All Forums > SimLeague Baseball > MLB > Defensive Metrics
9/3/2013 11:44 AM
Posted by bad_luck on 9/1/2013 11:25:00 AM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 8/31/2013 12:20:00 PM (view original):
I'm curious, with around one month left to go in the 2013 season, what BL's take on "Trout vs. Cabrera" is.
This year? I'll take Cabrera. The difference offensively is so big that Trout's large defensive and base running advantages don't make up the difference.
No comment, tec?
9/3/2013 12:03 PM (edited)
Posted by burnsy483 on 9/3/2013 10:39:00 AM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 9/3/2013 10:26:00 AM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 9/3/2013 10:18:00 AM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 9/1/2013 12:33:00 PM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 8/31/2013 11:39:00 AM (view original):
"And right now, Trout's defensive season just isn't that good."

So what's the argument? Trout is worse defensively this year?  Based on what, what is he doing wrong compared to last year?
 
I guess the argument is that he's not making the plays he made last year.
Why? What is he doing differently?
I think they have an example in the article. There was a low liner that Trout could have risked a dive for (a play he made at times last year). Instead he pulled up and let it fall, then he had trouble handling the bounce.
One play. 

Is it possible that there just isn't as many fly balls hit to him this year that there were last year?  That he is actually playing just as well, but the opportunity to put up a great defensive number isn't there?
rather than stereotyping some little old ladies who love 3-times weekly bingo events, this thread deserves the decibels of imax cinema quadrophonics to show what happens when a bunch of "number-nerds" play bingo, instead.

major league pitchers dont play bingo. turning their backs to batters, viewing the infield and outfield grids so necessary to nothingness. a pitcher does not determine that his left-fielder is poised to handle the next batted ball to the B-12 box on the grid. a pitcher does not decide to toss an 87mph off-speed slider that will then deliver the batted ball to the designated B-12 spot. the pitcher has an entirely different grid to pitch to, where a catcher's glove is ideally located at N-39 on the nerds bingo card.

is that how this really works? please dont answer that, because it really doesnt work that way. doesnt bingo have odds? if the first number called is not on your card then u luck out, since the 2nd call is odds increased when u have a 1 in 79 chance of that 2nd number landing on your card. but, u are lucky again, if the 2nd number does not appear on your card. imagine the odds of the 3rd number being a 1 in 78 chance of finally landing on your card?

your nerdy number games with baseball, involving the art of creating defensive numbers to show actual offensive prowess, has all the elements of bingo. a simple game, that is also well-populated with players. how come u keep giving evidence that u do not even understand a game like bingo?

dont be foolish looking for needles in haystacks, when common hearsay says all the needles are on the shorelines of the atlantic coast. get real. lights out for this thread. the number "86" defines it best.
9/3/2013 12:00 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 9/3/2013 11:44:00 AM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 9/1/2013 11:25:00 AM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 8/31/2013 12:20:00 PM (view original):
I'm curious, with around one month left to go in the 2013 season, what BL's take on "Trout vs. Cabrera" is.
This year? I'll take Cabrera. The difference offensively is so big that Trout's large defensive and base running advantages don't make up the difference.
No comment, tec?
Are you expecting one?
9/3/2013 12:23 PM
their logic. that they are not getting as many flyballs or opportunities to make great plays?

so major league managers should hit the ball to trout MORE often so that he looks better defensively, or that he had MORE chances last year and thats why he played better? poor defense is remedied by that idea, huh?

yes he is full of expectations that dont get met. does nothing to adjust his expectations so that they dont get unfulfilled. this type of thinking is nowhere to be found in any aspect of major league baseball, and its record of past events.

the difference between God and a doctor, is simply that the doctor thinks hes a doctor. the designated runner? the game winning rbi? now the defensive grid that is determined by espn as basic to determining offensive equivalents is also just an experiment that does not cover any other aspect but espn's need to lure advertisers to next months episodes, and next years new york stock exchange numbers.

go ahead and be the bunny rabbit who pulls the magician out of the hat. wisdom says there is nothing new under the sun. can u not find any way on your web page to click and close this thread. it gives real baseball people no hope that tradition can be passed down. baseballs essence is not for spray-paint, easy as it is to just push a button. 

u have no clue, or mastery of the numbers u think people should be asking u about. maybe-guess-maybe. can u operate an abacus, since the slide-rule is out of the question? your best answer is to close this thread. it does not make u look good, at all. u are no source for the source u think u are.
9/3/2013 12:25 PM
Posted by tecwrg on 9/3/2013 12:00:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 9/3/2013 11:44:00 AM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 9/1/2013 11:25:00 AM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 8/31/2013 12:20:00 PM (view original):
I'm curious, with around one month left to go in the 2013 season, what BL's take on "Trout vs. Cabrera" is.
This year? I'll take Cabrera. The difference offensively is so big that Trout's large defensive and base running advantages don't make up the difference.
No comment, tec?
Are you expecting one?
Yeah. Who would you take this year?
9/3/2013 12:45 PM
Cabrera.
9/3/2013 1:02 PM
See? We can agree on some things.
9/3/2013 1:37 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 9/3/2013 11:36:00 AM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 9/3/2013 10:39:00 AM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 9/3/2013 10:26:00 AM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 9/3/2013 10:18:00 AM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 9/1/2013 12:33:00 PM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 8/31/2013 11:39:00 AM (view original):
"And right now, Trout's defensive season just isn't that good."

So what's the argument? Trout is worse defensively this year?  Based on what, what is he doing wrong compared to last year?
 
I guess the argument is that he's not making the plays he made last year.
Why? What is he doing differently?
I think they have an example in the article. There was a low liner that Trout could have risked a dive for (a play he made at times last year). Instead he pulled up and let it fall, then he had trouble handling the bounce.
One play. 

Is it possible that there just isn't as many fly balls hit to him this year that there were last year?  That he is actually playing just as well, but the opportunity to put up a great defensive number isn't there?
One example.

Of course that's possible. He has less innings in center this season and BIS has him at 12 good plays to 16 misplays. Last year (in more innings) he had 26 good plays and 17 misplays.

I think the biggest difference is that he isn't turning low percentage chances into outs as often this year. In 60 low percentage chances (compared to 83 last year) as a CF, he has 19 less catches.

Here's a chart from the article:

Mike Trout
On Plays w/ Expected Out Rate
Between 5 percent and 50 percent

  2012 2013
Chances as LF 20 16
Balls Caught 6 3
Success Rate 30% 19%
 
Chances as CF 83 60
Balls Caught 31 12
Success Rate 37% 20%
>> Expected out rate: How often balls hit to that area are turned into outs (data through Aug. 28)
5-50% is quite the range.  How many are in the 30-50% range?  How many are in the 5-15% range?

The other thing to consider is that so much of this depends on positioning.  How is Scioscia positioning his outfield? What he does, did it work last year and not last year?  I saw an article that compared a couple shortstops, and they showed one of the "great" plays by one SS, and it was a routine ground ball to him, an easy play.  Except that he was playing close to the 3rd baseman, based on positioning.  Was that the SS exhibiting great range, or was it great coaching? 

So he's not taking chances this year?  How many balls got by him where a runner got an extra base because he was diving last year? Maybe he's becoming a smarter fielder.

There are so many variables to this.  The idea that Trout is becoming more careful in the outfield, A) isn't necessarily a bad thing, and doesn't mean he's a worse outfielder, and B) is a potential reason, but may not necessarily be true.  If that's not the reason, what is it?  I'm guessing he's not getting slower in his early 20s.
9/3/2013 1:55 PM
Of course there are tons of variables. All chances in the 5-50% range aren't counted the same. The chart is just a basic summary.

9/3/2013 2:14 PM (edited)
Posted by bad_luck on 9/3/2013 1:02:00 PM (view original):
See? We can agree on some things.
next semester, things will be different. the curriculum and my degree goals, will coincide, as i will finally be enrolled in an english prose lab. therein, i intend to maximize the skill of typing, texting, and sending the "no-brainer" to the "no-brainer", to be received by the "no-brainer".

since the baseball world must now use defensive metrics to determine the 2013 mvp, since it shines glaring lights and 4-eyed nerd lenses on amoebas of baseball offense, to which must be added since all other simple numbers are negligible because dumb "no-brainer" sportswriters use them as "no-brainers", then we can agree on what follows, as my "no-brainer" keyboard suffers needless wear-and-tear.

claiming that "no-brainer" defensive metrics is YOUR tool here in the made-up mvp collision of trout/cabrera, u also simultaneously agree with me that u have the superior edge in declaring that earned run average is a "no-brainer" as far as being useless to determining a cy young award. that poor defensive plays from trout could not possibly be in something as simple as earned run average.

we agree that u cannot see the most common resemblance of E = MCsquared, and the E.R.A. in baseball numbers.

physics and baseball do not mix, unless the answer is simple. trouts play is sufficiently demonstrated AT THE END OF ANY SEASON, by the simplicity of the fielding percentage, and the earned run averages of those team-mates. on the mound. thus proving einstein's equation of proof, as simply as possible.

einstein and "no-brainers" are not oxymoronic. ignoring the rule that says every action that u cause will have an equal but OPPOSITE reaction. the "no-brainer" is that the word EQUAL comes first, then the word OPPOSITE.

"no-brainer" oxymoronics can be defensive metrics, BASICALLY being equivalents of the simple equation that explains how batters go 0-7. we agree that u cannot agree on how to understand the simple earned run average and how it is used to more refinely sharpen offensive numbers, from a defensive standpoint.

your microscope needs a different hamster to power your journey. that is a "no-brainer" we can agree to. next semester, though, u are "toast." 
9/3/2013 2:32 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 9/3/2013 1:55:00 PM (view original):
Of course there are tons of variables. All chances in the 5-50% range aren't counted the same. The chart is just a basic summary.

Right.  I'd like to see it broken down more.  Because when 50 of those 83 chances last year are in the 40-50% range, and 20 of those 60 chances are in the same range this year, it may explain a lot.

The idea that he had to write an article to explain why his defensive numbers are down suggest that it isn't obvious to the fan who watches Angels games why the number is lower.  Meaning there's a good chance he's playing just as well this year as he did last year, and the hitters are simply "hitting them where he ain't."
9/3/2013 4:19 PM (edited)

.       _ii_______________n__
.   \yf____________________|- - - - - - - -- --- -----BANG !!! !!! !!!
.    //             //Y'     //
.   //     o     //====''
. //             //
. \\_____//                  If these are numbers, refecting people, -&,
what people do, & have done in the past, then it only makes a
whole lot of common sense to treat & respect numbers, just as
as U would treat & respect people...

Seems like U got a major problem there, related to the numbers
in your numbers that just won't hold still. U use parenthesis to a
point defining the updated latest MTrout numbers, -as of August,
the August 28th revised update... No doubt the cause of all of the
maybe answers, & the guess'd answers...

Just like with people... If U want someone to hold still, then point
a gun at them, and tell them to hold still. It has a 50/50 chance it
will work, but the odds increase for your math to work better, if U
would just make your numbers hold still, to solve the problem...

Brain-up, will ya' ???... Nobody does math with constantly moving
numbers, & variances that must be updated every 24 hrs... What,
R U like seeking 2 get a pension on a career as a mathematician,
but we still hafta' wait for an update to what (?) guess a maybe (?)

Nothing like another wasted 6-month 'Merry-Go-Round' ride that
goes nowhere but in circles... R U a dizzy dramamine pill addict ?
 

9/3/2013 4:18 PM
Posted by burnsy483 on 9/3/2013 2:32:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 9/3/2013 1:55:00 PM (view original):
Of course there are tons of variables. All chances in the 5-50% range aren't counted the same. The chart is just a basic summary.

Right.  I'd like to see it broken down more.  Because when 50 of those 83 chances last year are in the 40-50% range, and 20 of those 60 chances are in the same range this year, it may explain a lot.

The idea that he had to write an article to explain why his defensive numbers are down suggest that it isn't obvious to the fan who watches Angels games why the number is lower.  Meaning there's a good chance he's playing just as well this year as he did last year, and the hitters are simply "hitting them where he ain't."
Unfortunately, none of us have access to the BIS data. It's proprietary and expensive to buy.

I'm not confident that even an avid Angels fan who watches all the games on TV would be able to tell the difference just by watching and remembering.

Just in general, People tend to remember things that are remarkable (Trout making a diving catch as opposed to pulling up and letting a ball drop) and that confirm their existing beliefs.

Specific to this situation, I don't know how well you can judge an outfielder's defense on TV. You only see the end result of all but the most spectacular plays and you never have a frame of reference. I don't think I can tell by watching what balls turn into outs 20% of the time and which ones turn into outs 40% of the time. Yet there's a difference in defensive value between the outfielder who can get to both and the outfielder who can only get to the 40% ball.
9/3/2013 5:33 PM
Unfortunately, none of us have access to the BIS data. It's proprietary and expensive to buy.

9/3/2013 6:15 PM
Posted by lad_buck on 9/3/2013 5:33:00 PM (view original):
Unfortunately, none of us have access to the BIS data. It's proprietary and expensive to buy.

the mystery is not in the numbers, since u dont have those numbers.

the mystery is that now u are using the word "us" & showing evidence that u cannot even find enough guys to start-up a real poker game, nor find enough guys with money to pool together, to get the very numbers that u and your "us's" need to solve your not-so-well thought-out equation.

solution is to get a job at burger king, learn how simply they use numbers. your math foundation is questionable enough that it will not persuade others to join the "us" and finally purchase those proprietary numbers so necessary to your expected -EXPECTED- expected validation that there is better way to profile and classify baseball players. we already know such numbers will only confuse u more, not knowing what to do with them, once u get them.

wind speed is increasing. replace ruth. just got new numbers on that. hurry, and take advantage of the special introductory price of "expensive to buy" now. those numbers surely have a guarantee to never get stale. what a wonderful world, your mathematical pandora's box of "us" who cannot afford numbers to do math.

stay off the data. eat a corn dog instead. at least U will have a stick leftover. add some math to it, and it will still be a stick. u can't handle numbers. 

 
of 23
All Forums > SimLeague Baseball > MLB > Defensive Metrics

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.