According to "The Fielding Bible Website" Jeter ranked 28th over a three year period in turning the DP. Peralta was first. The ranking was based on % of opportunities converted.
<< <i>I certainly agree it is the best fielding method so far, >>
skinpinch, we've batted this back and forth before but I'm still not convinced that this guy's system is worth the paper it's printed on, let alone the best. There is one system that I've seen that does account for lefty/righty and fly ball/ground ball pitching staffs, and that's Bill James' Win Shares system. THAT system, if only for that fact alone, stands head and shoulders above every other system I have ever seen. Ignoring the impact of the pitching staff on fielding is probably a worse mistake than ignoring the ballpark effect on hitting, and any system that ignores it should be read, as they say, for entertainment purposes only.
Anyone who can find the book Win Shares (it's out of print I think) will find it well worth the $100 or so price.
This is for you @thisistheshow - Jim Rice was actually a pretty good player.
<< <i>According to "The Fielding Bible Website" Jeter ranked 28th over a three year period in turning the DP. Peralta was first. The ranking was based on % of opportunities converted.
Again, too many moving variables and just because he says his results are FACTs, it doesn't mean they are.
So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
All other good defensive metrics take the amount of balls hit into play and figure the percent that were fly balls, ground balls etc, and figure the amount of chances a player had... They never knew for certain how many balls exactly were hit in the area of the defensive player, whether he fielded them or not. If they know that a pitcher gave up 300 ground balls, that is all they know...they don't know where they were hit(except for the outs).
The other systems know exactly how many chances the player handled, but they don't know exactly the amount of opportunities that were in the players area. They could figure it out somewhat by looking at the amount of k's, but there is still a hole there. Even if you know exactly how many ground balls a staff yielded, it still doesn't tell you where they went. Even James's system doesn't know where all the ground balls went(just the ones that went for outs). They have to estimate.
THe one thing this system has over all others is that they have strong documentation on where the balls were hit, and how many were hit there. It takes away a big mystery part.
Dallas, like we talked about the value of the first basemen, I am curious if this system actually studied the amount of picks a first baseman had, or high stretches. They could tell exactly with no guess work. James had to estimate stuff like that.
Because of the uniqueness of fielding behind 11 exclusive pitchers, it is much harder to compare a SS from a different team in ALL defensive metrics, even James's. It is FAR, FAR better than relying on eyes alone, but it isn't quite as good as the hitting metrics.
<< <i>According to "The Fielding Bible Website" Jeter ranked 28th over a three year period in turning the DP. Peralta was first. The ranking was based on % of opportunities converted.
Comments
162 game average over 12 seasons is
27 HRS 110 RBI .315BA and about a .970 fielding percentage
Jeter
17 HRS 82 RBI .317 BA about .975 fielding
See http://www.fieldingbible.com/
<< <i>I certainly agree it is the best fielding method so far, >>
skinpinch, we've batted this back and forth before but I'm still not convinced that this guy's system is worth the paper it's printed on, let alone the best. There is one system that I've seen that does account for lefty/righty and fly ball/ground ball pitching staffs, and that's Bill James' Win Shares system. THAT system, if only for that fact alone, stands head and shoulders above every other system I have ever seen. Ignoring the impact of the pitching staff on fielding is probably a worse mistake than ignoring the ballpark effect on hitting, and any system that ignores it should be read, as they say, for entertainment purposes only.
Anyone who can find the book Win Shares (it's out of print I think) will find it well worth the $100 or so price.
<< <i>According to "The Fielding Bible Website" Jeter ranked 28th over a three year period in turning the DP. Peralta was first. The ranking was based on % of opportunities converted.
See http://www.fieldingbible.com/ >>
Uh, that's the article's author.
Again, too many moving variables and just because he says his results are FACTs, it doesn't mean they are.
All other good defensive metrics take the amount of balls hit into play and figure the percent that were fly balls, ground balls etc, and figure the amount of chances a player had... They never knew for certain how many balls exactly were hit in the area of the defensive player, whether he fielded them or not. If they know that a pitcher gave up 300 ground balls, that is all they know...they don't know where they were hit(except for the outs).
The other systems know exactly how many chances the player handled, but they don't know exactly the amount of opportunities that were in the players area. They could figure it out somewhat by looking at the amount of k's, but there is still a hole there. Even if you know exactly how many ground balls a staff yielded, it still doesn't tell you where they went. Even James's system doesn't know where all the ground balls went(just the ones that went for outs). They have to estimate.
THe one thing this system has over all others is that they have strong documentation on where the balls were hit, and how many were hit there. It takes away a big mystery part.
Dallas, like we talked about the value of the first basemen, I am curious if this system actually studied the amount of picks a first baseman had, or high stretches. They could tell exactly with no guess work. James had to estimate stuff like that.
Because of the uniqueness of fielding behind 11 exclusive pitchers, it is much harder to compare a SS from a different team in ALL defensive metrics, even James's. It is FAR, FAR better than relying on eyes alone, but it isn't quite as good as the hitting metrics.
-skinpinch
<< <i>According to "The Fielding Bible Website" Jeter ranked 28th over a three year period in turning the DP. Peralta was first. The ranking was based on % of opportunities converted.
See http://www.fieldingbible.com/ >>
until they go to the designated fielder in the AL i'll stick with Jeter over Peralta regardless of that stat (or any others, actually)
jmho
jmho
mine too.
Steve