I didn't vote for him and it's ok that he didn't get much support but trust me, keep an eye on Brice Turang. "Faster than that" (ok, not quite THAT fast), defensive wizard, and coming around at the plate. He's gonna have a very good career.
Joc Peterson plays for the DBacks, not the Cubs. And no Corbin Carroll option for best NL CF??? Jeez, we made it to the World Series last season, y’all
I could say something similar about my Mariner Julio Rodriguez, but frankly his offensive stats don't warrant it. If we are talking defense, that's another matter. Centerfield when he plays is definitely a.no fly zone. He even added something last week. With a runner on first the batter blooped a single into shallow center, except.....Julio came charging in and started to set up for the catch, glove and eyes up tracking the ball, except....the ball was uncatchable and hit 10-15 feet in front of him. He snatched the ball on the first bounce and fired to second, in time for the force out. The runner had fallen for the deke and taken a step or two back toward first, preventing him from getting to second ahead of the throw. Julio is also an excellent base stealer so maybe, just maybe if there is a player who has to back out, the AL manager will consider him as a defensive replacement/pinch runner.
I'm sorry, were we voting for the 2023 All Stars? NL CF is one of the weaker positions in the league as far as the top guys go, but still the 5 guys listed average 1.9 WAR and a 107 OPS+. Corbin Carroll has 0.3 WAR and a 78 OPS+. I wouldn't put him in if there were 10 choices this year.
Yes, yes... all of us in AZ know that Corbin is having a terrible year at the plate so far. It's actually a bit reminiscent of his July last year after he injured himself, so I wonder how healthy he is. And a 78 OPS+ has no business being in the ASG. But please let me note that Carroll is one of the NL's most exciting young players and the best base runner in the league. That's gotta be worth something!
Something, sure, but not an all star appearance. 23, bright future, If I were an AZ fan I would be glad to have him. But for whatever reason, this year he is JAG.
Yeah. And this year he is having a terrible year. I guess if you want to evaluate on prior year stats, but no way he belongs anywhere near the All Star game.
I hear you... but Joe specifically said that we get to vote for "best" and use our own judgment as to what "best" means. Sure, Corbin has only 2 HRs in 338 PAs, but he also has only 1 GIDP. I just hope CC gets himself going again...
Corbin had a little hot streak a couple weeks ago, so I even tried to bolster my argument by looking at his recent performance… ugh… he’s like 3/18 w no xBH in his last 5 games. Please enjoy first place up there in the Pacific NW!
Wouldn't that mean the NL was no longer playing baseball? Are we aspiring to become the Nippon Professional Baseball Central League? If you feel that way, you should also lobby for the Cubs to get of their lights and return to day baseball only at home. Why stop there? Make the Red Sox remove the seats in left field above the Green Monster. Heck, we could even go back to 50 foot pitching mound with underhand pitching and the batter calling for pitch up or down.
I must be the stupidest baseball fan on this blog. I had to look up who the hell Heliot Ramos was. Does everybody here know every damn player in both leagues?
Welcome to my world. I tend not to watch the NL as closely as the AL. Apparently he has had a very good half of a half season (after being called up May 8, 2024). If he's leading in WAR at 2.4 (per Baseball Reference) then this is an off year for NL outfielders
I won't get into Hunter Greene vs Chris Sale, but WAR for pitchers is weird because, as you noted it tries to separate defense from pitching and there's not really agreement on how to do that or what it even means. ERA doesn't really do that given we long ago stopped handing out errors for plays not made only the most egregious drops, muffs, and kicks. And we never gave errors for plays a poor fielder simply never got to.
Say it's one out and the bases are loaded. The pitcher gives up a rocket into the left-center field gap. Is this a good thing or a bad thing? Does it matter if the CF makes an incredible diving catch and doubles the runner off second to end the inning or if the ball splits the fielders for a bases clearing double? Or consider a line drive hit 110 MPH and whether the SS gloves it on a hop and turns a double play or it's a two run single?
Some measures of pitching and pitching WAR focus almost entirely on the outcome of the play -- the double play -- and not the outcome of the pitch -- an absolute rocket off the bat -- which is the only part the pitcher actually controls.
Interesting. Fangraphs has data like "Barrel %" and "hard hit %", and batted ball data like "soft %" and "hard %." I would assume someone analyzed these values in combination with K's & BB's. We do have K's, BB's and HR's, which is part of FIP and I believe FIP completely ignores balls in play. I would think someone could include these other batted ball values to get some more refined data.
So bWAR brings you to some interesting places. Look at the 1973 AL MVP voting, which Reggie Jackson won unanimously. According to bWAR, Bobby Grich had a slightly stronger season. Now I grant you Grich was significantly underrated in his time and I understand why some people think he's a borderline Hall of Famer, although I would still lean against him on that. But it's still hard for me to understand how Jackson can have a better average and a better OBP and a much better slugging percentage and still finish behind Grich.
Reggie actually led the league in runs scored, home runs, RBI, slugging percentage and OPS. Sounds like an MVP to me. Obviously Oakland wasn't a great place to hit, either. (I don't think Grich was helped by his home park either, though I'm not positive about that.)
Obviously Bobby was an excellent defender and he also played a few more games than Reggie; the first thing helps a lot, the second thing helps a little bit. But my instinct tells me that they're just not evaluating defense correctly. It's getting too much credit here. Again, I understand what an underrated joy Bobby Grich was. I just don't think he was the best player in the American League in 1973 (or that close to it), and I think you'd have a hard time finding anybody who held that thought, either.
It is actually pretty easy to see, if you think about how WAR is done. First, it is a counting stat, so playing "a few more games" makes a difference. Grich had over 11% more PAs. This is a significant difference. I tend to think of things in runs, rather than trying to convert them to wins. If he had as many PAs as Grich had, he would have created 21 more runs offensively in that amount of PAs. But in reality, he only created 9.5 more.
Then you have to think about the arbitrary positional adjustment. The difference between 2nd base and right field is about 10 runs in a full season. (Though the numbers used are slightly different, Fangraphs WAR has a 10 run difference per season as well) Whether you agree with the arbitrary positional adjustments or not, it is definitely a part of WAR. Also, just from a different perspective, Grich touched about 3 times as many fielded balls and was involved in 3.5 times the outs, so you can see that a 2nd baseman might affect the game more.
Because Reggie didn't play all the games, their difference is only about 9.5 runs. Now they are equal as far as runs go. Probably still less than equal in WAR, because there are more PAs for the "replacement" player to be subtracted from Bobby's total as well.
Once you get to this point, it is pretty easy to see Bobby as the better player, because you haven't even gotten to defensive prowess yet. Grich was an excellent fielder having perhaps his career year in the field. Jackson was around average as a right fielder in his career, probably a touch below in 1973.
When you look at it that way, it is almost impossible to believe that Grich wouldn't end up with the higher WAR. (Fangraphs, who some would say underestimates defense with the exception of overrating modern catchers, also has Grich higher, 7.8-7.1)
Also, no offense, but if you are that Scott Pianowski, then you are pretty much hard wired to evaluate players from a purely offensive level. It is your job. You do it probably 365 days a year, or close to that. You probably ignore defense completely 95% of the time. Maybe it comes into play every once in a while when a evaluating future playing time for a mediocre or bench player whose defense is either so good he will play more, or so bad that he might play less. So underrating defense is probably naturally a by product of this.
Interesting stuff. I definitely don't ignore defense, I just hold a healthy amount of skepticism on defensive metrics. And I'll continue to do that. Good thread.
But, because there's so much focus on offensive achievement, especially in the 20th century, we don't even begin to grasp how much more valuable a strong defensive 2B is than a decent RF. If we (and by "we" I mean fans and media) focused on defense, the thought would be Grich is an elite 2B, having an amazing year and probably the second best defensive player in baseball behind his teammate Belanger. Sure Reggie hit a ton, but there's no way hitting could make up the gap between that and a corner OF.
It's the same argument we'd have today around Betts (if healthy). As a passable SS there's no way a 1B/DH/OF could make up that gap with the bat.
That all said, Grich's 1973 defensive numbers seem fluky and perhaps a limitation of the metrics of 50 years ago. In the seasons prior and just after he was worth 1.5-2 wins on defense but in 1973 he was worth nearly FOUR wins.
Another problem is that Reggie's defensive value is just that. The things he did in right field stand on their own. With any 2B or SS, their value is bound to be affected by their partner. So if they are playing with a Gold Glove partner that likely gives a favorable bump to their rating. In fact , throw in a Gold Glove 1B and it might help even more. John Olerud had that effect on our Mariner infielders when he played here. Remember the poe, Tinker to Evans to Chance? Put an average player in with any of the other two and the poem may have never been written.
I think that things like MVP discussions bring out some of the weaknesses of WAR. The fact is that just about every team, even taking into account the value of defense, would take 1973 Reggie over 1973 Grich. The reason being that, if you were building a team, neither one of them would be replaced in the line up by a "replacement" player. Is it unreasonable to think that you could replace them with an average player? I understand the reasoning behind WAR, but the fact is the "next man up" for any given position is almost never a replacement level player.
I don't quite get your argument here. You seem to be saying Reggie over Grich because you can't actually get a replacement level player if you lose either of them?
I agree with your point there, and would go further to say that an actual replacement might be better in RF than at 2nd. Every team has a corner OF guy (or two) that plays quite a bit, and chances are they are a better hitter than the minor league guy or utility guy (jack of all trades, master of none, usually) that would be the replacement guy at 2nd. I might also argue that since there will be a drop off offensively for either guy, with the probably better hitter in RF making up for Reggie's advantage there, it may actually be harder to replace the elite defense of Grich.
In the real world, I would say arguing that the guys replacing them would be better than the fictional replacement player leans towards Grich rather than away from him.
I know Judge and Rutschman are objectively better, but I voted for Duran and Wong here anyway because I’m a Sox fan and the official All-Star voting underrated them so much that a corrective is needed
Hey Joe! Wondered if you'd noticed that the Mets pitched to Aaron Judge with the bases loaded the other night, even though it would have been smarter to walk him. They were up 9-3 in the 7th or 8th and with Gleyber Torres hitting cleanup (?), I thought for sure they'd issue the IBB, and yeah, walk in a run, but theyd still have a 5 run lead and a comparatively easy out in Torres.
I checked later and it turns out that Torres has about the same ~600ish OPS both overall this year and, believe it or not, for his career with the bases juiced. It's easily his worst OPS in terms of baserunner situations, and about 150 points below his career OPS.
So of course Judge hit a grand slam, making it 9-7, but the Mets won anyway so it didn't get much attention. I dunno if the Mets manager did it because he thought it woukd be the most entertaining thing for the fans, or (much more likely) because he figured they could weather the worst case scenario, which they did. But it was gratifying to see regardless.
This is results based thinking. Judge did the worst possible thing that could have happened, and it is something that he does more than anyone else. So it is natural to think that Torres, the easier out, would be worth giving up a run to get to.
It is not. Even using Judge's extreme numbers, the result from the average of his PAs is 0.84 runs in that situation, and also you only have to face the next hitter 43.2% of the time. If you walk him the average run output is 1 run, and then you have to face that guy every time. Torres average at his rate would be scoring 0.5 runs, so you can tack that on to run you already let in. You get the out 70.5% of the time, but the best case scenario is you let up only 1 run, and you still have to face the next guy 29.5% of the time. If you pitch to Judge, you face the third guy only 12.7% of the time. And so on, and so on, and so on.
I don't see where you're getting Judge out 70.5% of the time there. He's hitting almost.
400 in June, with a ~.500 OBP. he's a career .324 hitter with the bases loaded, .389 OBP. He's hotting .336 at home this year with an OBP of almost .500, so that single run is basically a coin flip, without factoring in that Reed Garrett has a career ERA over 5 (though admittedly much lower this year) and that he walks a batter about every other inning.
So yes, Judge makes an out in that situation slightly more than half the time, but when he doesn't he's going to cost you at least one, maybe multiple runs.
Of course Torres is capable of hitting the ball out too, and maybe the insult of having Judge intentionally walked to force in a run to face him with the bases juiced is just the kind of fire he needs lit under his butt. Who knows? The Mets would still have had the lead, either way, but to me seemed a lot less likely to blow it facing Torres.
Like I said, I assume they judged that they could deal with the worst case scenario, especially in a game in mid June. But I wonder if the opposition handles that situation differently in a playoff game.
The 70.5% was Torres. Judge was 56.8% (You only have to face the next hitter 43.2% of the time - line two, paragraph 2) The 70.5% was in the situation you brought up where you walked Judge, and on average gave up more runs (1 when you walked Judge, 0.5 from Torres, and so on) than if you faced Judge to begin with and gave 0.84. The other percentages was how many times you had to face whoever came up after Torres. 29.5% of the time if you walk Judge, only 12.7% if you pitch to him.
I definitely took in Judge's stats into account. I did not factor in the pitcher, as he was going to be the same guy every way. Yes Judge is better (0.84 bases loaded runs, gets on 43.2% of the time) than Torres (0.5 bases loaded runs, gets on 29.5% of the time.) So you give up an average of 1.5 runs through the first batter you choose to face if you walk him, (with a floor of one) and 0.84 if you pitch to Judge. (With a floor of 0). Also, yes, I factored in every single thing a guy can do, and the percentage of times he does it, (this year only) and even factored in the percentage chance that two runs would score in a single, or 3 on a double. (Using leaguewide percentages - I did not bother to look up who the runners were)
Being from KC I know this seems like I am a homer (and maybe you are right) BUT Bobby Witt Jr is the best shortstop in baseball. Statistically he is the best defensively, the fastest runner, most hits in the AL, and super fun to watch. I know the last one is silly but I do think it counts for something in the All Star game.
Sorry dude, I am from KC also and I voted for Witt because Royals. He is having a great season, there is no doubt about that, but Gunnar is having a better one, also no doubt.
Yes, Witt leads the league in hits. But Gunnar has reached base 10 more times and has more total bases with less hits. BWJ has a 147 OPS+, Gunnar is at 187. BWJ is faster. He has only grounded into 2 double plays. Gunnar has 0. Bobby has 9 more steals - but he has also made 6 more outs on the basepaths, which is not a good ratio. (In fact, overall he has made 16 more outs in 2 less PAs) BWJ has a +4 DRS in the field. Gunnar is +5.
Gunnar lead in rWAR 6.1 to 4.3. He leads if fWAR 6.0 to 4.6. I do a thing where I take a players runs created/saved above average, combining offense, defense and baserunning (Eschewing the fictional replacement player and not trying to convert runs to wins.) BWJ is an outstanding 31.5 runs above average. Gunnar is +44.
I love me some Bobby, and he is having a great year. But Gunnar is having an historically great one. Not only is he the best SS in the AL, but he would get my vote for AL MVP for the first half.
I would've agreed until I watched Henderson for a 3 game series just concluded. Next is a 4 game series with the Royals so my meaningless opinion could change. Both are really good.
I think there's way too much emphasis on who had the best 70-80 games to start the season vs. who is really the best player or the player we want to see (assuming it's not a washed-up 35 year old). Though in this case there's an argument that Henderson is both.
To paraphrase Bill James: “If they wanted, they could have the ‘Best First Halves by Mediocre Players Game’. They could play it in Cleveland every year.”
I do agree on this. It seems like every year there are guys at the end that we already wonder how they were all stars at mid season, and I'm not talking about the few token players from bad teams that don't actually have a legitimate one.
But the all star teams are kind of a nice mix, I think. You have some legacy guys that are getting in based on the past - which is fine, fans want to see them. You have guys having great first halves that may never be repeated, which is also fine. They get rewarded with an appearance for having the best stretch of their career. Those guys seem to really appreciate and enjoy their time.
Nowadays, you have replacement pitchers, that make the team when the other guy pitches too close to the break or something and their teams are scared that they will be injured by throwing an inning during 4 days off. (The contradiction between the babying and the max effort that is marching pitchers to surgeries cracks me up. Neither one is good for them)
Gone are the days when the leagues didn't play each other, the extra inning games they took seriously, and the home team in the World Series. Part of me missed the seriousness (as a guy who was around for that) but I have embraced the fun. It is a mix of guys having a good time, usually in some pretty ugly jerseys. (Even before Nike) It is not science.
Speaking of the home team for the Series, why not base it on whichever league wins the most interleague games in the season, now that they play 690 games between the leagues? Seems more fair than any other system, and maybe it brings a very small touch of league rivalry in the interleague games towards the end some years.
Nice to see Patrick Bailey getting some notice. Here's something on his pitch framing skills.
https://blogs.fangraphs.com/patrick-bailey-is-a-unicorn-pitch-framer/
Best centerfielder in the NL’s an interesting one. None of the other voting charts split anywhere near as equally and between 3 guys
Pos: I love your baseball blog. It keeps me on top of the goings-on in this extremely news-heavy business.
But then I read about your itinerary, with you doing football, movies and all. Aren't you afraid you'll spread yourself too thin?
Concerned friend in AZ
Hoping for a Minneapolis/ St. Paul stop!
I didn't vote for him and it's ok that he didn't get much support but trust me, keep an eye on Brice Turang. "Faster than that" (ok, not quite THAT fast), defensive wizard, and coming around at the plate. He's gonna have a very good career.
He's the 2nd base WAR leader in the NL. He's a joy to watch.
Joc Peterson plays for the DBacks, not the Cubs. And no Corbin Carroll option for best NL CF??? Jeez, we made it to the World Series last season, y’all
I could say something similar about my Mariner Julio Rodriguez, but frankly his offensive stats don't warrant it. If we are talking defense, that's another matter. Centerfield when he plays is definitely a.no fly zone. He even added something last week. With a runner on first the batter blooped a single into shallow center, except.....Julio came charging in and started to set up for the catch, glove and eyes up tracking the ball, except....the ball was uncatchable and hit 10-15 feet in front of him. He snatched the ball on the first bounce and fired to second, in time for the force out. The runner had fallen for the deke and taken a step or two back toward first, preventing him from getting to second ahead of the throw. Julio is also an excellent base stealer so maybe, just maybe if there is a player who has to back out, the AL manager will consider him as a defensive replacement/pinch runner.
I love plays like that! I’m still hoping Julio gets to the Acuna level. He is so fun
I'm sorry, were we voting for the 2023 All Stars? NL CF is one of the weaker positions in the league as far as the top guys go, but still the 5 guys listed average 1.9 WAR and a 107 OPS+. Corbin Carroll has 0.3 WAR and a 78 OPS+. I wouldn't put him in if there were 10 choices this year.
Yes, yes... all of us in AZ know that Corbin is having a terrible year at the plate so far. It's actually a bit reminiscent of his July last year after he injured himself, so I wonder how healthy he is. And a 78 OPS+ has no business being in the ASG. But please let me note that Carroll is one of the NL's most exciting young players and the best base runner in the league. That's gotta be worth something!
Something, sure, but not an all star appearance. 23, bright future, If I were an AZ fan I would be glad to have him. But for whatever reason, this year he is JAG.
Yep… sigh…
Yeah. And this year he is having a terrible year. I guess if you want to evaluate on prior year stats, but no way he belongs anywhere near the All Star game.
I hear you... but Joe specifically said that we get to vote for "best" and use our own judgment as to what "best" means. Sure, Corbin has only 2 HRs in 338 PAs, but he also has only 1 GIDP. I just hope CC gets himself going again...
And an OPS+ of 76. He'd fit right in with my Mariners this year. Which is a shame; he was electric last year. Hope he figures it out.
Corbin had a little hot streak a couple weeks ago, so I even tried to bolster my argument by looking at his recent performance… ugh… he’s like 3/18 w no xBH in his last 5 games. Please enjoy first place up there in the Pacific NW!
Seriously, the NL shouldn't have a DH.
Also, Manny Machado? FTG.
Wouldn't that mean the NL was no longer playing baseball? Are we aspiring to become the Nippon Professional Baseball Central League? If you feel that way, you should also lobby for the Cubs to get of their lights and return to day baseball only at home. Why stop there? Make the Red Sox remove the seats in left field above the Green Monster. Heck, we could even go back to 50 foot pitching mound with underhand pitching and the batter calling for pitch up or down.
Heliot Ramos not being on the list for outfielders is a travesty! He’s leading NL outfielders in WAR.
He's been terrific.
I must be the stupidest baseball fan on this blog. I had to look up who the hell Heliot Ramos was. Does everybody here know every damn player in both leagues?
Welcome to my world. I tend not to watch the NL as closely as the AL. Apparently he has had a very good half of a half season (after being called up May 8, 2024). If he's leading in WAR at 2.4 (per Baseball Reference) then this is an off year for NL outfielders
Glad it's not just me!
So this means you won’t be getting the Al Michaels AI to narrate your football book? 🥺
I won't get into Hunter Greene vs Chris Sale, but WAR for pitchers is weird because, as you noted it tries to separate defense from pitching and there's not really agreement on how to do that or what it even means. ERA doesn't really do that given we long ago stopped handing out errors for plays not made only the most egregious drops, muffs, and kicks. And we never gave errors for plays a poor fielder simply never got to.
Say it's one out and the bases are loaded. The pitcher gives up a rocket into the left-center field gap. Is this a good thing or a bad thing? Does it matter if the CF makes an incredible diving catch and doubles the runner off second to end the inning or if the ball splits the fielders for a bases clearing double? Or consider a line drive hit 110 MPH and whether the SS gloves it on a hop and turns a double play or it's a two run single?
Some measures of pitching and pitching WAR focus almost entirely on the outcome of the play -- the double play -- and not the outcome of the pitch -- an absolute rocket off the bat -- which is the only part the pitcher actually controls.
Interesting. Fangraphs has data like "Barrel %" and "hard hit %", and batted ball data like "soft %" and "hard %." I would assume someone analyzed these values in combination with K's & BB's. We do have K's, BB's and HR's, which is part of FIP and I believe FIP completely ignores balls in play. I would think someone could include these other batted ball values to get some more refined data.
If I’m not mistaken, FanGraph’s WAR just uses FIP and ignores ERA when calculating a pitcher’s WAR.
Yes. The problem there is much bigger than the BR problem with defense.
So bWAR brings you to some interesting places. Look at the 1973 AL MVP voting, which Reggie Jackson won unanimously. According to bWAR, Bobby Grich had a slightly stronger season. Now I grant you Grich was significantly underrated in his time and I understand why some people think he's a borderline Hall of Famer, although I would still lean against him on that. But it's still hard for me to understand how Jackson can have a better average and a better OBP and a much better slugging percentage and still finish behind Grich.
Reggie actually led the league in runs scored, home runs, RBI, slugging percentage and OPS. Sounds like an MVP to me. Obviously Oakland wasn't a great place to hit, either. (I don't think Grich was helped by his home park either, though I'm not positive about that.)
Obviously Bobby was an excellent defender and he also played a few more games than Reggie; the first thing helps a lot, the second thing helps a little bit. But my instinct tells me that they're just not evaluating defense correctly. It's getting too much credit here. Again, I understand what an underrated joy Bobby Grich was. I just don't think he was the best player in the American League in 1973 (or that close to it), and I think you'd have a hard time finding anybody who held that thought, either.
It is actually pretty easy to see, if you think about how WAR is done. First, it is a counting stat, so playing "a few more games" makes a difference. Grich had over 11% more PAs. This is a significant difference. I tend to think of things in runs, rather than trying to convert them to wins. If he had as many PAs as Grich had, he would have created 21 more runs offensively in that amount of PAs. But in reality, he only created 9.5 more.
Then you have to think about the arbitrary positional adjustment. The difference between 2nd base and right field is about 10 runs in a full season. (Though the numbers used are slightly different, Fangraphs WAR has a 10 run difference per season as well) Whether you agree with the arbitrary positional adjustments or not, it is definitely a part of WAR. Also, just from a different perspective, Grich touched about 3 times as many fielded balls and was involved in 3.5 times the outs, so you can see that a 2nd baseman might affect the game more.
Because Reggie didn't play all the games, their difference is only about 9.5 runs. Now they are equal as far as runs go. Probably still less than equal in WAR, because there are more PAs for the "replacement" player to be subtracted from Bobby's total as well.
Once you get to this point, it is pretty easy to see Bobby as the better player, because you haven't even gotten to defensive prowess yet. Grich was an excellent fielder having perhaps his career year in the field. Jackson was around average as a right fielder in his career, probably a touch below in 1973.
When you look at it that way, it is almost impossible to believe that Grich wouldn't end up with the higher WAR. (Fangraphs, who some would say underestimates defense with the exception of overrating modern catchers, also has Grich higher, 7.8-7.1)
Also, no offense, but if you are that Scott Pianowski, then you are pretty much hard wired to evaluate players from a purely offensive level. It is your job. You do it probably 365 days a year, or close to that. You probably ignore defense completely 95% of the time. Maybe it comes into play every once in a while when a evaluating future playing time for a mediocre or bench player whose defense is either so good he will play more, or so bad that he might play less. So underrating defense is probably naturally a by product of this.
Interesting stuff. I definitely don't ignore defense, I just hold a healthy amount of skepticism on defensive metrics. And I'll continue to do that. Good thread.
Grich had a more valuable season in 1973.
But, because there's so much focus on offensive achievement, especially in the 20th century, we don't even begin to grasp how much more valuable a strong defensive 2B is than a decent RF. If we (and by "we" I mean fans and media) focused on defense, the thought would be Grich is an elite 2B, having an amazing year and probably the second best defensive player in baseball behind his teammate Belanger. Sure Reggie hit a ton, but there's no way hitting could make up the gap between that and a corner OF.
It's the same argument we'd have today around Betts (if healthy). As a passable SS there's no way a 1B/DH/OF could make up that gap with the bat.
That all said, Grich's 1973 defensive numbers seem fluky and perhaps a limitation of the metrics of 50 years ago. In the seasons prior and just after he was worth 1.5-2 wins on defense but in 1973 he was worth nearly FOUR wins.
Another problem is that Reggie's defensive value is just that. The things he did in right field stand on their own. With any 2B or SS, their value is bound to be affected by their partner. So if they are playing with a Gold Glove partner that likely gives a favorable bump to their rating. In fact , throw in a Gold Glove 1B and it might help even more. John Olerud had that effect on our Mariner infielders when he played here. Remember the poe, Tinker to Evans to Chance? Put an average player in with any of the other two and the poem may have never been written.
or put Mark Grudzielanek in the middle and it wouldn't have been written either, but that's because it would mess up the metre.
Tinkers to Mark to Chance fits the meter as would Tinkers to Grudz to Chance. AND Mark did have one gold glove, but yes somehow it just doesn't fit.
I think that things like MVP discussions bring out some of the weaknesses of WAR. The fact is that just about every team, even taking into account the value of defense, would take 1973 Reggie over 1973 Grich. The reason being that, if you were building a team, neither one of them would be replaced in the line up by a "replacement" player. Is it unreasonable to think that you could replace them with an average player? I understand the reasoning behind WAR, but the fact is the "next man up" for any given position is almost never a replacement level player.
I don't quite get your argument here. You seem to be saying Reggie over Grich because you can't actually get a replacement level player if you lose either of them?
I think he is trying to say that the actual replacement player would be better than the fictional replacement level player that is used for WAR.
That would mean that WAR overstates their value, but if that's true of both Jackson and Grich replacements isn't the comparison still the same?
I agree with your point there, and would go further to say that an actual replacement might be better in RF than at 2nd. Every team has a corner OF guy (or two) that plays quite a bit, and chances are they are a better hitter than the minor league guy or utility guy (jack of all trades, master of none, usually) that would be the replacement guy at 2nd. I might also argue that since there will be a drop off offensively for either guy, with the probably better hitter in RF making up for Reggie's advantage there, it may actually be harder to replace the elite defense of Grich.
In the real world, I would say arguing that the guys replacing them would be better than the fictional replacement player leans towards Grich rather than away from him.
In effort of fairness, I will also mention that fWAR also prefers Grich to Jackson in 1973. You had a great life, Jim Palmer.
fWAR is how I feel about it too - when I'm not busy chasing kids off my lawn.
Whenever I see John Ortiz in a movie, I think about the Al Pacino trick pool shot scene in Carlito's Way: "Don't reach into that freezer, John!"
I know Judge and Rutschman are objectively better, but I voted for Duran and Wong here anyway because I’m a Sox fan and the official All-Star voting underrated them so much that a corrective is needed
Blake Perkins plays for the Brewers. Your Milwaukee blindness is showing again, Joe!
Hey Joe! Wondered if you'd noticed that the Mets pitched to Aaron Judge with the bases loaded the other night, even though it would have been smarter to walk him. They were up 9-3 in the 7th or 8th and with Gleyber Torres hitting cleanup (?), I thought for sure they'd issue the IBB, and yeah, walk in a run, but theyd still have a 5 run lead and a comparatively easy out in Torres.
I checked later and it turns out that Torres has about the same ~600ish OPS both overall this year and, believe it or not, for his career with the bases juiced. It's easily his worst OPS in terms of baserunner situations, and about 150 points below his career OPS.
So of course Judge hit a grand slam, making it 9-7, but the Mets won anyway so it didn't get much attention. I dunno if the Mets manager did it because he thought it woukd be the most entertaining thing for the fans, or (much more likely) because he figured they could weather the worst case scenario, which they did. But it was gratifying to see regardless.
This is results based thinking. Judge did the worst possible thing that could have happened, and it is something that he does more than anyone else. So it is natural to think that Torres, the easier out, would be worth giving up a run to get to.
It is not. Even using Judge's extreme numbers, the result from the average of his PAs is 0.84 runs in that situation, and also you only have to face the next hitter 43.2% of the time. If you walk him the average run output is 1 run, and then you have to face that guy every time. Torres average at his rate would be scoring 0.5 runs, so you can tack that on to run you already let in. You get the out 70.5% of the time, but the best case scenario is you let up only 1 run, and you still have to face the next guy 29.5% of the time. If you pitch to Judge, you face the third guy only 12.7% of the time. And so on, and so on, and so on.
I don't see where you're getting Judge out 70.5% of the time there. He's hitting almost.
400 in June, with a ~.500 OBP. he's a career .324 hitter with the bases loaded, .389 OBP. He's hotting .336 at home this year with an OBP of almost .500, so that single run is basically a coin flip, without factoring in that Reed Garrett has a career ERA over 5 (though admittedly much lower this year) and that he walks a batter about every other inning.
So yes, Judge makes an out in that situation slightly more than half the time, but when he doesn't he's going to cost you at least one, maybe multiple runs.
Of course Torres is capable of hitting the ball out too, and maybe the insult of having Judge intentionally walked to force in a run to face him with the bases juiced is just the kind of fire he needs lit under his butt. Who knows? The Mets would still have had the lead, either way, but to me seemed a lot less likely to blow it facing Torres.
Like I said, I assume they judged that they could deal with the worst case scenario, especially in a game in mid June. But I wonder if the opposition handles that situation differently in a playoff game.
The 70.5% was Torres. Judge was 56.8% (You only have to face the next hitter 43.2% of the time - line two, paragraph 2) The 70.5% was in the situation you brought up where you walked Judge, and on average gave up more runs (1 when you walked Judge, 0.5 from Torres, and so on) than if you faced Judge to begin with and gave 0.84. The other percentages was how many times you had to face whoever came up after Torres. 29.5% of the time if you walk Judge, only 12.7% if you pitch to him.
I definitely took in Judge's stats into account. I did not factor in the pitcher, as he was going to be the same guy every way. Yes Judge is better (0.84 bases loaded runs, gets on 43.2% of the time) than Torres (0.5 bases loaded runs, gets on 29.5% of the time.) So you give up an average of 1.5 runs through the first batter you choose to face if you walk him, (with a floor of one) and 0.84 if you pitch to Judge. (With a floor of 0). Also, yes, I factored in every single thing a guy can do, and the percentage of times he does it, (this year only) and even factored in the percentage chance that two runs would score in a single, or 3 on a double. (Using leaguewide percentages - I did not bother to look up who the runners were)
Gotcha, my misunderstanding. I also realized I was using his home stats when they were really away so just throw out everything I said! 😉
I watched Buck Showalter walk Barry Bonds with the bases loaded; IIRC with a 2 run lead. And it worked.
Being from KC I know this seems like I am a homer (and maybe you are right) BUT Bobby Witt Jr is the best shortstop in baseball. Statistically he is the best defensively, the fastest runner, most hits in the AL, and super fun to watch. I know the last one is silly but I do think it counts for something in the All Star game.
I respect the “fun to watch” metric, and I have fun watching Bobby Witt, Jr., but the shortstop who is most fun to watch is surely Elly De La Cruz.
Yes, but not in the AL.
I just went to a Reds game last week and Elly was such a joy to watch. Hit a HR that hit the boat in centerfield
Sorry dude, I am from KC also and I voted for Witt because Royals. He is having a great season, there is no doubt about that, but Gunnar is having a better one, also no doubt.
Yes, Witt leads the league in hits. But Gunnar has reached base 10 more times and has more total bases with less hits. BWJ has a 147 OPS+, Gunnar is at 187. BWJ is faster. He has only grounded into 2 double plays. Gunnar has 0. Bobby has 9 more steals - but he has also made 6 more outs on the basepaths, which is not a good ratio. (In fact, overall he has made 16 more outs in 2 less PAs) BWJ has a +4 DRS in the field. Gunnar is +5.
Gunnar lead in rWAR 6.1 to 4.3. He leads if fWAR 6.0 to 4.6. I do a thing where I take a players runs created/saved above average, combining offense, defense and baserunning (Eschewing the fictional replacement player and not trying to convert runs to wins.) BWJ is an outstanding 31.5 runs above average. Gunnar is +44.
I love me some Bobby, and he is having a great year. But Gunnar is having an historically great one. Not only is he the best SS in the AL, but he would get my vote for AL MVP for the first half.
How awesome is it that both Henderson and Witt are in baseball right now?!
Oh yeah! So many fun young baseball players right now. Future is bright
I would've agreed until I watched Henderson for a 3 game series just concluded. Next is a 4 game series with the Royals so my meaningless opinion could change. Both are really good.
I'm not a Royals fan, but Witt is by far my favorite player in baseball to watch these days.
For sure on the last part.
I think there's way too much emphasis on who had the best 70-80 games to start the season vs. who is really the best player or the player we want to see (assuming it's not a washed-up 35 year old). Though in this case there's an argument that Henderson is both.
To paraphrase Bill James: “If they wanted, they could have the ‘Best First Halves by Mediocre Players Game’. They could play it in Cleveland every year.”
I do agree on this. It seems like every year there are guys at the end that we already wonder how they were all stars at mid season, and I'm not talking about the few token players from bad teams that don't actually have a legitimate one.
But the all star teams are kind of a nice mix, I think. You have some legacy guys that are getting in based on the past - which is fine, fans want to see them. You have guys having great first halves that may never be repeated, which is also fine. They get rewarded with an appearance for having the best stretch of their career. Those guys seem to really appreciate and enjoy their time.
Nowadays, you have replacement pitchers, that make the team when the other guy pitches too close to the break or something and their teams are scared that they will be injured by throwing an inning during 4 days off. (The contradiction between the babying and the max effort that is marching pitchers to surgeries cracks me up. Neither one is good for them)
Gone are the days when the leagues didn't play each other, the extra inning games they took seriously, and the home team in the World Series. Part of me missed the seriousness (as a guy who was around for that) but I have embraced the fun. It is a mix of guys having a good time, usually in some pretty ugly jerseys. (Even before Nike) It is not science.
Speaking of the home team for the Series, why not base it on whichever league wins the most interleague games in the season, now that they play 690 games between the leagues? Seems more fair than any other system, and maybe it brings a very small touch of league rivalry in the interleague games towards the end some years.