunnar, Westburg, and AR first, and miss MC.

We’ll see, I guess.

rWAR is Baseball-Reference (some call it bWAR).  fWAR is Fangraphs.  fWAR now uses OAA as one if its main inputs for defense.  

Some people are complete OAA converts and believe it’s vastly superior to the other advanced defensive metrics.  I’m still in the mode of looking at all of them (Fangraphs publishes OAA and it’s old stat UZR, BB-ref publishes Rdrs and Rtot).  If there’s a consensus, I buy it.  If 3 of 4 basically agree, I buy it.  If it’s a split, I go with whichever ones agree with my eye test.   Not exactly scientific but it keeps me sane.  
 

[DrungoHazewood]

4 hours ago, Frobby said:

Buzzkiller!  

Rdrs (which feeds rWAR) has him at +4, tied for the AL lead.  

The Frobby eye test says he’s improved every year, yesterday’s miscue notwithstanding.  I’ll worry about his GG case at the end of the year when 162 games have been played.  

 

If I had to choose between OAA and DRS I'm taking OAA 100% of the time, even if it looks less favorably on Ryan Mountcastle. DRS is taking play-by-play data and kind of squinting and guesstimating. OAA is more-or-less directly measuring defensive ability. If UZR and DRS agree and OAA doesn't, I assume the same biases skewed the former two.

To me it's like measuring the length of a grain of rice with a school ruler, a yardstick, and a good digital caliper. I don't really care what number the ruler and the yardstick give me.

Edited May 20 by DrungoHazewood

[Moose Milligan]

3 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

If I had to choose between OAA and DRS I'm taking OAA 100% of the time, even if it looks less favorably on Ryan Mountcastle. DRS is taking play-by-play data and kind of squinting and guesstimating. OAA is more-or-less directly measuring defensive ability. If UZR and DRS agree and OAA doesn't, I assume the same biases skewed the former two.

To me it's like measuring the length of a grain of rice with a school ruler, a yardstick, and a good digital caliper. I don't really care what number the ruler and the yardstick give me.

Measuring the length of a grain of rice, eh?  Damn, you must be bored.

[Frobby]

16 hours ago, DrungoHazewood said:

If I had to choose between OAA and DRS I'm taking OAA 100% of the time, even if it looks less favorably on Ryan Mountcastle. DRS is taking play-by-play data and kind of squinting and guesstimating. OAA is more-or-less directly measuring defensive ability. If UZR and DRS agree and OAA doesn't, I assume the same biases skewed the former two.

To me it's like measuring the length of a grain of rice with a school ruler, a yardstick, and a good digital caliper. I don't really care what number the ruler and the yardstick give me.

I have noticed several data entry errors on OAA.  Plays that never show up, and plays that are miscoded.  That alone causes me to take it with a grain of salt. 

But as I said, I look at Rdrs, Rtot, UZR and OAA.  If it’s 3 against 1, I tend to believe the 3 even if OAA is the outlier.  
 

[RZNJ]

6 minutes ago, Frobby said:

I have noticed several data entry errors on OAA.  Plays that never show up, and plays that are miscoded.  That alone causes me to take it with a grain of salt. 

But as I said, I look at Rdrs, Rtot, UZR and OAA.  If it’s 3 against 1, I tend to believe the 3 even if OAA is the outlier.  
 

I think you could have parlayed a grain of rice joke in there.   Just saying.

[BRobinsonfan]

18 hours ago, Moose Milligan said:

Measuring the length of a grain of rice, eh?  Damn, you must be bored.

For more information on rice measurements, enjoy this fascinating article. https://www.researchgate.net/figure/The-average-length-and-width-of-a-grain-of-rice_tbl2_305787590

[Frobby]

On 5/21/2024 at 8:32 AM, Frobby said:

I have noticed several data entry errors on OAA.  Plays that never show up, and plays that are miscoded.  That alone causes me to take it with a grain of salt. 

Statcast rates the Nootbar catch of Stowers' liner that turned into a double play as a 95% probability catch.   Really?   I absolutely do not believe that ball is caught 19 times out of 20.

 

[Moose Milligan]

34 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Statcast rates the Nootbar catch of Stowers' liner that turned into a double play as a 95% probability catch.   Really?   I absolutely do not believe that ball is caught 19 times out of 20.

 

He got lucky.

[interloper]

Catch probability is super broken.

[baltfan]

On 5/21/2024 at 8:32 AM, Frobby said:

I have noticed several data entry errors on OAA.  Plays that never show up, and plays that are miscoded.  That alone causes me to take it with a grain of salt. 

But as I said, I look at Rdrs, Rtot, UZR and OAA.  If it’s 3 against 1, I tend to believe the 3 even if OAA is the outlier.  
 

How do you see this stuff on individual plays on Savant?