The Value of our 2007 Cincinnati Reds

[dougdirt]

Originally Posted by Falls City Beer

Well, except offensive metrics are far more reliable than defensive ones. Round and round we go.

What is wrong with Dewans Fielding Bible and its reliability?

[westofyou]

Originally Posted by dougdirt

I won't deny that Griffey is below average in RF.... but that has little to do with how bad Dunn is in LF really. Both suck out there, but I have yet to find anything that suggests Griffey sucks more than Dunn does compared to his positional peers.

I have... my eyes.

And isn't that exactly what you were after when you queried FCB in an attempt to discredit is assertion that Griffey sucked more then Dunn?

[Falls City Beer]

Originally Posted by RedsManRick

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.

What offensive stats tell you is a much more complete picture of reality than what defensive stats tell you.

For determining defensive value: use your eyes.
For determining offensive value: check the stats.

[RedsManRick]

Originally Posted by Falls City Beer

What offensive stats tell you is a much more complete picture of reality than what defensive stats tell you.

For determining defensive value: use your eyes.
For determining offensive value: check the stats.

How did you make the above assessment? What are Justin's defensive metrics missing that my eyes will tell me? What are the offensive metrics catching that my eyes would otherwise miss? And to the point, will your eyes will tell you how many runs Junior's defense cost the Reds relative the average RF in 2007?

One other point to be considered. Metrics measure what happened and only that. We should be careful not to interpret them otherwise. Your eyes see what happens and then merge that with everything else you've ever seen and know about that player.

Can you, FCB, really differentiate Junior's 2007 performance from any pre-existing bias you've had about his ability? Can you differentiate his 2007 performance from your general assessment of his current ability? Can you do this both for Dunn and Junior, relative to the performances of their peers in 2007?

It's quite possible that both the following things are true:
1.) Ken Griffey Jr is a worse outfielder than Adam Dunn in a general sense -- if they had to make the exact same plays, Dunn would better.
2.) Ken Griffey Jr had a better defensive season in 2007 relative to the other people at his position than did Adam Dunn.

The metrics you've seen posted in this thread only speaks to the second point. I find often that people discrediting quantitative measurement do so largely after they incorrectly inflate the scope of the intended interpretation. I suspect that that is at least partially going on in this case, and with critiques of defensive performance in general.

[dougdirt]

Originally Posted by westofyou

I have... my eyes.

And isn't that exactly what you were after when you queried FCB in an attempt to discredit is assertion that Griffey sucked more then Dunn?

Sure. But given that you saw a ton of games, your opinion holds a little more water at this point until FCB can also claim he saw more than 20 games this season.

[M2]

IMO, it's a slippery slope to equate the offensive runs with highly theoretical fielding runs. Technically it should add up to your team's overall +/- compared to the rest of the league, but it can't even get you close to that.

Also, Votto's -4.1 runs below average number in 23 games in the field (more like 21 games if you go by innings played) is highly suspect.

[Heath]

Hey, you two if you have disagreements that are personal in nature, take it out back or in the PM center.

Otherwise, be civil and keep it on topic before we hang a "Sorry, We're Closed" sign out.

[Patrick Bateman]

I would have to say that Dunn is a better LF than Griffey is a RF. One key here is that there is a lot more quality RF'ders than there are LF'ders.

Dunn is clearly a bad fielder, you won't getany argument from me there, but Griffey is just as bad, while playing a position with more skilled peers. Griffey has no speed any more. He can'tdo much more than a jog out there, even at top speed.

Also, you can tell Griffey is new to the position. As WOY noted he had huge troubles on the bounces out of the RF corner, and for the most part I felt that he had trouble reading the ball off the bat. Again, hard to blame him since he' played nothing but CF his entire life, but he doesn't know where the ball is going.

[RedsManRick]

Originally Posted by Austin Kearns

I would have to say that Dunn is a better LF than Griffey is a RF. One key here is that there is a lot more quality RF'ders than there are LF'ders.

I'm not sure how true that statement is for 2007 AK. There were a number of very good LF this year. I think it's probably true as a matter of convention or over time, but it's possible LF were better than RF in 2007.

To the point of the thread, and to FBC's comments, have you read Justin's work? Justin has done a ton of great analysis over there and it merits much more discussion than this chippy back and forth.

[RedsManRick]

Originally Posted by Falls City Beer

That's no offense to Justin; it's just there is more than one way to approach the conclusions we reach as assessors of talent.

You're right. And I'm saying that I'm choosing to put more stock in that approach than in yours. I have no love affair with bloggers. I do have a preference for an evaluation approach which considers all available information examined critically. You apparently a purely qualitative, experiential approach. We'll have to agree to disagree.

I would absolutely love to hear what M2, Steel, and WOY have to say on the matter, particularly in regards to the numbers (and methodology behind them) which is the subject of this thread.

[Patrick Bateman]

Originally Posted by RedsManRick

I'm not sure how true that statement is for 2007 AK. There were a number of very good LF this year. I think it's probably true as a matter of convention or over time, but it's possible LF were better than RF in 2007.

It could be true, but I certainly don't see any level of conclusive analysis on that particular subject. I would have a lot of trouble believing that mainly because I just don't think there were very many quality fielding LF'ders last season. It's not like it was a coming of age season for LF'ders. It was the same group of slow, big, offensive minded players.

I could see RF'ders going towards that definition too, and that would have to be the mian reason. But I still find most RF'ders to be much more athletic and therefore better fielders.

To the point of the thread, and to FBC's comments, have you read Justin's work? Justin has done a ton of great analysis over there and it merits much more discussion than this chippy back and forth.

Yes I did, and I thought it was a terrific analysis, but I'm still skeptical of most defensive metrics. I like them to compare players within the same position, but when they are translated from different positions or into run values, I find they become extremely questionable.

[dougdirt]

Originally Posted by Austin Kearns

I like them to compare players within the same position, but when they are translated from different positions, I find they become extremely questionable.

But that is what he does. He compares players to other players at their positions. Griffey was compared to other right fielders in baseball. Dunn to other left fielders. Edwin to other third baseman and so on.

[registerthis]

Arguing about who is a worse outfielder--Griffey or Dunn--strikes me as arguing over who is more of an obnoxious drunk: Britney Spears or Lindsay Lohan?

[dougdirt]

Originally Posted by registerthis

Arguing about who is a worse outfielder--Griffey or Dunn--strikes me as arguing over who is more of an obnoxious drunk: Britney Spears or Lindsay Lohan?

I am unsure.... most people here care about the Reds and how they can improve, while I bet a very small minority of people care about either BS or LL Bean.

[Patrick Bateman]

Originally Posted by dougdirt

But that is what he does. He compares players to other players at their positions. Griffey was compared to other right fielders in baseball. Dunn to other left fielders. Edwin to other third baseman and so on.

I wasn't suggesting otherwise. My statement was in regards to the discussion with RMR about whether RF'ders as a whole were worse fielding wise than LF'ders as a whole, and I certainly don't see how that was really possible.