I’ve recently written a couple of columns sketching a general measure of outfield fielding by looking at putouts the outfield turns as a percentage of team fly balls, using 2002 season data.
What about unit defense in the infield, though? Can we do the same thing there, except with ground balls instead of flies? And can that lead us to some really strange conclusions?
Yes on all counts, with some problems. While outfield putouts are context-neutral–each time a putout is recorded the batter, and only the batter, is out–infield putouts are context-heavy. A man on first means a successfully turned ground ball to short goes to the second baseman for the first out, and then (if possible) a second putout is recorded by the first baseman if the ball arrives there in time to get the batter.
For my purposes, though, I’m only interested when the infield turns any out, and only that first out. I’m going to try and isolate that by looking at infield unit POs by making a few adjustments:
The Phillies are 9-6, tied for first in the NL East. Even after a couple of low-scoring nights against the Marlins, they lead the world in runs scored. I mention that because this is going to seem like a strange time to pick on their offense. Bear with me.
In my NL East preview, I wrote the following:
“It is interesting to look at the Phillies’ lineup and see just how many slots have major platoon issues. Jim Thome and Bobby Abreu routinely lose 150 to 300 points of slugging against lefties, while Polanco and Mike Lieberthal are everyday players in name only; neither hits right-handers well enough to justify his lineup spot or salary. The Phillies might get away with this during the regular season, but it’s hard to envision them winning a short playoff series against a good manager, one willing to exploit these weaknesses.”
Here are the career platoon splits, through Tuesday, for the eight Phillies starters and their current center fielder. They’re listed in the most common order in which they’ve appeared.
One of the glaring weaknesses in the injury analysis game is the lack of data. As the injury database is built and populated, we are left with spotty research and anecdotal knowledge, especially when it comes to the crossroads of sports medicine and pitcher workloads. Adding to the problem is the lack of data for both minor league and college pitching. Since pitching is pitching, opponents of workload limitations often bring this up.
In one of the first systematic studies of early pitching workload, Lee Sinins, creator of the Sabermetric Baseball Encyclopedia, studied 135 pitchers who threw 175 innings or more before the age of 22.
John Patterson reclaims his spot in the Snakes’ rotation, Ricky Ledee gets a golden opportunity, the Pirates continue to bury Craig Wilson for no rational reason, and Chris Kahrl details the saga of the Indonesian Navy jacket.
In last week’s 6-4-3, Gary Huckabay wrote about the fact that our perceptions are more often colored by the way information is presented than by the substance of the information itself. There are plenty of examples of this, drawn both from the ballpark and the world at large. Get your hands on most any media guide, and you’re sure to see the familiar rotisserie categories–batting average, home runs, RBI–presented prominently in bold face. Now, a typical media guide runs about 400 pages, and there’s plenty of information to go around, ranging from the trivial (Mike Lincoln’s career ERA at Busch Stadium is 14.29) to the frivolous (Joe Borowski’s wife is named Tatum). Thus, should it really be that much of a surprise to find out that in the thick of that pulp forest, the people who rely on media guides to grab information on the fly–like beat writers pushing on a deadline and radio announcers trying to keep a cadence–gravitate toward those bits of knowledge that are literally staring them boldly in the face?
In response to one of last week’s Box Lunch articles, one reader asks: “I see the intellectual interest in all the detective work of reconstructing an inning from a box score, but in this day and age, who would do that instead of clicking on the game log provided right next to the box score at ESPN if you really want to know what happened?”
Maybe some of the same people who think it’s still worthwhile to cook their food on a stovetop. Also, newspapers don’t publish game logs. Box scores are portable, foldable, markable.
Did baseball’s leaders conspire to white-wash the All-Star game? BP’s Derek Zumsteg speculates on the subject, while resting comfortably atop the grassy knoll.
You know what the world needs? The world needs another article on the lousy work an AL East contender is getting from its relievers. Except, this one isn’t about the Red Sox and their closer-free bullpen. This is about the Yankees and their talent-free bullpen. Let’s compare the two…
Last year, I was given the privilege of writing a story that hadn’t been written. It’s a story about a hidden treasure and one that opened my eyes to yet another hidden game in baseball. While “original” UTK subscribers will remember this story, I think it’s important enough to bring to a BP audience. I’m also going to be speaking with American Specialty in the near future, bringing you more insight from the true masters of injury analysis. I hope you enjoy. –Will
Tony Pena weighs in on the end of Royals’ winning streak, Mariners chairman and CEO Howard Lincoln opposes Forbes’ recent findings, and Mike Cameron accuses Kevin Appier of throwing a spitball–which results in an exchange for the ages.
One of the completely ridiculous statements leveled at perfromance analysts–or “statheads,” if you prefer–is the idea that they need to get their heads out of a stat book and watch a game once in a while. It’s silly, because the analysts I know not only watch a ton of baseball, they have a love for the game that’s not found in many places. Personally, I watch as much MLB as I can, and most of my column ideas come from watching games, both in person and on television.
I was reading the most recent issue of Sports Illustrated yesterday, which includes an article chastising Tiger Woods for not being more involved in the effort to get Augusta National Golf Club to admit a woman member.
Going over the article, I couldn’t help but think of the controversy surrounding the Hall of Fame’s decision to cancel festivities celebrating the 15th anniversary of the release of “Bull Durham.” Hall president Dale Petroskey called off the event, citing the anti-war views of stars Tim Robbins and Susan Sarandon, and the possibility that the two would turn the ceremonies into a platform for their opinions.
Adam Kennedy’s injury opens a roster debate in Anaheim, the Braves try to sprinkle Mazzone dust on Shane Reynolds, Geoff Jenkins mixes in his requisite five games played before his next injury, and the Devil Rays celebrate Greg Vaughn’s signing in Colorado by grabbing John Rocker.
Some time ago, I wrote a column on a few of the new ballparks, and using the available evidence on their dimensions, speculated on how they’d play. In response to that column, I got a particularly cool question from a number of different readers. That is: “What would the best pitchers’ park look like?”
I love the questions that stick in your craw. How far back do you push the fences before today’s home runs and many line drives become inside-the-park four-sackers, for instance?
In order to answer this question, I took the liberty of persuing our list of historical park factors, and did some sorting, some grouping, and some determining of thresholds.
The good word on Greg Maddux, precautionary MRIs, a clarification on pitcher abuse, and more developments in the Mysterious Case of C.C. Sabathia.
There are lots of ways to present numeric information. In addition to just handing someone a big stack of numbers, you can create charts or graphs until the cows come home or the Tigers score five runs in a game–whichever comes first. In many circumstances, there will be some sort of an industry standard, and if you choose to diverge from that standard, you can bet that some of your very valuable time is going to be spent justifying your deviation from the norm. That’s what’s been going on in the baseball media and front offices for nearly a quarter century now–trying to change the norms of what information is used to evaluate players.