July 14, 2008
Slating Defense
Nate DiMeo pens an article for Slate titled, "Derek Jeter vs. Objective Reality." He's asking why there is a disconnect between what fans think of Jeter's defense and what statistical research shows. There's another question he asks as well:
If the sabermetric case against Jeter's glove has long been closed, why do the sabermetricians keep opening it? In an e-mail, Tom Tango joked that Jeter comes up again and again "because he gets far more girls than his fielding talents should allow." And there's probably something to that: The stat guys want to kick a little sand back at the press-box bullies--all of whom seem to have Word macros for phrases like "nerd writing in his mother's basement"--who lazily swallow the myth of Jeter's fielding prowess.
But the better answer is that Jeter's defense is at the heart of the conflict between sabermetrics and traditional baseball fandom. A recent article by Baseball Prospectus' Dan Fox poses the age-old question, "[W]hat would Sir Francis Bacon, the English philosopher and statesman, have thought of Jeter's defense?" Fox, who recently announced his departure from the blog world to join the front office of the Pittsburgh Pirates, looks back to Bacon's notion that people tend to think that memorable incidents define the whole. So we see Jeter flip the ball to Posada or emerge bloodied after leaping into the stands to catch a Trot Nixon foul ball and think "great fielder." Bacon, like today's statistical innovators, would seek out objective scientific data to understand the larger truth about Mr. Jeter. These data show that--yes, Sox fans--Jeter totally sucks.
I would note, too, that the case for OBA was made in quite the same way. Sabermetricans talked and talked about OBA for years before people started to pay attention. It was probably Sandy Alderson who helped move it into the main stream. I remember an ESPN broadcast where Gary Thorne suddenly started praising OBA because Alderson talked about it in an interview.
At some point, a GM will say something like, "We signed him as a free agent, because despite all the errors our probabilistic models show he turns lots of tough hits into outs." Then these models will start gaining acceptance.
Thanks to Nate for a link to the Probabilistic Mode of Range.
Posted by David Pinto at
08:56 AM
|
Defense
|
TrackBack (0)
I and my high school and college buddies knew the value of OBP in the 70s, thanks to Strat o Matic! Also as a pitcher I knew that walks were bad(therefore good for a hitter).Branch Rickey also knew the value of OBP/Slugging.
The "Jeter-sucks and I can prove it but everyone else thinks he is great" discussion is a straw man that speaks more to Sabermetricians' self-conceit than anything else. I think most fans have a good idea of how Jeter plays the field. My Dad mentions that he boots alot of balls and his range isn't that great. I am a Yankees fan and he is one of my favorites but I know he's not a great fielding SS. A big part of what is very irritating about "Sabermetric" people is the idea that before Bill James, the baseball world was in darkness and even now, only they see the Truth.
Jeter is actually having a decent defensive season in 08. His range to his left seems very improved. On the other hand, his arm seems less accurate.
His offense at SS generally makes up for and exceeds the runs he allows on defense.
Funny thing, Jeter isn't doing that badly this year in zone rating. He's middle-of-the-pack among qualifiers, a big imporvement over his awful peformance last year.
But the sabermetric "Jeter sucks" argument has become so automatic, that it's almost heresy to suggest even that Jeter could be improving.
I have a theory about OBP and OPS suddenly appearing on TV all over the country ... Cubs announcers have talked about it, as well as many of the ESPN national announcers. I must admit to being startled on more than one occasion early this season to hear the term OPS bandied about.
My theory is that since Bill James was hired by the Red Sox and the Sox won two World Series, then OBP and OPS are now acceptable to be discussed in mixed company.
As for Jeter, qualitative defensive stats could have taken a big step forward in the public conscience if they had only had proven that Jeter was a fielding god. Unfortunately, Jeter's not, that doesn't match the pre-written media template, so they are something to be sneered at. Oh well, try again next year.
My $.02,
rogerlmills@ameritech.net
I don't think any sabermetrician has EVER said "Jeter sucks." There's a general acknowledgement that, while his defense isn't great, his offense clearly makes him a standout at the position.
However... when he wins three Gold Gloves in a row, you have to admit that the sabermetric community has a point, and the baseball establishment has yet to catch up with reality. Whatever you think of the newfangled fielding measures, Jeter is not and has never been a Gold Glove shortstop.