What does defense do for a team?

[reillymcshane]

Question regarding defense.

 

I'll say upfront, I have a soft spot for good defensive players.

 

I realize that several positions get more action (SS for example), some are less challenging (1B for example), so all positions are not equal in thier importance.

 

My question is, how much does it really matter?

 

Specifically, I'm looking Dave Krynzel and CF.

 

How much would his defense make up for his lack of offensive production (assuming he wouldn't hit as well as Clark or someone else - say Hart if they really did move him there). I've heard some people say things like, "Krynzel's defense would save us dozens of hits," or something similar.

 

But would it really do that? Because if a guy's defense saves one or two hits a week - let's say 30 hits over the course of a season - that's pretty significant. It, in my warped theory, makes a .250 hitter a .300 hitter. Why? Normally, we'd just see those saved runs in the lower ERAs of the team's pitchers. Say Krynzel hits .250 - 150 hits on 600 ABs. Let's say his defense saves the team 30 hits over Brady Clark - 'giving' those 30 hits to Krynzel, he gets 180 hits, and thus a .300 BA. I know that's not how it's done, but I'm just trying to find a way to have one set value for a player - instead of two (hitting and fielding).

 

Has anyone done anything comparing what a guy's defense can do for the club with another player? Can you look at Brady Clark and say he gets to x percentage of balls hit to his zone, and then actually translate that into how many hits he has saved compared to another player?

 

Ultimately, I'm curious as to what Krynzel needs to do to actually become a starter in CF for the team. Compared to Clark, would his defense save us 10 hits? 20? 30?

 

I realize people probably won't have fielding breakdowns (zone ratings, etc.) for Krynzel like they will Clark - but just like any rookie, we'd have to estimate what kind of a defensive upgrade (or downgrade) he'd be. Perhaps this is impossible - especially for a guy like Corey Hart, who's not played there much. Not sure.

 

I apologize if this is really confusing.

 

Thanks for any suggestions/ideas/comments.

[1992casey]

I saw that 'dozens of hits' comment last night and decided simply to take it as hyperbole. I can't see any way a player can offer that kind of defensive improvement over someone else.

 

For illustration purposes, rather than actually looking at Clark and Krynzel, it might pay to compare two players with readily available stats.

[BillScottCanRake]

I think this one is going to be nearly impossible to quantify, because there are a lot of things that have to be considered beyond "how many more outs would Krynzel record than Clark" and defensive stats are somewhat unreliable. That's not to say that defense isn't important, or that Krynzel's defense won't be able to make up to some degree for his lack of offense.

 

When comparing Clark to Krynzel, a few things I think that should be considered, in addition to your question, are:

 

- How many extra plays can Krynzel make that Clark cannot?

- How many extra plays can Clark make that Krynzel cannot?

 

I think one has to consider both of these issues. Because of the type of defense they play, positioning, etc, Clark is going to get to some balls that Krynzel, for all his prowess in the OF, won't be able to get to. While I think Krynzel will get to more balls on a whole, it's easy to forget Clark is going to make some plays Dave won't.

 

- For those outs that Krynzel records that Clark cannot, what type of hits would Clark be allowing?

- For those outs that Clark records that Krynzel cannot, what type of hits would Krynzel be allowing?

 

This is pretty important, too. Clark, for example, plays pretty deep and tends to let a lot of balls drop in front of him. For the most part, this type of conservative style results in "extra" singles.

 

Because Krynzel is so much faster and better defensively, he plays a shallower CF. While he'll get to a lot of balls hit over his head that Clark can only get to playing deeper, there are probably some balls that get past Dave that Clark would get to. Maybe Dave would give up "extra" doubles and triples?

 

- How does the addition of Krynzel in the the OF effect the LFer and RFer?

 

How would having a CFer who can cover a lot of ground affect those players around him? Might the LFer and CFer get to more balls down the lines than they might have in the past having to play more towards the gaps?

[reillymcshane]

Quote:

---

For illustration purposes, rather than actually looking at Clark and Krynzel, it might pay to compare two players with readily available stats.

---

Sounds like a peachy plan. Perhaps a team like Philly would work, since Lofton and Michaels have had 200+ ABs in CF this year.

[DHonks]

you guys are right on with the theme of this...defense is hard to quantify. It would seem Hart would yield a few less hits falling in than Clark. It would be logical to argue that Krynzel may in fact have saved at least 30 hits over the course of the year, and his arm likely would have thrown out another player or two. But how can you compare that to the offensive contributions of Clark?

 

note: I said at least 30 for a reason. Clark plays deep, Jenkins and Lee have limited range. We've seen many balls fall just out of reach for Clark, whether left, right, behind or infront. I would assume with Krynzel's superior range playing shallower, defensively speaking those games where they bloop several to CF or hit some that fall in the gaps might have been very different with Krynzel. Of course, they'd also have been very different offensively, too. It would seem logical that Krynzel would likely have produced 30-45 more outs, however, a .235 avg and .300 obp would have resulted in many more outs.

[DuWayne Steurer]

I think when you're comparing players from different teams, ZR, RF and the like don't do a lot of good. Player X (A center fielder) might have a stunning zone rating, but play for a team with a lot of flyball pitchers.

 

Player Y (another CFer) might have a crap Zone Rating, and play for a team that employs a good number of groundball type guys.

 

BUT, if you're comparing guys on your own team, maybe the numbers take on a little more meaning. If Krynzel had a big enough sample that it actually meant something, I believe we could compare he and Clark, and at least draw some semi-solid conclusions.

[endaround]

Your best bet is to look at Win Shares. While far far from perfect it does give you a way to compare the numbers. Hardballtimes calculates Win Shares weekly.

[reillymcshane]

Thank you, folks, for you comments. I knew this was probably a futile idea, but I appreciate people at least giving it their two cents.

 

Thanks again.

[1992casey]

Well, I gave it a shot comparing the two players you mention. I don't know much of anything about the funky fielding stats Baseball Prospectus offers, but I'll summarize what they have on these two players.

 

Stat definitions are stolen from the Baseball Prospectus Stat Glossary. Information comes from each player's "DT" card, whatever that means. You need a free subscription to access those cards.

 

2005 numbers, Lofton and Michaels

AdjG (The estimated number of real, nine-inning games played at this position.)

• Lofton: 68.7
• Michaels: 54.5

Rate (A way to look at the fielder's rate of production, equal to 100 plus the number of runs above or below average this fielder is per 100 games. A player with a rate of 110 is 10 runs above average per 100 games, a player with an 87 is 13 runs below average per 100 games, etc.)

• Lofton: 110
• Michaels: 113

RAR (FRAR) (Fielding runs above replacement. A fielding statistic, where a replacement player is meant to be approximately equal to the lowest-ranking player at that position, fielding wise, in the majors. Average players at different positions have different FRAR values, which depend on the defensive value of the position; an average shortstop has more FRAR than an average left fielder.)

• Lofton: 19
• Michaels: 16

RAA (Runs above average at this position, similar to Palmer's Fielding Runs as far as interpretation is concerned.)

• Lofton: 7
• Michaels: 7

Rate2 (See Rate. Rate2 incorporates adjustments for league difficulty and normalizes defensive statistics over time)

• Lofton: 111
• Michaels: 114

RAR2 (FRAR2) (See FRAR, FRAR2. FRAR2 incorporates adjustments for league difficulty and normalizes defensive statistics over time)

• Lofton: 18
• Michaels: 16

RAA2 (Runs above average at this position, similar to Palmer's Fielding Runs as far as interpretation is concerned.--Note: BP directs you to the same definition as RAA. I'd assume that RAA2 incorporates the same adjustments as the RAR2 and Rate2.)

• Lofton: 8
• Michaels: 7

These two appear to be offensive stats:

 

BatOut (Approximate number of batting outs made while playing this position.)

• Lofton: 200
• Michaels: 153

EqR (Equivalent Runs; EQR = 5 * OUT * EQA^2.5. In the fielding charts, the estimated number of EqR he had at the plate while playing this position in the field.)

• Lofton: 37
• Michaels: 35

Player Cards:

Baseball Prospectus Player Card for KENNY LOFTON

Baseball Prospectus Player Card for JASON MICHAELS

[1992casey]

I figured it'd be better to put my limited comments and questions in a separate post.

 

According to these stats, it looks as if Jason Michaels might be the ever so slightly better defensive center fielder this year. Using Rate and Rate2, he looks be 3 runs (30% of a win) defensively over 100 games.

 

Am I right in that the defensive section of the player cards lists offensive stats? Is that just for convenience?

[reillymcshane]

Casey, thanks for the work. Wow. I'm trying to figure it all out!

[reillymcshane]

I just read an article on ESPN - link - it mentions the following:

 

Quote:

---

Damon has only an average arm, but he's still a more valuable commodity in the field. In 2004, he had an Ultimate Zone Rating (the Sabermetric measuring stick for the number of balls fielded in a player's zone) of plus-6. Williams was a minus-44, which is to say, the difference in the balls Damon caught and Williams didn't was worth 50 runs.

---

 

Can anyone shed some light on the 'Ultimate Zone Rating' thing? Never heard of it.

 

I assume that a '0' rating is average - meaning Bernie Williams costs the Yanks 44 runs because of his atrocious fielding. Ouch.

 

I wonder where a guy like Clark would be.

[dadofandrew]

UZR is, from what I've seen, an extreme stat. It always says players are worth or not worth far more than most folks feel D is worth. The example cited is often the case with it, so it seems likely it exaggerates the value of defense.

[pogokat]

it doesn't seem likely that bernie williams could have screwed up that many more chances...it doesn't seem like he would have had that many chances...it doesn't seem likely he would have stayed on the team...

 

al is right...those numbers are a bit too wacky for my tastes

[brettac1]

I doubt any system that says Johnny Damon is a "good" defensive player. Though I do think he'll be playing CF for the Yankees next year, replacing Bernie.

[endaround]

I see Damon as a Cub

[backup catchers]

To make defensive stats even more difficult than they already are it is impossible to determine how a pitcher reacts with a superior defense behind him. Seems to me pitching to contact is a little easier a sell to a pitcher if he has a great defense. But if it takes 10-20 points off an opponents ops and 10-15 rbi way it has to be worth something. As far as Krynzel goes if there is a good offense around him I think he would be worth it.