Remember's Ramblings –
Volume 2, Article 7
February 11, 2025
Defense
Matters, or Does it?
Something
I have been thinking about quite a bit with the recent Hall of Fame voting . .
.
In a comment last week, Jon G made a statement that “Keith Hernandez is the best defensive 1st baseman to ever play the game”. I will go out on a limb to think that Jon believes Keith should be in the Baseball Hall of Fame.
This brings me back to the age-old question of “what is the criteria for getting a plaque in Cooperstown?”. Obviously there are no cut and dried statistics. It used to be 3000 hits and 500 home runs or 300 pitching wins, etc, but the game has changed a lot in the last 50 years and it is now more driven more by WAR and other analytic measures.
According to MLB.com, WAR is “The number of runs above average a player is worth in his batting, baserunning and fielding + adjustment for position + adjustment for league + the number of runs provided by a replacement-level player) / runs per win”. The definitions of both bWAR and fWAR are the same, but the internal calculations are a bit different resulting in generally close, but different final tallies.
I have been trying to figure out what ‘Fielding Runs’ means and how much weight should be given to defense when looking at Hall of Fame candidates. There are several defensive measurements. Some have changed and some have been added to in recent years as better (?) data has become available with the advent of Statcast and other tools.
Some of what has been used in the past, mixed with more current measurements:
- Number of Errors
- Fielding Percentage
- Total Zone Fielding Runs Above Average
- Ultimate Zone Rating
- Defensive Runs Saved
- Fangraphs Value Fielding
- Fangraphs Value Defensive
- Gold Gloves
The simple number of errors was used in the old days when there was no other data or reference point. The fielding percentage was what I grew up with in the 70’s as the indicator of how good a fielder a player was. Gold Gloves were a mark of a good fielder because they were voted on by managers and coaches around the league – those that saw the players play.
Total Zone Fielding Runs Above Average is the ‘Rtot’ value in the Defense section of the Baseball Reference record for each player. It seems to be the applied to all players, unlike the UZR and DRS stats which are fairly new – not introduced until into the 2000’s.
Cross checking many of these stats is still quite confusing to me. I don’t understand how a player like Andruw Jones can have 10 gold gloves and have a +254 Rtot and a 64 Defensive Runs Saved (DRS) while Torii Hunter can have 9 gold gloves and have a -38 Rtot with a 23 DRS.
As a third point on the plot, Bernie Williams accumulated 4 career gold gloves yet has a -118 Rtot and -74 DRS. I think that says that over his career he was responsible for giving up 74 more runs than a replacement level centerfielder. It does not make sense to me that if he were that poor a fielder that he could have won 4 gold gloves.
So, all you baseball fans out there, what defensive measurements do you rely on and how important are they in the evaluation of Hall of Fame worthiness? Or even a comparison of current players as Paul did in his piece yesterday comparing the infielders of the Mets, Braves, and Phillies.
I know many Mets fans believe Keith belongs in the Hall of Fame. I think most fans would also agree that his offensive numbers alone are not good enough – it is the defense that sets him apart. If so, how do you measure that? Does that make him more Hall worthy than John Olerud? By what measure?
Thanks in advance for any and all input you can provide to help my understanding of how defense matters and how to best argue that point.
Happy 64th Birthday to Steve Springer and Happy 53rd Birthday to Brian Daubach. Also, the late Tom Veryzer would have been 73 years old today.
17 comments:
Simple on Keith vs. Olerud. Keith had 60 WAR, Olerud a mere 58 WAR. I think Keith is remembered fondly as more animated and fiery on the field. One of the reasons I liked Jesse Winker last year. Animated and fiery.
I largely stick with WAR, as I find much of The-rest is a bit confusing.
There is one constant in defensive baseball
Middle fielders
C
P
2B
SS
CF
Paul Blackburn and Kodai Senga arrived
Diaz and Manaea too
WAR is not the answer
DRS is a widely used metric that many struggle with because it is not always an "eye test" metric. It values a fielder's range quite a bit, and sometimes that escapes the average eye. If a shortstop dives 8 feet to their right, snares the ball, and throws to first in time to get the out, it looks like a gold glove performance. But another shortstop gets a better jump, fields a ball 10 feet to their right with a backhand and throws the runner out. The second example fares better in DRS. That same ball 10 feet away eludes the grasp of the first guy, but most of us just say, "nice try, that was a clean hit".
I agree, that works well for the 21st century guys, but DRS did not come on to the books until 2003.
Personally, I use the eye test. I don't need metrics to tell me Brooks Robinson was a great third baseman or Keith was exceptional at first. By the way. I think Gil Hodges and Vic Power rank among the best fielding first baseman all time.
Paul, it reminds me of what I used to hear as a kid, when a lousy fielder made a “spectacular play” and the announcer would say he made an easy play look difficult.
Ray, I don’t think of myself as anything special, but I also like to see players in person. I like to see the jump they get on a play. For example, I had written after watching Rosario play SS that he wasn’t a shortstop. He had so little range because he didn’t react to a ball until it was even with the pitching mound. Well, heck, by then you ain’t getting it if it isn’t close to you. And I’ve done that with many players.
I actually like many aspects of Alonso’s fielding, but hate a few also. I don’t like that he doesn’t know how far he can range yet and winds up playing second base. He should know that by now. I don’t like that he can panic on grounders to his backhand. But, I like his scoops, I like his tosses to a pitcher if the pitcher remembers to cover…
Hey 1969, thanks for the shout out! I guess it's simplistic, but being an old school fan, I basically use the "eye test" to determine HOF worthiness. Yes, gaudy numbers help (HR's, hits, etc.). Keith had good offensive numbers but having the privilege of watching him play in NY, to me he just stood out above the other players. Great glove, played the bunt extraordinarily well and his leadership skills on the field were unmatched. He was basically a pitching coach on the field and helped the Mets young pitchers through stressful innings. I am biased I'm sure, but to me Keith is the type of player that deserves the Hall. A similar player nowadays is Lindor. He might reach the numbers to get him in the Hall, but watching him night in and night out, he just has that aura about him that raises him above the rest and I think he should be in the Hall after his playing days are done
How were your eyes when you were judging Jose Reyes?
My eyes adored Jose ❤️ 😍
So near, so near and yet so far.
Unfortunately Jose fell off a cliff as he aged. In his prime I think he was on a hall of fame trajectory
After Jose turned 25 - early in the 2008 season, he never had a another positive DRS or Rtot number ending with a career -70 DRS.
Depends what the question is
Post a Comment