Hardy vs. Hall

[GenoSeligPrieb]

Guys, you make compelling cases for not trusting this stat. Honest. I mean, I'll still take a look at it, but you HAVE exposed some inherent flaws.

 

But if you're going to marginalize this formula, then why is it, that when statistical noise like VORP and MLB-Equivalency numbers for minor leaguers (even for A-ball'ers!) are brought up, they're accepted pretty readily?...and they're crap!

 

I'll axe you this: OBP is accepted as gospel. Range Factor, however, is bunk, significantly and rightly so, because it's dependent on others (teammates, who's pitching, etc.).

 

But doesn't it take 2 to put a walk up on the board? Not only does the batter stand there and not swing, but the pitcher has to throw 4 bad ones, right? And even then, the ump chooses to call Ball 4, and the catcher may even be either miscommunicating with that pitcher, or he's calling a bad game.

 

Just askin'...

[dogs with bees in their mo]

You: "Range factor."

Me: "zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz"

[brettac1]

Hall plays behind the same pitchers that Hardy does, though, doesn't he?

 

Certainly, but he doesn't play behind an extreme groundballer like Mulder like Eckstein does - this is why the contention made in USA Today that Hardy has the worst range is a joke. The Cardinals, as a team, have a 1.74 GB/FB ratio - by far and away the highest in either league (the next closest is 1.52). The Brewers sit at 1.11, second lowest in the NL.

 

So, I guess the idea that Hall has better range is certainly true, but the idea that Hardy has the worst range in baseball is a joke.

 

Also, just for reference, the USA Today article is here: www.usatoday.com/sports/b...-stats.htm they completely misunderstand most of the other stats they show, as well.

[1992casey]

---

Hall plays behind the same pitchers that Hardy does, though, doesn't he?

---

That doesn't make Range Factor any more useful when comparing players who are on different teams.

 

I think we could have possibly used Range Factor to a point when comparing Hall to Counsell last year. However, Hardy and Hall have spent a lot of time playing next to each other this year. They're playing under different circumstances.

 

Zone Rating, while not without flaws, is a better stat than Range Factor. Hardy and Hall have almost exactly the same Zone Rating at shortstop this year (.840 for Hardy; .837 for Hall). That puts them both right in the middle of the pack among MLB shortstops.

[giffted1]

You can't base defensive skills on stats. The only way to judge defensive ability is to watch a game with an open mind. From watching games its easy to tell that Hall has more range, but JJ is much more consistent. Personally, I prefer consistency, so I like JJ.

[danzig6767]

If people want to use range factor to rank defensive players,then we would have to believe David Eckstein is the second best defensive shortstop in baseball.

 

That's good for a laugh,not reality.

[brettac1]

It also has Jeter listed at 7th. I'd agree with Casey, ZR or UZR are a much better stat defensively than is RF. It has Eckstein at 16th and Jeter at 19th.

[1992casey]

gifted1,

 

You can use defensive stats as long as you acknowledge their limitations. But I agree with you in that observation is extremely important.

 

I think the general approach used by most is to take a several defensive stats and weigh them accordingly. Unfortunately, the flaws in Range Factor stick out like a sore thumb. I might use it once in a blue moon, but if I use it in a message board post, I generally go out of my way to acknowledge why it generally stinks and why I feel I might have found a situation that's an exception.

[rluzinski]

Most of this has already been said, but to summarize:

 

1. I don't like Yost at ALL but he's not going to criticize Hardy's defense through the media, nor should he.

 

2. Even the stauncheststatheads recognize that current defensive metrics don't seam to paint an accurate picture of player's abilities. As a result, most aren't willing to think Hardy's defensive metrics mean he's a bad defender.

 

3. Hall has been a poor defender his entire career. While it looks like he's made great strides this year, it isn't going to erase the rest of his career.

 

4. Hardy's defense has been described as "major league ready" by virtually all the scouts since he was drafted. One year's worth of suspect defensive metrics isn't going to erase that.

 

Everyone criticizes Brewer players and coaches here on a regular basis. I have no idea who you are, but apparently Brian has seen you stir up arguments at JSOnline and is simply making sure you don't do the same here. By your reaction I have to think Brian's concerns are well founded.

[gregmag]

when statistical noise like VORP and MLB-Equivalency numbers for minor leaguers (even for A-ball'ers!) are brought up, they're accepted pretty readily?...and they're crap!

 

Thanks for clearing that up.

 

Statistics are only as good as the thought that goes into designing them. They're information. Some information is more valuable than other information. You can judge a hitter's season based on the raw number of base hits he got, or you can judge it based on his OPS and plate appearances. I'd say the latter information is a lot more valuable than the former. But to say, "some information is crap; therefore, any other piece of information I don't like is crap" . . . wow. It's like a Dark Ages revival party.

 

On Hardy and range factor, here's my two cents: (a) A fielder's range is very important in assessing his value. (b) A fielder's range is measurable. © Measuring a fielder's range in a manner that corrects for extrinsic variables is hard. (d) Straight-up range factor -- putouts plus assists per inning -- does a very, very bad job of correcting for extrinsic variables. I'm not very sophisticated in my knowledge of different defensive stats, but those statements seem clearly right to me.

 

Greg.

[danzig6767]

I cant take any of these defensive stats to seriously.When stats try to tell me Brady Clark is a better defensive CF than Andruw Jones,Beltran,Pierre,and equal to Edmonds i can't help but dismiss them pretty much.

 

Last year Scott the butcher Podsednik was ranked as one of the better defensive CF's in ZR.Anyone who watched him play outfield for us and misjudge one ball after another knows how laughable that is.

 

Edit--Want to add arm strength isnt a part of any off these stats.For players with a great arm or those with a noodle arm,it's a sizable part of what makes them the defesive player they are.

[Brian the Automator]

[ Do you give such flares and warnings to all new members of this forum --- or just to those who have the inclination to criticize Yost and/or Hardy when it is due? ]

 

I certainly give it to those who I feel make it their "posting career" to criticize Yost.

 

There's nothing wrong with criticizing Yost from time to time, I do it, everyone does it. But when that's ALL people do, then I have a problem with it. So, as long as it's not ALL you do, then we don't have a problem. I just don't want any "crusade" posters at Brewerfan.

[GenoSeligPrieb]

"Even the stanchest SABR-freindly folks recognize that current defensive metrics don't seam to paint an accurate picture of player's abilities. "

 

Fair enough, Russ, but which defensive measures DO the SABR types embrace? Any?

 

It just seems that offensive formulas are "easier?" to quantify, and are perhaps more readily accepted. Perhaps someday, someone will figure out THE universally-accepted defensive formula...maybe you! http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

 

"I don't like Yost at ALL but he's not going to criticize Hardy's defense through the media, nor should he."

 

Honesttogod, after reading and hearing Ozzie Guillen's meltdown this week all over town (his players pretty much all play like their next mistake will get them benched, and he even threatened to quit after this year if they win it all), I've GOT to figure Ned would handle some bad Brewer baseball in a playoff race, infinitely better.

 

Ned has his drawbacks, but I think he's beginning to grow out of his scary loyalty and favoritism (although Obermueller STILL starts!) and would be much better suited to a pennant race than a profane, embarrassing Royster clone like Good Ol' Ozzeroo...

[LS Brewer]

It also has Jeter listed at 7th. I'd agree with Casey, ZR or UZR are a much better stat defensively than is RF. It has Eckstein at 16th and Jeter at 19th.

 

I admit that I am not a person that is as absorbed by statistics as others on this site, although I do appreciate the good arguments advanced by those who statistically-inclined. However, I am highly suspicious of the Zone Rating statistic which depends upon the subjective determinations of of a particular fielder's "area of responsibility".

 

For a definition of ZR see www.baseball-almanac.com/stats3.shtml

[And That]

There are instances when pure statistical analysis is necessary. There are instances when no statistical analysis is necssary. However, both of the above instances are extremely rare.

 

There generally has to be a comingling of statistical and perceptual data, and judging defense is certainly one of those cases. Defensive metrics (or those defensive metrics that the general public know about) are laregly much more flawed than offensive and pitchers metrics for the simple fact that defense is much more of a reactive statistic while pitching and hitting are proactive statistics. A batter can choose to swing or not, a pitcher (to some extent) can choose whether or not to throw a strike (or, try to make the batter make contact; at the very least, you could say the pitcher controls the ball) - there is no situation in which a pitcher and the batter are not involved in every play (save for pick-off attempts or balks or similar on-mound events).

 

However, defense, much less individual defensive players themselves, are not involved in every play. This makes defensive counting-based statistics almost irrelevant, especially when comparing players on different teams. Even comparing players playing the same position on the same team becomes problematic because of small sample size - if a guy gets 5 balls hit his way per game, and 2 or 3 guys divvy up the games during the year, there just probably aren't as many chances to go around as might be necessary to form a valid conclusion.

 

I'm sure there are very good defensive metrics out there (mainly those based on computer-measured range), but I'm even more sure that we simply don't know about them because clubs won't give up their proprietary information. Why would they. So we're left with defensive computations that put players on different teams at great advantages and disadvantages to each other.

 

So, I'd say that without these good defensive metrics at our disposal, what we observe on the field in terms of range, throwing arm, etc., is at least equally as important as to what we read in the statistical tables. Some inferences can be made with defensive statistics, but they are always mitigated by the weakness of their own composition.

[homer]

I guess I wonder why there's a need to question Yost's response. What's he supposed to do? Bench Hardy in favor of Hall because of 'range factor'? I think his response was entirely appropriate.

 

And no, I'm not a Ned Yost apologist. I wish the word 'bunt' was removed from his personal vocabulary.

[Brian the Automator]

[ Ned has his drawbacks, but I think he's beginning to grow out of his scary loyalty and favoritism (although Obermueller STILL starts!) and would be much better suited to a pennant race than a profane, embarrassing Royster clone like Good Ol' Ozzeroo... ]

 

Like I said earlier in the thread, you have to look at who trained him. He said next to one of the most effective stiffs in the game, Bobby Cox. I know a lot of fans want him to lay into his players so the media gets a quote, but I honestly don't think he'll ever do that.

 

He's not an attention whore like Ozzie.

 

When I judge a manager, I usually say, given this talent, where did you expect to be on paper? The + and -, to me, depends on injuries and managing. I've said all along that I expected the Brewers to finish a few games under .500, and that's where they are. I'm not HAPPY with it, but i'm not all that shocked.

 

I do differ in opinion with Yost in some of his strategies, but as far as getting the most out of his talent from a motivation point of view, I think he's doing a very good job.

[rluzinski]

It just seems that offensive formulas are "easier?" to quantify, and are perhaps more readily accepted.

 

Offensive metrics are in a much more controlled environment. You know the pitcher's prior success and you know the batter's. That dreaded BABIP comes in a ruins everything, but compared to defense, it's a piece of cake.

 

We don't even HAVE most of the information you would need to properly gauge defensive abilities. We finally have spray charts available but what was the velocity of the ball hit? What was it's trajectory? Where was the defender positioned? Where did the defender end up?

 

Too many variables and almost no data. When statheads have tried to make up metrics using the data available, they have had limited success. They certainly aren't good enough to make the proclaimation, "Player A is better than Player B!"

[BrewCityUnit]

I had to jump in on this, how do you think Yost is getting the job down, motivational wise? What specifically has he done that we can prove?

[brettac1]

Offensive metrics are in a much more controlled environment.

 

They've also been around for much longer. Many of the defensive metrics are in their relative infancy when compared to things like OBP.

[rluzinski]

It just seems that offensive formulas are "easier?" to quantify, and are perhaps more readily accepted.

 

Offensive metrics are alot easier to "prove" because their ultimate goal is simply to predict runs scored. On a team level that's easy as pie. Even on a player by player level, it's not difficult to calculate a player's run production in a certain offensive environment.

[Brian the Automator]

[ I had to jump in on this, how do you think Yost is getting the job down, motivational wise? What specifically has he done that we can prove? ]

 

I'd have to say that first and foremost, the team has handled the loss of Ben Sheets remarkably well.

 

Like I said earlier, when I have a team on paper, and I figure that they'll come in a couple of games below .500, I look at how they ended up, and then factor in injuries. The team has been able to stay competitive even after losing their ace.

 

Other than that, there really is no proof, as we have no players coming out and saying what's actually on their minds regarding Ned. So it IS a complete judgement call. Ther's no SABR manager stat or anything http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

[GenoSeligPrieb]

"Like I said earlier in the thread, you have to look at who trained him. He said next to one of the most effective stiffs in the game, Bobby Cox."

 

Yeah, Brian, but hasn't Bobby Cox been ejected more than anyone in history? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think he may even have been the only manager to have been run, in a World Series game!

 

That said, Ned is not an over-the-top quote machine like Guillen, whom the Tribune's Rick Morrissey today annointed the "Say Anything Kid" and that's a very good thing.

 

Honestly, I'd much rather have low-key Ned than a screwball who, when he was a Marlins coach, could be seen looking around for the cameras, and only then, gave the "choke" sign to the Cub dugout during the Bartman series. (And yes, the Tribune already HAS reprinted that picture this week - I'm looking at it right now!).

 

That's why I hated Royster so much. He not only was a godawful manager, but he embarrassed us in the process by not being able to handle himself with even a little professional and organizational class. Guillen, right now, is a cartoonish example in how to NOT manage in the face of some adversity.

[brettac1]

Ther's no SABR manager stat or anything

 

I'd say also that the managers I like a little more than Yost are guys like Macha or Tracy, and I think they have a lot more pressure exerted on them by the front office than Yost does. Not to take this in a completely different direction, because I do think this is a really good discussion, but I think the importance of field managers in general is overstated.

[Brian the Automator]

[ Yeah, Brian, but hasn't Bobby Cox been ejected more than anyone in history? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think he may even have been the only manager to have been run, in a World Series game! ]

 

There's a difference between going off on umpires and going off on your own players, Geno.