CF Defense, is it that important?

[texasdave]

http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.asp...ter=&players=0

Maybe Dusty is right. Maybe Heisey isn't a centerfielder. But these UZR stats from Fangraphs might lead one to believe that possibly he is.

[dougdirt]

Originally Posted by UCBrownsfan

Why is it such a sure thing that Choo won't be a good defensive CF, I feel like the corner's are a touch more difficult(reading the spin), where speed is the key difference for CF, ie just covering the ground. He'll also be located right in the middle of Bruce, Ludwick, Phillips, and Cozart -- so a few balls that Stubbs may get that Choo can't will just be caught by the others. He's got decent speed, and he's a good defender.

Choo is in the top 26 OF's last year for stolen bases... nearly every other OF in that category is considered a CF.... 17 CF, 6 RF(including Choo), and 3 LF. Included in the groups of the 9 corner outfielders though is Juan Pierre, Carlos Gonzalez, and Alex Rios which a year ago would have been considered CF's.

Guys his age, with declining defensive skills (defense peaks in the 22-24 year old range) and with stats to back up a decline, don't move to a tougher position and get better. If Stubbs wasn't getting to the ball, then no one else on the team was catching it either. The fact that Choo, if he even plays in center (I still think Bruce will wind up there), will be surrounded by other good fielders won't do a thing to make up for his issues. If the other guys can catch something, they were going to catch it no matter who was playing center.

[Griffey012]

Originally Posted by R_Webb18

I'm calling it now he does fine in cf. No reason to back this up just my gut feeling.

Count me in your boat. He won't be great, but I feel he has the athletic ability and skill to be slightly below average to average. We do not need a lot more in the small park.

[smixsell]

Originally Posted by Griffey012

Count me in your boat. He won't be great, but I feel he has the athletic ability and skill to be slightly below average to average. We do not need a lot more in the small park.

I have a feeling he'll do OK there as well.

[lidspinner]

I am almost always a glass half full type of fan....I am usually the one trying to look at the positive side of Reds issues.....and I hate to harp on this one fact but I cant let it slide....Drew Stubbs amazed me at least once a week and usually more than that....so many times we watch a game on TV and see Drew catch a ball in the gap and the announcer makes a comment on how fast Drew is then we move on and forget it happened or we treat it as a catch that is "normal" for drew......we are going to see this year just how good Drew Stubbs was in CF........with that said I was one of the people calling for Drew to either get traded or go back to AAA and learn how to hit or bunt or both......and when he finally was traded I was pumped, so glad that I actually said a thank you out loud when I heard the news......I think the Reds team will still win the Central this year and I think we will go further in the playoffs than last year.....however, us fans will see what it is like to have a below average CF'er roaming out there....we will see balls drop in the gap, we will see balls bounce over the CF'ers head and hit the wall, we will see more triples hit against us.....the difference is I think our pitching will be better this year and I think our offense will be able to carry us a little better this year so we will not have to dig our way our of holes as often.....just my opinion but we are really going to miss Drew in CF....you can count on that.

[edabbs44]

Originally Posted by dougdirt

Let's just assume that one ball a week that Stubbs would have gotten now falls. Just one a week. That is 26 hits. A standard break down of those means 20 singles, 5 doubles and a triple. Assuming we take defense out of it and just were to add that to offense, that is the difference between hitting .250/.300/.400 over 600 PA's and hitting .286/.333/.448.

Isn't that a slightly skewed way of looking at things? In a very basic way of looking at this, those 26 hits would be spread out over 9 batting slots and those 81 OPS points would be as well. Which would likely add 9ish pts of opponent OPS to the Reds staff.

Now take into account that Choo will likely not play a full season's worth of CF and maybe it isn't as bad as it seems.

[jojo]

Is CF defense important? Ya.

Doug's hypothetical of a 26 play difference would roughly translate into a 20 run or 2 WAR difference.

The question is how big will the gap between the gloves AND bats be between Stubbs and Choo and can Dusty do things to minimize the negatives defensively?

In an earlier Choo thread, I supposed Choo's defensive value in CF might be something like -10 runs. While bad, if he can manage that, he'd be a significant upgrade overall assuming his bat performs as expected.

If he slumps at the plate a bit and is as bad in CF as some scouts seem to suggest he might be, then the calculus changes dramatically.

[Will M]

I like the Choo trade but would have liked it better if the Reds had Choo + Span instead of Choo + Ludwick. The Twins wanted pitching for Span. I wonder if the cost would have been worth it (Corcino or Cingrani for 2 years of Span). I believe the Reds were also linked to Revere who was traded for a young starter. Once the Span & Revere trains had left the station the Choo in CF plan was implemented. I suspect it wasn't plan A.

Long term we may (hopefully) be thrilled that the team kept the young pitching but short term IMO Span was the best bet for the Reds in CF.

[nate]

Looking at it very simply, the Reds' CF had 371 Defensive Chances which is the total of putouts, assists and errors.

That was second fewest in the NL (the Dodgers were last.)

As a simple test, how will that change this year?

[Kc61]

If Dusty doesn't like Heisey in CF, the Reds should have traded Heisey this off-season and acquired a true backup CF.

I can understand that Stubbs was perhaps too expensive to be a backup on the Reds. Understand why they moved him in the Choo deal.

On the road, when playing in a big ballpark, the Reds will need a good defender out there in CF. Not very encouraging to hear Dusty's take on Heisey in CF.

[Kc61]

Originally Posted by Will M

I like the Choo trade but would have liked it better if the Reds had Choo + Span instead of Choo + Ludwick. The Twins wanted pitching for Span. I wonder if the cost would have been worth it (Corcino or Cingrani for 2 years of Span). I believe the Reds were also linked to Revere who was traded for a young starter. Once the Span & Revere trains had left the station the Choo in CF plan was implemented. I suspect it wasn't plan A.

Long term we may (hopefully) be thrilled that the team kept the young pitching but short term IMO Span was the best bet for the Reds in CF.

Guessing Span was never really on the table because Hamilton is in the wings. Don't think Reds wanted Span's longer term commitment.

Again guessing, I think the Reds were focused on Revere. Just based on Walt's comments this winter, reading between the lines, that's my take. And I definitely agree the Choo in CF idea wasn't Plan A.

Dusty tends to rest Ludwick quite a bit. There will be a good number of games when a fourth outfielder can play CF. I guess that's Heisey, who is ok out there, although Dusty doesn't seem to love him as a CFer.

[edabbs44]

Originally Posted by jojo

Is CF defense important? Ya.

Doug's hypothetical of a 26 play difference would roughly translate into a 20 run or 2 WAR difference.

The question is how big will the gap between the gloves AND bats be between Stubbs and Choo and can Dusty do things to minimize the negatives defensively?

In an earlier Choo thread, I supposed Choo's defensive value in CF might be something like -10 runs. While bad, if he can manage that, he'd be a significant upgrade overall assuming his bat performs as expected.

If he slumps at the plate a bit and is as bad in CF as some scouts seem to suggest he might be, then the calculus changes dramatically.

I don't think that one hit per week would equate to "20 runs" or "2 wins" if applied at a team level.

[kaldaniels]

Originally Posted by edabbs44

I don't think that one hit per week would equate to "20 runs" or "2 wins" if applied at a team level.

What is the correlation going from hits to runs just in general?

For the sake of this discussion the 26 extra hits probably would not include home runs, unless you figure on one of them being a home run robbed by Stubbs that Choo couldn't get. Yet you may figure on there being more doubles and triples because anything to the side of Choo that he can't get is headed to the wall. I don't know. How many bases are we giving the average hit of those 26 hits?

[edabbs44]

Originally Posted by kaldaniels

What is the correlation going from hits to runs just in general?

For the sake of this discussion the 26 extra hits probably would not include home runs, unless you figure on one of them being a home run robbed by Stubbs that Choo couldn't get. Yet you may figure on there being more doubles and triples because anything to the side of Choo that he can't get is headed to the wall. I don't know. How many bases are we giving the average hit of those 26 hits?

Just looking at total numbers per year across the league, it looks like a rough 2 hits to every run ratio. Take the HRs out and it should be less. But that is very rudimentary math on my iPhone.

[SweetLou1990]

Right after the trade, I looked up the WAR comparison. Stubbs was around a -1.
Choo was at about a +2. This of corse takes into account defense and hitting. For the roughly 26 extra hits that choo (allegedly) may give up, he may be on base an additional 50+ times.