The Zo Zone

I like range factor a lot since it records what happens instead of what should have happened, but I don’t think it can’t stand alone. Since the are a lot of factors that don’t clearly effect it, like the more the ball is hit to a player the higher his ratings will be. If a team has more flyball pitchers then infielders will suffer and the oppisate is true with more groundball pitchers the outfielders suffer.

I like to combined it with Zone Rating and a lower extent fielding percentage to get an idea about how good a player is.

I’ve just started looking at OOZ or Out of Zone. That measures how many plays were made outside of the defensive zone for that position. Rollins was 5th in the MLB last year with 65 plays out of his zone. Tulowitzki was first with 87.

I think what bothers people about defensive statistics is there is no easy way to make an all in one stat. There are no OPS, Runs Created, VORP or any of those nifty all in one stats that you can get with the offensive numbers. You have to look at a number of them to get a clearer picture.

I still think they hold a lot of weight. In just about ever defensive saber stat Tulowitzki is at the top and Rollins is a few down. I think Rollins is really good, but all the numbers tells me that Tulowitzki might be something special.

There is also no clear way to quantify defense yet, but I think Zone Rating and Out of Zone might be really good as starting points.

I agree with B Dub. Also, I find nothing wrong with these numbers, with the possible exception of Rollins who should be a bit higher, but half of those guys are in the AL and I don't see them as much.

In the NL, Rollins is 6th in RF and ZR which sounds about right. What makes Rollins stand out is his Fielding % and the fact that he can do it 162 per year vs 140 to 155 games for everyone else and his bat.

I think Zone Rating is the best overall number to date.

Side Note: One reason why people might think Rollins is better is because people compair him to Reyes (in the whole NY vs Philly thing) and he was wayyyyyy behind Rollins being 12th in Range.

How do you factor in great advance scouting, pitcher/catcher experience, defensive positioning and players who have great anticipation in certain situations??

Some fans need stats to argue whose player is best. I prefer seeing the play and just knowing I would want that guy on my team.

These "designer stats" make Mr. James a ton of money. God bless him and his inventiveness. It's the American way and if it grows interest in baseball plus makes him a few bucks, I'm all for it.

Does the new defensive metrics factor in arm strength? How many times have we seen J-Roll throw out baserunners from deep in the hole that other shortstops would even attempt, much less succeed?

All of this sabremetric stuff is such a crock. Just watch the games, people, and you'll know who's good or not.

Are errors subtracted out of total "successful chances"? If not, it's not much of a stat if I'm reading it right.

If not, then if one guy has three balls hit to him and is successful all three times, that's three successful chances. If another guy has five balls hit to him and boots two, he has three successful chances too. If they both play nine innings, their stat will be the same. So errors have to be factored in somewhere.

Range factor is a very flawed statistic, as "B Dub" noted. I think the best statistic that is free and readily available is David Pinto's Probabilistic Model of Range (PMR). Basically it compares the number of outs a player made compared to how an average player would have performed. It takes into account the difficulty of balls hit at a player [direction and velocity], and indirectly, it factors in arm strength since greater arm strength [and accuracy] will add up to more outs. It's superior to Zone Rating since ZR doesn't factor in the degree of difficulty.

Screw range factor- just give me a guy who can field...stats are great but should not magnify.

About Lohse- Buster Olney is reporting the Phils have a 4 year offer on the table for Kyle Lohse. Don't get me wrong, I'm very thankful for what Lohse did for us in the final months of '07, but giving this chronic underachiever big years and big money would be a huge mistake (of the Adam Eaton variety). I want security in the 5th spot in the rotation as much as the next fan, but not at the expense of another bad contract. I'd much rather have Kris Benson on a 1 year deal if any where near healthy.

I agree with GM-Carson on both points. These stats contain somewhat arbitrary numbers, multiply, divide, blah, blah.. Watch a guy play and tell me how good he is. What about a SS who makes the non-routine play look routine?

And for a 4 yr deal for Lohse, that is overpaying, which is what I thought they were not going to do? He was solid last year for us, but I don't know if he's worth this. Plus, I believe I read something earlier in the offseason where he said he didn't like pitching in CBP? They must be in panic mode or something. Maybe they really didn't like what they saw out of Benson?

GM-Carson,

Do you just blog all day long or do you have a job?

Lohse stops a charging Atlanta team twice in the last two weeks. With little support. You don't think the Mets are looking at that. Boras will wait till the Santana debacle is over. Atlanta, if it gets the pitching, has always been the power in the East. There are a bunch of teams in this, no one wants to start the bidding too soon. Watch St Louis try a trump move out of the blue. Look at whats happening to the Twins. GM bails because the owner is so cheap. The coach sucks. Cincinnati is a joke. The Phillies are the first team Lohse has played on. If the Phillies don't get him, or something better, they will do no better than 3rd in the division. The Mariners are going to go 40million to Silva. He is absolutely the worst free agent out there. They know how much tension is brewing around Lohse so they are doning the best they can with whats left.

Louis, errors are not factored into Range Factor specifically because Range Factor is meant to be a record of what actually happened.

Errors are judgment calls and are based solely on what the official score keeper thinks should have happened. At one time in baseball a walk was seen by some as an error on the pitcher. An error is very subjective and hard to really tell how good someone is based off them.

Range Factor is flawed, but at least it is based on really happens and not what someone deems as a makeable play in their imagination.

A note on observing a player as a means to figure out how go they are, there is nothing wrong with it, but the reason why many of us are turning to sabermetrics and other statistics is that there is no way for us to see everyone equally. Even if we did we couldn’t see everyone enough to get a clear picture to determine how good a player they are and what all of their strengths are.

I like this quote from Bill James for to explain this, even though he is talking about offense here and today’s discussion is about defense I think it still applies…

“One absolutely cannot tell, by watching, the difference between a .300 hitter and a .275 hitter. The difference is one hit every two weeks… in fact if you see both 15 games a year, there is a 40% chance that the .275 hitter will have more hits than the .300 hitter in the games that you see. The difference between a good hitter and an average hitter is simply not visible-it is a matter of record.”

That’s not to say scouting and observing are bad, but used together can be great.

“At Baseball Prospectus, we liken this false dichotomy to choosing between beer and tacos. Why make an either-or quandary out of two options that can coexist and be equally embraced? Beer or tacos? Nope: beer and tacos. Stats and scouts. After all, when it comes to evaluating baseball talent, stats and scouts are complementary, not contradictory approaches.”

Bill James also makes a ton of cash by being a consultant to the Red Sox. He’s not the only reason, but they take him very seriously there. I do think there is a direct collation between James becoming a consultant and one of his disciples being hired as GM (Theo), to their recent successes.

B Dub - how about the $$ Boston spends being related to their success? I don't 100% disagree with using statistics to a degree, but stats don't tell the whole picture. Your example of the .275 hitter vs. the .300 hitter is a good one, but by watching them play, you may see that the .300 hitter hits the ball hard, even on his outs, while the .275 hitter strikes out or pops up, so by watching them play, you can see the difference in which is better.

We’ve got stats for that too… :-)

Like the quote says Beer and Tacos.

and yes the moeny is part of it and it what makes The Red Sox so freaking scary. They are smart and rich.

Imagine if the Yankees were that smart too…

Compare to the Dodgers, who are rich and stupid.

Serious sabermetricians haven't even touched range factor in 20 years. You're about as likely to see serious statistical analysis using range factor at this point as you are to see your favorite new music release on 8-track at Amazon.

Your example of the .275 hitter vs. the .300 hitter is a good one, but by watching them play, you may see that the .300 hitter hits the ball hard, even on his outs, while the .275 hitter strikes out or pops up, so by watching them play, you can see the difference in which is better.

Actually, you're not. The human brain is poorly equipped for these types of long-term systemic observations. Our brains are hard-wired to see patterns where none exist, a biological failsafe. We can evaluate physical characteristics and make short-term observations with players through observation, but evaluating the performance and value of the 20,000 or so plays hit to shortstops in a season? Not a chance.

Hard-hit ground balls get past infielders more quickly than slowly-hit balls. Line drives fall into gaps in the outfield; fly balls hang up there and can be caught more often. I guess this "range factor" doesn't account for that.

I'm so tired of the stat geeks and their made-up garbage.

And I'll take a .300 hitter over a .275 hitter every day of the week.

Hard-hit ground balls get past infielders more quickly than slowly-hit balls. Line drives fall into gaps in the outfield; fly balls hang up there and can be caught more often. I guess this "range factor" doesn't account for that.

Correct, which is why stat geeks don't use it.

More advanced methods nowadays take into account speed, trajectory, and location of hit balls.

Tim, there are actually stats such as line drive rate and prOPS that tell you whether or not a .300 hitter was lucky all year or if a .250 hitter hit frozen ropes right at people all year.

Look, anyone who disregards statistical is analysis is foolhardy. At the same time, anyone who disregards scouting observations is missing out too.

Phils just signed Chad Durbin. Wow. He's going to make a huge difference.

Who cares about range factor? Really. The rap on Larry Bowa back in the day was his excellent fielding percentage was due to a lack of range. Funny, but wasn't he on the 1980 World Series team? And didn't he virtually never make a bad play?

Yes he did. Oh, and this just in: Nunez is not quite as good at third base as ARod.

I do not think there's a direct connection between Bill James at the Red Sox and their World Series titles.

I do think there's a direct connection between the Red Sox having the second-highest payroll in baseball -- and a front office that uses its spoils (mostly) wisely -- and their World Series titles.

Let's move on.

"Line drives fall into gaps in the outfield; fly balls hang up there and can be caught more often. I guess this "range factor" doesn't account for that."

What the fuck is that supposed to mean, mongoloid?

I'm sick of these new-fangled stats like "batting average." I don't care if somebody hits ".335" or ".202" or has an "RBI" or 125 of em. Gimme somebody who knows how to play the game, has the fundamentals, hustle, and I'll give you a winner.

And I'll take a .300 hitter over a .275 hitter every day of the week.

What if the .300 hitter only hit bunt singles and the .275 hitter hit 50 HR a year?

Riddle me this - who makes more outs, a .300 hitter or a .275 hitter?

Riddle me this - who makes more outs, a .300 hitter or a .275 hitter?

You have no idea, unless you know their OBP, and PA.

who cares about all this crap....its about W's and L's boys

You can use Range Factor, Fear Factor, Home on the Range, any stat you want- Jimmy Rollins is a hell of a lot better than the 15th best SS in the bigs. My support for that is the eye factor- I watch him play.

How many World Series has Mr. Moneyball won with the A's? I'd rather watch a guy hit than take a million pitches to build up his OBP or his OPS (it's all BS anyway). What none of these stats measure is character and real clutch play. The stats geeks love a guy like Bobby Abreu because he's on base all the time. So what ... what has Abreu ever won? The most important stat to me is what a guy does in clutch situations, either at the plate or in the field. Walking in the eighth inning with a tying run at third is not clutch. That's what defines Abreu and so many others.

Where's this Chad Durbin stuff? I can't find anything on the net.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07353/843046-63.stm

I watched Jimmy Rollins play something 75 times this season. He has bad footwork and so-so hands. Range factor is a junk stat, but that doesn't make Jimmy Rollins a better fielder.

Rejecting styles of play and methods of gathering information based on aesthetics is a way to lose baseball games. Virtually every front office in baseball understands this. You can call Billy Beane "Mr Moneyball" all day, but it doesn't change the fact that the successful teams use advanced statistics in concert with human input in order to win.

It is all about W's and L's. The people who use statistics in order to break down the game are attempting to figure out how to win baseball games. And succeeding, you'll note.

Who cares about stats? How about these two signings reportedly coming up?

KMG: Kodos to you since you appear to have enough time on your hands to have seen every single shortstop in baseball enough to know where Rollins ranks.

Unless you are a pro scout I can’t take the eye factor seriously.

Really there is no reason to attack the numbers if you are a Rollins fan. Sure he was middle of the road in Range Factor, but he does great in other saber stats. The stats say Rollins is a great defender…

How many World Series has Mr. Moneyball won with the A's

Given his budget you have to admit his success rate it quite impressive. How often are the As in the playoffs or contending for the playoffs? More then the Phillies, Dodgers, Mets and other teams that have a much larger payrolls.

Eman: you proved my point for me. The Boston front office is run by Theo Epstine, John Henry and others that are all James people. Their decisions are based off James and their great scouting department.

Gimme somebody who knows how to play the game, has the fundamentals, hustle, and I'll give you a winner.

Like David Bell?

Bear and Tacos / Stats & Scouts.

tim said:
"B Dub - how about the $$ Boston spends being related to their success? I don't 100% disagree with using statistics to a degree, but stats don't tell the whole picture."

B Dub and the other stat people NEVER SAID THAT STATS TELL THE WHOLE PICTURE. they said that stats are important, ALONG WITH scouting. try to make your point without putting words in other peoples' mouths.

god forbid there might be a better defensive player than Jimmy. it's entirely possible. fortunately for the Phils, baseball players have to play offense as well, and while Jimmy might not be the tip-top defensive player, there is probably no other SS with his combination of offense and defense.

and honestly, while ARod is obviously a better overall player (b/c of that "offense" part i mentioned) than Nunez, Nunez plays better defense.

"it's all about Ws and Ls." no kidding...pure genius, there.

Jenkins is a Phillie

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3162819

YAY!

Pitching wins championships.

Jenkins is a solid signing. I'm glad they were able to get this one done. One more starter? Durbin appears to be a much better relief pitcher than starter, so he should probably stay in the pen.

Jimmy Rollins is the best all-around shortstop in Phillies history. He is the MVP. Crunch that, Bill James.

And to all the faithful ZoZone readers (special shout out to Pat H.and John in LA) and posters (even Mr. Met and Metsfan, but not that nitit from Denver), a very happy whatever you celebrate and a safe and healthy New Year. And to Todd for his hard work posting and giving us the inside stuff, with humor and honesty, a special thank you. You make the season fun.

Maybe 2008 will be our year.

Happy holidays to all.

$13M for a platoon player who can't hit lefties? There won't be a whole lot of roster flexibility... and we know how well Uncle Charlie manages his roster during the game... our bench will be empty by the 7th inning.

All I know is you do not sign fly ball starting pitchers like Adam Eaton and Chad Durbin with low strike out to innings pitched ratios to pitch in a pin ball machine-like venue such as CBP.

$13 mil over two years, so $6.5 per. Gives them depth, he'll rotate with Werth and spell Burrell here and there. Chad Durbin will play the JD Durbin role, of part pen, spot starter. They may be bargain basement guys, but I rather sign these guys in volume, then give wads of cash to Lohse or Silva for 4 or 5 years.

Think how empty the bench would have been without signing him. .288 vs righties, platoon with Werth. 2 years at 6.5M per year with an option for a 3rd year. Its an upgrade.
3rd base and another starter to go.

Play ball!

Jenkins strikes out 25% of the time he bats... his numbers at CBP over the last 3 years - .215 BA, 42 ABs, 1 HR, 4 RBIS, and 13k's (Last year he was 0-8 with 5k's). He is marginal at best, and while he adds some OF depth - doesn't this team have enough lefties and enough strikeouts?

Any one hear anything on Adrian Beltre? friend of mine called last night and left a message that he heard the Phils are after him.

Poor job of reporting by Zolecki, who is usually quite excellent. A quick flip through the actual '08 James Handbook shows he believes Rollins is the 5th best defensive SS in baseball.

So while I'm sure Zolecki got range factor stats from somewhere and listed them accurately in his article, it is far from being the only source of info James uses to rate defensive ability.

RF is indeed outdated, and James knows it well. Todd Z, without specifically saying it, gave the impression in his article that RF was James' end-all metric for measuring defense, which couldn't be further from the truth.