Yuniesky Betancourt: What value does he bring to the team? (part 1)

[Flood Pants]

The problem is, this team isn't inexperienced anymore. They should be making better decisions. I'm not seeing any progress in this area.

This is a very good point. I think part of the issue is that the Brewers (probably rightfully) always drafted the best bats possible and didn't worry about the defense. This was probably the way for this team to improve the fastest, and it got the respectable fairly quickly. But that's not necessarily the way to build a contender. In general, a great offensive player contributes more than a bad defender detracts. But when every single defender is bad, something probably needs to change.

 

And you're right, many of these players have had the time to improve and simply haven't. Weeks has, but that was going from horrible to slightly below average. Fielder and Braun both show flashes of improvement and then regress. It seems like the clubhouse atmosphere is pretty laid back and informal, and I wonder if that has anything to do with it. One can only speculate though.

[TooLiveBrew]

His play today might be the worst I've EVER seen a major league baseball player look defensively.

Did you just start watching baseball this season? This may sum up how the Yuni haters see his play. A bad hop play is seen as the worst ever. So you either have seen very little baseball or just look for ways to kick the guy.

Yeah, the main problem with that play was the ball catching the lip of the infield grass & not taking much of a hop off the ground. However, on that play (& numerous others), he just doesn't get himself into good position. Even when he has plenty of time to get in front of the ball, he'll typically opt to backhand the play. He's just got lazy habits on defense (& poor foot speed), which made that incredible hustling play to snare the liner off Mitre all the more impressive.

[DuWayne Steurer]

That play, yeah. That was a bad hop, but he was poorly positioned. He could have been trying to backhand it with Victorino running, that's gonna be a tough out. Huh, I just made an excuse for him. I must not be a hater after all.

[cwolf2012]

It was awful fundamentals on the bad hop play. I'd be okay if he doesn't field it cleanly if he was actually in position. Bad hops happen and I can't fault someone for not having perfect reaction abilities. I can, however, fault a player for not putting himself in the proper position out of laziness. I think that's what people are referring to when talking about that being one of the worst plays they've ever seen.

 

I bet a pretty darn good number of shortstops still make that play even with the bad hop.

[logan82]

I think I am starting to lean towards laziness and Betancout's problem as well. He made a couple nice plays so we know he has some ability but has looked slow on several other plays.

[Raw Biz]

It was awful fundamentals on the bad hop play. I'd be okay if he doesn't field it cleanly if he was actually in position.

I'm not really a Betancourt supporter but I think RoCo is right. He was trying to quickly backhand it because with Victorino running, it would have been a close play. If he just squares himself up with "good fundamentals," it's going to be pretty close at first. He probably could've used his legs a little better on that play and actually attempted to bend down but I really won't fault him for that play alone.

[monty57]

we should take a low BA in the same amount of time to crucify his offense.

It's angry when people say "he sucks" or he's "the worst ever" on a daily basis. That's completely over the top and not backed statistically.

3115 PA's

.295

.390

.685

That looks like enough evidence to me to say that he sucks offensively.

He basically had one horribly bad season in 2009, where he posted a .625 OPS. Other than that, he' spretty much been a .700ish OPS guy. That's pretty league average for a SS. He is tilted more heavily towards SLG than OBP, but considering that Escobar hit for a .614 OPS last season, Yuni will likely be a big improvement for us offensively this season. The problem is that his offense hasn't been good enough to make up for his poor range on defense. If you're a bad defensive SS, you should be better than "about average" on offense.

 

 

 

Ennder wrote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

But again quoting stats of any type much less defensive stats over a small sample is just completely useless, it has no meaning. What Betancourt has done so far this year has no meaning at all in the discussion.

 

Strawboss is trying to show that Betancourt hasn't been that bad defensively so far this year. He is not trying to predict the future. If you are trying to show what a player has done over a two-week period, it's more important to show what he has actually done over that two-week period than what he theoretically should have done over that two-week period. What I just wrote is so blatantly obvious it shouldn't need to be said. It's basically if A=A, then A=A. It seems that sometimes people get so engrained into the idea of "predictive stats" that they forget that players are actually playing in the here and now. The "predictive stats" show that Betancourt should suck on defense this year. For the past two weeks, he has not sucked on defense. Nothing more, nothing less.

[logan82]

As has been repeatedly explained, the defensive stats don't necessarily show what has happened.

[monty57]

As has been repeatedly explained, the defensive stats don't necessarily show what has happened.

But he said "What Betancourt has done so far this year has no meaning at all in the discussion," when the discussion is about what Betancourt has done so far this year. What he's done is what he's done. If you are talking about what he's done, then what he's done is pretty relevant.

[logan82]

The defensive metrics don't necessarily show what has happened or how he has performed. It is like looking at a few days of hitting stats and saying a guy has done well when he may have hit the ball well but hit right at defenders.

[strawbossisevil]

They may not be perfect, but if you want to be objective, there is no better way of assessing how the player has done.

 

If (per your example) a player hits a bunch of balls right at a defender and therefore has a low batting average, his batting average will suggest he had a rough stretch (which he did in reality). That batting average won't be predictive, because if a person is hitting the ball right at defenders his hits will likely fall eventually giving him a better batting average.

 

The stats aren't necessarily descriptive of talent and ability, but they show the results the player has accomplished. Therefore they tell us what happened (the actual results of a players play) just fine, but they fail to measure what can be expected in the future.

 

Monty57 is exactly right. So many get so sucked into the predictive nature of statistics that they forget that the statistics are actually measuring very real events that happened. In this thread, I was soley focused on the "results", and not whether those results are predictive for the future.

[Ennder]

As has been repeatedly explained, the defensive stats don't necessarily show what has happened.

But he said "What Betancourt has done so far this year has no meaning at all in the discussion," when the discussion is about what Betancourt has done so far this year. What he's done is what he's done. If you are talking about what he's done, then what he's done is pretty relevant.

The stats don't describe what a player has done over such a small sample though. A player can actually play poorly and still put up good offensive or defensive stats over a small sample, they just don't really mean anything. BIS is a little better than the other stats because of how it is done but even those don't mean a whole lot. And no we aren't just talking about the predictive nature of things.

 

Here is an example, a ball is into to the right of the SS with a runner on 2B. One SS with good range would get to the ball but not be able to throw the runner out at 1st, however since he knocks the ball down the guy on 2nd goes back to 2nd fearing a throw at 1B. Another SS doesn't come close to the ball and it goes right through for a single and the runner ends up on 3rd. Pretty much every defensive system scores these two exactly the same when the results are clearly different. That of course is kind of a silly and extreme example but there are all kinds of little things that can't be scored properly on defense. Over time a stat is going to mostly get it right but over a small sample it just isn't capable of telling us what happened.

[strawbossisevil]

It is kind of like the ERA debate. Many deride ERA, and when you are trying to predict how a pitcher will do in the future, it isn't all that worthwhile or predicative. But ERA does one thing, it shows the results of how many earned runs actually crossed the plate while that pitcher was pitching.

 

A player can pitch poorly, theoretically, and still have a great ERA because the batters have a few bad outings at the plate. That said, if a bad pitcher has an ERA under 4 during that bad stretch, you can't take that away from him, as those were the actual results of his pitching. It isn't at all indicative of what he will do, as more often than not he will get hit around if he pitches that poorly. But that doesn't matter when looking at the results. This happened, whether he lucked into it or not, it happened.

 

And say, such a pitcher was expected to have an ERA of 5+. If he has an ERA under 4, his results have been better than expected for that stretch and the team is better off for those better results.

 

So, in reality, they do mean something. They aren't predictive, they don't necessarily tell the whole story. But they do reflect that the value such a player has had to his team (and their chance to win) over that time period, even if it was based on nothing but luck.

 

My point in this thread is to say, whether lucky or not, Betancourt's defensive statistics have been better than we could have hoped to this point. That says nothing about his talent or his luck, or what can be expected. It is merely saying that for the first tenth of a season his defense hasn't been a huge detriment to the team's chances of winning.

[Ennder]

So, in reality, they do mean something. They aren't predictive, they don't necessarily tell the whole story. But they do reflect that the value such a player has had to his team (and their chance to win) over that time period, even if it was based on nothing but luck

 

They don't even do that though. A pitcher doesn't really control his ERA very much, the other teams offense controls 50% and the pitchers fielders control a portion, the relievers control part of it and of course a portion is always just dumb luck, that is why an elite pitcher is only 1-1.5 runs a game better than a merely average pitcher, they just can't control a lot of it. Baseball is still a team sport and most stats are individual stats, they can't really tell you how valuable a player was to the team, they are just results of how the team ended up doing in certain situations.

 

To me it seems you are a very results oriented thinker so I doubt we are going to see eye to eye on things. It is a team sport, the results aren't generally in control of an individual. It takes a long time for the results in baseball to have any meaning at all. A pitcher can be pitching great and give up a bunch of ER and the result I take from that is he is pitching great. You can be walking a ton of guys, not striking anyone out and getting lucky all over and not giving up many runs and the result of that is you are pitching poorly. The only way to cut out all the noise is to have such a large foundation of evidence that you can spot clear trends and for ERA or defensive stats that takes more than a year worth of data.

[strawbossisevil]

I am focusing on results here, I'm not necessarily "results oriented" - especially when using stats to project how a player will do in the future. Results tell us what happened, they don't necessarily say "how" they happened. A person can play technically poor and still put up good stats. Despite the poor technical play the good results still, in the end, benefit his team over that period in which he put up the good stats.

 

In the same way, a technically sound player might put up bad stats. He may have done everything right but his results negatively impacted his team over that stretch. It speaks nothing to the future, only how his results have impacted his team.

 

If you are going to project a player's future results, yes, the results don't really matter. However if you are trying to evaluate how the player's results have effected (past tense) his team, then results are valuable. This is what I was pointing out about Betancourt, while his approach may not be one that will result in a positive defensive stats over the season, his results have (past tense) not been a huge negative for the Brewers to this point.

 

Point being his results have not been as poor as many on here have suggested they have been. That could definitely change in the future, and I think it will.

[rluzinski]

It's more objective but not necessarily better. And you are combining several defensive systems that use the same or similar data to come up with their metrics. I don't think that decreases the uncertainty at all. That's like saying that a batter's OPS, WAR and wOBP are all good after a week, so perhaps a week of data is good enough.

This is all very simple. It's April 19th. Whatever has happened so far this season tells us very little, whether it be stats or scouting. Yuni has been in the league for awhile now, so there is plenty of data to look at to formulate an informed opinion with regard to his abilities.

Right, there is no doubt that ability wise, he is likely going to finish below average. That is not what I, or anyone else making this argument, have been asserting. We are merely stating that based on the objective data compiled by four different statistical models (all who seek to be the best objective measures of defense). Based on that, we can say that Yuni had a few good weeks, nothing more, nothing less.

The only reason I even make that point is to show that many have been over-critical in regard to his performance to this point in the season. My goal isn't to try to extrapolate what we can expect of him going forward, or to show his "real ability". If I want to figure those things out, I agree that it is best to look at the career statistics.

I see this as the equivalent of saying, "Plush has really started off the season hitting better than I expected." I'm not suggesting that what we've seen from Plush reflects his actual ability, nor that what he's done in the opening weeks of the season can be expected to be continued throughout the season.

I'm not talking about descriptive vs. predictive. I'm talking about knowing what happened (batter hit a HR in 1 PA) vs. making an educated guess at what happened (defender making an out on a play that is estimated to be converted into an out 50% of the time by an average defender).

We know Plush has had a positive impact because he's hit so much better than an average player. Whether it represents his true abilities or not, the hits actually happened. In contrast, when Betencourt makes an out, we don't REALLY know if that out was as easy or hard as the advanced defensive metrics suggest. They are making a hopefully accurate estimate but with low precision. Over perhaps 70 defensive chances, I will continue to argue that these defensive metrics tell us next to nothing about reality. The rely on a large sample to have any real utility.

I am basing my opinion on the writing of MGL, who is the creator of UZR and frequents the Insidethebook.com blog. They had a thread on the fundamental difference of batting stats and UZR type stats. One knows what happened, one is estimating it. Some searching should let you hear it from the horse's mouth.

 

[topper09er]

Point being his results have not been as poor as many on here have suggested they have been.

This is only because of randomness, there is no direct reason for these defensive stats to show this other than randomness. IT IS NOT BECAUSE YUNI HAS IMPROVED ON DEFENSE.

[monty57]

The only way to cut out all the noise is to have such a large foundation of evidence that you can spot clear trends and for ERA or defensive stats that takes more than a year worth of data.

 

...and to have unflawed data. You just mentioned that data is scored differently depending on who scores it, and someone who actually worked for one of the companies posted earlier that he couldn't believe how flawed the data is. Yet, with all of this, some are still treating the "defensive metrics" as gospel, flawed data and all. Now, I'll agree that Yuni is severely lacking in range, but it is impossible to put an absolute value on a player's worth based on any "metric" which relies on admittedly flawed data, small sample or large. To just assume that all of the inaccuracies will even out over time isn't a sound premise. If this is indeed the case (I didn't say the data was flawed, others did), then these "defensive metrics" can be used to get an idea of a player's ability, or it could be grossly exaggerated one way or the other if the inaccuracies happen to be inaccurate in one direction instead of evening out. And, if that is the case, if I were a GM/owner, I would certainly want to look beyond these numbers if I were about to spend millions on a player.

[strawbossisevil]

Point being his results have not been as poor as many on here have suggested they have been.

This is only because of randomness, there is no direct reason for these defensive stats to show this other than randomness. IT IS NOT BECAUSE YUNI HAS IMPROVED ON DEFENSE.

What it probably means is he's had a few games where he's played better than what is typical for him. That's all. He may not be technically improved, nor likely to continue putting up better than typical results.

The point is, though, that despite his results being better than expected, that hasn't stopped people complaining ABOUT HIS RESULTS. His results haven't been the problem to this point, the problem is that his approach is likely going to lead to poor results in the future.

His results have not negatively impacted our team to this point, call it randomness, call it luck, call it a few better than normal weeks. However you want to call it, he's done it.

[rluzinski]

Point being his results have not been as poor as many on here have suggested they have been.

This is only because of randomness, there is no direct reason for these defensive stats to show this other than randomness. IT IS NOT BECAUSE YUNI HAS IMPROVED ON DEFENSE.

To be fair, he's not saying the stats suggest Yuni has actually improved. He's only claiming that the stats show his defensive performance has been better than average. I am arguing that the HUGE uncertainty in the estimate suggests that it tells us nothing. T o make up numbers, if the estimate is +2 runs, one standard deviation might be 10 runs. So we could say that we are 68% sure that Yuni's defensive has been worth between +12 and -8 runs to the Brewers so far this year. We are 95% sure that Yuni's defense has been worth between +22 and -18 runs.

[strawbossisevil]

Point being his results have not been as poor as many on here have suggested they have been.

This is only because of randomness, there is no direct reason for these defensive stats to show this other than randomness. IT IS NOT BECAUSE YUNI HAS IMPROVED ON DEFENSE.

To be fair, he's not saying the stats suggest Yuni has actually improved. He's only claiming that the stats show his defensive performance has been better than average. I am arguing that the HUGE uncertainty in the estimate suggests that it tells us nothing. T o make up numbers, if the estimate is +2 runs, one standard deviation might be 10 runs. So we could say that we are 68% sure that Yuni's defensive has been worth between +12 and -8 runs to the Brewers so far this year. We are 95% sure that Yuni's defense has been worth between +22 and -18 runs.

In addition, you haven't factored in the fact that four independent systems of establishing defensive value (all intently trying to be the best objective measure of defense) came up with very similar results (ranging from -.4 through +3 runs saved). It is kind of like in politics, one poll may not tell us much. But when four separate polls say essentially the same thing that can certainly be an indicator that the results are fairly accurate. Same here with the four systems of defensive value essentially agreeing that Betancourt's results have been league average to this point.

If it were just one system, yes, the results would be fairly dubious. Four independent systems make it far less dubious.

[monty57]

Russ, to say you know more about these stats than I is a tremendous understatement, so could you please alleviate my fears about the flaws in the data? From a couple of earlier posts, I'm now worried that the plays are being monitored by some drunk college kid while he's chatting up the ladies at the game.

 

"Hey, I wasn't watching. How did Prince get on 1B? Oh, it says a single, so I'll just say he shot a line drive by the second baseman. No one will know the difference."

 

If the data is indeed flawed, then the numbers have to be taken with a huge grain of salt.

[RockCoCougars]

Because one 2-3 game hot streak at the plate, or multi-error game could change everything dramatically in this case, I'm not going to get into the stats debate.... but from what I've seen, Betancourt reminds me of an aging Shawon Dunston. In the field generally makes the routine play with a strong arm.. probably a little below average due to limited range. At the plate, will never walk, but doesn't strike out much either, with a little pop. Below average hitter in general, but probably about average for a shortstop.

[endaround]

No they don't tell us anything. To take you analogy is like interviewing 30 people giving the same interviews to 4 polling firms and them getting different but similar results because of the filters they use. It doesn't change that the underlying sample tells us nothing. And this isn't just a sample size issue, its a measurement issue. All they tell us is that he's neither been especially great or especially terrible and that doesn't even get into how shifts can muck things up.

[danzig6767]

The only way to cut out all the noise is to have such a large foundation of evidence that you can spot clear trends and for ERA or defensive stats that takes more than a year worth of data.

 

...and to have unflawed data. You just mentioned that data is scored differently depending on who scores it, and someone who actually worked for one of the companies posted earlier that he couldn't believe how flawed the data is. Yet, with all of this, some are still treating the "defensive metrics" as gospel, flawed data and all. Now, I'll agree that Yuni is severely lacking in range, but it is impossible to put an absolute value on a player's worth based on any "metric" which relies on admittedly flawed data, small sample or large. To just assume that all of the inaccuracies will even out over time isn't a sound premise. If this is indeed the case (I didn't say the data was flawed, others did), then these "defensive metrics" can be used to get an idea of a player's ability, or it could be grossly exaggerated one way or the other if the inaccuracies happen to be inaccurate in one direction instead of evening out. And, if that is the case, if I were a GM/owner, I would certainly want to look beyond these numbers if I were about to spend millions on a player.

That's why i doubt if few or any GM's use just defensive metrics when evaluating players they are going to consider acquiring, this includes teams that rely more heavily on sabermetirics. I think it's safe to assume they view defensive metrics as just a tool to go along with what their scouts say about a players defense. If then the scouts and metrics both pretty much agree on a player, then a GM has more reason to trust that evaluation of a player's defensive abilities. If though the metrics and scouts differ greatly, then the GM should try his best to get to the bottom of why this is.

 

The troubling thing with Betancourt before Doug chose to acquire him is that the defensive metrics put Yuni in a very negative light and most scouts or people who have watching him play defense over an extended number of games also said he was a very poor defensive player at arguably the most premium defensive position on the diamond. It's hard to find anything or anyone who has watched him play for awhile that has a positive thing to say about Betancourt beyond the fact that he can provide some extra base pop for the position.

 

Speaking of Melvin, i've long wondered how exactly he feels about more advanced stats in general? I've heard him interviewed many times and here and there he'll say things that involve not just basic stats like say batting average/ERA, but then he'll rave about how Betancourt had 78 RBI's last year or more than once bemoan strikeouts in the lineup even though team strikeout totals really show no clear story in why teams score more runs than others.