sfgdood
Long time member
stats geeks never played the game...that's why they don't get it and never will
Posts: 90
|
Post by sfgdood on Feb 28, 2019 13:44:55 GMT -5
if we get the 2018 pre-injury Mac, I wont care a lick about his defense.
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Feb 28, 2019 14:27:36 GMT -5
And it's no, and I mean NO contest in my eyes. Rog -- We pretty much all think we're pretty good scouts. And especially on defense, it's pretty hard to argue what one "sees," since it's really tough to judge defense. Some fielders make plays look tough and thus appear to be better than they are. Other players are simply awkward, making their plays look worse than their results. Then there are the players who make everything look easy. If a fielder is really smooth, he can make himself look good even if he doesn't make the play. We look at the guy and say, look how smooth he was. If he couldn't make that play, probably no one could. But guys CAN make plays look easier than they are if they can get to the ball in a particular hurry. Maybe he doesn't get the credit because he doesn't need the acrobatics. In other words, how a guy LOOKS making plays can be either better or worse than he truly is. Thus, anayltics have their place. But they too are far from perfect. For starters, they are calculated a little different from each other, so they don't always give the same results. Most believe the most accurate results comes from kind of an average of the various metrics, particularly when they are averaged over multiple years. That can help take away the "one bad year" factor. Former major league outfielder Erik Byrnes places the most credibility in the ratings calculated by Statcast -- which are based on how far the fielder has to go to catch the ball and how much time he has to get there. If for instance the time and distance says a play is 50/50, the outfielder gets half an out credited to him if he catches it, and loses half an out if he fails to catch it. Pretty simple, really. Sure, there are other factors that enter into it such as wind and sun, but overall if a play is usually 50/50, the good ones get them more often than not, the bad ones usually don't get catch them, and the average fielders catch about half of them. Statcast has Mac at +1, -2 and #3 the past three seasons. That's based on how far he had to go, and how much time from the crack of the bat he had to get there. Does that make Mac an above-average outfielder? Not necessarily. He hasn't played all that much, so the sample is pretty small. But it likely tells us he isn't as bad as you believe he is, Boly. You're also basing your judgment on a small number of plays, and it's likely the ones he hasn't made are sticking out more in your mind than the ones he has caught. Then there are the plays you haven't seen for various reasons, and the plays on which you were correctly watching the entire play, not merely focusing on evaluating Mac's fielding. In the three seasons Statcast results are available, Mac has finished in the top 25%, the bottom 40% and the top 15%, while Bryce has finished in the bottom 2%, the bottom 10% and the bottom 10%. In fairness to Bryce, his "badness" is overemphasized by the large number of plays he's had (and thus had the opportunity to miss) compared to the plays Mac has had, but Mac seems to have done OK overall, whereas by this measure, Bryce has been pretty darn poor in the field. It is my believe that Mac isn't as bad as he appears to you, and that you didn't realize just how bad Bryce may be. Overall I suspect that Mac is an averagish defender, while Bryce is a poor one. I've looked at only this one metric, but it's the one Erik Byrnes trusts (and I don't think was available when Byrnes played, which might make it less likely he would be biased in its favor). It's just that Bryce scores so horribly that I can't believe he is even an average outfielder. And Mac scores well enough that I considerably doubt he's a very bad defender, although there is a bit more doubt because of the small sample size. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.prioboards.com/thread/5105/#ixzz5gqziRwKA
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Feb 28, 2019 14:28:42 GMT -5
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Feb 28, 2019 14:33:11 GMT -5
Bryce Harper is a power hitter in an age when the MLB is highlighting the HR. Last year was the most ever in the bigs. Rog -- I'm with Boagie in that I wish you posted a lot more often here, Gary, but in fact homers declined a bit last season. There were 480 fewer than in 2017 and 25 fewer than in 2016. Your overall point though is a good one. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/5105?page=2#ixzz5gr7tZt6V
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Feb 28, 2019 14:36:48 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Mar 1, 2019 10:51:27 GMT -5
So you're going to evaluate outfielders with numbers?
Seriously?
That's your argument?
Have you have played in the outfield, Roger?
I mean more than little league?
I'm telling you that numbers do NOT tell me what an outfielder can do.
They do NOT.
And if you believe otherwise, you're not just wrong, you are really wrong.
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Mar 1, 2019 13:17:16 GMT -5
Two points here, Boly.
First, I'm not saying that Mac is a GOOD outfielder. What I'm saying is that he isn't as bad as you're making him out to be. If he were as bad as you're saying, he wouldn't have been able to put up good numbers.
I'm not saying he's as good as the numbers indicate. His samples are small, and one of the three years he was below-average. What I'm saying is that's he's almost certainly better than you said he was.
You are frustrated, and Mac is recent. IMO you forgot all about a lot of guys such as Daddy Wags.
Second, let's suppose you and I were holding a defensive tryout for two outfielders. Let's pretend that baseball were like football, and we were going to sign one of two players to be out defensive right fielder. With me so far?
We would want the chances to be as lifelike as possible, and as close as possible for each player, wouldn't we? We might want to have each player chase balls in various directions, and if we could hit balls that the player had to say go 70 feet in 3.50 seconds to catch, we'd want to do that for each player, wouldn't we? We would of course want to see how the player handled routine fly balls, but only the worst outfielders have many problems with cans of corn. What we'd want to see is how often the guy could catch a 50/50 fly ball. How often he could catch the 75/25 fly ball. How often he could get the 25/75 fly ball. Can he get to that 10/90 fly ball, the type of catch that can buoy the team if it is made at a critical point in the game?
That is precisely what Statcast is measuring in the results I quoted here on Harper and Williamson. There measurements are rather simple, and they're rather accurate. If a fly ball is x feet away from the fielder and is in the air for y.yy seconds, it's caught z% of the time. If it's a 50/50 fly ball, and he catches it, he receives 0.50 net outs. That's the out he recorded minus the 0.50 outs that are expected on a 50/50 fly ball. If he doesn't catch it, he received a MINUS 0.50 net out -- the 0.00 outs he recorded less the 0.50 expected outs.
Former major league outfielder Erik Byrnes places his greatest confidence in this highly objective measurement. Based on location and time, a ball does indeed have a certain percentage likelihood of being caught. It's not you and I saying, that was a tough play. It's caught only 75% of the time (as if we could truly know that). It's where the ball is and how much time there is to catch it that determines the percentages. It's as accurate as anything I can imagine.
And based on that, Bryce Harper has caught far fewer fly balls than most outfielders over the past three seasons. Mac has caught as many as most.
Now, as you correctly point out, there is a lot more to playing the outfield than simply catching fly balls. Especially in right and center fields, the throwing arm is also important. How strong is the player's arm. How quickly does he get to the ball? How fast is his release? How accurate are his throws? Does he throw to the right base? Does he hit the cutoff man? Does he hit the cutoff man in a way that discourages runners from taking the extra base?
His positioning is important. His hustle. His ability to communicate with the other outfielders and with the infielders.
But by far the most important aspect of playing the outfield is converting fly balls into outs. When you've criticized Mac, it's been primarily for his bad routes to the ball and for his hard hands that can prevent his catching it even if he gets to it. Statcast says he's not awful at catching the fly balls he should catch. It says that Bryce is bad at doing so.
We wouldn't think so. Bryce is plenty athletic. Let's not forget though that Bryce isn't a natural outfielder. He played a lot of infield growing up, soon settling in as a catcher. He moved to the outfield to allow him to play more games in his career.
We also wouldn't think that Mac is faster than Bryce, but he is. Working backward, the past four seasons Bryce's fastest speed has averaged 27.5, 27.7, 27.2 and 27.7 feet per second. Mac's have averaged 28.2, 27.9, 28.5 and 27.7. Mac is roughtly four-tenths of a mile per hour faster than Bryce. Bryce himself is just faster than average (about 27 feet per second), and Mac is about twice as much above average as Bryce is.
Ideally if you and I did our scouting, it would come in game situations. The "scouting" Statcast does comes entirely from actual game situations. Statcast compares how often the average outfielder catches fly balls to how often the player being measured is catching them. Mac appears to be at least average in catching fly balls, while Bryce has been one of the worst.
How is it that Statcast lets us down in your opinion. Or did you simply not understand how Statcast measures the outs recorded by outfielders compared to the average number of outs recorded by the average outfielder?
|
|
|
Not much
Mar 1, 2019 14:34:38 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Islandboagie on Mar 1, 2019 14:34:38 GMT -5
Impressive report on the two fielders, Rog. I'm not sure who Boly is misjudging, Mac or Bryce, maybe a little of both. Neither is very good, and both would have trouble covering RF in our park.
But now that Harper is playing for Philly we don't have to worry about this. My guess is Mac will only play in LF (perhaps some time in RF on the road) and Parra will most likely play a good amount of his time in RF. We'll see smatterings of Shaw and others filling in as well.
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Mar 1, 2019 15:35:29 GMT -5
First, I'm not saying that Mac is a GOOD outfielder. What I'm saying is that he isn't as bad as you're making him out to be. If he were as bad as you're saying, he wouldn't have been able to put up good numbers.
I'm not saying he's as good as the numbers indicate. His samples are small, and one of the three years he was below-average. What I'm saying is that's he's almost certainly better than you said he was.
You are frustrated, and Mac is recent. IMO you forgot all about a lot of guys such as Daddy Wags.
Living behind the Blue Curtain down here, I never got to see Wags play unless it was a televised Dodger, Giant game.
And when Wags was with the Giants, 1958 and 1959, I wouldn't have known a good outfielder from a bad one.
I was in Little League, and remember what I said about Little Leaguers and guys who've never played above Little League.
Mac isn't a terrible outfielder.
The terrible tag is reserved for defenders like Dick Stuart, Curt Blefary and others who can't catch the ball very well.
You want to argue numbers to defend your case, but here's what numbers DON'T show:
Hardness of hands as opposed to softness
Steadiness under a fly ball.
Stutter steps in judging balls hit.
Now prior to the concussion last year, I posted that Mac had shown remarkable improvement.
I don't count what happened afterwards because he never really recovered.
So let's throw those out, and go back to the years when he was concussionless...if that's even a word.
2015,16,17.
He was:
Awkward TO the ball.
Bad jumps
Bad routes
And worst of all, SHAKY under fly balls.
At one point I wanted to start calling him "Clank," because I lost count of the number of times balls were about to squirt from his glove.
He's NOT the kind of guy I want patrolling our RF.
He isn't, and anyone who says he is, I submit, isn't paying attention to his history
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Mar 1, 2019 16:35:12 GMT -5
You want to argue numbers to defend your case, but here's what numbers DON'T show: Hardness of hands as opposed to softness Steadiness under a fly ball. Stutter steps in judging balls hit. Rog -- Please take a step back here and look at what you wrote, Boly. You are absolutely correct that Statcast doesn't measure hands, steadiness or stutter or other missteps. But while those factors contribute to whether the fly ball is caught or not, the bottom line is whether the ball is caught or not, and Mac has thus far in his career done a good job of turning the exact fly balls he has been faced with into outs. We pretty much all agree with you that hard hands may contribute to future muffs. We agree that a lack of steadiness can also contribute to drops or other misses. Same thing with stutter steps and getting to the ball in the first place. But the bottom line is that Mac has done a good job of catching fly balls. He's not Gorkys Hernandez or Stephen Duggar, but he's certainly not Denard Span or Hunter Pence either. By the way, with the players the Giants have, Mac isn't my choice to play right field. I think Duggar, Parra and perhaps Ferguson are likely better. But I do think Mac likely would be better there than Bryce would have been. I have to admit, I didn't know until fairly recently just how bad a fielder Bryce was. Regarding Wagner, I was older than you, although you probably saw him play more than I. But I knew he was considered a poor outfielder. You likely did too, if nothing else from playing Strat-O-Matic. I recall reading a funny Jim Murray column that indicated Leon wasn't exactly as composed as Richard of the same surname. Murray covered all bases though and later wrote about Wagner at the 1962 All-Star game "The face is chocolate brown and the eyes are merry and bright, as if the owner is constantly laughing at some inner joke -- or at you. The cheekbones are high and seem to have two plums in them, or a case of the mumps that went up. "Two years ago, if Leon Lamar Wagner were in the game in the same outfield with Mickey Mantle and Roger Maris, he'd be the one with the autograph book.... But when the umpire calls 'Play ball!' at Washington's new stadium, the fellow in left field with the halo around his hat and delighted grin on his face will be old 'Cheeky,' the American League's home-run and RBI leader to date." Personally I think "Daddy Wags" is a pretty good nickname, and in truth, despite his horrid fielding, Leon wasn't a bad player. In his doen seasons, he put up a .795 OPS, including .833 against right-handed pitchers. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/5105/?page=2#ixzz5gxMwNuMN
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Mar 1, 2019 18:46:09 GMT -5
We are not going to agree on Mac other than this point, Rog.
He's not terrible.
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Mar 1, 2019 19:48:22 GMT -5
We are not going to agree on Mac other than this point, Rog. He's not terrible. Rog -- That was my point. You originally stated "He's not terrible, but over the years I've watched him be THE most unsteadiest, lifetime outfielder that I've ever seen on a Giant's roster." So you DID say that he isn't terrible. But you went on to paint him as terrible when you said that he is THE most unsteady lifetime outfielder you've ever seen on a Giants roster. The past two seasons we've witnessed Denard Span and Hunter Pence, and just in those two seasons we've seen two guys who were more unsteady than Mac. I'm not saying Mac is a great outfielder. I'm hoping he's above average, but I don't think we know enough to determine that yet. But I maintain we've seen plenty enough to know he's not the most unsteady Giants outfielder in Giants history. Perhaps we should have the Daddy -- not the tail -- wagging the dog. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/5105/?page=2#ixzz5gyFbDPXDRead more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/5105/?page=2#ixzz5gyFKkDYZ
|
|
|
Not much
Mar 1, 2019 21:55:26 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Islandboagie on Mar 1, 2019 21:55:26 GMT -5
Glenallen Hill was a lot worse than Mac.
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Mar 1, 2019 22:40:44 GMT -5
Awkward TO the ball.
Bad jumps
Bad routes
And worst of all, SHAKY under fly balls.
Rog -- I'm going to show how Boly's four points here could all be true, yet Mac has done a pretty good job of catching the fly balls his his way:
. Awkward to the ball -- Awkward, but not to the point that it prevented his catching a high percentage of the balls he should have caught.
. Bad jumps -- But mostly not on balls hit where a bad jump cost the out.
. Bad jumps -- But mostly not on balls hit where a bad route cost the out.
. Shaky under fly balls -- but not so shaky as to interfere with his catching most balls he should catch.
I want to make it clear that to the extent that Boly is correct in his judgment of Mac's fundamental weaknesses on fly balls, they will almost certainly catch up with Mac sooner or later. Mac's done an above-average job of recording outs, but his sample isn't all that large. Sooner or later these flaws will indeed interfere with Mac's results.
But the point is that they haven't thus far, which indicates that Boly is perhaps overly critical of Mac defense. I haven't even looked at Mac's Defensive Runs Saved. Let's see how they stack up:
Mac shows a +5 Defensive Runs Saved. That's not exactly Andrelton's Simmons' 184 DRS or even Brandon Crawford's 77, but it's five runs above the average outfielder.
How about Zone Rating? That's a big zero, meaning that as measured by Zone Rating, Mac's defense has been average.
Mac hasn't caught a single one of the six fly balls on which he had a 1-10% chance, but he's fielded two of the six on which he had a 10-40% chance. He's caught two of the four fly balls on which he had an average chance. He's caught every one of the 10 fly balls on which he had a 60-90% chances, and he's fielded all but three of the 143 balls he's had a 90-100% chance at.
All in all, not bad so far.
But if he has the flaws Boly suggests, they're bound to surface if he gets enough playing time.
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Mar 1, 2019 22:44:26 GMT -5
One Giants outfielder who has been extremely good with both his fielding and his base running thus far is Stephen Duggar. As you all know, I'm not yet completely sold (too many strikeouts and more luck than solid contract), but his defense and base running are very encouraging factors.
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Mar 2, 2019 10:19:44 GMT -5
Glenn Allen Hill was pretty bad, that's for sure.
And I'll concede, he was worse than Mac.
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Mar 2, 2019 10:57:21 GMT -5
Well, Mac is no Daddy Wags!!!
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Mar 2, 2019 16:20:09 GMT -5
If you're talking defense, praise the Lord for that!
Now offensively, Wags was a pretty good hitter!
He played 7 seasons in which he got into at least 135 games.
In 6 of those, hit hit 20+ HRs.
And in 2 of those, 30+
Career .272 hitter with 211 HRs and 699 RBIs.
All that in really just 7 years.
That is averaging around 30 HRs and 99 RBIs/season.
If Mac can do that, we'll all be happy.
But honestly, He has more power than Wags ever had.
Now temper that with Oracle...and it's a push.
Thus I'll take Wag's numbers for Mac
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Mar 2, 2019 22:24:40 GMT -5
Wags' .795 OPS against all comers and .834 against right-handers were impressive. Think back to the days of Wags, Willie Kirkland, the Alou brothers, Harvey Kuenn, McCovey or Cepeda on occasion, and Jackie Brandt. That's why I think if the Giants had played Willie Mays at shortstop, they might have won some World Series.
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Mar 3, 2019 11:59:36 GMT -5
Speaking of shortstop, one more point in our Simmons/Crawford debate.
We've spoken of Crawford's fundamentals. Just fabulous. Boly gives him an advantage because Simmons makes the jump throw on occasion, while Brandon gets as set as he can given the play.
The jump throw gets rid of the ball more quickly, but for most players, they don't have the strength and accuracy to take advantage of the time saved. Not much advantage to getting rid of the ball more quickly if the throw isn't accurate.
When we watch the highlight videos of the two players, we see just how special Simmons' arm is. Crawford also has an excellent arm, but I have been convinced that he threw the ball into the dirt more often than Simmons. The highlights show that on the throws of each player to first base or for a non-force out on ground balls, Brandon threw the ball in the dirt two out of every seven throws, or nearly twice Simmons' one out of every six.
In other words, Simmons not only saves time on his releases, but because his arm is so strong, he gets the ball to the first baseman without a hop far more often. Given the difficulty of getting enough on the ball with the jump throw, we would expect the opposite. Simmons simply has a stronger and more accurate arm than even Crawford, who has a really good arm himself.
Crawford gets the edge in fundamentals, smoothness, going back on pop ups and perhaps on hard-hit balls right at him. Simmons gains the edge in arm strength and accuracy, athleticism, reach, instinct and creativity. I should mention that while I give the edge to Brandon on pop ups and to Simmons on instinct, Simmons too is outstanding on pop ups, and Crawford has exceptional instincts. It's just that in each case, the other guys is, amazingly, even better.
Study these guys for several hours, and you'll see what I mean.
Anyway, it's a lot more fun comparing the defense of Crawford and Simmons than the defense of Mac Williamson and Glenallen Hill. I won't be spending hours on Mac and Glenallen.
Know what Glenallen had in common with Casey McGehee? Both grew up in Santa Cruz.
Casey illustrates the importance of something Farhan seems to be trying to accomplish. Casey was a huge disappointment in 2015, but the Giants set themselves up for it because they had little money left to spend on third base. Farhan is almost always looking for value, and still has money left over to spend. We know that one of his huge accomplishments in LA was in getting the Dodgers out of cap trouble while still keeping them in the World Series.
The Giants are stuck with big if not bad contracts through 2022. How the Giants are able to deal with those contracts will have an impact on how smoothly the rebuild goes.
Regarding our talk about defense here, in building an ongoing successful franchise while keeping spending under control, it can be important to remember that bats usually don't decline as early as pitching and defense. That gives the Giants one more incentive to trade pitching (and defense) for the power bats they need but have such a horrible time attracting through free agency.
Also, as player careers shorten, the importance of developing players internally is magnified. Draft 'em, acquire them internationally, sign the good ones into their free agency years, then trade 'em before they become too old and expensive.
Baseball is increasingly becoming a young man's game. In addition to the players, we're also seeing younger coaches, manager and front office personnel. Certainly I'm getting older and older, but I see this youth movement as a good trend.
By the way, we appear to have a high likelihood of a work stoppage before the next Collective Bargaining Agreement. As we are seeing with free agency -- particularly of the middle class -- the power is shifting from the players to the owners. About the only way for the players to get some back will likely be a work stoppage. Hopefully cooler heads will prevail.
Incidentally, remember all our discussions that it's the owners, not the players and agents, who set player salaries? Teams are playing the salary game smarter these days, and salaries are no longer growing like crazy. Look at the caliber of players the Giants have signed to minor league contracts. I can't remember getting so many proven major leaguers without requiring a major league pact.
|
|
|
Not much
Mar 3, 2019 12:34:21 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Islandboagie on Mar 3, 2019 12:34:21 GMT -5
Or perhaps the caliber of a "major leaguer" has diminished so greatly that it's enabled players like Cameron Maybin to hang around longer.
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Mar 3, 2019 13:08:53 GMT -5
I concur, boagie. I'd like to see Gary post here a lot more often.
Same with Mark and Mordy.
I would like to hear from both of them more often.
MUCH more often
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Mar 3, 2019 13:19:49 GMT -5
I don't believe that is true, Boagie. It definitely IS true that the pitching is so good that even with the livelier ball, run scoring isn't very high, but Maybin hasn't been a poor player. As recently as 2016 he hit .315, and in 2017 he stole 33 bases. Let's not forget that while he will likely make the Giants' roster, at the moment he doesn't have a major league contract.
Compare these hitting lines:
.254/.322/.368/.690
.252/.318/.395/.713
Fairly close except that the second guy has more power. The first guy levels that out somewhat by having stolen 174 bases. The first guy is Cameron. The second is Brandon Crawford.
Big difference in defense, and Brandon plays the more premium position, especially since Cameron now plays more corner outfield than center, but offensively there isn't all that much difference.
The past three seasons Maybin has hit .267, .315, .228 and .249. Brandon has hit .256, .275, .253 and .254. Brandon has been much more consistent and has hit with more power. Maybin has reached base more frequently and has averaged 20 steals.
I'd certainly rather have Brandon than Cameron, but I think Maybin may be a bit better than you're giving him credit for. Of course it's also possible that having hit just .228 and .249 the past two seasons, he's about done. Brandon is slightly the older, by about two and a half months.
Cameron's loss of wheels will hurt him more than Brandon's. Cameron averaged a top sprint speed of 28.6 feet per second last season, 10% faster than Brandon's 25.9. Cameron's peak measured average speed was 29.1 in 2015, while Brandon's was 26.8 in that same season, so Brandon is slowing down a little more than Maybin. Both players have declined defensively.
|
|