PDA

View Full Version : Jose may not be as bad as everyone makes him out to be at SS.


Dadawg_77
09-03-2001, 02:45 AM
I was looking up some stats, just to see how Jose could play 2B. He has played 103 inn in 19 at 2B according to ESPN.com and Stats Inc. His measure range was over 6, which is a overstated number since the lack of games/innings played at 2B, and Stats inc. has at 1.0 in the zone range (ZR) stat. It measures "The percentage of balls fielded by a player in his typical defensive "zone," as measured by STATS, Inc." Not sure how its computed but hey its sounds good.

At SS over career, Jose hase a ZR rating of .921, and a range factor of 4.877. Range factor is (PO + Att.)/Inn. He has a fielding % of 956, 4446 total chances with 186 Es, and had made 631 DP in 7394 inns. of work at SS. So in trying to figure out what these numbers mean I decided to compare these stats to Jeter's, four rings, and Clayton's, our current SS, numbers.

Royce has ZR rating of 938, and range factor of 4.759. He has a fielding % of 971 with 177 Es in 6033 total chances. He has also turned 789 double plays in 11075 inns. of work at SS.

Now Derek Jeter numbers, he has a ZR of 879, and a range factor of 4.205. His fielding % is 973 with 3868 total chances and 103 Es, in 8059 inns. He has also turned 486 DP.

What I see here is Jose is a step below these two dfensively but the gap isn't has wide as everyone believes. Jose makes more plays then the other two as shown by the higher zone range number. Jose is also better when trying to turn two, since he gets to more balls and is very good at making the piviot.

Every shortstop makes errors, good SS range from about 15 - 25 for a year, its just Jose is at the high end of this range. Jose has mental laspses at certain points in games, which leads to his lower fielding %. But Jose also didn't commit any errors in Sept last year, I think and acording to WSI report only commited 5-7 errors that had a effect on the outcome of the game. So this shows his laspes may mostly come at points when the game is a blowouts or at meaningless points within a game.

I have no clue how Stats Inc. figures out what someone's "zone" so it makes it difficult to figure what it means. Not sure if a zone is the same for everyone at a certain position, or its personalize. I put the numbers in just in case anyone has a better clue of what they mean, I would love to hear.

Nellie_Fox
09-03-2001, 02:54 AM
I grew up watching Luis Aparicio at short. I also watched Beebee Richard. Defensively, I'm afraid Valentin is closer to Richard than Little Looie. Every ball hit to Manos is an adventure.

Dadawg_77
09-03-2001, 02:58 AM
Originally posted by Nellie_Fox
I grew up watching Luis Aparicio at short. I also watched Beebee Richard. Defensively, I'm afraid Valentin is closer to Richard than Little Looie. Every ball hit to Manos is an adventure.

I tad bit young, who is Beebee Richard?

Nellie_Fox
09-03-2001, 03:11 AM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77


I tad bit young, who is Beebee Richard?

Lee "Beebee" Richard was supposed to be the heir apparent to Looie. Played SS for the Sox 71-72, had a return engagement 74-75. Was affectionately known as Stone Glove.

Bmr31
09-03-2001, 10:32 AM
we all have two eyes. hes a butcher out there and shouldnt be anywhere near the infield, unless hes running the bases....

Procol Harum
09-03-2001, 12:14 PM
Originally posted by Bmr31
we all have two eyes. hes a butcher out there and shouldnt be anywhere near the infield, unless hes running the bases....

I wouldn't go as far as "butcher" that implies a degree of hideousness reserved for only a few mortals like Bee-Bee Richards--but I agree with Nellie's estimation on a scale that runs from Looie, to Ozzie, to Bucky Dent, to Alan Bannister, to Bee-Bee Richards (for those who are too young, imagine the guy who played a bad shortstop on your pony league team for perspective and you get the picture), and Jose V. is probably there somewhere in the Alan Bannister vicinity (again for you youngsters, the Sox shortstop in '77 and '78--good hit, something of a clutch hitter, a little pop in his bat, limited range, arm and his hands--well, if you could imagine a brick with a thumb....)

Bmr31
09-03-2001, 12:21 PM
Originally posted by Procol Harum


I wouldn't go as far as "butcher" that implies a degree of hideousness reserved for only a few mortals like Bee-Bee Richards--but I agree with Nellie's estimation on a scale that runs from Looie, to Ozzie, to Bucky Dent, to Alan Bannister, to Bee-Bee Richards (for those who are too young, imagine the guy who played a bad shortstop on your pony league team for perspective and you get the picture), and Jose V. is probably there somewhere in the Alan Bannister vicinity (again for you youngsters, the Sox shortstop in '77 and '78--good hit, something of a clutch hitter, a little pop in his bat, limited range, arm and his hands--well, if you could imagine a brick with a thumb....)

In comparison to the other MLB SS, jose is hideous.........

Dadawg_77
09-03-2001, 12:59 PM
Originally posted by Bmr31


In comparison to the other MLB SS, jose is hideous.........

Looking at the fielding percentages and assuming history repeats itself, Jose is likly to make errors 5% of the time. while Jeter and Clayton make errors about 3% of the time. So Jose is 2% more likly to make an error then those two. Now, Jose has gotten to more balls in the past. The question, now is does he make enough plays to make up for the 2% chance of error. Jose has has around 600 more total chances in over 700 less innings then Jeter. 5% of 600 is 30, so Jose has made 570 more defensive plays that resulted in out and 30 more errors then Jeter with these extra chances. If the goal of a defence is to get guys out, doesn't Jose accomplish this goal more then Jeter does? This is a different point of view then what I seen out there, but it is something to look at.