from Amazon
Tuesday, November 07, 2006
Reyes and Betancourt
Dial’s ZR hated Jose Reyes early in his career, and now it thinks he’s great. The data’s just not good enough - yet - to take one year of defensive performance and use it to evaluate a player’s defensive abilities.
-- David Cameron
To be fair, most mets fans i know think reyes has actually gotten a lot better, not that he wasn’t measured properly in prior years.
-- Kyle S
What to make of this?
Statements like Kyle is making I’m hoping to make obsolete through the Fans’ Scouting Report. This is Reyes, year-by-year, through the eyes of hardcore Mets fans who took their time to evaluate him:
Reyes In Fi Sp Ha Re St Ac
2004 74 81 87 58 63 88 57
2005 69 90 92 61 66 92 62
2006 65 84 90 66 67 90 69
Legend:
Instincts
FirstStep
Speed
Hands
Release
Strength
Accuracy
That’s a fairly-stable set of numbers, isn’t it? Which Mets fans are saying that he’s gotten “a lot better”? Mets fans who go to my site think that he’s always been a great fielder.
If his performance data wasn’t up to snuff, but now is, what does it mean? First, likely, it simply means that the uncertainty level around the results was rather large. However, what if the uncertainty level was low, but, the fans see something in Reyes that projected greatness for him? That is, they see something raw in him, the performance data agrees that he stunk, but it’s irrelevant. After all, what we really care about is evaluating the player for what he’s about to do for you, just like a stock or real estate. The performance data can’t tell the difference between “finished product” and “raw materials”. Fans probably can. Which brings us to…
YuBet In Fi Sp Ha Re St Ac
2005 87 89 78 90 91 81 85
2006 86 84 77 84 85 77 74
Yuniesky Betancourt. In 2006, I had 221 fans evaluating him, which is far, far, far more than I needed. Ichiro, Rolen, Everett, and Betancourt were each selected by the Fans as one of the nine best fielders in the league, in both 2005 and 2006. Ichiro’s fielding is already legendary, and is usually impressive in performance metrics. Rolen had the best UZR of 2000-2005 of all fielders. Everett has performance numbers that makes Ozzie Smith salivate. And then there’s Betancourt.
Is he raw, and therefore, once he’s a finished product, will give Everett a run for his money? Betancourt is almost exactly 5 years younger than Everett.
Or, is he simply not being positioned optimally (whether by him or his coaches)? Performance metrics attribute the positioning skill to the fielder. Experience will of course help.
Or, is the classification of balls hit to Betancourt (or, generally speaking allowed by Seattle pitchers in the SS vicinity) simply not being handled very well by the PBP metrics?
Whatever the answer, it doesn’t matter. Our expectations for Betancourt should be a hair below Everett. Either the performance numbers are wrong on him, and they’ll eventually see what everyone else sees. Or, his talent is really raw, and it’s just a matter of time that he puts it together. Or, his talent is there, and he just needs the wisdom to maximize his skillset. Regardless, the future for Betancourt must be that he will excel. And Reyes, one year younger, will be right behind him.
The only way to accept that Betancourt is not an excellent fielder is to mark him as lazy, no-hustle. Not giving your best effort will easily sink someone from being one of the best to one of the worst. At the level of MLB, there is a fine line between being great and being terrible.