The decline in our OF defense is on display

[Pickles]

Again, this is a message board not "Meet the Press." How come you can't make an opinion on something here? Character assassination is over-the-top. I guess every time someone belittles the President or a politial figure they ought to be banned from speaking? Gimme a break, this is the United States. Land of the Free and Freedom of Speech. If you don't love it leave it, as Merle The Hag, my favorite singer sings!

Slander is not covered under freedom of speech.

But I guess you knew that, being such a true and blue American and all.

[El Gordo]

Winner, winner, chicken dinner

The real problem as I see it is that we have some folks on here who put faith in things they don't really understand, especially if those things are "problems" that they can espouse about.

I've read A TON on defensive metrics over the years and I like to think I'm not an idiot, but I'm not qualified to defend why defensive metrics are accurate over an X game sample. On the contrary, I come away from my learning efforts with more questions than answers. That doesn't mean the stats aren't valuable. They may be, but I haven't been convinced how valuable or over what sample size. Therefore I try not to quote them because I try not to act authoritative over subjects that I either don't grasp or don't have enough information to defend.

You raise some interesting questions about defensive metrics. It would be great to have some stat guys like 1970 or Baltimoron to weigh in on this. One thought I have is that with an incease in good defensive CF's league wise the standard for average play is elavated. For what it's worth AJ has greatly improved his play according to the FB+/-. He was a -10 at the beginning of the year and is now at 0. So his play has definitely improved over the course of the season according to them and this is what I am seeing as well. He seems to be repositioning himself so that he has + numbers shallow and medium and decreasing his - numbers deep. Nick on the other hand continues to get worse with a current -13.

[Old#5fan]

Slander is not covered under freedom of speech.

But I guess you knew that, being such a true and blue American and all.

So speculation that the Orioles are terrible on the road due to possibly being out late partying is slander? Or it is slanderous to say it appears that NM and Jones are playing below par defense and there has to be a reason which could be an injury or the fact NM signed a fat LT contract, and Jones has no worries now of losing his job? That is slander in your view? You have no idea how that term really applies do you? :scratchchinhmm:

These people are public figures. There is no slander of a public figure unless you accuse them of a crime or something very specific that would tarnish them with some kind of actual damage to them. You really think an anonoymous keyboarder on an internet web forum site can slander an Orioles player by simple speculation such as this? :rofl::laughlol::mwahaha:

[Pickles]

Resist the urge. It isn't worth it. He is bringing a knife to a gunfight so there is no joy in "debating" him. Also, he won't lay down and die regardless of how many times you shoot him dead. He is sort of like a chicken that just continues to run around without his head.

No, you're right of course. I'm quite familiar with his act from sunspot. He's held it in here a bit, because of the tighter moderation, but the pathetic pathology that drives his behavior remains the same.

[Old#5fan]

No, you're right of course. I'm quite familiar with his act from sunspot. He's held it in here a bit, because of the tighter moderation, but the pathetic pathology that drives his behavior remains the same.

Now what your Buddy VaTech94 just posted about me (BTW - thanks for quoting him as I have him on ignore and only see his posts whenever someone does that) is more in line with slander. As he has specifically insulted me in plain view of all the members here by calling me a chicken with no head. Yet apparently, you have no problem with that though do you?:laughlol::clap3:

I am also familiar with and unfortunately recall your whiny posts from sunspot as well. You complain about everything under the sun all the time. That is all you do. Your accusations of slander for example are beyond silliness :rolleyestf: We talk serious baseball here not false accusations of a term that you don't even know how to properly apply.

[wickedwitch]

There are several issues with defensive metrics. First, they don't really effectively account for shifts; they can't separate positioning from performance. They also don't adjust for different ballparks. The biggest problem is that they can't account for the impact of the defense of other players. If Jones goes into Markakis's zone to make a play that Markakis could have made, then that hurts Markakis's rating. The same goes for a ball that Markakis could get in Jones's zone. Jones would call Markakis off on any play they could both make.

That said, Markakis's defense does look worse than last year.

[freethebirds]

Well if Pie's bat continues to play, moving Jones to LF would be a good idea (if we either trade Scott or teach Reimold first in the offseason). I think Jones would still be a fantastic LF. He's probably just lost some steps due to having put on so much muscle, which is fine if we can get Pie to play GG defense in center.

[ChaosLex]

Now what your Buddy VaTech94 just posted about me (BTW - thanks for quoting him as I have him on ignore and only see his posts whenever someone does that) is more in line with slander.

Huh? Not trying to call you out, but you just responded to one of his posts at 1:59pm.

[El Gordo]

There are several issues with defensive metrics. First, they don't really effectively account for shifts; they can't separate positioning from performance. They also don't adjust for different ballparks. The biggest problem is that they can't account for the impact of the defense of other players. If Jones goes into Markakis's zone to make a play that Markakis could have made, then that hurts Markakis's rating. The same goes for a ball that Markakis could get in Jones's zone. Jones would call Markakis off on any play they could both make.

That said, Markakis's defense does look worse than last year.

In most cases positioning is part of performance. Cal is a great example of this. What matters is the result. Did player X get to the ball hit to vecter Y.It doesn't matter whether his positioning put him in that spot or he had to run and dive to get the out.

[tvz1997]

I don't know why all of this had to turn into some giant p%ssing contest. People overstate things on message boards all the time, but until people started making personal accusations about each other, I don't see what was said that would cause anyone to get so upset unless they are bringing an old beef into this situation.

Take away the last two pages of this thread and tell me what has been said that is more "irresponsible" than talking about a guy performing better during his walk year. If this consideration of WHY some players' performance has dropped off makes anyone so upset, I don't know how they have hung around this site through the Angelos era and there is no way you could handle the comments on School of Roch or from Ozzie Guillen about his own players.

[Pickles]

Didn't you also just describe stats such as OPS, wOBA, and the like? They're useful at the macro level, but not very useful at the micro level.

I wouldn't ask anyone to try to use UZR at the micro level - not sure why anyone would try to do so. Of course, I guess it also depends on how much of a macro level you use.

I've seen people say they'll rely on their eyes, but not the stats. I'm sure some will say they'll rely on the stats, but not their eyes. Why not use both? (Question not aimed at you, VT) Why not use UZR, TFB, RZR, PMR and your eyes?

Yes, if UZR and TFB completely disagree with each other, you need to dig deeper and/or look at another defensive stat. Or maybe rely on your eyes. In my mind if UZR and TFB are pretty much in agreement with someone (as they are with most players), then I see little reason to question what they're telling me.

I guess here's my problem with defensive stats: There are often enough discrepancies between various systems, and between scouts' eyes (because not all eyes are created equal) and the systems, that I'm left to wonder just how useful they are, period. Mind you, I'm not saying they're useless.

You say, if two of them are in agreement about a player, then that is likely correct data. Likewise, if there is a discrepancy, then more info is needed.

What I'm saying is if they are in fact credible there should be no major discrepancies between them on one player. And yet we know there are, and, in fact, that this is not uncommon.

I think any data gathering system that produces such results has a worm in the core of it somewhere. I'm not sure what it is but it's there, and it's presence is confirmed in the results.

[El Gordo]

Two scouts disagree on how a player is defensively. How useful are the scouts?

No, I said I see little reason to question what they're saying. I didn't say it is likely correct data. There could be a discrepancy between what OPS and wOBA tell me. Does that mean they aren't reliable?

This is so far from the truth that I don't know where to begin. If scouts are credible, then there should be no major discrepancies between them, but yet there are. Should we no longer trust scouts. There are occasional discrepancies between OPS and wOBA. Should we not trust offensive stats?

You say it is not uncommon for there to be discrepancies between systems. I personally don't think it is as common as you imply. You have to remember that UZR data and TFB data are in fact pulled from two separate data sources. Of course there will be some disagreements. wOBA and OPS look at different things (as do UZR and TFB) - thus the difference between them. Scouts are humans, and therefore have flaws and will look at things differently - thus the difference between them.

And I think you have a basic misunderstanding of what these stats are supposed to tell us.

The results are obviously not as faulty as you seem to think.

My question for you, is about the issue at hand, namely Nick and AJ's drastic defensive decline, in terms of their numbers both UZR and TFB +/-, from last season to this. Are you seeing a decline that supports what the numbers indicate?

[Lucky Jim]

Winner, winner, chicken dinner

The real problem as I see it is that we have some folks on here who put faith in things they don't really understand, especially if those things are "problems" that they can espouse about.

I've read A TON on defensive metrics over the years and I like to think I'm not an idiot, but I'm not qualified to defend why defensive metrics are accurate over an X game sample. On the contrary, I come away from my learning efforts with more questions than answers. That doesn't mean the stats aren't valuable. They may be, but I haven't been convinced how valuable or over what sample size. Therefore I try not to quote them because I try not to act authoritative over subjects that I either don't grasp or don't have enough information to defend.

Okay. And you've got a number of fairly sophisticated, fairly responsible, fairly level-headed posters who all claim to believe the numbers confirm what they're seeing.

You don't believe. Fine.

There's no need to condescend or deride those who do believe they see a problem.

Are Tom Tango and John Dewan not qualified to defend the metrics? I think both could and have explained why these things are valuable and why they're not perfect. Clearly - they're incomplete. But being incomplete doesn't mean they don't give you information.

I mean, do you believe in evolution?

[rolliefingers]

Yes to both. I agree with your assessment that Jones has improved since April. Not sure why, but Markakis just hasn't looked like the same player this year - in any aspect of his game.

As others have wondered, maybe it has something to do with being happier personally (married) and having less stress or aggression to work out on the field. Same concept of some athletes saying they'll never have sex before a game because it lessens their killer instinct.

Obviously, complete speculation.

[Lucky Jim]

You may want to read up certain subjects prior to making some of the "factual statements" you just made.

You said "they also don't adjust for different ballparks." That is a false statement. UZR is park adjusted. I'm not sure if TFB is adjusted by park. He even takes into account whether an infield is a fast or slow infield.

You said "they can't account for the impact of the defense of other players. If Jones goes into Markakis's zone to make a play that Markakis could have made, then that hurts Markakis's rating." Again, that is a false statement. If Jones goes into a zone that "belongs" to Markakis and catches the ball, then Jones gets credit for a plus play, and the play counts neither for or against Markakis. It would be as if that ball was never hit to Markakis.

Here's a great article on the subject. Keep in mind that this was written in 2006, so chances are pretty good that he's improved the system since then.

You may want to read the section where he describes the impact of positioning. This is a snippet from that section:

Didn't you also just describe stats such as OPS, wOBA, and the like? They're useful at the macro level, but not very useful at the micro level.

I wouldn't ask anyone to try to use UZR at the micro level - not sure why anyone would try to do so. Of course, I guess it also depends on how much of a macro level you use.

I've seen people say they'll rely on their eyes, but not the stats. I'm sure some will say they'll rely on the stats, but not their eyes. Why not use both? (Question not aimed at you, VT) Why not use UZR, TFB, RZR, PMR and your eyes?

Yes, if UZR and TFB completely disagree with each other, you need to dig deeper and/or look at another defensive stat. Or maybe rely on your eyes. In my mind if UZR and TFB are pretty much in agreement with someone (as they are with most players), then I see little reason to question what they're telling me.

Two scouts disagree on how a player is defensively. How useful are the scouts?

No, I said I see little reason to question what they're saying. I didn't say it is likely correct data. There could be a discrepancy between what OPS and wOBA tell me. Does that mean they aren't reliable?

This is so far from the truth that I don't know where to begin. If scouts are credible, then there should be no major discrepancies between them, but yet there are. Should we no longer trust scouts. There are occasional discrepancies between OPS and wOBA. Should we not trust offensive stats?

You say it is not uncommon for there to be discrepancies between systems. I personally don't think it is as common as you imply. You have to remember that UZR data and TFB data are in fact pulled from two separate data sources. Of course there will be some disagreements. wOBA and OPS look at different things (as do UZR and TFB) - thus the difference between them. Scouts are humans, and therefore have flaws and will look at things differently - thus the difference between them.

And I think you have a basic misunderstanding of what these stats are supposed to tell us.

The results are obviously not as faulty as you seem to think.

Yes to both. I agree with your assessment that Jones has improved since April. Not sure why, but Markakis just hasn't looked like the same player this year - in any aspect of his game.

There's honestly not enough positive rep to give you for this contribution.