PDA

View Full Version : Griffey Range Factor


Carolina Kenny
08-28-2008, 09:38 AM
Do any of the stat heads have a range factor on Griffey in CF?

Is it the worst in the league?

WhiteSox5187
08-28-2008, 10:04 AM
Most defensive stats are an awful way of judging a defender...having said that, there is no stat that can demonstrate how truly bad Griffey is in CF.

kittle42
08-28-2008, 10:14 AM
Kenny Williams and Ozzie would play Willie Mays in CF - right now!

JorgeFabregas
08-28-2008, 10:19 AM
2.58, which is average.

To show that the stat isn't that great, BA's current RF is 1.94.

doublem23
08-28-2008, 10:31 AM
2.58, which is average.

To show that the stat isn't that great, BA's current RF is 1.94.

Here comes the **** storm! :o:

jabrch
08-28-2008, 10:41 AM
RF is as useful as a number in evaluating a baseball player as is the ratio of birth month to weight.

oeo
08-28-2008, 10:46 AM
Griffey hasn't been nearly as bad as I thought he'd be. He's been okay out there. Not good by any means, but he hasn't been killing us.

Last night on that blooper, Alexei had that all the way and just quit.

kevingrt
08-28-2008, 11:03 AM
Just watching Griffey is enough to tell me he sucks in CF. I don't and I don't think anyone else here needs any range factor numbers to validate the fact that Griffey sucks in CF.

Jimmy Piersall
08-28-2008, 11:05 AM
Just watching Griffey is enough to tell me he sucks in CF. I don't and I don't think anyone else here needs any range factor numbers to validate the fact that Griffey sucks in CF.

Perfect.

jabrch
08-28-2008, 11:07 AM
Just watching Griffey is enough to tell me he sucks in CF. I don't and I don't think anyone else here needs any range factor numbers to validate the fact that Griffey sucks in CF.

And we all knew that when we acquired him. I don't recall anyone happy about him playing defensve in CF for us - in particular in some of the larger parks we play in.

Jimmy Piersall
08-28-2008, 11:49 AM
And we all knew that when we acquired him. I don't recall anyone happy about him playing defensve in CF for us - in particular in some of the larger parks we play in.

And God forbid Ozzie if he has Griffey in CF the last week of the season and the poor guy falls all over himself during a critical game and it costs us a playoff spot...how's that for a dark cloud.Piersall just stabbed himself with a fork.

FedEx227
08-28-2008, 12:01 PM
Just watching Griffey is enough to tell me he sucks in CF. I don't and I don't think anyone else here needs any range factor numbers to validate the fact that Griffey sucks in CF.

His Zone Rating is currently at .879, which would put him 3rd to last in the AL (for qualified CF) in front of BJ Upton and Coco Crisp but below Swisher, Anderson and Wise (all three at not considered qualified).

kevingrt
08-28-2008, 12:09 PM
And God forbid Ozzie if he has Griffey in CF the last week of the season and the poor guy falls all over himself during a critical game and it costs us a playoff spot...how's that for a dark cloud.Piersall just stabbed himself with a fork.

I would think Swisher will be playing CF 90% of the time from here on out. If he does not I would be very disappointed with Ozzie.

Lefty34
08-28-2008, 02:21 PM
His Zone Rating is currently at .879, which would put him 3rd to last in the AL (for qualified CF) in front of BJ Upton and Coco Crisp but below Swisher, Anderson and Wise (all three at not considered qualified).

Hey hey hey, don't bring that propellerhead crap in here! It's not like ZR comes from people actually watching the games, thus no fact and no reality. Now go ask your mom when dinner is ready. Nerd. (If there was a way to put extra teal on this post, I would use it)

DSpivack
08-28-2008, 02:37 PM
RF is as useful as a number in evaluating a baseball player as is the ratio of birth month to weight.

1:40 for me. :bandance:

Is that current weight or birth weight?

tstrike2000
08-28-2008, 02:40 PM
Griffey Range Factor....I think we'd all be in favor of it.

guillen4life13
08-28-2008, 03:11 PM
Hey hey hey, don't bring that propellerhead crap in here! It's not like ZR comes from people actually watching the games, thus no fact and no reality. Now go ask your mom when dinner is ready. Nerd. (If there was a way to put extra teal on this post, I would use it)

Are you still bitching about that dialogue with Daver a few days ago?

It's kind of funny. You might want to let it go if you want people to think of you as a mature individual.

kittle42
08-28-2008, 03:12 PM
Are you still bitching about that dialogue with Daver a few days ago?

It's kind of funny. You might want to let it go if you want people to think of you as a mature individual.

Agreed, though it's debatable whcih side of the statistics discussion actually acts more maturely.

Konerko05
08-28-2008, 03:13 PM
Griffey's Range Factors: Old and slow.

guillen4life13
08-28-2008, 03:15 PM
Agreed, though it's debatable whcih side of the statistics discussion actually acts more maturely.

I agree also. I actually think that stats have their place and are valid to a certain degree... but Lefty's post reminded me of childhood arguments with my older brother. Childish.

Lefty34
08-28-2008, 03:23 PM
I agree also. I actually think that stats have their place and are valid to a certain degree... but Lefty's post reminded me of childhood arguments with my older brother. Childish.

Give me a freaking break guys. It was a joke about the stereotypes used by people on this forum against stat heads. Just laugh at it and go on about your way. Jesus Christ.

kittle42
08-28-2008, 03:50 PM
Give me a freaking break guys. It was a joke about the stereotypes used by people on this forum against stat heads. Just laugh at it and go on about your way. Jesus Christ.

I realized that.

EndemicSox
08-28-2008, 03:58 PM
Sorry for adding fuel to the fire, but I don't believe that defensive ability can be quantified with statistics, at least not a degree that is significant. Unlike hitting and pitching, in which stats are king nowadays, a trained eye is the best asset when it comes to evaluating an outfielders/infielders defensive skills. I've tried to throw a whole bunch of numbers together, but I don't think we have the technology, or at least the masses don't, to measure defenders by numbers. Some defensive stats are (much, like ZF) better than others, but that isn't saying much.

Back to Griffey...he just 'aint got the wheels no more...and this could hurt the team in October if the Sox run into some bad luck against batted balls...

Getting old sucks :end rant:

turners56
08-28-2008, 04:02 PM
Do any of the stat heads have a range factor on Griffey in CF?

Is it the worst in the league?

Range factor = PHAIL.

At least use Zone Rating or something...

Griffey's a terrible center fielder. Having him in center probably didn't cost us the game last night, but Swisher clearly should of been playing center yesterday.

Lefty34
08-28-2008, 04:14 PM
Sorry for adding fuel to the fire, but I don't believe that defensive ability can be quantified with statistics, at least not a degree that is significant. Unlike hitting and pitching, in which stats are king nowadays, a trained eye is the best asset when it comes to evaluating an outfielders/infielders defensive skills. I've tried to throw a whole bunch of numbers together, but I don't think we have the technology, or at least the masses don't, to measure defenders by numbers. Some defensive stats are (much, like ZF) better than others, but that isn't saying much.

Back to Griffey...he just 'aint got the wheels no more...and this could hurt the team in October if the Sox run into some bad luck against batted balls...

Getting old sucks :end rant:

Yes, the defensive statistics out there are sub-par, at best. However I still hold out some hope for ZR, at least for infielders. But there really is no stat that you can come up with for an OF knowing to shade over when a known slap or pull hitter is up, along with all the other pre-pitch things that go into being a good defensive OFer.

MikeKreevich
08-29-2008, 10:52 AM
Ken Griffy Jr. is a good 15 pounds over a good playing weight for his frame. He is not likely to lose it this year. His range, considering his age, will suffer until he does.

hi im skot
08-29-2008, 11:01 AM
Ken Griffy Jr. is a good 15 pounds over a good playing weight for his frame. He is not likely to lose it this year. His range, considering his age, will suffer until he does.


:?:

jabrch
08-29-2008, 12:06 PM
Ken Griffy Jr. is a good 15 pounds over a good playing weight for his frame. He is not likely to lose it this year. His range, considering his age, will suffer until he does.

I don't think losing 15 lbs would help. He can't get 15 years younger.

RockyMtnSoxFan
08-29-2008, 12:39 PM
Yes, the defensive statistics out there are sub-par, at best. However I still hold out some hope for ZR, at least for infielders. But there really is no stat that you can come up with for an OF knowing to shade over when a known slap or pull hitter is up, along with all the other pre-pitch things that go into being a good defensive OFer.

I agree. The outfield is big, and sometimes a ball just can't be reached. Other times, a good set of wheels or a good read off the bat will be the difference between an out and a hit.

All of the stats can be useful if you recognize them for what they are, however. For example RF = (PO + A)/Innings * 9. By looking at this stat, you can tell which players have recorded the most outs. That doesn't necessarily tell you who is the best fielder; the pitching staff, field, and random chance play a role.

jabrch
08-29-2008, 01:04 PM
By looking at this stat, you can tell which players have recorded the most outs.

That's virtually a worthless thing to know.

Something about Daver's ass chewing gum...

35th and Shields
08-29-2008, 02:24 PM
That's virtually a worthless thing to know.

Something about Daver's ass chewing gum...

or mental masturbation

Lefty34
08-29-2008, 03:01 PM
or mental masturbation

But the premise behind RF is that the total number of outs a player participates in can tell you WAY more than a simple percentage of cleanly-handled fielding attempts (like Fielding Percentage). It is not mental masturbation if you take a break from masturbation and use your mental abilities.

Luke
08-29-2008, 03:17 PM
I don't fall solidly into either camp on the issue of evaluating players. There's value in scouting just as there is value in numbers, and either one misapplied or relied on to heavily will will take you down a bad path.

That being said, it should be obvious to even the most casual observer that Brian Anderson is a far superior center fielder to Griffey. The fact that RF has them even close, let alone is higher for Griffey, really calls into question the validity of that stat. I really feel that defense is something best gaged qualitatively.

Lefty34
08-29-2008, 03:32 PM
I don't fall solidly into either camp on the issue of evaluating players. There's value in scouting just as there is value in numbers, and either one misapplied or relied on to heavily will will take you down a bad path.

That being said, it should be obvious to even the most casual observer that Brian Anderson is a far superior center fielder to Griffey. The fact that RF has them even close, let alone is higher for Griffey, really calls into question the validity of that stat. I really feel that defense is something best gaged qualitatively.

That is why ZR should be considered a little better. In 2006, Anderson started 106 games in CF and his ZR was .883, also in 2006, Griffey started 100 games in CF, and his ZR was .822, and the year before that it was .805 (124 games in CF). So ZR far and away puts BA ahead of Jr. (call, call, call me Junior).

FedEx227
08-29-2008, 03:51 PM
Range Factor is lame because it also benefits guys who play with fly ball pitchers. Look at Dan Haren's outfielders and they usually have insanely high RFs.

Adele_H
08-29-2008, 04:35 PM
2.58, which is average.

To show that the stat isn't that great, BA's current RF is 1.94.

That right there further proves how, um, imperfect a stat 'Range Factor' really is. I believe Andruw Jones ranked dead last in NL in either RF or ZR one year a few years ago :rolleyes:

Speaking of which, last game in Baltimore in particular featured brutal (range) defense by the Sox - between Griffey, Alexei, Swisher, Cabrera and Uribe not guarding the line on an off-speed pitch - that accounted for the first 6 runs of the game, basically. Game over right there... not that Danks pitched well cuz he sucked, too.

FedEx227
08-29-2008, 04:58 PM
That right there further proves how, um, imperfect a stat 'Range Factor' really is. I believe Andruw Jones ranked dead last in NL in either RF or ZR one year a few years ago :rolleyes:

He's down there a lot and despite what most people say in the last 4-5 years he's become a shell of his former self, mainly effort-based. He's been severely overrated thanks to a good amount of "dives" in the past 5 years.

Lefty34
08-29-2008, 05:01 PM
That right there further proves how, um, imperfect a stat 'Range Factor' really is. I believe Andruw Jones ranked dead last in NL in either RF or ZR one year a few years ago :rolleyes:



I have a hard time believing that Willie Mays was any better than him

35th and Shields
08-29-2008, 05:19 PM
But the premise behind RF is that the total number of outs a player participates in can tell you WAY more than a simple percentage of cleanly-handled fielding attempts (like Fielding Percentage). It is not mental masturbation if you take a break from masturbation and use your mental abilities.

I'm not arguing with you at all. I'm actually on your side about stats but I was just using Daver's saying from the argument from the other day. Sorry for the confusion

WhiteSox5187
08-29-2008, 06:59 PM
I think there are very few defensive stats that are good, but when you see a guy who's a very low FLD%, like say Mike Caruso, it gives an indication as to how bad a fielder he is. So, really defensive stats are good indication of how bad a fielder is, but not how good.

Lefty34
08-29-2008, 07:11 PM
I think there are very few defensive stats that are good, but when you see a guy who's a very low FLD%, like say Mike Caruso, it gives an indication as to how bad a fielder he is. So, really defensive stats are good indication of how bad a fielder is, but not how good.

In 3 out of the last 4 seasons, Derek Jeter has been in the top 10 among MLB SS in FLD%, so that stat doesn't always show you who is bad. Keep that in mind.

WhiteSox5187
08-29-2008, 07:15 PM
In 3 out of the last 4 seasons, Derek Jeter has been in the top 10 among MLB SS in FLD%, so that stat doesn't always show you who is bad. Keep that in mind.
No, my point was if a guy who has a very low FLD% you can look at him and go "Whoa! He's REAL bad!" But I don't think you can look at a guy's FLD% and go "Oh wow! He's really good!"

Lefty34
08-29-2008, 07:37 PM
No, my point was if a guy who has a very low FLD% you can look at him and go "Whoa! He's REAL bad!" But I don't think you can look at a guy's FLD% and go "Oh wow! He's really good!"

No, actually, you really can't, because that would be cherry-picking results. You can't look at one side of what a stat tells you but then ignore what the other side says. To me, FLD% is a bad stat all around because it rewards guys for not taking chances on hard-hit balls (Jeter) and punishes guys who take those risks (Not Jeter).

Brian26
08-29-2008, 07:45 PM
Do any of the stat heads have a range factor on Griffey in CF?

Is it the worst in the league?

His range factor is somewhere between the Charles Comiskey statue and Ron Santo. Not good.

WhiteSox5187
08-29-2008, 07:45 PM
No, actually, you really can't, because that would be cherry-picking results. You can't look at one side of what a stat tells you but then ignore what the other side says. To me, FLD% is a bad stat all around because it rewards guys for not taking chances on hard-hit balls (Jeter) and punishes guys who take those risks (Not Jeter).
Well, if you're putting up FLD% like Mike Caruso it's not cause you're going after balls that are way out of your range.

kitekrazy
08-29-2008, 10:01 PM
His range factor is somewhere between the Charles Comiskey statue and Ron Santo. Not good.

Only the White Sox would put the oldest guy on the team to play CF.

They're still trying to replace Rowand and they did with station to station players.

slavko
08-30-2008, 12:09 AM
His range factor is somewhere between the Charles Comiskey statue and Ron Santo. Not good.

Why am I thinking of the words Range and Griffey and coming up with a mental image of a place cattle go to fatten up for slaughter? Not that I'm saying he's fat or anything.

Adele_H
08-30-2008, 12:51 AM
Now you've all done it.

Don't you know that Griffey's people/posse/crew read this stuff - mocking criticism, snark and all - and immediately report it to Junior himself?

Sorry, Mr. Ken Griffey Jr. I apologize on behalf of everybody. We know not what we say. Please let us atone for our sins. Livestock shall be sacrificed; nubile virginal flesh - rendered available. Guitar Hero III is in the mail.

Pretty pleasE?

Frater Perdurabo
08-30-2008, 07:31 AM
Only the White Sox would put the oldest guy on the team to play CF.

They're still trying to replace Rowand and they did with station to station players.

Don't you understand?

In the Sox organization, CF is an offense-first position.

Range factor can be useful for comparing fielders on the same team, because they play behind the same pitchers in the same home park.

Adele_H
08-30-2008, 01:35 PM
Range factor can be useful for comparing fielders on the same team, because they play behind the same pitchers in the same home park.

The uneven distribution of balls in play pretty much renders such comparison sufficiently invalid or unreliable, and thus not terribly accurate, with no basis in reality or fact, thereby making any such projections an agent bargaining ploy because the numbers lie. :tongue:

Sure you have your basic ratio and your RF league average for a given position, but that's too crude.

For RF to truly matter, you'd have to have like a 5-year sample size using same players/pitchers & other variables... which in the FA era is kinda difficult.

In short, RF sucks almost as much as FP%. Find a supercomputer and hightly sophisticated algorithms/sofware that tracks every single play and factors in the myriad conditions, then we'll talk Range Factor. I think Boston people have one of those.

Adele_H
08-30-2008, 04:31 PM
In short, RF sucks almost as much as FP%. Find a supercomputer and hightly sophisticated algorithms/sofware that tracks every single play and factors in the myriad conditions, then we'll talk Range Factor. I think Boston people have one of those.

It should be mentioned, however, that Boston's closet-full of Bill Jameses & innovative computer stuff..... still hasn't precluded them from trotting out such unspectacular/pedestrian fielders as

Manny
Varitek
Pedroia
Lugo
Lowrie
Youklis
Bellhorn
Ortiz
Renteria
Mirabelli
Crisp
Damon
Millar
Mueller
Nixon

to mention a few, in recent years.

Go figure.

EuroSox35
08-30-2008, 08:05 PM
I've actually been impressed by him in CF, I expected much worse