Originally Posted by Falls City Beer
Well, except offensive metrics are far more reliable than defensive ones. Round and round we go.
I have no clue what bearing that statement has on this conversation.
Saying that A (offensive statistics) is better than B (fielding statistics) does not discredit B relative to C (FCB's opinion).
I'll take a thorough quantitative AND qualitative method of evaluation (Justin included the Fan's Scouting Report) over some random dude's opinion who doesn't see the fielders in person often and isn't a trained scout.
And really, on what basis are we deciding what "reliable" means? Does it mean accepted? Because there are lots of really good offensive stats that aren't widely used or accepted. Does it mean accurate? How do you judge the accuracy of a stat? How warm it makes your tummy? 10 years ago people looked at you funny if you used OPS as a way to evaluate offensive production. The calculation hasn't changed at all, but now it's become standard and considered "reliable".
In no way would I say those defensive metrics are perfect. Nor would I say they're as "reliable" (aka, accurate representations of the player's performance) as some offensive metrics. But I'm 100% comfortable saying they're as good or better than any other way of evaluating defense currently there, including the "because FCB watched some games and decided" method.