|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 12, 2017 14:49:21 GMT -5
We've discussed here the top-fielding shortstops. This season has seen a drop off from Brandon Crawford IMO. I came across an ESPN article yesterday that showed several plays that the article felt showed that Andrelton Simmons was the best defensive shortstop in the game. I read something else today that stated that those who watched all the plays felt that Francisco Lindor was the best in 2016. Here is Keith Law's article from 8/23 showing the best defensive tools. Keith feels that Simmons has both the best glove and the best arm among all infielders. I'll try to find yesterday's article showing several plays by Simmons. Had it yesterday, but I can't find it today. www.espn.com/blog/keith-law/insider/post?id=7540 |
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 12, 2017 15:00:25 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Sept 13, 2017 8:58:46 GMT -5
I'm not seeing the full article here. I think you need to be a member of ESPN insider to view it. But if it has Brandon Crawford as #5 I already know I'm not missing anything.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 13, 2017 15:35:47 GMT -5
I'm not seeing the full article here. I think you need to be a member of ESPN insider to view it. But if it has Brandon Crawford as #5 I already know I'm not missing anything. Rog -- Yes, you are missing something -- objectivity. Do you truly think Brandon is having as good a season this year? One thing too is that IIRC they were talking about fielding FOR THE POSITION. For instance, they had Paul Goldschmidt at #10 and Nolan Arenado at #4. I would have to say that Arenado likely IS better as a third baseman than Crawford is as a shortstop -- at least this season. The three players ahead of Crawford and Arenado were shortstops: #3 Nick Ahmed #2 Addison Russell #1 Andrelton Simmons Crawford was described as not an elite athlete as were the other shortstops on the list, but one who made subtle plays, in particular those related to double plays. You don't see much of the other players, Boagie, so I don't understand how you are so sure of your evaluation of Crawford. Personally I think he's darn good and would be very surprised if he weren't among the very best, but I just don't see enough of the other players to know for sure. I can't say I value my own opinion higher than that of those who watch all the plays by every player. That would be extremely vain of me. If you want to be that vain, go for it. Incidentally, the one guy here who surprised me here was Ahmed. I guess I'll need to play a little more attention to him if he was ranked this high. I personally like Crawford over Russell, but I haven't seen all that many of Russell's plays. I have no quarrel with those who might evaluate Arenado AS A THIRD BASEMAN over Crawford as a shortstop. Arenado makes a lot of FABULOUS plays. The only factor I can think of that might augur against Brandon is the one mentioned in the article: He's not an elite athlete. That likely means quicker players are getting to a few balls he's just barely missing on. Incidentally, what did we think of the play by Tomlinson last night? I thought that was one of the most spectacular plays I've seen by a shortstop. This thought just hit me. It is possible Crawford wouldn't have been able to pop up quite as quickly or even been able to reach the ball cleanly. Tomlinson is faster and might have gotten to the ball a little better than Crawford -- almost any shortstop -- could have. I don't think Tomlinson could make that play consistently. I'd have to see him make that 270 degree throw a few times before I believed he could do it consistently. Doesn't take away from the difficulty of the play, but I did have the thought that he might not be able to repeat it consistently. And of course the throw was in the dirt -- but playable. One heck of a play though. One I would think any shortstop would be proud of. And while I might have been slightly higher on Tomlinson's shortstop play than some here, I was truly surprised he was able to make it. Highly impressive play, and one that may show Kelby has more potential at shortstop than we realized. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4070/shortstop-fielding#ixzz4salYUoip |
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 13, 2017 15:47:14 GMT -5
By the way, the ESPN Insider comes free with a subscription to ESPN The Magazine, which isn't very expensive. I was able to get a 2 for 1 Christmas special where I could keep my subscription and give one for Christmas. ESPN has a lot of good stuff, and frankly I should read it more often than I do.
|
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Sept 13, 2017 16:46:22 GMT -5
I would get ESPN the magazine, except toilet paper is cheaper and more absorbent.
Btw, Crawford has one less error than Russell and 200 more chances. Crawford's fielding percentage is 14 points higher. Crawford is smarter and has a better arm. The only reason Crawford isn't ahead of Russell is because he's not wearing a Cubs uniform.
|
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Sept 13, 2017 19:55:10 GMT -5
Bingo! boagie!
Bingo!!!!
boly
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 14, 2017 12:14:06 GMT -5
Perhaps your worst post ever, Boagie. Lots of foolish things said.
|
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Sept 14, 2017 14:00:24 GMT -5
That's fine, but it's my own. It's not recycled, clearly evident mainstream bias that you present as factual data.
Mine is just my opinion, and it's based on many many years of consistent mainstream bias against players in a Giants uniform.
We saw it in every post-season prediction since 2010. We saw it in the steroid witch hunt against Barry Bonds and the love affair with "Big Poppi."
We've seen it MANY times.
And now we're seeing it yet again with Brandon Crawford (who happens to have the best fielding percentage among all of the top 5 fielders on the list.)
Simmons is very good, and you could make an argument for him, but that's it. Arenado is a great third baseman, but shortstop is a much more demanding position. But Russell and Ahmed? That is a joke. There is absolutely no viable reason that they would be higher on the list than Crawford. Prove me wrong, I welcome it.
If you want to read that crap, that's fine. But when you post that regurgitated drivel on this board I'm going to point out it's overwhelmingly obvious flaws.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 15, 2017 12:42:16 GMT -5
That's fine, but it's my own. It's not recycled, clearly evident mainstream bias that you present as factual data. Rog -- How could what I presented be fact? Clearly it is opinion, which is about all we can do with fielding. As to mainstream bias, I believe the rankings were based on metrics, so probably not. It might be worth straightening out your thinking here, Boagie. Clearly you have some misconceptions. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4070/shortstop-fielding#ixzz4slpDKRa5 |
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 15, 2017 12:43:58 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 15, 2017 12:49:08 GMT -5
And now we're seeing it yet again with Brandon Crawford (who happens to have the best fielding percentage among all of the top 5 fielders on the list.) Rog -- Your parenthetical comment is indeed a fact. Probably the main point isn't. Anyone above a casual fan knows fielding percentage isn't the best way to judge a fielder. Know which third baseman led the Texas League in fielding percentage in 1975? Jack Clark. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4070/shortstop-fielding?page=1#ixzz4slqMW84l |
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 15, 2017 12:51:21 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 15, 2017 12:54:04 GMT -5
But when you post that regurgitated drivel on this board I'm going to point out it's overwhelmingly obvious flaws. Rog -- You have indeed pointed out what you believe to be overwhelming flaws in the ESPN aricle. What you haven't done is give much evidence of why the flaws exist, let alone are obvious. The guy who wrote the article is good enough to write for ESPN. Neither you nor I am. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4070/shortstop-fielding?page=1#ixzz4slsCZfqi |
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Sept 15, 2017 13:45:21 GMT -5
Rog -- You have indeed pointed out what you believe to be overwhelming flaws in the ESPN aricle. What you haven't done is give much evidence of why the flaws exist, let alone are obvious.
Boagie- Crawford has 2 consecutive gold glove awards under his belt, he has over 300 more chances than Ahmad, and still has a higher fielding percentage. But yet Ahmad is ranked higher. You could not make a stronger case that their ranking system is flawed. You just can't see that as flawed because you will always defend the mainstream writers.
You always tout objectivity here when referring to mainstream sports media, but you don't practice what you preach when reading our posts. I've brought you facts here and you disregard them because they're not "geeky" enough for you.
Fielding percentage isn't everything, but when you add way more chances, and a fairly considerable gap between those fielding percentages, you have to admit the ranking is flawed.
I am being objective here. We've had the Simmons/Crawford debate for a long time now, and I fully admit Simmons could be as good if not slightly better than Crawford, and some could make a case that Crawford is slightly better..the numbers back those two positions up. Arenado is brilliant at 3rd, he is definitely in the same conversation, but the fact that shortstop is a more demanding position I believe puts Crawford and Simmons slightly ahead. But Russell and Ahmad are not in the same conversation. The numbers I've seen support that. Show me numbers that say otherwise.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 15, 2017 14:52:56 GMT -5
Crawford has 2 consecutive gold glove awards under his belt, he has over 300 more chances than Ahmad, and still has a higher fielding percentage. But yet Ahmad is ranked higher. You could not make a stronger case that their ranking system is flawed. You just can't see that as flawed because you will always defend the mainstream writers Rog -- Brandon's two Gold Gloves are impressive. Having played in as many as 100 games only one season among his four, Ahmed hasn't been in any true position to compete. Not that chances per nine innings makes one player better than another, but Ahmed has averaged 4.66 chances per nine innings over his career to Brandon's 4.44. I don't think you want to use total chances when saying that Brandon is better. So, yeah, if the system were flawed -- which I suspect it isn't -- I could make a clearly better case that it was. As for supporting mainstream writers, I would support that virtually all of them are more knowledgeable than you or I. But where I truly support writers more than most is in supporting those writers outside the mainstream. Most of the ideas on this board are mainstream. Don and I likely diverge from the mainstream more than others. I'll have to look the article over again, but I think it presented quite a few ideas outside the mainstream. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4070/shortstop-fielding#ixzz4smKn2Goj |
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 15, 2017 15:01:18 GMT -5
Looking at the article again, although it appeared on ESPN, Scott Spratt is far from a mainstream writer. He's with Baseball Info Systems, which is known far more for its metrics than its writing.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 15, 2017 15:09:00 GMT -5
This is what the article said about Nick Ahmed:
3. Nick Ahmed, SS, Arizona Diamondbacks: Ahmed is the only player on this list whose entire value is tied to his glove. In four seasons in hitter-friendly Chase Field, Ahmed has yet to finish a season with a .300 on-base percentage, and he has just 18 home runs and 12 stolen bases in almost 1,000 career plate appearances. But Ahmed's defensive skills are so good that he continues to earn a substantial role. With limited playing time, Ahmed has saved the Diamondbacks 37 runs at shortstop since 2015, which is fourth-best at the position. Ahmed is most adept at ranging to his left and is sure-handed with great instincts.
If Ahmed is fourth in runs saved at shortstop over the past three seasons even though he's played only 265 games during the three seasons, he's likely pretty good.
Hey, I don't know how good these rankings are, but I do know that they're based on pretty much all the plays made (and not made) by pretty much all the players. That doesn't guarantee they're right, but it does indicate they're made with a lot more information than I have. I usually go along with guys like this. They've simply seen a ton more plays than I have.
Is Simmons the best shortstop? Is Crawford? Is Russell or Ahmed? I would say we have enough information to say they're all very good. I believe Simmons is the best because I think he is the consensus choice among those who are most knowledgeable.
I happen to think Crawford is among the best shortstops in history as well. Russell seems to be getting quite a bit of notice. That Ahmed is even strongly considered given how little he's played is impressive.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 15, 2017 15:10:05 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Sept 16, 2017 11:26:39 GMT -5
I have. What you've given me as evidence is a ranking system by ESPN insider and the fact that Ahmed was 4th in runs saved since 2015. Where was Crawford on runs saved? When we're making comparisons shouldn't we...oh I don't know...compare?
What I gave you was the fact that Crawford has a substantially more chances and a fairly significant gap between fielding percentages compared to that of Russell and Ahmed. If we were to switch the same argument to hitting, it would be like saying a hitter with more at bats and a higher OPS should be ranked below 2 hitters with less at bats and a lower ops.
Is that also an argument you'd make?
I gave you the evidence, if you want to counter that with other evidence then I'm up for that discussion, but instead you just call me foolish. Isn't that the type of arguments you despise from Randy? I think this is an interesting topic, I'd like to discuss it with facts, not name calling.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 17, 2017 3:48:35 GMT -5
What you've given me as evidence is a ranking system by ESPN insider and the fact that Ahmed was 4th in runs saved since 2015. Where was Crawford on runs saved? When we're making comparisons shouldn't we...oh I don't know...compare?
Rog -- Remember this all started when I tried to find an ESPN article (including play clips) about Andrelton Simmons and came across the Scott Spratt article we're not discussing.
I'm glad to hear you say that Simmons might be better than Crawford. That shows more objectivity on the subject than I've seen in the past.
When I watch Brandon, he certainly looks darn good. He threw out a guy at the plate the other night on a very bad hop that he slurped up like it was ice cream melting out of the cone. He's about as smooth as they come, making a lot of tough plays look routine.
But Brandon is slower afoot than I thought. That likely cuts down on his range. Balls he dives for, others might snag without diving. Balls that just scrape by him might be picked up by a few others. This depends on positioning, anticipation and quickness as well as speed, so I certainly don't know that for sure.
But I do know there are some excellent defensive shortstops out there.
When I quoted the article on Ahmed's having finished fourth in defensive runs saved (DRS) since 2015, I was simply quoting the article, since Ahmed certainly came as a surprise to me. I did mention that having finished fourth despite playing many fewer innings than others was a feather in his cap.
So let's look at arguably the top four defensive shortstops who have been in the league since 2015.
Ahmed -- 34 DRS in 2146 innings
Crawford -- 47 DRS in 3605 innings
Russell -- 53 DRS in 3209 innings, with 9 DRS coming in 746 innings at second base in 2015
Simmons -- 72 DRS in 3576 innings
That certainly isn't the only evidence we have, but you asked for a comparison, and there it is. On a runs saved per inning basis, it shows Simmons to be far ahead, followed by Russell and then Ahmed in reasonably close proximity and with Crawford bringing up an impressive rear among the foursome.
Ultimate Zone Rating shows Simmons at 47 runs, Crawford at 40, Russell at 33 and Ahmed at 20.
Rating players on a 1 to 100 scale, the fans rated Simmons at 87, Crawford and Russell at 80 and Ahmed at 74.
Inside Edge Fielding has Simmons far ahead. On 1-10% balls, Simmons leads with 13.2% outs. Russell is next on these exceptionally hard plays with 64%. On 10-40% balls, Simmons again leads with 43.5%, but Crawford is close behind with 41.6. On the tough plays, Simmons and Crawford rank highest.
On 40-60% balls, Simmons is again far ahead at 72.2%, while Brandon is next at 50.5%. On 60-90% balls, Simmons and Crawford are tied at 82.2%. On the routine plays, 90-100%, Simmons again ranks #1 at 98.7%, while Crawford is second at 97.4%.
Inside Edge Fielding shows Simmons to be easily the best, followed by Crawford and then the closely-bunched pair of Russell and Ahmed.
This is what we find at Fan Graphs. There are no doubt other metrics available as well. But when we combine the Fan Graphs metrics, the rating seems pretty clear as:
1. Simmons
2. Crawford
3. Russell
4. Ahmed
Again, this doesn't prove anything. We're talking about rating defense, which is an extremely difficult thing to do. The best answer I've seen has been to combine the available factors, as we have here.
These show why I think Simmons is #1, and Crawford is my #2 guy. I really haven't seen many plays by the other pair. And while I've seen hundreds of plays by Brandon, I haven't seen a high number from Simmons either. And mostly I've seen his highlights.
I will say that Simmons' highlights are certainly highlights. Even as a Giants fan, Simmons' highlights are far easier to find, which might be further evidence someone out there thinks he is the best.
I still can't find the original article I found showing many Simmons highlights and discussing what aspects of Andrelton's fielding they showed.
But regardless of how I personally rate defenders, I usually go with the experts, particularly when there is a strong consensus. That consensus has rested with Simmons since he entered the league in 2012.
One other point here: I don't believe I called you foolish, Boagie, but I did point out some things you said were. As the primary example, I'll use "I would get ESPN the magazine, except toilet paper is cheaper and more absorbent."
I also thought that "The only reason Crawford isn't ahead of Russell is because he's not wearing a Cubs uniform," might have lacked a little objectivity as well. You knew virtually nothing about the writer when you made that comment. For all we know, he might dress up in a Giants uniform late at night.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 17, 2017 3:49:52 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 17, 2017 4:00:01 GMT -5
Fielding percentage isn't everything, but when you add way more chances, and a fairly considerable gap between those fielding percentages, you have to admit the ranking is flawed. Rog -- A player's pitching staff has a say in his range factor (total chances). If the pitching strikes out more batters or allows more fly balls or has more batters hitting the ball to right field, clearly it is going to reduce a shortstop's range factor. As for fielding percentage, we know it's merely a rudimentary guide. Coming back to range factor, I believe you said it showed that Brandon was better than Ahmed. To the extent it says much of anything, Ahmed's 4.66 chances per nine innings is clearly ahead of Crawford's 4.44. Simmons is right behind Ahmed at 4.64, and Russell is the clear laggard at 3.95. But that belies the fact that the author wrote that he felt Russell actually had the largest range of the group, but fell behind Simmons primarily because of arm accuracy. Anyway, Boagie, would you agree that your comment about fielding percentage combined with range factor showed that the ranking is flawed was a tiny bit flawed in and of itself? Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4070/shortstop-fielding?page=1#ixzz4svMwlbJM |
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 17, 2017 4:02:14 GMT -5
I am being objective here. We've had the Simmons/Crawford debate for a long time now, and I fully admit Simmons could be as good if not slightly better than Crawford, and some could make a case that Crawford is slightly better. Rog -- I agree with you that your comment shows some objectivity. I congratulate you on it. (Now if we could just get Boly on board the objectivity train!) Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4070/shortstop-fielding?page=1#ixzz4svPXwl7M |
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 17, 2017 4:04:59 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 17, 2017 4:22:06 GMT -5
What did you think of the behind-the-back tag on that led him away from the third-base bag and into a leap over the runner? How about the play where he nailed the speedy Zimmer rounding third base on a ball that would gotten past most shortstops?
One thing I would mention about Simmons having the most ESPN highlight replays: Because Brandon Crawford plays most games later than Simmons, his chances are somewhat more limited.
One thing I will say about many of the Simmons highlights: They often show him doing something we haven't seen other shortstops do.
I posted the play where he nearly wound up in foul territory after making a throw from the DEEPEST hole I've ever seen a play made from. I remember that Boly wasn't all that impressed, but even though Simmons is a shortstop, he wound up in the same proximity to the left field line as Brooks Robinson did while making some his great plays as a third baseman.
We've seen Brandon Crawford make some GREAT plays from the hole. Because of his strong arm, some of Brandon's best plays have been made from the hole. But have we EVER seen him go as far into the hole as Simmons did on that particular play? I just don't think so. The closest I can remember was when he dived into the hole to rob Yadier Molina of a hit, causing Yadier to overreact to the out call at first and get tossed from the game. But even that play wasn't made from as deep in the hole as Simmons' was.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 17, 2017 4:42:37 GMT -5
We didn't get a good look at it, and it didn't result in an out, but what did you think of Simmons' 95.4 mph relay throw (the third-fastest recorded)? Ask Boly how hard it is to throw 95 mph on a RELAY throw.
You've set yourself and tried to use your 180 degree twist to put extra mustard on a relay throw, but did you ever think a guy could throw 95 mph with that movement? I think Brandon is GREAT on relay throws, but I think Simmons may be even better. As strong as Brandon's arm is, many consider Simmons to have one even stronger.
By the way, for those who aren't digging the new metrics, isn't it a lot more meaningful to say that a guy made a 95.4 mph throw than merely that he made a great one? The 95.4 mph tells us HOW great it was (from a speed standpoint). Incidentally, how quickly he got rid of the ball on the throw would also have been measurable.
Or how about the picture that shows not just that a guy had great range, but how long the ball was in the air, how much ground the outfielder covered, how pure his route to the ball was, and his top speed on the play?
They talk about a guy like Jerry Rice playing with great FOOTBALL speed. The same thing exists with BASEBALL speed. And now we can actually measure it. We know for SURE that Byron Buxton and Billy Hamilton can cover over 10 yards in a second ON THE BASEBALL FIELD. They've done so.
We get excited by a great play and say "What a great play that was." Metrics can tell us HOW great a play it was.
|
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Sept 17, 2017 9:50:11 GMT -5
I am objective, Rog, but being objective doesn't mean always agreeing with one person.
Your concept of objectivity is 'what do the numbers say?'
Mine is not.
I see the numbers and I see the player.
Having played I see things beyond the numbers that you, as a former accountant/CPA, I can't remember which, do not
That you don't agree with my logic is a moot point.
I AM objective, just not in the way in which you would like.
boly
|
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Sept 17, 2017 9:51:22 GMT -5
I also have a temper; a bad temper.
I understand mistakes, but I do NOT tolerate half-assed or STUPID play, and thus my rants.
But I can and DO come back to earth.
boly
|
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Sept 17, 2017 12:35:42 GMT -5
I appreciate the stats you've given, Rog. And those stats do prove that ALL the players mentioned are quite good at making the fantastic plays. But I still don't believe those stats Trump the overall fielding percentage. How many times do we see Crawford not get to a ball he could have gotten to? How many times do we see him not make the out when he gets a glove on it?
Fielding percentage is the large sample. Your stats are the smaller sample. A huge part of being a good infielder is being sure handed, and there should be no argument that Crawford is more sure handed than Russell or Ahmed.
In addition, I think Brandon's arm makes a lot of those plays look less fantastic. When Brandon backhands a grounder in the hole, he straightens up and fires a strike to first. When a lot of other shortstops get to that ball, they don't necessarily have the same arm strength to do that. They might get the out, but the play looks more fantastic because Crawford's arm makes a number of those difficult plays look more routine.
Again, this isn't about Simmons and Crawford. In my opinion, as I said before, those two could be considered the best. It's the rest I had an issue with. And I still do. And if what you say is true about the range and speed factor, then why is Arenado also ahead of Crawford?
I still maintain, that if you put Crawford on a more mainstream friendly team, and consider the two gold gloves he's had in the last two seasons, ESPN would have placed him at LEAST #2 behind Simmons, and that would have been acceptable to me, and more accurate, imo.
|
|
