Dadawg_77
09-03-2001, 01:45 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.
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.