If you want love, you'll need a glove. (Defense 2010)

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

Rumors threads abound, as do roster building ones. How's about getting defensive, and talking some glovework? To start:

-- A nifty, straightforward primer from the Yahoo! gang about UZR, that mysterious zone-rating derivative that all the nerds are tossing around.

-- A tidy MLB.com article by Doug Miller about the growing adoption of defensive metrics by major league clubs, including last year's CF-infested Mariners.

(Also, there's a treat in the "Doing it the old-fashioned way" section... think of it as comfort news, if you're worried certain division rivals are getting too far ahead of our favorites, FO-wisdom-wise.)

SEATTLE -- With two World Series titles in the last six years and almost-yearly postseason appearances, the Boston Red Sox don't have much of a reason to take after the Seattle Mariners, who haven't made the playoffs since 2001. Then again, it's 2010, and things are changing in baseball. Take, for example, the growing importance of new defensive statistics, which the Mariners used last winter in overhauling their team. Seattle traded for outfielders Franklin Gutierrez and Endy Chavez and ended up improving their overall defense so much that they went from an American League-worst 61-101 record in 2008 to an 85-77 campaign last year, the biggest improvement in the Majors, despite scoring fewer runs than they did in '08. The Red Sox paid attention and realized that to once again catch fire in October, they'll have to get better at catching the ball. So after thinking seriously about bringing back Jason Bay or signing Matt Holliday, the Sox instead spent their dollars on D. Boston laid out warm welcomes for Marco Scutaro, Adrian Beltre and Mike Cameron, and defensive stats are gaining traction every day with Red Sox general manager Theo Epstein, Seattle GM Jack Zduriencik and a growing number of executives. They might not have the same ring to them as traditional baseball stats like ERA and RBI, and they might take a lot longer to explain, but Ultimate Zone Rating (UZR), Defensive Runs Saved (DRS), Plus/Minus (+/-) and Probabilistic Model of Range (PMR) are all making more and more teams show serious love for the glove. Shopping around for value When GM Bill Bavasi was let go by the Mariners and Zduriencik took over last winter, the new GM brought along Tony Blengino as a special adviser. One of Blengino's main tasks, through his position at the helm of the team's first official department of statistical analysis, was to look for some way, any way, to make the most of a limited budget on an unsuccessful roster saddled with hefty contracts not set to expire for another year. "I think the first thing you're trying to do when you take over a team like we did is look at the big picture," Blengino says. "It's pretty simplee. How are you going to get good? "Looking at our ballclub, our ballpark, looking at [staff ace] Felix Hernandez, we felt that we were closer to being a pretty good run-prevention team than we were a run-scoring team. Big-name players are very costly, but sometimes you can come across impact players of the defensive sort a little more easily in the marketplace." The Mariners entered a multi-team trade with vaunted closer J.J. Putz as their main chip and wound up with Gutierrez from the Indians and Chavez from the Mets. Both were relatively inexpensive, Gutierrez was young and under team control, and the results were staggering right away. "With Ichiro [suzuki] in right, Gutierrez in center and Chavez in left, we had three center fielders in the outfield. We thought, 'Well, at least we're good at something now, and it was something that was doable without spending a lot of money.'" The Mariners also had one outstanding glove on the infield with Beltre at third base, and by the end of the team's turnaround campaign, the UZR system featured on FanGraphs.com not only ranked them as the best defensive team in the game, but also pegged Gutierrez as the best individual defender in all of baseball. The Mariners continue to go in this direction, too. Since last July, they've added plus gloves in first baseman Casey Kotchman, shortstop Jack Wilson and third baseman Chone Figgins. And Boston is right there with this logic. "Unless something goes wrong, we really should be one of the best run-prevention teams," Epstein said recently in explaining the acquisitions of Cameron, Beltre and Scutaro, not to mention starter John Lackey. "If we just went out and addressed the offense, I think we would have had a really bad run-prevention year, putting a subpar defense behind a pitching staff with some holes in it." Getting in the zones One of the pioneers of these stats, "The Fielding Bible" author John Dewan, says it all seems complex, but it isn't. Dewan's main stats, the DRS metric and Plus/Minus, are the result of logical data culled from comprehensive, painstaking attention to detail throughout a Major League season. Simply put, Dewan's company, Baseball Info Solutions, has upwards of 2,000 "scouts" who pore over video of every game played in the course of a 162-game MLB season and track each batted ball, analyzing how hard the balls are hit, how close or far they are from each fielder deemed to be responsible for making the play, and the result of what said defender does. Many factors go into the point totals, including adjustments for things like stadium dimensions, wall height and even the occasional bonus points for home-run-saving catches. Successful plays are awarded with a positive point total, points are subtracted for perceived failures, and the scores are added up and equated to "runs saved" throughout a year. Dewan and most other defensive-stat purveyors tend to agree that 10 runs saved equals one win over the course of a season. "For Boston last year at third base, for example, Mike Lowell, who was unable to move well because of injury, cost them 20 runs, and now they have Adrian Beltre, and he added about 20 runs," Dewan explains. "Right there, the Red Sox have added four wins. Plus they've added three wins at short with Marco Scutaro and a couple more in the outfield with Mike Cameron. It's a huge improvement." UZR, developed by Mitchel Lichtman, is similar to DRS in its variables such as park adjustment, and to Dewan's Plus/Minus in the sense that its scores are based on how often each defensive player is better than average on balls hit into their specific "zones" on the field. Gutierrez, for example, led baseball with a UZR score of 29.1, while Aaron Rowand of the San Francisco Giants was one of the lowest-ranked center fielders in the game with a UZR of 1.3. "Gutierrez had as much to do with our success as anybody last year," Mariners manager Don Wakamatsu said. "He made our outfield better, he made our pitching staff better, he made our whole club better." For Dewan, Lichtman and David Pinto, who came up with the similar PMR metric, watching the Mariners improve by 24 games gave strong evidence that these stats are legit and the old methods of ranking defense, fielding percentage and range factor, are becoming antiquated. Doing it the old-fashioned way Not everyone pays attention to these numbers, of course. While teams such as the Mariners, Red Sox and Detroit Tigers, who improved greatly on defense in 2009, peruse and subscribe to these stats, some teams still just won't buy them -- literally or figuratively. "I think defensive statistics are the most unpredictable stats there are," says Charley Kerfeld, a former big league reliever who now serves as a special assistant to Phillies GM Ruben Amaro Jr. "And since I've been here, we don't have an in-house stats guy and I kind of feel we never will. We're not a statistics-driven organization by any means. "I'm not against statistics. Everybody has their own way of doing things. But the Phillies believe in what our scouts see and what our eyes tell us and what our people tell us." The results show that Philadelphia is doing something right, with two straight National League pennants and a World Series title in 2008. But Lichtman points out that the Phillies could be even better if they focus more on defense. "Look, a team can be a very good team even if they're bad on defense," Lichtman says. "And a team can be a bad team even if they're great on defense. "That said, scouts do a pretty good job of evaluating defense. The best you can do is use the numbers like UZR or Dewan's Plus/Minus plus the scouts. A combination of the two seems to be the best." Catching the wave So where does it all go from here? Onward and upward for the stat-makers, who are refining their numbers with new wrinkles such as the timing of each batted ball to determine how long each potential out stays in the air. "We're calling them liners and fly balls, and we even have a category for balls hit that are in-between," Dewan says. "We call those 'fliners.'" Dewan also said his company is measuring misplays and good plays. "There are tons of plays that are clearly defensive misplays that no one notices, like missing the cutoff man and allowing a runner to take an extra base. It's not an error, per se, but we're giving them a defensive misplay. "And if a first baseman makes a great scoop of a throw in the dirt, he gets credit for a good play. We have 54 different categories of misplays and 27 in good plays. "It's all part of trying to get to where the hitters and pitchers are with stats. We need about another 20 percent and we'll be there." As far as the open market for players is concerned, Dewan says Boston's recent splurge on expensive leather might jack up the value of defense even more. "Now you have a big-market team doing it," Dewan says. "Now it's going to be adopted, no question. Teams are going to think, 'If it works for Boston, it should work for us.' "And that's great to see."

[Fman99]

You should wear a glove, even if she doesn't insist. Best way to keep your gear from rotting off.

Oh wait, what?

[Chad ochoseis]

Thanks for posting this. I've never seen an explanation of UZR that went beyond "it's this really great statistical like metric that's better than fielding percentage."

It's not bad, but...

The Yahoo article wrote: Using run expectancy charts, these rates can be converted to runs.

In a nutshell, that's the problem I have with most of the more advanced stats. There's usually some kind of proprietary (or not readily available) methodology underlying all the rigor. Without knowing what a run expectancy chart is - I mean, knowing how it's calculated, not just knowing that it's the "expected run value of hits in zone X" - I can't judge how relevant UZR is.

The boring old school fielding and batting metrics have flaws, but they have the advantage of being completely accessible, so that you can mentally correct for the flaws however you choose. With UZR, you've just got to trust the smart guys who put together the methodology.

Simply put, Dewan's company, Baseball Info Solutions, has upwards of 2,000 "scouts" who pore over video of every game played in the course of a 162-game MLB season and track each batted ball, analyzing how hard the balls are hit, how close or far they are from each fielder deemed to be responsible for making the play, and the result of what said defender does.

This isn't really a statistical method at all, then - just scouting gone wild. Nice, though I've got to wonder about those 2000 "scouts," where Dewan found them, and how well they know the game.

Fman99 wrote: You should wear a glove, even if she doesn't insist. Best way to keep your gear from rotting off.

You can put the boy in Utah, but you can't put the Utah into the boy.

[Guest Edgy DC]

I'd just rather things weren't converted into runs, and then to wins from there, as if X amount of runs equals a win --- but rather the performance was converted to wins directly.

S drive to rightt with the winning run on first and one out in the ninth, the fielder pulls up to play it on a hop. If the same hit comes with the winning run on third, he dives with all his might, but the performance is scored as if the situation is the same. A simialr effect may come into play with a fielder guarding the line, giving up more singles in exchange for fewer doubles.

It seems miniscule, but I don't think it is, particularly in the case of late-inning defensivive replacements, for whom each decision is that sort of high-leverage choice. I guess the implact of a pinch hitter or a relief pitcher is analogous.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

CHAD: That's the primary issue I have with UZR too, Ocho. The idea is that it's an defensive stat that corresponds nicely with the "Runs Created" offensive stat (of Jamesian origin) to give a neat total picture of the player in full. Not seeing behind the curtain/being able to check the math is a pain, but as long as the run values are constant, we can-- theoretically-- trust their results within the system itself; the numbers may at worst be inaccurate but precise, and thus okay for comparing UZR to UZR.

And Dewan's +/- depends on data collection/production via people's subjective interpretation of actual events... like virtually every other stat/measurement/decision on a ballfield-- going all the way down to hit/error or pitching-win decisions by team scorers and ball/strike calls. As far as the "scouting," they're basically playing, rewinding, playing again, and recording play result--in essence, it's "line drive 10 feet from fielder caught for out" x 10000. And while they probably couldn't tell you what a winning clubhouse smells like, I'd venture that each of those scouts probably watches more baseball than your average BBWAA writer.

EDGE: Without translating first to a run value, approximating wins either becomes infinitely more difficult/convoluted or it grows more arbitrary than assignation of traditional pitcher-wins.

As far as context goes, well... no, that's not really covered here. But just as offensive rate stats tell you about general offensive prowess but don't tell you much about relative weight of PAs, these metrics aim at telling you about the player's skill in general, not how he does situationally. Similarly, as the offensive stats don't tell you about swing mechanics, +/- and UZR don't tell you how much of the results are due to bad paths, or good positioning, or PlasticMan arms.

There are other stats that attempt to and do a better job at depicting the difficulty/importance of performance in context (Win Percentage Added being the big one). But, conversely, those don't do so well at telling you about the player as much as about the game/games.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

From the Patrick Flood blog-- purveyor of last week's David Wright Week-- it's a squinty, smart-cum-smartassy look at Dabidrye's defensive travails. A sample:

When David Wright came up in 2004, both defensive evaluation systems, UZR and +/-, agreed that he was an above-average fielder for his half season. David followed up that effort by achieving below-average defensive marks in both 2005 and 2006, then above-average marks in 2007 and 2008. The roller coaster came back down again in 2009 when David registered a -10.4 UZR and -13 Runs Saved, which are Luis Castillo levels of defensive ineptness. The poor defense combined with a power blackout is how a 7.4 WAR player becomes a 3.4 WAR player in just one year.

[Ceetar]

Doesn't the article sorta contridict itself a little with talking up defensive stats and then mentioning the Phillies have no interest in stats whatsoever? (which doesn't surprise me.)

And if this is the case, and the Phillies obviously played above their heads defensively last year (Howard may be genuine improvement, but Ibanez?) and the supposed downgrade of defense with Polanco, aren't they in for a regression to ~87 or so wins?

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

I don't think the article is arguing FOR anything in particular, apart from merely raising the facts that:

1) Many more teams are focusing on newer defensive metrics in player evaluation and team-building, and

2) Some teams-- the Mariners and Rays being two good recent examples-- have found it a smart way to build a contending team on the cheap (as defense is still less properly valued than it should be).

That the Phils don't focus on newer metrics doesn't mean that they're ignoring defense, nor does it mean that they won't have players who look good on said metrics.

(And didja catch who's speaking for them these days? That's the real treat!)

[Guest Edgy DC]

Let's look at defense:

c: BlancoSantos (journeymen who can fairly be described as fair, but it takes a dose of charity to elevate them to average)

1b: Murphy (muffy), Carter (described as indifferent at any position), or Delgado (old and gimpy)

2b: Castillo (Once good, now old, gimpy, and coming off a season of terrible metrics and one wretched lowlight-film drop)

3b: Wright (Sometimes excellent, often erratic)

ss: Reyes (rangey, strong-armed, and creative, but unpolished and coming off a mysterious leg injury and surgery)

ut: Cora (probably fair at all three infield slots, maybe able to achieve averageness when healthy, probably not), Hernandez (has always looked good, but his metrics always look bad)

lf: Bay (below average)

cf: Beltran (excellent when healthy, but coming off a career-risking leg injury/operation), or Pagan (probably average, makes some bad reads but some acrobatic catches too)

rf: Francoeur (could be anywhere --- average-ish with a cannon of an arm, but over-aggressive throwing gave him terrible metrics last year)

How do you feel about this defense? Will it be a minor issue? A hewage one? What do you propose be done?

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

I'd guess it won't be the worst in the league, but I'm afraid that over the course of the long season it's likely to cost us a few games.

That and Jerry's passive offensive gameplan will be hard to overcome, I think.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

PSST!

[Guest Edgy DC]

Sorry, all merged.

[smg58]

Outfield defense is a BIG worry. Beltran is out at least a month and may be compromised when he gets back. With Bay, you hope he hits well enough so that people don't notice his fielding. Francoeur's arm may cancel out his below-average range, or it may not. Pagan will be average in center, which may or may not be good enough to make up for the corners. I think Citi will be a much bigger issue for outfield defense than for hitting home runs.

The infield depends a lot on Reyes. Cora and Castillo aren't the plus defenders they used to be, and Wright is up and down. Murphy is better than his rep, assuming he starts at first. I think we'll be average at least in the infield if Jose stays healthy, but I wouldn't get excited about it.

So yeah, I'm worried, especially with Beltran out.

[nymr83]

Its easy to notice someone pulling a Knoblauch and hitting Keith Olberman's mom in the stands with an errant throw, but bad range is probably a much bigger culprit in bad defenses over the course of a season and it is much harder to spot.

[Guest Edgy DC]

Except that Knoblauch's actual throw was symptomatic of a broader issue of erratic throws.

Now, replacing F-Bomb with Sarge, Jr. --- that's not sending us in the right direction.

[Frayed Knot]

An extra outfielder who allows them to keep Fernando starting everyday in Buffalo for at least a half-season is a good thing.

[Guest Edgy DC]

Oh, understood. I'm just using this thread to look at the acquisition through a defense-first prism, if not a defense-only one.

If Jr. displaces Carter, he improves the team's defense (though maybe cuts down on the versatility). If he replaces Martinez (more likely, I think), he does not.

[smg58]

If Martinez can't start right now, he's not making the team out of ST regardless. Carter will likely still have a place on the bench, though. It will be interesting to see what happens when Beltran comes back. It's certainly possible that Carter can outperform Matthews, and extremely likely that Pagan will. Would the Mets be OK DFAing Matthews at that point if it comes to that?

[Ceetar]

My impressions of Bay is that he's basically average range (and does that translate to below average at citi? who knows..) but is solid within that range. He's used to the off the wall shot which is helpful in Citi (and is something Tatis and Sheffield were abysmal at). I think Pagan's fairly decent, he's obviously no Beltran, but who is? I'm not going to worry about 'what if' he doesn't come back with full range right now, and assume he will by May 1st.

I think Reyes will be okay, range/speed wise, and I think Castillo gets a bit of a bad rap in the range regard, but having Reyes up to snuff with his range and Murphy's actually got good range, he just has to learn more what's outside his range right now.

Something I haven't heard anyone really bring up in regards to the Mets infield defense last year was their placement. Is it possible that whoever is in charge of positioning them was doing a bad job of it? Could they have moved Castillo more towards first, figuring Murphy would need the help, which would cause more balls to shoot through the middle?

[batmagadanleadoff]

Edgy DC wrote: How do you feel about this defense? Will it be a minor issue? A hewage one? What do you propose be done?

I was going to write that the Mets could dim the lighting by about 10% whenever the other team bats. This way the visitors would strike out more and more K's means less worrying about our fielders on account of there'd be less batted balls to catch. But then I realized that it might be even harder to field the ones that are batted because of the more darkness --the Mets might lose out on that deal. So I don't know anymore. What about darker by 40%? And if anyone complains about the dark, I figure that they could play that Rick Astley song, only really really loud and then no one would hear all the griping about the 40% darker. Besides, they'd probably start to complain about Astley and forget about the darkness. Plus, Fred can always say that it's another Ebbets Field tribute -- 1950's style lighting. Honoring the Brooklyn Dodgers means never having to say you're sorry. Also, I won a Strat O Matic tournament a long time ago (First Place!!!) by drafting mostly Home Run Hitters who also walked a lot. I had the most "4" fielders but I still won running away. Mariano Duncan was my shortstop and his backup was even worse -- this in an All-Star League. I was the last team to draft a shortstop because I went instead for the power hitters. I had Pedro Guerrero who couldn't stop a beach ball but no one raked like Petey did back then -- and against righties too. Fielding's overrated when you can outhomer your opponent by a lot. You can't catch a Home Run. So if Luis Castillo hits a Home Run for every error he makes, I think we'll be okay. We could also use some better fielders.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

The reviled Patrick Flood-- who, again, has been doing some generally fine work over in NascentBlogLand presents a graphic representation of John Dewan's +/- numbers for our likely starting OF for the first two months of the season. Learning is fun!

[Guest Edgy DC]

That's a lot of fun, and I like that he acknowledges that there's guesswork involved and that it's a work in progress.

[Frayed Knot]

What he said about Francoeur: "... looks to have averagey range, but the arm bumps him into the above average group.", is about the way I would have put it just from observation.

And I wonder again if Fenway helped to "rob" Bay of some of his 'going back' range - particularly since he mentions that it used to be somewhat of a strength of his.

[smg58]

Bay's defensive numbers were better last year (at least according to the Fielding Bible) than the previous two. Perhaps he's made some adjustments, or perhaps he benefited from having less ground to cover in Fenway. I guess we'll find out soon enough.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

I'd prefer Wally Backman working with him on second base footwork, but this does pique the interest:

In a report for Newsday, David Lennon says Daniel Murphy will work with Keith Hernandez on defense at first base this season.

[Guest Edgy DC]

I'd prefer Doug Flynn working with him on second base footwork.

I have to say that reading the amount of irrational hate and vitriol published in blog comments gets me depressed for hours at a time.

[Benjamin Grimm]

The simple answer is, don't read that stuff! I know you've tuned out WFAN (as I have) so I know you can do this as well.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

You know that friend/acquaintance/relative of yours who likes movies and shares his/her opinions on the same eagerly, but has pretty damn close to the opposite taste as you? And how it's gotten to the point where you use his/her opinion as a counter-recommendation in choosing what movie to see?

I have the same tack when weighing Metsblog comments regarding Metly developments.

[Ceetar]

I can't stay away, it's like a train wreck.

I don't listen to WFAN at work anymore, at least until it's really baseball season then maybe..but I prefer talk so I tune in for my commute. Sometimes I think I'd be better driving in silence. (Of course, then I'd hear all the bad noises my car is making)

[Benjamin Grimm]

I've been WFAN-free for nearly five years now, and I've lost count of how many brain cells have regenerated.