2008 UZR

[kramnoj]

http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/index.php/site/article/how_well_can_we_project_team_defense_and_other_uzr_data/ displays UZR for the teams as whole and best at worst at each position. The Brewers as a team are at -15 so far (MGL had projected they would be at -12 at this point).

 

Best and worst Brewers:

 

Fielder at -16 (5th worst)

Hall at -20 (4th worst)

Cameron at +40! (best)

 

Some comments: I knew that Hall wasn't as good this year, but I had no idea he was this bad. Weeks doesn't make it into the bottom 5. Braun has definitely taken well to LF. We don't know where he is, but he isn't among the worst. There isn't a UZR for catcher, so we don't have a rating for Kendall.

 

Edit: The individual numbers are on a rate basis. In the comments, where rluzinski and JoeHova make appearances, it is noted that Hardy is at -16 (worse than Jeter!).

[rluzinski]

Keep in mind that sample size issues are even more prevelant with defensive metrics than with offensive ones. This would be like 75 AB, or something along those lines. So we just have to be careful assuming that these numbers represeent "true skill".

 

He gave the rest of the Brewers infield:

 

Branyan is +3 runs at 3B in 10 "games."

Counsell is -2 runs in 22 odd games at various positions.

Dillon is -1 in 10 games at various positions.

Fielder is -6 runs in 58 games.

Hall is -6 runs in 46 games.

Hardy is -7 in 66 games.

Rivera is -1 run in 1 game.

Weeks is -4 in 69 games.

 

TOTAL: -24 runs

 

Wow. That's bad. The offense was +9, although Cameron might be all of the that.

[pete]

Zone ratings has to be one of the most flawed of attempts at quantifying performance in baseball. Individual factors can radically change the outcome. The Brewers use shifts aggressively causing a massive influence in rating. Prince Fielder is both not tall and not highly adept at balls in the dirt. That alone could change a "bad" ZR to a "good" one. Someone like Hardy plays with Rickie who sometimes takes balls that Hardy could field, but also Hall and Branyan who tend to range quite wide toward their left. Those are just three examples.

 

Infield conditions is a significant factor. Troy Tulowitzki credited Colorado's as a big factor in helping him last year in an TV interview before the world series. Maybe the ever aggressive salesperson Mitch Lichtman can provide a "linear adjustment" based on species and height of grass. Perhaps to live up to the ultimate sales pitch he could include turgidity to measure the lushness at any point in time.

 

Defense is inherently a team activity. Constantly extending the mathematical formulas won't change that.

[TooLiveBrew]

So the argument is 'Give up now, because the metrics we have now are poor'? I like the way people are working through different measurments -- trial & error. I have little doubt that roughly 5 years from now we will have the beginnings of accurate individual defensive metrics, and it will be thanks to the people who were able to learn from the flawed metrics we have now.

[rluzinski]

Defense is inherently a team activity. Constantly extending the mathematical formulas won't change that.

 

I think you bring up some valid points (athough I think "lushness" is a minor factor) but I don't buy your apparent conclusion (persuing defensive metrics is fruitless). UZR is certainly a work in progress but so is trying to gauge defense by any measure. If you look at UZR over 2 or 3 years, the results are quite reasonable. I think it's faiar to say that he (and others trying to use hit ball locations) are on the right track.

 

Maybe the ever aggressive salesperson Mitch Lichtman

 

Wow, thems fighting words. If I may ask, what caused you to have such a negative opinion of him? I wouldn't exactly call him amiable but....

[kramnoj]

Maybe the ever aggressive salesperson Mitch Lichtman

 

Wow, thems fighting words. If I may ask, what caused you to have such a negative opinion of him? I wouldn't exactly call him amiable but....

 

First, I don't understand how you can call him a salesperson, because he isn't one at all. I'm fairly sure his cut of the proceeds from "The Book" go to Retrosheet, so he doesn't profit from it. Tango has said that Mitch has offered to make the data available for free, but Tango insisted that they sell it to somewhat offset all the time they put in to the project.

 

As far as mgl's personality, it's beyond my understanding. When he used to post at Primer, now BTF, he would often act like a complete jerk. Calling people names, being very abrasive, etc. On the site for the "The Book", he usually seems fairly reasonable. I've heard him on Homer's show, and he couldn't have been a nicer person, and I've heard that from others who have met him. I just think his inner 13 year old came out when he wrote on BTF and he has moved beyond that.

 

On to the defense and UZR. There's a saying from Poli Sci that I love: Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others. UZR is far from perfect, but from what I have read it is the best currently out there. It's certainly much better than range factor or fielding percentage, and BP's numbers don't seem reliable to me whatsoever. Win Shares isn't a PBP stat. UZR when available, and ZR when not have been for me the best stat to use.

[Phenomenal Smith]

I heard mgl the radio with Richard Justice, and he was pretty nice. Everywhere else he comes across as a complete jerk. Tango really isn't any better. They both post contraversial political topics on The Book Blog and then delete comments from people who disagree with them. Their collective skins could not be thinner.

[rluzinski]

MGL can come across as terribly arrogant and heavy handed on message boards. If someone wants to call him a jerk, I won't call them wrong. Tango is the polar opposite of MGL, though. I've never seen a guy who can so easily stay above the fray of all the message board arguments surrounding the use of stats in baseball. It's amazing. I can't do it. He's also very helpful. I've emailed him several times with sabermetric questions and he has ALWAYS taken the time to look over my work and respond with suggestions and encouragement.

 

You don't agree with his political beliefs? That's understandable. He's a liberal from Canada, which means he's very liberal by American standards. Of course, one man's "controversial political belief" is another man's common sense, so what are you going to do? Well, you could just click the "baseball only" filter on his blog and you'll never have to deal with it.

 

Personally, while I don't always agree with him politically, I enjoy that the discussions generally stay pretty civil and intelligent. I think it's pretty absurd that you suggest he deletes comments on the basis of how they align with his own beliefs. You can skim any one of those threads and find plenty of dissenting opinions. Perhaps it was the quality of your comment that got it deleted?

[Phenomenal Smith]

Nope, the quality of my comments have been fine. The funny thing is that he's a liberal from Canada griping about free speech in America. Well, at least we don't have Human Rights Commissions going around trying to stifle free speech (see Mark Steyn).

 

I'll admit that both genetlemen are tremendous beancounters and I have learned a lot about baseball from them, but I have zero respect for them otherwise.

[rluzinski]

Nope, the quality of my comments have been fine.

 

Well, there are plenty of quality posts on that blog that strongly disagree with Tango's opinions, so I find that hard to believe. Your follow-up comments certainly didn't help to convince me to change my mind. Tango is just a guy with opinions. It doesn't matter where he's from or where he lives. It's not a competition.

[Tangotiger]

Regarding the deleting posts: from non-bots, out of the several hundred people who have posted on my blog, there is only one person that I have deleted posts from. Since I recognize the Human Rights Commission line used by Mr.Smith, and since he has claimed I deleted posts from him, he is that person. I stand by my decision.

 

Calling me a baby k-ller because you don't agree with my views on abortion is my line, however thin-skinned you wish to characterize it, and however you wish to hold to your claim that the quality of your comments have been fine. I don't wish to interact with you at the level that you wish to, and am posting here only to set the record straight by confirming Mr. Smith's claim that I did delete his posts.