PDA

View Full Version : In defense of defense


Fuller_Schettman
04-26-2006, 01:00 PM
One stat that I have always used to measure how good a defense is, is how many unearned runs they give up. After all, errors really have no consequence if they do not result in runs scored. As of today, the Sox have given up 1 unearned run.

That is ONE unearned run through one-eighth of the season! That's pretty remarkable. I wonder what the record is for fewest unearned runs in a season.

One thing that has helped this along is how many walks our pitching staff has issued. Our pitchers have the lowest walks per game in all of baseball! Again, very impressive!

Last year, we knew that team would be something special. This year, special can get a whole 'nother meaning!

SweetnesSox
04-26-2006, 01:03 PM
is there a record for lowest amount of unearned runs? i dunno how long they've been keeping the stat.

Fuller_Schettman
04-26-2006, 01:09 PM
is there a record for lowest amount of unearned runs? i dunno how long they've been keeping the stat.

I'm sure Elias Sports Bureau could dig this up in a nano-second.

BTW. I love your sig! Jesus rocks! :wink:

D. TODD
04-26-2006, 01:17 PM
Stats for defense are highly misleading. Making tough plays, or showing great range do not show up in stats. The gold glove award is a joke in many cases, because of this. You need to see the plays with your own eyes, and from what I've seen this year the Sox have been a very solid defensive squad.

Fuller_Schettman
04-26-2006, 01:21 PM
I totally agree, stats do not tell the story when it comes to defense. If you cannot get to a ball because you have lousy range, you will never see that on a stat sheet. That makes judging individual defensive prowess a very subjective exercise. That is also why I like to use the team stat of unearned runs to get a very accurate snapshot of a teams true defensive abilities, as a whole.

D. TODD
04-26-2006, 01:31 PM
I totally agree, stats do not tell the story when it comes to defense. If you cannot get to a ball because you have lousy range, you will never see that on a stat sheet. That makes judging individual defensive prowess a very subjective exercise. That is also why I like to use the team stat of unearned runs to get a very accurate snapshot of a teams true defensive abilities, as a whole. Some official scorers are suspect as well. I see how unearned runs can be more reliable, but it is not without it's subjective parts as well. I do like the small amount of unearned runs we have given up to this point.:D:

scottjanssens
04-26-2006, 01:35 PM
There are stats that address range and whatnot. Some of them are even available to the public.

Ol' No. 2
04-26-2006, 01:50 PM
Ask and you shall receive. The 1999 NY Mets were clearly the best. They allowed 20 unearned runs in 163 games, for a rate of 0.123 per game. The 1994 Baltimore Orioles allowed 20 unearned runs in 112 games for a rate of 0.179 per game. No other teams has ever allowed fewer than 33 unearned runs in a full season or averaged fewer than 0.2 per game.

fquaye149
04-26-2006, 01:55 PM
One stat that I have always used to measure how good a defense is, is how many unearned runs they give up. After all, errors really have no consequence if they do not result in runs scored. As of today, the Sox have given up 1 unearned run.

That is ONE unearned run through one-eighth of the season! That's pretty remarkable. I wonder what the record is for fewest unearned runs in a season.

One thing that has helped this along is how many walks our pitching staff has issued. Our pitchers have the lowest walks per game in all of baseball! Again, very impressive!

Last year, we knew that team would be something special. This year, special can get a whole 'nother meaning!

I think that's a useful stat, but it's flawed for the same reason fielding pct is flawed: if Carlos Lee, for instance, lets a ball fall at his feet it's not an error, but it's not good defense. Likewise if Royce Klayton dogs it after a ball 8 feet to his right so he doesn't boot it or make a bad throw, it's not an error, but it's not good defense. Further, errors that don't result directly in runs (as in, not in the same inning) still up a pitcher's pitch count and psychologically affect their willingness to put the ball over the plate (certainly this isn't true of EVERY pitcher, but look at, for instance, Prior in the 2003 NLCS and how he refused to pitch out of an error.).

I like the pct of batted balls converted into outs. I think ESPN.com (forgive me Lip and West) ran a piece on this midway through last season and showed the Yankees were so pitifully lacking on this statistic as to verge on the ridiculous. Any stat that comes to that conclusion about the Yankee's defense merits serious consideration, imo. For what it's worth, also, the Sox were near the top if not at the top, further cementing its legitimacy.

Suffice to say, our boys can throw the leather around with the best of them.

Fuller_Schettman
04-26-2006, 01:56 PM
Thanks, Ol' No. 2!! That is pretty amazing, the 99 Mets gave up an unearned run every 8 games, compared to every 5 games for the next closest teams (or every 5.6 games for the '94 Orioles)

TheKittle
04-26-2006, 01:58 PM
There are stats that address range and whatnot. Some of them are even available to the public.

There is no stat that can really address range etc. Is there a stat the addresses the type of pitchers on a staff? That would clearly effect defensive stats. If you had a staff of strikeout pitchers, well not many ground or fly outs. If you had a staff of flyball pitchers, well your IF won't get as many chances. If you had a staff of sinkerballers, you're IF better be good.

But I'm sure Bill James or BB could invent one to make themselves look better.

Fuller_Schettman
04-26-2006, 02:00 PM
I think that's a useful stat, but it's flawed for the same reason fielding pct is flawed: if Carlos Lee, for instance, lets a ball fall at his feet it's not an error, but it's not good defense. Likewise if Royce Klayton dogs it after a ball 8 feet to his right so he doesn't boot it or make a bad throw, it's not an error, but it's not good defense. Further, errors that don't result directly in runs (as in, not in the same inning) still up a pitcher's pitch count and psychologically affect their willingness to put the ball over the plate (certainly this isn't true of EVERY pitcher, but look at, for instance, Prior in the 2003 NLCS and how he refused to pitch out of an error.).

I like the pct of batted balls converted into outs. I think ESPN.com (forgive me Lip and West) ran a piece on this midway through last season and showed the Yankees were so pitifully lacking on this statistic as to verge on the ridiculous. Any stat that comes to that conclusion about the Yankee's defense merits serious consideration, imo. For what it's worth, also, the Sox were near the top if not at the top, further cementing its legitimacy.

Suffice to say, our boys can throw the leather around with the best of them.

You make a lot of sense, as usual. The only problem I have with the % of batted balls stat (and it is a tiny one), is that it penalizes the teams that have a lot of games against hitters that excel at slapping the ball into holes. I know that sounds very picky, but if a team faces Ichiro or Tadahito in 20 games, they will have a lower % of batted balls > outs versus a team that faces Ichiro or Tadahito only 6 times.

D. TODD
04-26-2006, 02:02 PM
There are stats that address range and whatnot. Some of them are even available to the public. They are totally subjective. Who determines if a ball was hit hard, or soft to create their range factor. The ONLY way to judge a guy is to watch the guy play numerous games. Defensive stats are terrible to judge with by theirself.

batmanZoSo
04-26-2006, 02:07 PM
Ask and you shall receive. The 1999 NY Mets were clearly the best. They allowed 20 unearned runs in 163 games, for a rate of 0.123 per game. The 1994 Baltimore Orioles allowed 20 unearned runs in 112 games for a rate of 0.179 per game. No other teams has ever allowed fewer than 33 unearned runs in a full season or averaged fewer than 0.2 per game.

Not surprising, that 99 Mets infield was pretty frickin good--Ventura, Ordonez, Alfonzo and Olerud.

We've really only given up one unearned? I thought Pablo's left field adventures alone accounted for like 5. :?: Guess not though.

kjhanson
04-26-2006, 02:18 PM
Not surprising, that 99 Mets infield was pretty frickin good--Ventura, Ordonez, Alfonzo and Olerud.

We've really only given up one unearned? I thought Pablo's left field adventures alone accounted for like 5. :?: Guess not though.

They counted for five in my book. Hearing Farmer and Singleton call that game was much more brutal than usual, and of course, that's saying something.

Fuller_Schettman
04-26-2006, 02:18 PM
Yes, Batman- only 1.

Interestingly enough, it was a game we won. The error that Iguchi made in the slop of the rain-shortened game against Toronto is the sole unearned run we have allowed all year! And it took an ocean of mud to make it happen!

MarySwiss
04-26-2006, 02:22 PM
Ask and you shall receive. The 1999 NY Mets were clearly the best. They allowed 20 unearned runs in 163 games, for a rate of 0.123 per game. The 1994 Baltimore Orioles allowed 20 unearned runs in 112 games for a rate of 0.179 per game. No other teams has ever allowed fewer than 33 unearned runs in a full season or averaged fewer than 0.2 per game.

Until this year. :cool:

scottjanssens
04-26-2006, 02:23 PM
They are totally subjective. Who determines if a ball was hit hard, or soft to create their range factor. The ONLY way to judge a guy is to watch the guy play numerous games. Defensive stats are terrible to judge with by theirself.

The stat keeper watching the game determines these things. Of course the stats the come from that data have to be purchased. I'm not sure what you're talking about the number of games for. Stats cover every game.

Which defensive stats are you talking about? Fielding % is worthless and partially subjective. Range facter has limitations but is objective ((PO + A) / innings). RATE works pretty well. Direct observation is about as subjective as it gets; one fielder's diving catch can be another fielder's can of corn.

Trav
04-26-2006, 02:24 PM
Couldn't this stat be more telling of how well the pitching is able to pitch around errors and get out of jams that they didn't cause?

scottjanssens
04-26-2006, 02:26 PM
Not surprising, that 99 Mets infield was pretty frickin good--Ventura, Ordonez, Alfonzo and Olerud.

We've really only given up one unearned? I thought Pablo's left field adventures alone accounted for like 5. :?: Guess not though.

It's not an error of you don't touch the ball. That's the main flaw in fielding %. It's also a flaw in ERA. If you compare pitchers on different teams by using ERA you're not taking into account the defense behind those pitchers.

That doesn't mean ERA is worthless. Just that when comparing pitchers you need to recognize the different defenses and ball parks behind them. Fielding %, however, is worthless.

SweetnesSox
04-26-2006, 07:20 PM
BTW. I love your sig! Jesus rocks!
lol thanks, it applies to all the sox fans last year who still thought the sox couldn't do anything...

That doesn't mean ERA is worthless. Just that when comparing pitchers you need to recognize the different defenses and ball parks behind them. Fielding %, however, is worthless.

more or less, yes.

Fuller_Schettman
04-30-2006, 05:26 PM
I wonder if any team has ever gone an entire calendar month allowing just 1 unearned run? (and if it isn't pouring down rain with puddles on the infield, we have ZERO in April!)

viagracat
04-30-2006, 05:42 PM
The way BA and Uribe play their positions, it a lot easier to take their currently low batting averages. I remember for years and years defense was the chronic weakness on the Sox. Not now. Just part of how fundamentally strong this team is right now. When THOSE guys start hitting, watch out! :smile:

viagracat
04-30-2006, 05:43 PM
I wonder if any team has ever gone an entire calendar month allowing just 1 unearned run? (and if it isn't pouring down rain with puddles on the infield, we have ZERO in April!)

Was that Iguchi's "error"?