PDA

View Full Version : Best Defender



Red Rover
02-03-2006, 03:57 PM
Of the 2005 Reds, who would you consider to be the best defensive player at his position?

I really couldn't come up with one - Graves, maybe Kearns?

Cooper
02-03-2006, 03:58 PM
Encarcarion---may not be the best but close.

KronoRed
02-03-2006, 04:16 PM
None of the above? ;)

ED44
02-03-2006, 04:21 PM
Two posts and still no mention of Wily Mo? COme on now...we all know he was our top defensive player.

In all honesty though, I think the improvements of Larue last year has to warrant him some consideration.

RedsManRick
02-03-2006, 04:23 PM
I would say Kearns is probably the best on the team relative to his positon. However, I think Dunn, Lopez, and Encarnacion all have the tools to be above average. Encarnacion in particular could be near gold glove if he were able to get much more consistent.

Superdude
02-03-2006, 04:24 PM
Larue and Kearns. Dunn may be pretty goodat first, but everybody else is terrible.

Ravenlord
02-03-2006, 04:37 PM
for 2005? i'm going to have to say Joe Randa or Adam Dunn in LF.

for 2006, probably Encarnacion or Kearns.

max venable
02-03-2006, 06:08 PM
I thought Casey was solid defensively last year.

pedro
02-03-2006, 06:20 PM
I thought Casey was solid defensively last year.

I had issues with Casey's ability to scoop the ball on bounced throws to 1B. At least last year he sure seemed to have problems with that aspect of his defensive game to me. Other than that, I thought he played D pretty well for a guy of his build.

Mario-Rijo
02-03-2006, 06:59 PM
I had issues with Casey's ability to scoop the ball on bounced throws to 1B. At least last year he sure seemed to have problems with that aspect of his defensive game to me. Other than that, I thought he played D pretty well for a guy of his build.

Granted most of this argument has nothing to do with your quote but I am using it as a jumping off point for my argument why he should have had a legit shot at the Gold Glove this past year.


The guy had less errors (2) than the gold glove winner at that pos. in the National League Derrek Lee (6). He had a .998 Fielding Percentage in 1210 chances, comparitively No One with at least 500 chances had less than 4 errors and No One with 1000 chances had less than 5 errors except Casey. Lee had 1450 chances. While I understand that A.) He didn't play as many games (134) as Lee (158) and he doesn't possess the range that Lee has the award is called the GOLD GLOVE not the Gold Glove + Range. I mean if he had Derrek Lee's Range (Height) wouldn't he still have a more Golden Glove? The fact is when the ball was in his range he didn't miss! Ok except twice, nobodys perfect. :thumbup:

And based on the fact that Kearns Range while above average is not great (When in Shape) I give the mantle to Casey for best defender of '05. Only Randa & Kearns IMO was as good or better and neither played near the games w/ the Reds!

pedro
02-03-2006, 07:43 PM
Mario-Rijo, one thing to consider about comparing the total number of chances between players who play the same position for different teams is that due to the strength or weakness of a particular teams pitching staff, the numbers can be misleading. This is because the worse a teams pitching is, the more potential chances a player gets. Granted the effect would be greater were we comparing outfielders than first basemen, but still I think it is fair to assume that if Derrick Lee would have been on the Reds, he would have had even more than 1450 chances.

In any case, the issue I have with Casey's fielding didn't show up in his error totals, but in those of other players on the infield.

RedsManRick
02-03-2006, 07:44 PM
At first base in particular, the real value difference is your ability to reduce the throwing error of your teammates. Derrek Lee, partially because of his build, but also because of his skill and athleticism, is able to save balls over his head or way off to the side that Casey simply couldn't get to. I don't know of a metric which analyzes this, but it's planly clear when watching the game.

With outfielders, range speaks to their in ability to get to certain balls. But with 1B, the ball they must "field" is not batted, but thrown. And Casey's "range" on thrown balls is MUCH less than Derrek Lee, Todd Helton, JT Snow, Jeff Bagwell, or any other of the superior fielder 1B. That Lee saved Ramirez from receiving an error doesn't show up in the box score anywhere.

max venable
02-03-2006, 08:25 PM
I think all that Mario and me are trying to say is that Casey had a pretty solid year defensively.

Cooper
02-03-2006, 08:56 PM
Completely agree with Casey's struggle to field ballls in the dirt.

dougdirt
02-04-2006, 04:56 AM
I will give the honor to Kearns. He doesnt drop much if anything, has a cannon with accuracy and plays on this team, who doesnt have the best defensive squad ever.

dougflynn23
02-04-2006, 01:51 PM
:) Ray Olmedo at 2B was by far the best defensive player on the 2005 Reds. If you are looking for a starter, I guess I'd go with Austin Kearns in RF.

CySeymour
02-04-2006, 02:26 PM
What about Randa?

Cooper
02-04-2006, 03:54 PM
you know Freel plays good defense no matter where he plays --he may be a lot better than we realize cause he gets lost in the shuffle...

His range factors (yeah, i know) are always waay high -no matter where he plays --and it's been that way for the last 2 years ....every position. There's got to be something to that.

RFS62
02-04-2006, 04:09 PM
This thread reminds me of Cincinnati Chili's old signature line.

Modified slightly, Being the best defender on the Reds is like being the smartest Hilton sister.

Mario-Rijo
02-13-2006, 01:35 AM
Modified slightly, Being the best defender on the Reds is like being the smartest Hilton sister.


I couldn't agree more! :laugh:


One last interesting nugget that I uncovered a few days ago though was this. Of ALL Reds players past and present with 500 or more chances Sean Casey has the best fielding percentage (.995) of the modern era. Not a bad legacy for The Mayor. Only Benito Santiago had the same mark but in way fewer chances, not even close. :thumbup:

LincolnparkRed
02-13-2006, 03:52 PM
you know Freel plays good defense no matter where he plays --he may be a lot better than we realize cause he gets lost in the shuffle...

His range factors (yeah, i know) are always waay high -no matter where he plays --and it's been that way for the last 2 years ....every position. There's got to be something to that.

I would say that with Freel you will get a high range factor because he is nuts going after the ball, but from seeing him at second a couple of times in person, I wouldn't put him there everyday. He is an A+ on effort but a C or worse on the fundamentals of the position.

Cooper
02-13-2006, 04:15 PM
Getting to balls is a big part of being a good defender...so let me try to understand this ...he gets to a lot of balls, his effort is top notch, his range is really good, but he doesn't have good fundamentals....how do his bad fundamentals effect his defense? is it that he doesn't look good when he gets to the ball...i.e. not smooth?

The same thing was said re: WMP and his defense.
IMO, folks put way too much emphasis on how a player looks rather than what he accomplishes...?

There's got to be something to the deal --there's just tooo much going on there to not mean something half way signifigant.