JJ Hardy in the field

[silversurferr]

I've read a surprising amount of comments on this board that JJ is merely an average fielding shortstop with suspect range. I disagreed. Watching JJ in the field, and without using metrics, I was convinced that JJ is a well above average fielder. Apparently, there is at least one system that agrees with me: John Dewan's "Fielding Bible" ranked JJ third in fielding among Major League shortstops last year. Same system has Prince near the bottom for first basemen.

[liveforoctober]

I think we all agree that JJ can pick it with the best of them... it's his range that is suspect. He's a perfect defensive 3rd baseman.

[Ennder]

Most systems show Hardy as one of the best defensive SS in the game though there was one that didn't like him much(Dial's I think it was). I never could figure out how the systems differ such that they disagree on him so much. Seems like players like him are the poster boys for fielding metrics and how to improve them. I mean all systems think Fielder stinks, just a matter of how much but when some systems think a guy is a gold glover and others think he is average then obviously something is fishy.

[Thurston Fluff]

I think the variance in systems for measuring defense is how they determine the significance of each skill. If you determine range is a high priority Hardy will measure a lot worse than if you think arm strength or consistency is. You can tell if a player is great or terrible if all the various systems agree but I think trying to rank them is nearly impossible.

[logan82]

Hardy ranked as the best SS in OOZ with 72 out of zone plays. That was 11 higher than the next closest guy. In RZR he ranked 11th out of 19. I don't like those stats though. I think they fail to account for shifts and therefore the results can be skewed for infielders that play for teams that shiftt a lot(like the Brewers).

 

UZR/150 has JJ as the 4th best SS in the league.

[MNBrew]

The fact is, fielding stats beyond chances, PO, assists, and (for the most part) errors are the most highly subjective of any in baseball. Due to that fact, they are also the least reliable. They evolved last, also, because it was the one area not measured in anything other than basic detail. So the stats mongers tried to come up with measurements that would make fielding as quantifiable as hitting & pitching. Now there are numbers. How telling they are depends on the extent to which you take them as gospel.

 

When it comes to this realm, I'm going to rely tons more on what scouts, team officials, and the "simple" stats say. Everything we've ever heard in that context is that Hardy is a stud defensive SS. All the rest of it IMHO isn't worth putting much more than an ounce of stock in. Many of you will disagree and several will rip. That's the nature of these forums. But it won't change my mind.

[kramnoj]

MNBrew, can you tell me how ZR is subjective? ZR has problems, in that it doesn't know how to account for shifts, but that's different than being subjective.

[TooLiveBrew]

He's a great fielder on balls he can get to. His failing is that he doesn't get to as many balls as the elite defenders at SS. I love Hardy's defense at SS, fwiw.

[logan82]

He's a great fielder on balls he can get to. His failing is that he doesn't get to as many balls as the elite defenders at SS. I love Hardy's defense at SS, fwiw.

Which is why I don't like ZR, RZR, or OOZ. They seem to show the opposite to be true. I am not saying those stats are not objective, just that they don't properly account for shifts.

[Ennder]

The fact is, fielding stats beyond chances, PO, assists, and (for the most part) errors are the most highly subjective of any in baseball. Due to that fact, they are also the least reliable

 

Yeah they aren't as reliable but you just listed the least reliable fielding stats in baseball, bit confusing for your point I think. Any advanced fielding metric is more reliable than anything you just listed.

[TooLiveBrew]

He's a great fielder on balls he can get to. His failing is that he doesn't get to as many balls as the elite defenders at SS. I love Hardy's defense at SS, fwiw.

Which is why I don't like ZR, RZR, or OOZ. They seem to show the opposite to be true. I am not saying those stats are not objective, just that they don't properly account for shifts.

I don't think people should overlook things like OOZ/ZR/RZR (which is NOT what logan is suggesting). I just think that, objectively, Hardy is a fine defender, Yes, he doesn't get to every groundball, but yikes... anything he gets to, he turns into an out.

 

It is confusing, though... OOZ/ZR/RZR seems to be infallbile, but certainly... defensive shifting isn't taken into account in those metrics...

[silversurferr]

Who are the shortstops whose range is so much better? Rollins, and a few others, but it ain't like Hardy has telephone booth range. In fact, I think he does really well to his left/ up the middle. No way we trade him or move him from short next year.

[cwolf2012]

It is confusing, though... OOZ/ZR/RZR seems to be infallbile, but certainly... defensive shifting isn't taken into account in those metrics...

 

I think they actually can be inferred from the stats. If a team does a lot of shifts, then the RZR will be lower and the OOZ will be higher. If you see someone with not too many OOZ and a high RZR, you can be pretty sure that he's got a good glove and not much range. You can also infer that there aren't many shifts in place, either.

 

But I may be mistaken about how RZR is calculated. I believe the zone is 100% consistent on every play, regardless of defensive placement.

 

EDIT: I think JJ will never have a higher value than right now. If we're not signing a good pitcher this year in order to compete, JJ should be traded. If we're going to compete this year, then we should trade him next offseason and hope he has another good season this year (assuming Escobar is good with the bat again).

[TooLiveBrew]

Who are the shortstops whose range is so much better? Rollins, and a few others, but it ain't like Hardy has telephone booth range.

 

Oh, very true. I think you're talking about a very small number of SS that are better defensively than J.J. ... but complicatedly enough, one of them is probably Escobar http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

[endaround]

I think its important to note that last year was the first year Hardy looked very good in most metrics. It is also the first year he's been fully healthy in forever. The problem is that even if Escobar is better there's just not much room for Escobar to be significantly better. What I mean is Hardy was at 12.2 runs above average in UZR/150 which is where he falls in most measures. Players top out by around 20.

[jhart05]

I would still rather trade Fielder and Boras for that #1 or #2 starter they need.

 

Move Hardy to 3b, Gamel over to 1b, and Escobar of course at SS.

 

As Hardy gets older and looses a step, that's going to be his natural position change anyway.

[rluzinski]

I wouldn't trust any one metric from any one year, nor would I trust the opinion of just one scout. Taking all the information that we have about Hardy's defensive ability, it appears that he's at least an average SS. I'd be willing to wager that he's above average.

As Hardy gets older and looses a step, that's going to be his natural position change anyway.

 

Moving an above average defender to an easier position is a complete waste of his talents. Generally speaking, you do your best to play a positional player at the most difficult defensive position he can handle. Hardy probably won't even be a Brewer by the time his eroding defensive skills justify a positional change.

[Ennder]

I think its important to note that last year was the first year Hardy looked very good in most metrics

 

2007 was the same actually, some systems loved him and some said he was average to below average. I think he certainly is the type of player that shows how far we still need to go in defensive metrics. I'd say the systems are pretty close on the majority of players, Hardy is one of the biggest outliers.

[brewerguy71]

You have to keep in mind, when looking at Hardy's defensive numbers (such as OOZ and his range factor) that he was positioned perfectly for MANY plays last year by the coaches and scouting department. Many balls that were headed straight up the middle for base hits last year were hit directly at Hardy, and as we all know, if he can glove it, its a sure bet to be an out. This raised his numbers defensively. Bottom line, he was playing out of position. This isnt his fault, he did what he was supposed to do.

 

But he is an average to below average shortstop defensively. The guys with great range like Tulowitzki, Rollins, Reyes, Escobar, Furcal...win games because of their range defense. I believe our Escobar has that same sort of ability. Hardy is a Hold or Sell when it comes to his defensive ability at SS, the guys mentioned above are Buys.

[logan82]

I really don't care if a guy is positioned well or has good range as long as the outs are made. I would like the defensive metrics to take positioning into account to get a clearer picture of a defender though.

[3Putt]

Criticizing JJ's defense is really a reach regardless of what numbers you use. How about a common sense approach? Which Brewers infielders don't make you cringe when the ball is hit in their general direction. Pitchers - mostly cringing, Kendall - no cringe, Prince - serious cringing, Weeks - ditto, JJ - no cringing whatsoever, Hall - major cringing especially when he cocks his arm to throw.

 

Simple isn't it?

[brewerguy71]

Sure, but the difference between a good shortstop and an average one is whether or not they can range to either side to get to a ball, and still convert the out.

 

Hardy just doesnt do that. Do you cringe when it's hit to him, no, but I would much rather have a guy playing shortstop who can make those plays in the hole or up the middle. Its what good shortstops do.

[endaround]

I think its important to note that last year was the first year Hardy looked very good in most metrics

 

2007 was the same actually, some systems loved him and some said he was average to below average. I think he certainly is the type of player that shows how far we still need to go in defensive metrics. I'd say the systems are pretty close on the majority of players, Hardy is one of the biggest outliers.

 

UZR actually said hes' gotten slightly worse, but still good. PMR's have him at the same for this year after average last year. RZR is what really changes with him going up and still getting a bunch of OOZ plays.

[logan82]

How about a common sense approach? Which Brewers infielders don't make you cringe when the ball is hit in their general direction

 

That doesnt' work especially with Weeks who is still thought of by many people as the same fielder that he was when he came up.

[Ennder]

How about a common sense approach? Which Brewers infielders don't make you cringe when the ball is hit in their general direction

 

I don't cringe when a ball is hit to Durham, I just assume if it isn't right at him it is a single. He was much worse defensively than Weeks last year in my opinion.