|
|
|
According to a statistical break-down by Beyond the Boxscore, the Mets not only had the worst second baseman in all of baseball, in Damion Easley, they also had the third worst in Luis Castillo and the sixth worst in Argenis Reyes.
…thanks to Nate for the info, i guess…
Naturally, according to the same post, the best second baseman in baseball was Phillies 2B Chase Utley, followed by Sox 2B Dustin Pedroia and O’s 2B Brian Roberts.
In a recent report for FoxSports.com, Ken Rosenthal wrote that the O’s could look to trade Roberts if the two sides do not reach agreement on a contract extension.
 |
 |
 |
RSS 2.0 Both comments and pings are currently closed.
Ouch.
no surprise there…..lol
We didn’t need a statistician to tell us this.
We only needed a pair of eyes.
How could Easley be worse than Castillo and Argenis? If you gave me a choice of those three, I’d take Easley hands down.
Probably because defensively Easley grades out as by far the worst of the 3. Argenis is by far the best of the 3 defensively, but can’t hit a lick. And Castillo is mediocre (at best) at both.
They basically all 3 stink.
Yep, the defense makes sense. I’d still take Easley because he is the only one of the 3 capable of hitting the ball out of the infield. Man, I really wish Jose Valentin was healthy. He played flawless defense and hit better than most second baseman (in 2006 at least).
Yep, some clone of Jose Valentin would be perfect for this team.
if we’re gonna go back in time for a cloned second basemen, I’d like Edgardo Alfonzo circa 1999, thank you very much.
Of course, if we’re allowed to go back in time and make clones, I see no reason why we can’t clone a non-Met 2B, in which case I want Rogers Hornsby circa 1924-25.
Probably because defensively Easley grades out as by far the worst of the 3
Not so. I’m not sure what stats they are using but Easley and Castillo have almost identical fielding stats this year (ZR and FLF PCT), and even in their chart, Easley only has 1 fewer point on offense than Castillo does.
The reason his method ranks Easley lower is because they gave him 3 fewer points on offense which is also a mystery since Easley had more RBIs and a higher OPS than Castillo.
Also, I believe his method is quantitative which means that any player who played much less than a full year is at a disadvantage.
If he had used a qualitative methods I doubt Easley would rank that low.
Easley only made 4 out of zone defensive plays all year, which is tragically low for someone that 539 innings at second base.
And Easley fielded more balls successfully in zone than Castillo did. So they pretty much balance each other out, which is basically what this author said.
It was on offense that he ranked Easley much lower than Castillo, which as I said makes no sense to me since Easley had better offensive numbers
He must place a heavy emphasis on OBP.
he must place a Mo Vaughn heavy emphasis on OBP. I like guys with high OBPs, but not if that’s the ONLY thing they contribute, which it was for Castillo.
I’m guessing you don’t understand linear weights.
Dan Murphy has something like 10 double plays and 1 error in 10 games. It’s about darn time that Cerrone & co. give credit where credit is due and view him as a legit candidate.
Daniel
Minaya pretty much said that he wasn’t a candidate, so I don’t think you can hang that on Cerrone.
How do they determine who was best/worst? because in my mind, Easley is better than Castillo and Reyes
Methodology is all linked there in the post.
Oh, and that same site lists Beltran as the # 2 CF and says:
“…Beltran is one of the ten best position players in the world”
and
“Given what Manny and Tex are going to sign for this year (and what Andruw Jones signed for last year), his $18MM yearly salary is a steal.”
So of course he should be traded. Geez!
Insert anti-Beltran rant by Furioso here
You know, his name is perfect because that’s exacly how I feel after reading everyone one of his posts.
FYI, Carlos Beltran is #2 on the Best Center Fielders list in all of baseball, behind Grady Sizemore.
Yep, and Wright will be #2, and Reyes will be #2 at his position as well.
TRADE THEM!
Yet people still love to dismiss the notion of Daniel Murphy playing 2nd base for this team next year.
Well there you have it, even if it wasn’t blatantly obvious to your eyes. The Mets get absolutely zero from 2nd base to begin with. Anything is a major upgrade.
I’m confident Murphy can figure out a way to play at least a respectable enough 2nd base to warrant his bat in that spot.
It certainly can’t get any worse. And it’s a hell of a lot cheaper than Hudson, who I do like but would take money and resources away from LF, the pen and starting pitching.
I was one of the doubters but you can’t get worse than worst.
People, as in people here, aren’t dismissing the notion.
The Mets seem pretty skeptical.
That being said, they have him at 2B in winterball right now. I’m sure they’re thinking about it.
I think that people here underrate how difficult a position 2B is. That being said, if Murphy can play it, Murphy can play it.
I do find it rather surprising that the Mets seem so dismissive of the mere notion of Murphy at 2nd base.
If nothing else, it’s a very tiny bit of leverage in talks with Hudson to show some confidence in Murphy at 2nd base. It certainly can’t hurt to be less dismissive.
All that said, I view Murphy as one of these gamers who will figure out how to do whatever he is asked to do. He seems to have that makeup.
Put him at 2nd and tell him you need to learn 2nd base in a hurry because we want you there next year. I’m sure he’ll justify your confidence in him.
The smartest thing the Mets can do is let Murphy play 2nd base next season. He’s capable and a fast learner. It will allow the Mets to address the bigger needs of the team.
Jeff Kent made it to the hof playing an average, tough 2b, with a hot bat. Now I am not making Murphy out to be a HOFer… however, it would be a good move for both him and the team. 2b is going to transform some, just like SS did.
As much as I want O-Dawg’s attitude in here, If Murphy plays a solid 2b in Winter Leagues, it makes sense to save the cash for the bullpen and SP. I would rather have Murph at the 2b, then put the money to CC, or Manny, or KRod, or whoever.
Its not as if DM is a defensive wiz out there anyway. He gets by because he is a smart baseball player, and understands the finer points of the game. That quality will translate to 2b.
Might as well put Murphy on 2nd– anything is better than what they had in ‘08.
Iceman is a good bat off the bench and occasional fill-in, but we all know he can’t be starting too many games for a contending team. I’m very much in favor of starting Murphy at second and dealing Castillo for Guillen, if that deal’s still on the table.
And, yeah, you gotta look at Manny for LF, but I get the feeling the Dodgers will throw a lot of money at him to stay in LA.
I think the Mets also might be well served to look into the possible availability of Milton Bradley. I might even be willing to part with Niese in such a deal. Personally, I don’t think Niese projects as anything better than a #4 or #5 starter, so I think the Mets would be best served to deal him for a good reward while his value’s high.
I don’t know if I’d dismiss Niese that quickly. His stuff from the left side (curve, fastball) is reminiscient of Barry Zito circa 2001 (back when Barry cracked 90 MPH). I think he has a lot more potential than a #4 or #5.
I dont think you can afford to trade any of our pitching prospects this offseason.
Too many bullpen/rotation holes to let something go…
Bradley is going to be a free agent this off-season. So we wouldn’t have to trade for him.
I think we are all missing that bottom line about Roberts. He would be perfect for us. Check out his numbers, they make Orlando Hudson look like Awful Recraptillo’s. He is the perfect 2 hitter as his OBP is just incredible. A 1-2 punch of Reyes Roberts would be something to see. Trade them Fmart, Evans and cash for Roberts and a salary dump. PLEASE.
lead him off and bat reyes second…he’d be on base for all those reyes XBHs
I agree. I’ve long felt that Reyes is the absolute PERFECT #2 hitter. Just perfect.
roberts-reyes-wright-beltran
i’d love that 1-4. throw delgado in the 5 spot with an .850 OPS and 25 bombs..we’d be in the top 5 in runs scored again.
I’m not too sure about that. I love Brian Roberts at 2B but I honestly don’t think he fits in the batting order. I like:
Reyes
Beltran
Murphy
Wright
Delgado
[Left Fielder]
Church
Schenider
[Pitcher]
I don’t care how they do it, but Murphy needs to be in the lineup every single day. Offensively, he’s worth more at second base, if he can learn the position. I like Eric Byrnes at LF but the D-Backs don’t want anything to do with Castillo. He would make a good 6 or 7 hitter tho, IMHO, and I love his hustle.
Maybe we can get Roberts for The Taco? (see next thread)
Take this guy’s ranking with a grain of salt.
I’m not sure what stats they are using but Easley and Castillo have almost identical fielding stats this year (ZR and FLF PCT), and even in their chart, Easley only has 1 fewer point on offense than Castillo does.
The reason his method ranks Easley lower is because they gave him 3 fewer points on offense which is also a mystery since Easley had more RBIs and a higher OPS than Castillo.
Also, I believe his method is essentially quantitative which means that any player who played much less than a full year is at a disadvantage.
If he had used a qualitative method I doubt Easley would rank that low.
Easley only has 1 fewer point on defense than Castillo does.
What makes you think RBIs would factore in to it at all? That’s a team stat.
The methodology is completely there. If you really want to have a critique, the best way is to get informed.
Also: remember OPS is unbalanced. SLG is not equal to OBP.
I didn’t say that RBIs factored into it. I don’t really know what factored into it. I simply said that from those two perspectives (RBIs and OPS) Easley was more productive.
The results just don’t make sense looking at many stats and from what most fans saw this year.
As for being informed, I did glance at that page but he doesn’t go into detail as to how he came up with his ranking.
Since you seem to know so much about it, why don’t you explain it for the rest of us? OK, smart guy?
And what do you mean SLG is not equal to OBP? Do you mean OBP is more important than SLG as some sabermetricians believe. You know, many sabermetricians believed that clutchness doesn’t exist, but the father of the field now believes it does. So there ya go!
The supporters of Castillo have always said that he’s valuable because of his high OBP. Heck, I was even one of them last year. But after watching him for over a year, I now think that his OBP must be one of the emptiest in baseball. For whatever reason — unclutchness, clubhouse chemistry, other intangibles — he adds nothing to this team and seems to bring it down. It could be as simple as his seemingly lethargic and/or disinterested personality.
The explanation of how the numbers come out would fill this block. The long and short of it is it’s a very, very typical offensive run estimator and then a run estimator using a prism of defensive numbers.
I myself like adding VORP to an estimate (x0.8) of plus/minus, and it comes out extremely similar.
The point is that he provides a link to thorough explanations. You might as well follow them. It gives you a better platform to stand on then merely “the numbers don’t agree with my anecdotal opinion.”
The rest of that rant was pretty crazy.
one point of OBP is about 3 times more valuable than one more point of SLG, with variation from year to year. and no, that’s not an arbitrary number.
don’t worry about FAH. he’s a baseball luddite. clutchness, grit, clubhouse chemistry, all the other empty platitudes…he loves them. no idea why. and yes, he is sort of crazy.
metsftw ftw
philkid, all I’m looking for is an explanation of what numbers he uses to come up with his calculations. You don’t need to give me the exact formula, but I would like to see a comprehensive listing of what stats go into it. For example — OBP, BBs, KOs, etc. What exactly goes into his stew? You don’t need a city block to just list the ingredients.
When you click on the link, there is no detailed information there either.
For example, Justin says he uses RZR and ZR, yet Easley has a better RZR than Castillo and an almost identical ZR. So how did he end up with one less point than Castillo :?:
Is it OOZ?
So would you care to list exactly which stats he uses?
The main problem I have with his column is that this is basically a quantitative method. You can’t use such a method to determine the “worst.” Though it is valid for determining the best (or more correctly, the most valuable). And this Kalkman guy actually uses the word “worst” when listing those who ranked near the bottom of his list.
Also, what was his cutoff? In terms of win shares, Easley is certainly no where near the bottom of the pack for second basemen in the NL this year. He’s about in the middle.
That’s why I find what Kalkman wrote — or how he spinned it — very questionable.
C’mon, smart guy. Where is that list of stats?
And that’s one less point on defense I’m talking about.
Castillo had quite a few runs per AB. and stole a reasonable amount of bases. he did quite well in those categories considering how lousy he was at the plate.
If a trade doesn’t happen, I hope Castillo bounces back. He does have the potential to be a good 2B and #2 hitter. I doubt, however, Mets fans will ever give him a chance to show his face again….
Runs?
Seriously?
As we think about Omar’s take on Murphy at 2nd base, remeber he wanted no part of Keppinger there either.
or did Willie want to part of keppinger there?
What I’m getting from this is that Murphy would have to be a historically bad fielder to be a worse option than any of these guys. I think I’m officially on the Murphy for 2nd bandwagon.
I actually came here to see if people saw this.
So you’re a Philly fan. Figures.
I hope the Rays sweep your team.
And this guy’s methodology is questionable ,…. even though I know when the shortstop rankings come out Reyes will rank way ahead of the overrated 1-year wonder, Rolllins.
No, I’m not a Phillies fan. In fact, I hate the Phillies.
I hope the Rays win, too!
Rollins, by the way, was a +23 fielder this year. He’ll do pretty well.
Oh, OK. Then you must be a Yankee or Braves fan. Same thing.
Rollins may have been an OK fielder this year but he is one of the most overrated players in the game. And Reyes is a better overall player.
Still wrong.
He was well beyond an “ok” fielder, though. Arguably deserves a Gold Glove.
. . . unlike last year’s abomination.
Still wrong refering to the team. I despise the Yankees and don’t care about the Braves.
Why does Rollins deserve a gold glove when he wasn’t the best fielder at his position this year?
‘
See what I mean? … Terribly overrated.
No, I don’t see what you mean. You just said something subjective and used it to support your subjective statement. No support anywhere. You can’t just say something and then say it’s true because you say so.
Anyway, Jimmy Rollins arguably deserves a Gold Glove because he was a +23 fielder this year, which led all shortstops in Major League Baseball. As in there wasn’t anything better than him period (by one, very good, measure).
Ok,. Here’s my support – Both Tejada and Izturis had a higher RZR..
Hence, he was NOT the best SS defensively in the NL.
There’s a quick explanation of the stats used in the actual article and a link to a series of posts with more explanation than you’d ever want. But sure, instead of forcing others to spend time reading, I’ll take the time to recap the stats used in my article. My snark ends here.
Offense is simply linear weights, which gives park-adjusted credit for things like BBs, 2Bs, HRs, and SBs, while removing credit for GIDPs, outs, Ks, and CS’s. Really the only thing not included is baserunning (other than SB/CS). AL hitters get a five-run bonus over NL hitters over a full season because AL pitching is better.
Defense is a combination of position and fielding your position. Over a full season, here’s what each player receives for position:
+12.5 runs CA
+7.5 SS
+2.5 runs CF/3B/2B
-7.5 runs LF/RF/1B
Fielding is based on zone ratings, which measure the percentage of balls hit into a player’s area of responsibility that he turns into outs. Two zone ratings are used based on the data provided from two companies: STATS and BIS. Zone ratings are converted to plays above average, which are converted to runs above average. This method is way better than systems like Win Shares, range factor, fielding percentage, BPro’s FRAA/FRAR, etc. because actual hit location data is used. Systems like Dewan’s +/-, MGL’s UZR, and Pinto’s PMR are equal, if not better systems, but are not both free and publicly available (Pinto’s should be available within a month).
If you have more specific questions, please ask, or read the explanatory articles. These are better, more accurate stats, than anything else available on the web, I’m confident in saying. They are a measure of actual 2008 production and should not serve as a proxy for 2009 projections.
the chances of FAH replying to this post are slim to none, unfortunately.
Will he call Kalkman “smart guy” and try and guess what team he roots for “as if it matters?”
Should be () not “” around “as if it matters.”
No, I won’t be calling him smart guy unless to really mean it. He at least gave the stats used, and it didn’t take a whole block.
And yes, it matters what team you root for, because we get a lot of trolls here and they always have an agenda. Sounded like you might be one of them.
And why so secretive about your team?
If it doesn’t matter, then just tell what it is.
Because the guessing game entertains me.
Seems like if I’m at a Mets Blog there’s a good chance I’m a Mets fan. . .
Fine, you’re a Mets fan.
If you’re on MetsbBlog with “phil” in your name, there’s also a good chance you’re a Philly fan. Even without the “phil” part, there’s a good chance you’re a troll. There are a lot of them here.
or maybe his name is “Phil” — ever thought of that? philkid posts at many sites and is a smart guy. not a troll. not sure how someone who posted a bunch of intelligent comments here could be mistaken as a troll anyways, but whatever.
Since this thread is dying and I’ll get no more wild guessing, I’ll answer that I’m a Rangers fan.
I was linked here by a Mets fan a while ago.
Well, thanks for replying in person.
skyking, be snarky all you want. I don’t mind. All I want is to understand the methodology that came up with the conclusion that Easley is the “worst” 2nd basemen in the league and inferior to Castillo when I know he was not on both counts
I don’t have time to read through multiple pages and endless posts just to attempt to understand your methodology. If you had encapsulated it in a short few paragraphs explaining the stats used it would have been much more persuasive instead of expecting a reader to click through multiple levels of links and glean from multiple pages the formula you used.
Ok, so now it’s apparent you’re putting Castillo ahead of Easley because he has more BBs and SBs, even though he was less productive in situational spots and less clutch in the eyes of most Mets fans.
See, philkid, it didn’t take an entire block for someone to explain the methodology. Just a few paragraphs..
I have a few questions and points:
1) Exactly which stats do you use to come to the conclusion that AL pitching as a whole is superior?
2) Yes, I already saw that ZR and RZR were used for defense. And, as I had asked previously above, why then would Easley have one less point on defense when he had a superior RZR to Castillo’s and essentially the same ZR, actually a smidgen higher? Where does that extra point come from for Castillo?
3) What was your cutoff for inclusion of second basemen? Because Easley certainly was not the “worst” in the league, either in terms of quantity (production) or quality. Was your cutoff arbitrary? If so, how did you decide what the cutoff should be and why did you not adhere to the generally accepted cutoff that most use to determine qualified players?
4) Where can I see the entire list you came up with for second basemen? I would like to see where other certain players ranked in it.
5) As I already mentioned earlier today above, my main problem with your piece is labeling those at the bottom the “worst.” That is not what your system does. It measures value as your stats define it, but not the quality of the player, their talents or their performance, since those who play more are generally going to get more points. You may think I’m nitpicking about semantics, but in sabermetrics, it’s really important how you couch your results. Because some may end up actually believing Easley was the “worst” at second this year when he was not.
Looking forward to your answers.
Why does this site eat my posts? When I try to re-post, I get an error message that “I already posted that”. If I’m logged in, do I need to re-enter my name/email/uri?
I’m hoping my long comment comes through eventually, but here’s an additional point:
I’m ignoring situational/clutch stats because I don’t believe players can control in which situations they perform well or don’t. But sure, you could use something like WPA instead of linear weights, and I might even buy that for an MVP-like discussion.
sky, this site has a really bizarre spam/word filter. Go through your comment and make sure it doesn’t have any of the following words:
Grif-fey
man-agement
che-ese
… and any word with a-s-s in it. You can not write a-s-sume, for example, or mas-sive. If your comment has any of these words, it will simply disappear, never to be seen again!
I was not suggesting that traditional situational stats be used in a system to measure value. That’s because these stats are far from adequate in as-sessing clutchness. However, they are the closest we have, and I just brought them up to make a point that in almost all Mets fans’ eyes, Easley was a more valuable player than Castillo this year, coming through more often with bigger hits in bigger situations.
1. It’s an a–umption based on the work of others. Some studies have compared hitters and pitchers switching leagues. Sorry I can’t point you to an exact study, but I trust the guys at insidethebook.com/ee
2. Playing time matters. A below-average fielder in 100 innings will rate better than a below-average fielder in 500 innings.
3. There was no cut-off for playing time. All players are compared to replacement-level, which is the minimum level of production a team should expect from any position for the minimum salary cost. Players who perform this level help their team. Players who are worse hurt their team. A really low quality player (say, you and me) will still rate near 0 overall given only 10 PAs, whereas a slightly-below-replacement-level player given 500 PAs will rate worse than us. It’s a measure of production, which is a combination of quality and quantity.
4. The entire list is available by clicking through to Justin’s stats, copying it to Excel and sorting by position and TotalValue. Or send me an email at skyking162@gmail.com if you don’t have the technology to do that.
5. Sure, that’s fair, it depends on your definition of worst. It really should read “most productive” and “least productive”. Relative to replacement-level, naturally.
That spam filter is obnoxious. Especially with the site requiring registration and using Akismet.
sky …
1. You simply can’t make that as-sumption. It’s invalid. Just using the anecdotal evidence of a player here or there jumping leagues is not enough to make a blanket as-sumption about the quality of pitching or hitting in an entire league. And for every player who did better or worse going from one league to the other, I could come up with another player who had the opposite experience. Moreover, a study done one year will not necessarily have relevance to the next year due to the constant movement of pitchers between the two leagues each year. I think there are some as-sumptions about the differences between the two leagues that are safe to make, but that is not one of them. Can you explain your logic for even making that as-sumption?
2. That reply makes no sense regarding my question. Easley had fewer plate appearances than Castillo and fewer innings played at 2nd, yet he had a higher RZR and a slightly higher ZR. So how does he end up with 1 less point on defense? If what you said is true, then Easley should rate higher on defense.
3. I as-sumed you used a cutoff since there is no way Easley was the “worst’ player at 2nd this year. And looking at Justin’s spreadsheet, at least one other player is ranked lower at 2nd than Easley – Felipe Lopez. Was that just an oversight on your part? Regardless, my belief is that Easley was better at 2nd than just Lopez. How in the world does Iguchi get rated better? Sure, his RZR was higher, but in almost every offensive category he was worse, including OBP. If your system weighs defense so heavily over offense, then there is something wrong with that. Moreover, Chris Gomez logged most of his innings at 2nd this year. So why was he listed as a third baseman on Justin’s spreadsheet? Is that an error on his part? If listed correctly, surely he would be at the bottom along with Lopez , especially since your system overrates defense so much. Gomez’ RZR was 100 points lower than Easley’s. and none of his offensive stats were better.
Another anomaly – Ray Durham’s ZRZ is 30 points lower than Easley’s. So how in the world is he rated 8 points higher on defense :?: :?:
It’s these errors, oversights and anomalies like this that make me question the results and methodology. It all just doesn’t make sense.
Finally, there is no way Lo Duca was a more valuable player in the majors than Easley. He threw out just 10% of runners, and had lower offensive numbers in all categories. He was valuable to no team this year, and I’m sure both his teams would agree with that. Any system that would place him higher than Easley is seriously flawed, even given that you rate catchers differently from infielders. There’s no logic there.
Maybe it’s your formula that’s flawed, maybe it’s errors on yours or Justin’s part (especially with the Durham vs Easley defensive rating) … or maybe it’s both … but it all just doesn’t add up. Something is wrong here.
1. By “a–umption” I don’t mean I pulled it out of thin air. I just mean that I didn’t run the study myself and instead used the conclusions of people I trust. And it’s not “anecdotal” evidence. There were REAL studies done correcting for everything that can be thought of, including everything you worried about in your response. It’s not perfect, but I’m confident it’s way more accurate than a–uming equal pitching talent between leagues. Here’s an example of the thoughtfulness put in:
I can’t post that link, evidently. If you google “hardball times is the AL really better” it’s the first result. Again, that’s just an example of the quality of the work done to explain the AL’s advantage over the NL.
2. Ok, I didn’t actually look at the numbers. My other guess is that you’re not looking at out-of-zone plays, which are added to in-zone plays to compute a modified version of RZR. Yup, Castillo had 16 OOZ plays while Easley only had 4. That puts Castillo ahead.
3. Justin uses THT’s position cla-sifications. I a–umed they went by most innings played, but I’m not sure. Ok — Gomez actually played in more GAMES at third base, but played more innings at second base. THT must go by games played.
As for Lopez, he played for both the Nationals and Cardinals. His overall rating is a combination of the two. Justin lists him twice and I’ve combined the two stints into one listing.
4. My system does not overrate defense. And it’s at this point that I’m going to ask that you read through the methodology articles, because it’s all laid out for you. I’ve already given you an article for linear weights, which is what’s used for offense — my ratings don’t overrate OBP or any other stat, because the proper, park-adjusted rates are used for every single individual event (singles, doubles, GIDPs, CS, HRs, HBP, etc.) Please know what you’re talking about before criticizing.
5. You quoted some RZR numbers for Gomez and Durham. Remember, I’m including OOZ plays and also using STATS’ zone rating, not just RZR (BIS’ zone rating).
6. LoDuca vs. Easley: Lo Duca is a catcher and therefore gets more credit for his position than Easley. In other words, he’s allowed to be worse at the plate because catchers in general hit worse than second basemen.
He also only had 190 plate appearances compared to Easley’s 350. When you’re performing below replacement-level, the extra playing time hurts your value. What would you rather have, a really bad player for 190 PAs plus the rest from someone a bit better or a really bad player for 350 plate appearances plus someone a bit better for the rest? Obviously you’d go with the first, which gives you LoDuca. Had LoDuca been given 200 more PAs and played at the same level, he would have been less productive than Easley.
As for LoDuca’s defense, catchers are rated by SB/CS and preventing PB/WP. Lo Duca allowed only one pa-sed ball. And while an 18/2 SB/CS rate isn’t good, it’s only 18 SB! How much could those hurt? At .17 runs per SB (linear weights, read about it), Lo Duca’s 14 net SBs allowed were worth less than three runs against his team.
10 (or whatever): I’d appreciate if you took back the comments about Justin being careless. Just because you don’t fully understand what’s going on doesn’t mean he’s messed something up. Again, please read the methodology before making a–umptions about it.
Maybe Justin used some incorrect base numbers when calculating the defensive portion for the Mets players?
That’s the only way to explain things like Durham vs. Easley on defense. His error in categorizing Gomez as a third baseman also leads me to believe he was less than careful in constructing his spreadsheet.
I’ve explained both these issues. Obviously your a–umption of carelessness or incorrect numbers is not “the only way” to explain the results.
FAH, I invite you and anyone else here over to Beyond the Boxscore for some quality discussion of the entire list, including the Mets players. There’s also a link to the best center fielders article and the first base article should be up within the hour.
Here’s a link to the study showing the AL’s superiority in pitching, through the 2008 season:
(ok, I forgot I can’t post links. but it’s at the Inside The Book Blog — google it. or email me: skyking162 AT gmail)
I saw above we were talking about cloning 2B’s….how about Jay Bell of 1999-2000…holy crow! Slick glove, speed, gap and HR power!
With or without roids?