|
Post by Rog on Sept 18, 2017 9:27:40 GMT -5
But I still don't believe those stats Trump the overall fielding percentage. Rog -- Almost everyone in baseball now realizes fielding percentage is a poor judge of a fielder's performance. Ozzie Smith wasn't considered perhaps the best-fielding shortstop in history because of his .978 fielding percentage. They don't believe total chances are the best way either, even though Brandon falls well short of Simmons and Ahmed in that area. Brandon is really good. Maybe he IS the best. But there are balls Simmons gets to and records outs on that Brandon isn't able to, in part because Brandon doesn't have much speed. And as strong as his arm is, it isn't considered to be quite as strong as Andrelton's. There is no way to prove which player is better. But most of those who watch every play by every fielder believe Andrelton is the better of the two. Maybe it's just because he plays on the East Coast. Oh wait. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4070/shortstop-fielding#ixzz4t2YljsiV
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 18, 2017 9:35:46 GMT -5
Your concept of objectivity is 'what do the numbers say?' Rog -- My concept of objectivity is to be open-minded to the facts. In this case, the people who watch every play by every player tend to view Simmons as even better than Brandon. And Brandon himself is darn good. You and Boagie may think your own observations based on almost all of Brandon's plays and a small percentage of Andrelton's makes you a better judge than those who watch all the plays of each. I'm not egotistical enough to do that. It is quite possible that I have seen more of Simmons' plays than either of you, but I certainly haven't seen enough to make a fully-knowledgeable judgment. I have read a fair amount about him, but I still don't have the knowledge bank of those who are best prepared to make the judgment. I will say that I haven't yet seen anything that indicates to me that Crawford is better but I haven't seen enough of Simmons to be sure he's better either. But most of those who have judged all the plays made by both seem to think Simmons is even better than Crawford. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4070/shortstop-fielding?page=2#ixzz4t2acYDaN
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 18, 2017 9:37:14 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 18, 2017 9:49:26 GMT -5
Fielding percentage is the large sample. Your stats are the smaller sample. Rog -- Given that all (with the exception of the fans' ratings I mentioned) are based on a sample of every play by every player, I'm not sure how the judgments I cited are based on a smaller sample. What I presented were all the evaluations I could come up with. I didn't mention fielding percentage or range factor, since neither of those are great evaluators. But when combined, what the two do show is that Simmons successfully fields more balls than Brandon. That doesn't necessarily make him better, since neither of those stats show anything approaching a comprehensive indication of how fielders compare. But if we use them, we see that even though Simmons makes slightly more errors than Brandon, he still fields more balls successfully. The stats I cited show that he is more successful compared to the average shortstop than Brandon is. Most believe the best way to evaluate fielding -- which is quite hard to evaluate -- is to look at all the rating factors to get an overall idea of the player. I feel I'm pretty good at judging fielding, but I have a hard time believing my judgments are better than those of people who have seen every play made -- and not made -- by every player. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4070/shortstop-fielding?page=2#ixzz4t2dJqO6G
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 18, 2017 9:55:14 GMT -5
By the way, fielding percentage and range factor don't lie (although fielding percentage is based in part on judgments (error or hit) that may not be totally objective or accurate. What does happen with those figures is that they can be overvalued.
If a team gets a lot of strikeouts, a fielder won't get as many chances. If a team has a lot of fly ball pitchers, an infielder won't get as many chances. If a team has pitchers who allow more balls to be pulled, a shortstop will get more plays. Thus while total chances seems like a fine indicator of fielding prowess, it can be rather skewed.
Fielding percentage and range factor can help us judge fielding prowess, but they are rather limited.
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Sept 18, 2017 14:03:45 GMT -5
But I still don't believe those stats Trump the overall fielding percentage.
Rog -- Almost everyone in baseball now realizes fielding percentage is a poor judge of a fielder's performance. Ozzie Smith wasn't considered perhaps the best-fielding shortstop in history because of his .978 fielding percentage.
Boagie- I don't consider Ozzie Smith the best defensive shortstop in history, I consider Vizquel the best ever and I believe his fielding percentage reflects that. They both made incredible plays, but Vizquel was about as sure handed as it gets which separates him from the fielders like Smith. I believe I've made the same argument comparing Crawford against Ahmed and Russell.
Speed isn't necessarily that important with infielders because it's all about footwork, the first step and getting a good read off the bat. If you dont get a good first step and read off the bat speed very rarely makes up for the initial mistake. The outfield is entirely different. Speed is important and can make up for that initial mistake.
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 19, 2017 8:14:39 GMT -5
If one uses fielding percentage and range factor to determine the best-fielding shortstop, Troy Tulowitzki is your man. Troy's .985 fielding percentage is the equal of Omar Vizquel, and his 4.80 range factor per nine innings is clearly ahead of Omar's 4.62. I'm glad we've settled that argument. Incidentally, Ozzie's range factor was an amazing 5.22. All three of those guys were great shortstops in the field, but their fielding percentages and range factors show that we can't simply use those two factors when we judge their fielding. Some like Ozzie as the best fielder; some like Omar. That Ozzie is in the Hall while Omar isn't, despite Omar's OPS being 26 points higher, makes a strong argument in Ozzie's favor. On the other hand, Ozzie played on better teams, and as odd as it seems, that makes a difference in the voters' eyes. If catching the ball is our standard, Ozzie and Omar likely stand ahead of Troy. If arm is the standard, Troy wins without breaking a sweat. Both Simmons and Crawford are closer to the two O's when it comes to catching the ball, and more like Troy when it comes to throwing it. If we want to compare Simmons and Crawford, one way to do so is to see how they compare on comparable chances. On the toughest chances (1-10% probability), Simmons has more than doubled the success of Crawford -- 13.2% to 5.9%. Advantage to Simmons on the toughest plays. At the other extreme, Ozzie has made 98.7% of the routine plays (90-100% probability). Brandon has made 97.8%. Andrelton holds the advantage in every other category -- tough (10-40%), even (40-60%) and easy (60-90%) -- with the exception of easy, where the two are tied at 82.2%. Generally speaking, I would say that sentiment is somewhat split between Simmons and Crawford among those who don't watch all the plays, with Simmons perhaps being ahead a little. But where the tables tip is when the two are compared by those who judge based on every play made by each player. There, Simmons seems to come out ahead fairly consistently. And those guys who watch every play likely make better judgments than we do in watching a little over half the combined plays made by the two.
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 19, 2017 8:15:37 GMT -5
If one uses fielding percentage and range factor to determine the best-fielding shortstop, Troy Tulowitzki is your man. Troy's .985 fielding percentage is the equal of Omar Vizquel, and his 4.80 range factor per nine innings is clearly ahead of Omar's 4.62. I'm glad we've settled that argument. Incidentally, Ozzie's range factor was an amazing 5.22. All three of those guys were great shortstops in the field, but their fielding percentages and range factors show that we can't simply use those two factors when we judge their fielding. Some like Ozzie as the best fielder; some like Omar. That Ozzie is in the Hall while Omar isn't, despite Omar's OPS being 26 points higher, makes a strong argument in Ozzie's favor. On the other hand, Ozzie played on better teams, and as odd as it seems, that makes a difference in the voters' eyes. If catching the ball is our standard, Ozzie and Omar likely stand ahead of Troy. If arm is the standard, Troy wins without breaking a sweat. Both Simmons and Crawford are closer to the two O's when it comes to catching the ball, and more like Troy when it comes to throwing it. If we want to compare Simmons and Crawford, one way to do so is to see how they compare on comparable chances. On the toughest chances (1-10% probability), Simmons has more than doubled the success of Crawford -- 13.2% to 5.9%. Advantage to Simmons on the toughest plays. At the other extreme, Ozzie has made 98.7% of the routine plays (90-100% probability). Brandon has made 97.8%. Andrelton holds the advantage in every other category -- tough (10-40%), even (40-60%) and easy (60-90%) -- with the exception of easy, where the two are tied at 82.2%. Generally speaking, I would say that sentiment is somewhat split between Simmons and Crawford among those who don't watch all the plays, with Simmons perhaps being ahead a little. But where the tables tip is when the two are compared by those who judge based on every play made by each player. There, Simmons seems to come out ahead fairly consistently. And those guys who watch every play likely make better judgments than we do in watching a little over half the combined plays made by the two.
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 19, 2017 8:20:13 GMT -5
Speed isn't necessarily that important with infielders because it's all about footwork, the first step and getting a good read off the bat. If you dont get a good first step and read off the bat speed very rarely makes up for the initial mistake. The outfield is entirely different. Speed is important and can make up for that initial mistake. Rog -- Nicely put here, Boagie. Where speed becomes most important to an infielder is on plays where a lot of ground has to be covered. That is why it's far more important for middle infielders than corner guys. One are in which Brandon excels is in his reflexes combined with soft hands. He is excellent at playing really hard-hit balls. But the farther he has to travel, the more his lack of speed hurts him. That is part of the reason shortstops usually aren't as good as they age. Speed isn't as important to a middle infielder as to an outfielder, but it is still important. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4070/shortstop-fielding?page=2#ixzz4t88pn6GP
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 19, 2017 8:23:25 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 19, 2017 8:50:47 GMT -5
www.youtube.com/watch?v=8f35TuL-iB4Rog -- Count the number of plays Simmons makes that we've never seen Crawford make. One thing that truly stands out is that Andrelton is the best I have seen at tag plays other than Javier Baez. Look too at how deep in the hole Simmons is on the one play. We've seen Crawford make great plays from the hole, but never from THAT deep. They talk about the 5 1/2 hole. That play came from the 5 1/4 hole. Look at the throws Simmons makes behind runners at first base. There is a reason Simmons has made more than double the truly hard plays (1-10%) than Crawford. And let's not forget that while Crawford's 2.2% misses on the 90-100% plays is outstanding, Simmons' 1.3% misses is nearly twice as good. To be honest, the more plays I see by Simmons, the more convinced I am that he is better than Crawford. Of course, these are highlight plays, and all players look great on their highlights. But we've seen a ton of highlight plays by Crawford, and the quality here seems better. The acrobatic tags (between the legs and behind the back). The quick and strong throws behind the runners. The throws from the seat of the pants. The play in the 5 1/4 hole. Brandon Crawford doesn't make the majority of those plays. As great as he is, he still can't make some of these. Just watch the highlights and keep an open mind. For Boly in particular, what do you see here that I'm missing?
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Sept 19, 2017 9:58:10 GMT -5
A lot, Rog.
I see Brandon making all the plays Simmons makes, and then some.
I'm using the eye test, which you seem to abhor.
In addition, and for me, former coach, more importantly, Crawford rarely chokes on the routine play.
I've seen Simmons become too casual on the routine plays to make me happy with him.
But to me, this argument is pointless, Rog, boarding on the mundane.
Why do we HAVE to pick who is better? They are both darned good!
You take Simmons, I'll take Brandon and we'll both be happy.
boly
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Sept 19, 2017 10:04:18 GMT -5
The fact that you are still stuck on just comparing Crawford and Simmons, tells me you have no ammunition to defend ESPN ranking Ahmed and Russell ahead of Crawford. The Crawford/Simmons debate is not one I feel strongly enough on to continue debating. They're both VERY good, and yes, Simmons might be slightly better. Simmons has better range, although I think Crawford is more sure handed, and better at turning 2. But I believe Simmons and Crawford should be #1 and 2 in the ranking, in no specific order.
The argument is, and has always been the idea that Russell and Ahmed are ranked higher than Crawford.
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 20, 2017 9:20:50 GMT -5
A lot, Rog. I see Brandon making all the plays Simmons makes, and then some. I'm using the eye test, which you seem to abhor. Rog -- Why would I abhor the eye test? It's FUN to use the eye test. Frankly, it takes a lot of work to put together the stats I do. Watching guys MAKE the plays is a ton more fun. With regard to that, how many plays have we seen Simmons make? We've all seen Crawford make a ton, and no question he has been highly impressive. He has great body control, a smoothness few aside from Omar have had. He makes plays look easy, even the tough ones. But how many plays -- of the 3392 Simmons has made resulting in an out or on which the official scorer felt he SHOULD have made an out -- have we seen? Have we seen more than 6% of those plays? You say you have seen Brandon make plays Simmons wouldn't have made. Go to a Brandon Crawford highlight film and tell us which ones those were. Tell us WHY Simmons wouldn't have made the play. You mention that Simmons rarely fails to make the routine play, but we know that a judgement made by a fielding expert shows that while Brandon has missed only only a highly impressive 2.2% of plays with a 90% chance or higher of being completed, Simmons has missed barely more than half as many at Watching the Simmons tape, I saw many plays I don't think Brandon would have made. The first two plays on the film, for starters. The behind the back and between the legs tag plays. The play where his positioning is more than halfway to third base, yet he gets to the ball, tags the second-base bag and somehow contorts his body back 90 degrees to make a leaping throw to first base to complete the double play. The throws he made behind guys. The "hidden ball trick" play where the guy steps off the bag for a millisecond. One thing the eye test shows me is that a few of the plays on which Simmons has to stretch to his fullest Crawford couldn't possibly have made from the same position, because Simmons' arm are much longer than Brandon's. Of all the plays we've seen Brandon make, we've never seen him record an out after going as far into the 5 1/4 hole as we saw on the very first play on Simmons' film. We've never seen him make the amazing contortionist tags Simmons has made (and let's not forget that if Simmons barely got the runner, Crawford's shorter arms wouldn't have LET him make the play, even if he were capable). We haven't seen the throws behind runners we saw on Simmons' tape. We haven't seen Brandon make the 3rd-fastest relay throw in recorded history. We've never seen these plays even though we've seen Brandon make many times as many plays as we've seen Simmons make. You mention that Brandon makes the routine play more often than Simmons, yet while Brandon has missed on barely one out of 45 plays that were 90% higher or easier to make, Simmons has missed on only only one out of every 77. So which plays do you find on a Brandon Crawford tape that he would have made that Simmons wouldn't have made? Why was it that Andrelton wouldn't have made the play? Simmons is talked about as one of the MVP candidates this season. He won't win it -- he isn't even the most valuable player on his own team (Mike Trout. But in his first full season of 2013, he finished 14th while hitting only .248 and posting just a .692 OPS. Last season Brandon finished two spots higher (#12), but he did so in a season in which he hit .274 with a .772 OPS and 84 RBI's. Simmons finished #14 in the MVP balloting based almost exclusively on his glove work. Crawford finished #12 based on his excellent glove work and one of the top shortstop bats in the league. Addison Russell was the only NL shortstop with more RBI's, and the lesser-known fielder finished #19 in the MVP balloting despite a meager .238 batting average. In 2015 Brandon won the Gold Glove over Simmons (ironically, in part because stats were included in the ranking, and the stat chosen was possibly the only one in which Brandon finished higher than Simmons). But in his first two seasons, Simmons beat Brandon. Even in 2015, Simmons won the Platinum Glove Award at short. I have seen Simmons mentioned as possibly the best fielder of all time. www.espn.com/blog/sweetspot/post/_/id/56835/andrelton-simmons-might-be-the-greatest-defensive-shortstop-ever m.mlb.com/cutfour/2017/08/09/247157786/los-angeles-angels-of-anaheims-andrelton-simmons-is-one-of-the-best-players-in-mlbwww.theringer.com/2017/4/26/16040848/mlb-shortstops-los-angeles-angels-andrelton-simmons-119c55e84657And many more. Even following the Giants closely, I have never seen anyone say that about Brandon, despite all his other accolades. I did come across one article that said Brandon was the best defensive player in baseball a year ago (July, 2016). But getting back to an important question I asked but haven't yet had answered: What is it that others see in Crawford -- beyond the numbers -- that makes him better than Simmons? Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4070/shortstop-fielding?page=2#ixzz4tDyOIiuy
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 20, 2017 9:21:54 GMT -5
It would be nice to see specific plays too that Brandon made but Simmons wouldn't have made.
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 20, 2017 9:22:35 GMT -5
And to know WHY Simmons wouldn't have made them.
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 20, 2017 9:25:09 GMT -5
I came across an article in which Omar Vizquel calls Brandon one of the best shortstops today. Not THE best. Not surprisingly, Omar says he wished he had Brandon's arm.
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 20, 2017 9:38:40 GMT -5
Can we all agree that fielding percentage and range factor aren't the best ways to judge defense?
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Sept 20, 2017 9:41:30 GMT -5
You're asking me to remember specific games in which I saw Simmons boot routine plays?
Seriously, Rog?
I saw them. Routine balls hit right at him.
What more can I say?
This argument is silly.
Who in the world cares who's better?
Both are very good.
boly
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 20, 2017 9:44:16 GMT -5
We've spoken here about Joe Panik's being one of the best at turning the double play. So if anything, he should HELP Brandon Crawford's percentage of double play chances turned. Yet in 2015, Brandon finished fifth with 71.2% of double play chances cashed in. Simmons finished first at 83.5%. Put another way, Brandon failed to complete 28.8% of double plays, nearly twice as many as the 16.5% Simmons failed to turn. Remember, this came in the lone season Crawford beat out Simmons for the Gold Glove. www.espn.com/blog/sweetspot/post/_/id/68025/lets-turn-two-the-best-double-play-combos-in-the-majors
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Sept 20, 2017 10:36:17 GMT -5
I would say Crawford is probably better at throwing without momentum going towards the base he's throwing to. Both have very good arms, but Simmons' throws are either strong with his footwork involved, or off balance and not very much behind the throw. Crawford puts heat behind just about every throw unless it's not needed.
Also, I'm not sure how many of Simmons errors are due to errant throws, but I can't even remember a throw of Crawford's resulting in an error.
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 20, 2017 11:30:11 GMT -5
You're asking me to remember specific games in which I saw Simmons boot routine plays? Seriously, Rog? I saw them. Routine balls hit right at him. What more can I say? Rog -- Heck no. I don't care what routine balls you've seen that Andrelton didn't field. As you say, that doesn't really matter. We already know from those who watch all the plays that Andrelton misses fewer routine plays than Brandon does. No, what I want to know is which plays you can see in a Brandon Crawford highlight film that Andrelton Simmons wouldn't have made -- and why. You say you see things I don't see. Those are the things I want to see. To the extent that it is true, I would like to learn to see those things myself. I'm interested too in how you believe Brandon would have made the plays I cited from Simmons' tape that I didn't feel Brandon would have made. I want to know what you're seeing that I'm missing. I'm intrigued also to know why you value your own opinion of a player's defense above that of those who watch every play by every player. I think I can evaluate defense pretty well (although I'm hoping to learn more from you), but I have a hard time valuing my judgment over professionals who watch every single play. Fielding is very hard to judge. Batting average, on-base percentage and slugging percentage tell us a lot about a hitter. WHIP and OPS against tell us a lot about a pitcher. Fielding percentage and range factor, not so much. Percentage of double plays tell us something, but even that doesn't evaluate the difficulty of the opportunities. In that regard, it's kind of like saves. That said, when is the last time we considered the percentage of double plays turned when evaluating a fielder? Evaluations like Defensive Runs Saved seem more valuable, although even the best defensive metrics don't always agree. Most believe looking at ALL the metrics gives one the best way to evaluate defense. As for why it is important to compare the fielding of Simmons and Crawford rather than simply saying they are both exceptional, it's a lot of FUN to compare them. It's kind of like, who was better -- Ruth or Mays? Mays or Mantle? (I've seen a very convincing argument that Mickey was better, even though of course I like Willie better. When we look at the level of play, in pure accomplishment terms, today's players almost HAVE to be better. They simply have more available to them, both physically and mentally. But which player was better FOR HIS ERA? Honus Wagner or Mike Trout? Clayton Kershaw or Sandy Koufax? Pedro Martinez or Juan Marichal? Randy Johnson or Tom Seaver? Buster Posey or Carlton Fisk? Somewhat related to this, I recently heard ex-Giant Kevin Frandsen say on KNBR that the average fastball is up 3 mph just since 2004. We know that generally speaking, harder-throwing pitchers are more successful than their slower-pitching counterparts. Doesn't it follow that today's pitchers are better than those before them? And since the hitters still hit them, that the batters are likely better as well? Aren't fielders better because of greater positioning and range? Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4070/shortstop-fielding?page=2#ixzz4tEgI0EnM
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Sept 20, 2017 12:33:34 GMT -5
Rog, again you're bringing up numbers, and I already said I just used the eye test.
Balls hit right at a SS are routine plays.
In my eye-sampling, I've seen Simmons boot routine plays more often than Brandon.
That's it.
boly
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 21, 2017 12:05:14 GMT -5
In my eye-sampling, I've seen Simmons boot routine plays more often than Brandon. That's it. Rog -- A couple of things. First and foremost, you're not explaining to me what you're seeing that I'm not. Secondly, your eye-sampling telling you that Simmons boots routine plays more often than Crawford simply validates the primary point I have been making -- that it's really tough for us to form a better judgment than those who watch every play by every player. They tell us that Simmons boots 1.3 out of every 100 plays and that while still quite good on the routine plays, Brandon has booted well over half again as many, failing on a still very good 2.2%. You can argue that you would see a "routine" play a little different than they do, but even if your definition is better than the 90-100% probably level they call routine (actually, my word, not theirs), it's hard to imagine that Brandon is better than Simmons on those plays. The gap is simply too large. As is the sample size. They've seen ALL the plays. We haven't. In the case of Crawford, we've come darn close to seeing all the plays of his career. But our memory of them isn't as good as having the numbers to support our memory. And we haven't come close to seeing even a tenth of Simmons' plays. Especially his routine plays, which don't show up on Sports Center or on his highlight films. I said two things, but I just remembered another. Which of the plays in Crawford's highlight films did he make that we're pretty sure Simmons wouldn't have made? You haven't told us exactly what you see in Crawford and Simmons, but I see a very smooth, very controlled fielder in Crawford. One who excels on both the double play and the long throws because of his quick release and his strong arm. He has a very strong backhand, although one might argue that he uses it a little too often. But it's hard to argue with results. His quick hands make him particularly strong on hard-hit balls that take unpredictable hops. The softness of his hands help on virtually any type of bad hop, and his fielding position in receiving the ball is excellent. In Simmons, I see a more athletic player with a more lithe body and longer arms. Probably an even stronger arm than Crawford, although both are among the very best in that regard. Simmons is more creative than Crawford. His greater speed allows him to cover more ground, which is probably more important at shortstop than any other position aside from the outfield. Simmons goes back on a ball quite well, although from what I've seen -- and maybe it is simply because I see Crawford much MORE -- he isn't quite as good as Crawford, who may be the best I've seen. Unless Crawford's positioning is better -- and with Ron Wotus as his infield coach, that is a possibility -- he isn't going to get to as many balls as the more athletic Simmons. He certainly doesn't have the mind-blowing tagging ability Simmons has. Both players seem to have great anticipation, but Simmons may have a tiny bit more quickness to act on it (as is illustrated by his great throws BEHIND the runner). That's what I see that springs immediately to mind. You may see things I don't, and I'd certainly like to know them. I do recall that you felt Brandon's throwing mechanics would withstand the test of time better than Simmons' would. Might be true, but it doesn't affect their performance NOW. Right now, as excellent as Brandon's arm is, Simmons' is likely stronger. I've never seen or heard anyone write or say that Brandon's arm is better than Simmons', while I've seen more than once that Simmons' is the strongest among all shortstops now playing. Two reasons I think Simmons' arm COULD be stronger are more quick twitch and longer arms to provide more whip. Hey, since both players are so good defensively, I find this an intriguing subject. It's so darn fun to research the subject too, since both players are capable of extremely exciting highlights. It's a lot easier to find Simmons highlights than Crawford highlights though, which might tell us something. And no longer does Simmons play in an earlier time zone, which does provide a better opportunity for Sports Center highlights. As for highlight FILMS, there should be little difference in opportunities. As for more routine plays, Simmons has been evaluated as being even more consistent in making them than the steady Crawford. My own eye test shows to me that Simmons appears to be even better, and most of the metrics favor Andrelton as well. I like to learn, so I'd love to know what I'm missing. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4070/shortstop-fielding?page=2#ixzz4tKcddu3t
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Sept 22, 2017 11:31:16 GMT -5
Roger, I DID answer you specifically:
"You're asking me to remember specific games in which I saw Simmons boot routine plays?
Seriously, Rog?
I saw them. Routine balls hit right at him."
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 22, 2017 21:13:11 GMT -5
I would say Crawford is probably better at throwing without momentum going towards the base he's throwing to. Both have very good arms, but Simmons' throws are either strong with his footwork involved, or off balance and not very much behind the throw. Crawford puts heat behind just about every throw unless it's not needed. Rog -- Based on the little I've seen, I agree with you here, Boagie. Brandon is extremely smooth and has excellent footwork. As for Andrelton, the range of plays he makes seems to be broader. And he does have a strong enough arm, even when not having momentum toward first base, to throw guys out. The play where he ranged onto the outfield grass and about in the 5 1/4 hole, leaped and threw the runner out at first was one example. Another came on a play in which the announcers pointed out his momentum was backward. And two where he threw from his tush. I think Andrelton's arm is stronger when his momentum isn't going into the play, and because of his control, Brandon's might be stronger when moving toward first. Both have very strong arms. Some consider Simmons to have the best shortstop arm in the game. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4070/shortstop-fielding?page=2#ixzz4tSnD2UeS
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 22, 2017 21:41:08 GMT -5
Also, I'm not sure how many of Simmons errors are due to errant throws, but I can't even remember a throw of Crawford's resulting in an error. Rog -- Over their careers, Brandon has made 95 errors, 43 of which have been throwing errors. Simmons has made 61 miscues, 37 of which have come with his arm. Based on their assist totals, Simmons has a throwing fielding percentage of .859 to Brandon's .853. They're very close, although Simmons is slightly ahead. This is a guess on my part, but based on Simmons' athleticism and Crawford's body control, it may be that Andrelton has made slightly the more difficult throws overall. On the other hand, I've been extremely impressed with Braves first baseman's Freddy Freeman on throws. For one thing, he's got the best stretch I've seen. As good as Brandon Belt is, Freddy might save more throwing errors than Brandon. Now that Simmons is with the Angels, I'm not sure how good Albert Pujols is. Simmons' throwing errors with the Angels might average about an extra error per full season compared to his time with the Braves. As we will see in the next paragraph, just that little difference with Freeman may have allowed Simmons the slight throwing fielding percentage. Andrelton has easily the overall better career fielding percentage at .983 to Brandon's .976, but the past two seasons Brandon has won or now leads with .983 and .983 to Andrelton's .982 and .981. One last point: When we base our judgment on what we see and remember, we run the risk of being slightly off compared to what really happened. For instance here Boagie you said you can't remember Brandon's making a single throwing error, which means you've missed or forgotten 43 of them. In particular, we need help with what we remember. No matter how good our memory is -- unless it's eidactic -- we forgot a lot of the details if not the more major parts. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4070/shortstop-fielding?page=2#ixzz4tSqQ0gOX
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 22, 2017 22:06:03 GMT -5
Roger, I DID answer you specifically: "You're asking me to remember specific games in which I saw Simmons boot routine plays? Seriously, Rog? I saw them. Routine balls hit right at him." Rog -- I think if you go back, Boly, you will see that I didn't ask that question. What I did ask was: . Looking at Brandon Crawford highlight films, which plays have you seen Brandon make that you didn't feel Simmons would have made -- and why wouldn't he have made them? . You say you see things I don't see. Specifically what are those things, and how do they affect our respective judgments of fielding? One last point: Just as Boagie couldn't remember any of Brandon's 43 throwing errors, your small experience has shown you that Simmons boots more routine plays than Brandon. Except that their career numbers say that while Brandon's 2.2% failure rate on routine plays is excellent, Simmons' 1.3% is phenomenal. You can argue that your definition of routine plays is different than the one I cite bases on plays with a 90% to 100% chance of being completed, but with such a huge difference between the numbers posted by Simmons and Crawford, it seems unlikely that had you seen and recorded all the plays made by both players, you would feel that way. Again, I don't feel qualified to judge players over the judgments of those who have watched every play by every player. By the way, that would be kind of a cool job, wouldn't it? Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4070/shortstop-fielding?page=2#ixzz4tSxGyqvU
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 22, 2017 22:35:30 GMT -5
I have mentioned here, Boagie, that fielding percentage and range factor aren't great ways to evaluate fielding. But even there Simmons seems to have been better with that .983 fielding percentage to Brandon's .976, and his 4.64 range factor per nine innings compared to Brandon's 4.44.
I do think the gap between the two has shrunk significantly the past three seasons.
But my own eye test, and most of the metrics, indicate that Simmons is still the better of the two. One thing I hadn't seen until just this week was the almost unbelievable tags made by Simmons. I thought Javier Baez was in a class by himself -- and he may well be -- but Simmons himself is simply outstanding in that regard too.
You mentioned that Brandon might be better on plays on which he is moving toward first base, and I think he's really special on hard-hit balls right at him too. But I think Andrelton is even better than Brandon on plays requiring athleticism and/or a strong arm, and the stats indicate that as steady as Brandon has been on routine plays, Simmons has been even better. And that Simmons' arm might be slightly more accurate than Brandon as swell as even stronger.
(The accuracy thing isn't clear to me. It's darn close either way IMO.)
I'll ask you too Boagie, which plays on Crawford's highlight film would Simmons have been unlikely to make?
One final point: On balls in the hole where a very difficult throw is required, Simmons uses the jump throw a fair amount, while Brandon usually sets himself. Which is the better way to approach that difficult situation?
I would say that the longer the throw, the more important it is to set your feet. Yet Simmons made that play on the ball hit well into the outfield grass in the 5 1/4 hole, and I don't think Brandon would have been able to make that play (in part because Brandon might not have been able to field the ball without a slide). But I've never seen Brandon -- or anyone else -- throw out a player from that deep in the hold.
You must be right that Brandon's set throws are clearly faster than Simnmons' jump throws. But that play and the play at second base where Simmons sprints a long way toward the bag to field the ball, then touches second before jumping to throw sharply across his body to complete the unassisted double play are plays I don't think Brandon would have been able to pull off -- even with set feet.
By the way, you may remember that the only difficulty group in which Simmons didn't outperform Brandon was the 60% to 90 percent range. In that are of difficulty, both are at 82.2%. That would indicate that Andrelton is better on the routine play, the less than likely, the play that could go either way, and the really tough ones. And equal to Brandon on the tough but not exceptionally difficult plays.
Almost every metric -- including the less sophisticated fielding percentage and range factor -- favor Simmons.
To my eye as well, Simmons appears to have made plays Brandon couldn't have. And I'm not sure I've seen many if any that Brandon made that Andrelton might well not have made.
I think both may be in the top 10 of all time. But I think Simmons is closer to the top of that elite group, while Brandon may be closer to the bottom. Still, fabulous fielding on the part of each.
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 23, 2017 1:46:08 GMT -5
Another feather in Simmons' cap may be that Ozzie Smith thinks that Simmons reminds himself of himself.
Asked which shortstop in today’s game most reminded him of himself, Smith said, “I guess Simmons probably from a range standpoint."
Ozzie got into the Hall of Fame primarily on his fielding. Does he think Simmons, a light hitter who has broken out a bit this season, will have a shot?
“Yeah,” Smith said.
Earlier it was mentioned here that Omar Vizquel, who some think was an even better defensive shortstop than Smith. thought Crawford was one of the best.
|
|