Rangers End-Of-Season Defensive Barometer: Tallying The Numbers
Joey MatschulatFor what seems like months now, the concept of achieving better run prevention via the power of defense has been stuffed down your collective throats. Knowledgable fans are embracing it, sportswriters are begrudgingly recognizing it -- some more quickly than others, of course -- and front offices have taken steps to neutralize any market inefficiencies that might have left it undervalued. Baseball, as a whole, is falling in love with defense all over again.
Of course, even the most laudatory assessments of the Texas Rangers' well-rounded 2009 defensive corps grow tiresome after a while; yeah, the fielding is better, but how much better and why? To address those questions (and finally parse the individual numbers, which is something I've been meaning to do all month), included below are the end-of-season Ultimate Zone Rating (UZR) and plus/minus (+/-) figures for every Rangers fielder who logged at least 75 innings at any given position this past season:
1B: Hank Blalock (+2.9 UZR, +0 +/-), Chris Davis (-2.7 UZR, -4 +/-)
2B: Ian Kinsler (+9.8 UZR, +18 +/-), Omar Vizquel (+0.0 UZR, 0 +/-)
3B: Michael Young (-8.1 UZR, -17 +/-), Chris Davis (-2.0 UZR, -2 +/-), Omar Vizquel (+3.3 UZR, +5 +/-)
SS: Elvis Andrus (+10.4 UZR, +11 +/-), Omar Vizquel (+4.6 UZR, +3 +/-)
LF: Julio Borbon (-1.8 UZR, +1 +/-), Marlon Byrd (+2.1 UZR, +4 +/-), Andruw Jones (+2.1 UZR, +2 +/-), David Murphy (+0.3 UZR, +2 +/-)
CF: Marlon Byrd (-5.3 UZR, -3 +/-), Josh Hamilton (+5.9 UZR, +7 +/-)
RF: Nelson Cruz (+11.8 UZR, +7 +/-), Josh Hamilton (+2.3 UZR, -1 +/-)
[Teamwide: +33.2 UZR (ranked 6th), +43 +/- (ranked 6th), .699 Defensive Efficiency (ranked 5th). All numbers courtesy of Bill James Online, Fangraphs and Baseball Prospectus.]
● Mitchel Lichtman, creator of Ultimate Zone Rating, issued this important caveat regarding the fallibility of baseball's predominant defensive metrics back in late July: "When a player has a good or great UZR in any time period, it does NOT mean that he is a good or great player and it does not even mean that he had a good or great year with the glove. What does it mean, you ask? Well, it doesn't mean anything other than he had a good or great UZR. It really doesn't. He may be a bad or average defensive player who had a good 147 games with the glove.
"He may be a bad or average defensive player who had a good 147 games with the glove. [He] may be a bad or average defensive player who did NOT have a good or great year with the glove but the way we measure defense with UZR just got it wrong. That does NOT mean that UZR is a bad measurement device. It just means that it is not a PERFECT measurement device."
Ergo, when Ian Kinsler, according to UZR, posted three consecutive defensive seasons in the red -- totalling minus-30.9 runs -- before surging to the doorstep of a positive double-digit mark, is that ascribable to random variance in performance or measurement error? The reality of the matter is that we don't actually know, and that's why it's essential that we take a multi-pronged approach to defensive evaluation by taking as much play-by-play defensive data into account as possible. Even then, however, nailing down a player's true defensive talent level with any degree of confidence is still nigh-impossible.
● Cruz has, of course, been roundly criticized for what some observers perceive to be shoddy defense in right field, with the most frequently voiced complaints of his detractors being that (a) he sometimes takes bad routes and (b) he sometimes commits brain-dead mistakes, such as overthrowing the cutoff man or throwing to the wrong base.
As I've already suggested, part of that negative perception seems to stem from Cruz not really looking like the elite defender that the numbers purport him to be, in the sense that he's "thick" and muscular and not wiry and agile like Ichiro Suzuki, Chone Figgins and Franklin Gutierriez. The plus/minus defensive rating system has consistently bestowed above-average ratings upon Cruz for his play on "deep" fly balls, supporting the notion that he's deceptively quick; sure, he's fast approaching the big three-oh, but it can be pretty safely inferred at this point that his defensive game in right field is an asset to some degree.
● For those of you who have strong conviction in the value of up-the-middle defense, the Rangers' catcher-second base-shortstop-center field quartet logged a plus-47 (runs saved) according to the plus/minus defensive rating system, tying the Blue Jays for the best mark in the majors. Yes, catcher -- at which the Rangers somehow picked up three more defensive runs saved -- has been recognized by Bill James Online; unfortunately, we don't know what criterion they used to arrive at that calculation, so idle speculation is our only real path of recourse.
● Sure, Marlon Byrd's true talent level as a defensive center fielder is probably still right around league average right now ... but how much longer is an age-32 or -33 Byrd going to remain in that ballpark?
Reader Comments (10)
1B: Hank Blalock (+2.9 UZR, +0 +/-), Chris Davis (-2.7 UZR, -4 +/-)
So Hank should be resigned and start at 1B.
3B: Michael Young (-8.1 UZR, -17 +/-), Chris Davis (-2.0 UZR, -2 +/-), Omar Vizquel (+3.3 UZR, +5 +/-)
And Michael is the Rangers third best option at 3B
LF: Julio Borbon (-1.8 UZR, +1 +/-), Marlon Byrd (+2.1 UZR, +4 +/-), Andruw Jones (+2.1 UZR, +2 +/-), David Murphy (+0.3 UZR, +2 +/-)
And if the Rangers do not resign Byrd maybe they can get Jones to play LF
Please tell me I am redaing these numbers backwards. Where is my coffee? I am not yet awake
Or maybe Smoak plays 1B and Davis backs up 1B & 3B. Resign Omar to back up 2B & SS. Resign Byrd and LF Byrd, CF Hamilton, RF Cruz with 4th Corner OF Murphy and backup CF & DH Borbon?
Not too bad from MY, at least since mid June. He should be an average fielding 3B next year.
EOS 3B: Michael Young (-8.1 UZR, -17 +/-)
Aug 12 3B: Michael Young (-10.8 UZR, -16 +/-)
July 23 3B: Michael Young (-11.4 UZR, -15 +/-)
July 16 3B: Michael Young (-11.5 UZR, -15 +/-)
June 29 3B: Michael Young (-9.8 UZR, -15 +/-)
June 22 3B: Michael Young (-9.8 UZR, -14 +/-)
June 17 3B: Michael Young (-10.2 UZR, -14 +/-)
Caveats.... Not all that helpful to the user to receive caveats without some sort of help understanding their practical meaning. It might give the author of UZR a clear conscience.
Have they done any work to understand if there is correlation between UZR and scouting assessments of defense skill?
At the very least, UZR tells us the Rangers have players who can cover a lot of ground.
I find it hard to put too much faith in these metrics; however, I also find it hard to argue with them when they all agree. I'll start by saying that I believe 1B defense is as hard to accurately evaluate with stats as C; the naked eye tells you a little more. With a catcher, CS% isn't necessarily all on him. There are some pitchers who would make it impossible for Pudge in his prime to throw out a runner, and there are others who might make it possible for me to catch someone in the act. Watching both Davis and Blalock play at first this season, one thing was obvious. Chris Davis has Tankin' Hank completely outclassed defensively. Hank didn't make too many mistakes but also didn't have the reactions or instincts to get to many of the sharp grounders hit his way. He also can't stretch out to save throwing errors the way Davis can. It might actually be fair to give Davis a couple of those positive runs from both Kinsler and Andrus.
I don't know if Young is as bad as the numbers suggests, but I'm equally confident that he's not above average. I also believe that while Cruz might not be quite as good as the numbers suggest, he's a damn good right fielder.
Yep and yep, since UZR doesn't note Davis' saving picks on low throws, he is as undervalued in this context as the other IFs are overvalued. Somehow combining UZR with a 1B's "% of Picks" and the measure of his stretch on close plays would rightly either add or take away from the 1st Baseman's value, and act conversely on the value of the other IFs.
"Yep and yep, since UZR doesn't note Davis' saving picks on low throws, he is as undervalued in this context as the other IFs are overvalued."
BJO hasn't published the updated data (I presume they're saving it for the next print version of The Fielding Bible), but as of August 3rd, Davis's four-month total of 0.34 scoops per game (24 scoops in 70 games) was the highest ratio among the 10 major league first basemen with the most scoops to that point in the season. So, yeah, that's a valid point.
Wahoo! A stat for it! As you, said, Joey, we need a 3- (maybe 4-)pronged approach.
I think the Rangers defense was somewhat improved but rather overstated in its role in the improvement of the team. After all, it was pretty much the same players. Andus was a nice improvement and the pitchers fielded a lot better as well.
The pitching was actually a lot better than last year. Both Millwood and Feldman made significant improvements, Tommy Hunter pitched well, Padila was fairly solid while he was around and Harrison and Holland had their moments. It also seemed that the ballpark played a little differently this year which helped some too and hurt the offense as well.
When it comes to Nelson Cruz, he does definitely cover a lot of ground. He tears into the alley like a man possessed. But he does occassionally misplay some balls. I think fans tend to overanalyze the balls he misses and fail to recognize his great range. He makes up for his misses.
"Both Millwood and Feldman made significant improvements [...]"
Feldman? Sure. But if we're talking about Millwood making significant improvements in the context of improving his peripherals (e.g. what he REALLY wields control over), then, well, that's a pretty sketchy claim in light of the fact that his walk rate (6.4 to 8.4 percent) and strikeout rate (16.3 percent to 14.5 percent) both went backwards in 2009. That could be an anomaly, but it's worrisome nevertheless.
True enough. I've seen the claims that Millwood was not any better in 2009 than in earlier years by the saberists. It was all just defense and luck. I kind of doubt it though, but I'm not expecting a repeat of his 2009 performance at his age. Having C.J. Wilson around and healthy was another big boost for the pitching. I think Mike Maddox was a bigger influence than the defense.