Quote: Originally posted by schedule1 on 3/17/2010check out seattle and vancouver in ruth league. both teams have historically struggled, but this year they're 50-39 and 53-36, respectively. they have 57 and 58 plus plays respectively, and 5 minus plays each.
mike's right, though: defense is a commodity just like everything else.

I think we can find examples on both sides. I have a team that in the last 4 seasons won 92, 87, 88, and 86 and after abandoning any defense I might of had for offense I am now 60-31 at the All Star Break.. I said hell with defense this season and moved my 3rd Basemen to 2nd Base, played my below average defensive but better Offensive SS full time. I believe every position has a poor defensive player in comparison to others around the league at his position, and it shows with my 6 plus plays and 49 minus plays at the All Star break. Even my Starting pitching is poor and I would say none of my SP is a top 2 quality pitcher type.

I kept waiting too lose but I kept waiting, I even chose to bring up a CF to the majors I had planned on keeping 1 more season in the minors because I felt I could win now.

I obviously believe that good defense is better than poor defense, I am just saying that I am moving into the camp that a 50 PC Catcher who can hit is better than a 80 PC catcher who can't hit, or a 70 Range 2nd basemen who can hit, is better than a 90 range 2nd basemen that is a mediocre hitter.

Quote: Originally Posted By MikeT23 on 3/17/2010
How so? The average 3B makes 3 plays per game. His LH 3B made 2.26.

Plays not made by player A aren't made by player B. They end up as something. What do you think it is?

Wait, don't tell me. Not made by A and not made by B but something else? Hmmmmmm, I got it! "Past the diving."

Quote: Originally Posted By erffdogg on 3/17/2010no. don't watch tv since they canceled firefly

Same here erff....although I just boycott Fox....like that was a major loss anyway.

Quote: Originally posted by MikeT23 on 3/17/2010How so?   The average 3B makes 3 plays per game.  His LH 3B made 2.26.Plays not made by player A aren't made by player B.   They end up as something.  What do you think it is?

I just showed an example where one player had a range factor of 3.94 but was clearly a worse defender than another with a range factor of 3.24.

There's way too many other variables in range factor for it to be even close to reliable. And besides, when you already have putouts, assists, errors, (+), and (-), why would you even use range factor? The other stats can get you a much better approximation for runs saved compared to average.

Besides, there is something logically wrong with any fielding stat that shows a guy allowed 100 extra hits compared to what an average fielder would do. That doesn't even make sense.

Quote: Originally posted by MikeT23 on 3/17/2010How so?   The average 3B makes 3 plays per game.  His LH 3B made 2.26.Plays not made by player A aren't made by player B.   They end up as something.  What do you think it is?

Not enough information.

The average 3B makes 3 plays per game out of how many chances? If player A has a flyball/strikeout staff, there may have only been 2.5 chances a game for that position. In a case like that, 2.26 RF might be very good.

Using Range Factor in isolation can produce meaningless results.

No one is using them in isolation. Obviously a team full of strikeout pitchers provides less opportunities for 3B putouts as does a team full of flyball pitchers. But, all things being equal(which they are not and I really, really didn't think I had to be that detailed), a guy making 2 plays per game is giving up 162 more hits per season than a guy making 3 plays per game.

But they're not equal, and you know they're not equal. They're not even close to equal. In Capra 15 (whose regular season just ended), team GB/FB ratios ranged from 1.39 to 0.96. K/9 ranged from 7.17 to 5.98. Both of those ranges are much wider than RF variances. Range factor by itself is meaningless noise. Saying things like "My guess is your LH 3B allowed 100+ extra baserunners." is wrong, because it can't be determined just from range factor.

This game's based on ratings. Use the ratings, not the statistics.

Do you understand baseball? Follow the game, maybe? Please list all LH 3B currently in MLB. Then list all previous 3B in MLB history.

I don't care what the ratings are for his LH 3B. His LH 3B is making about .75 plays less per game than the average 3B. Now you can say "But their GB/FB was different and K rates are different and the flux capacitor was broken" but, at the end of the day, if the LH 3B is making .75 less plays than the average 3B, it really has nothing to do with groundballs, strikeouts and flux capacitors. He's LH and he's making a lot less plays than you'd expect from a 3B. Because he shouldn't be playing 3B.

What part of that do you find objectionable?

To put it another way, in my 60ish seasons of HBD, thirdbaseman, for all teams, average a little over 3 plays per game. It's just a fact. If a player is way below that average, there's a reason for it and it likely has very little to do with a pitching staff.

Quote: Originally posted by MikeT23 on 3/18/2010To put it another way, in my 60ish seasons of HBD, thirdbaseman, for all teams, average a little over 3 plays per game.  It's just a fact.   If a player is way below that average, there's a reason for it and it likely has very little to do with a pitching staff.

I agree with you about -handed thirdbaseman. I think most people realize there's a serious cost to playing a -handed player at 3B/SS/2B even if some people (aka me, on 2 separate occasions) are dumb enough to not check and put -handed players in those spots.

However, it is quite possible for a player to have a very depressed (it would seem improbable to be under 3 at 3B though) range factor while still being well-above average in the field.

My main point is that, now that the fielding engine has been updated and (+) and (-) plays are much more prevalent, why use range factor at all? I would argue that plus/minus and fielding percentage tell you all you need to know about a player's fielding effectiveness and range factor is nothing better than a muddled approximation of what you already know.

Because RF is a quick "How does my guy compare to the world?" reference. As I said, there are many, many factors at play but, if a play is way off the world average in RF, he has a problem of some sort. If a guy is a couple of +/- plays ahead/behind the world average, it don't think it indicates much at all. That said, fielding percentage is another quick reference guide.

In short, it may take half a season for a problem to expose itself using +/- but RF/Fldg% will show up quickly.

To each his own, I suppose.

Sounds like you agree that it could take awhile for +/- plays to manifest itself as a problem spot.

Quote: Originally posted by MikeT23 on 3/19/2010Sounds like you agree that it could take awhile for +/- plays to manifest itself as a problem spot.

No doubt. But I tend to trust ratings and I feel like I have a reasonable idea how the fielding ratings work. So, realistically, I'm not going to look at any stats after 30 games and make decisions based on that.

It's more of a situation where I'm looking at league-wide stats at the end of the year and, by then, +/- is going to be fine.

I tend to trust ratings also. And I'm sure crabby trusts ratings also. However, I think all of us sometimes misread/misinterpret ratings. In this case, I think crabby did because he didn't think his LH 3B was harming his team. However, a quick check of RF would have told him "Whoa, wait a cotton-pickin' minute here. My guy is way off the league average!" And I believe that would have been very early into his "experiment".