THE BOOK--Playing The Percentages In Baseball

“Every particle doesn’t stay in the same spot, every one doesn’t have the same properties. Every one doesn’t have the same speed, it’s impossible to do that.” Heisenberg, 33, pointed out you can get the exact same particle in the exact same place and it could be traveling at any speed. “How can you compute that?” he asked. You can’t.

Unlike the other shortstops, he never has to throw out the Yankees’ hitters. So on average, the people who hit grounders to Jeter are faster. It’s a huge factor. You people just don’t understand.

Also, I assume you’ve seen this from the Onion. (Jeter is “quoted.")

Link didn’t take.

Link worked fine for me.

rfs/2: were you being sarcastic about the speed thing?

Uh, yeah. At least that was the idea—I guess I won’t try that again. (And I can’t see the link.)

It was probably me.  I’m not used to you yet around here.

In THT08, I showed that Jeter primary pitcher was Andy Pettitte, and 12.7% of all of Pettitte BIP were fielded for an out by Jeter as SS.  When Jeter was NOT on the field, Pettitte got 13.9% of all of his BIP fielded by the SS (Adam Everett mostly I think).  I went through every single pitcher Jeter ever had.

I’m sure if MGL were to show the UZR of the SS of each of Jeter’s pitchers, with and without Jeter, the non-Jeter SS would have a UZR of around zero.

Well, if Jeter’s primary pitcher was Pettitte, and Pettitte’s primary other SS was Everett, I am not so sure that all his other SS combined would have a UZR of zero!

You can’t EVER (I mean EVER) win an argument with someone who does not or will not comprehend your position, even if you lay out ALL the facts on the table and explain them as you would to a 7 year old.  That is especially true if the person has an “agenda” (in this case, Jeter’s agenda is strong - not admitting that he is a bad SS). Did I say EVER?

There is one (and only one) exception.  That is when the person comes into the discussion with the stated or unstated notion that they have an opinion or putative knowledge of something but they are willing to change or amend their position when presented with some countervailing facts or arguments. That is rarely the case.

This thing comes up periodically and is more ridiculous by the day. I mean, it’s not just the numbers. He even looks very bad at this point. Why aren’t people willing to accept that? You don’t need UZR and the like, but your eyes will do…

The Fans have turned on him, those who fill out the scouting report anyway:
http://www.tangotiger.net/scouting/sim2007_5406.html
http://www.tangotiger.net/scouting/sim2006_5406.html
http://www.tangotiger.net/scouting/sim2005_116539.html

What I love about those is that Michael Young is one of his top comps every year.  And UZR hates Young even more than Jeter.

***

Re: Everett.  He is only one SS in a plethora of SS of counterparts that Jeter would be compared against.  I’d bet anything that the UZR of all those SS will be very close to zero.

Tango: I think that fans that come here are sabermetrically-inclined, or at least have an open mind with regards to certain topics. This is like Keith Law’s HoF poll, where Tim Raines did so much better than the actual poll possibly because those who were willing to share their results with him also shared a certain way of watching and evaluating baseball.
I’m not sure the majority of fans/scouts/coaches sees Jeter as a disastrous shortstop (although I would have to imagine/hope that scouts/coaches will at least see him as below average!).
By the way, according to UZR, who was more of an awful fielder between Hanley, Young and Jeter this season?
I have Jeter as the worst, followed by Hanley, Felipe Lopez, Carlos Guillen and Michael Young (the last three are virtually even).

And by the way, I’d pay my own money to see Jeter interviewed by an unbiased and mildly competent journalist on defensive matters. He says that no two defensive opportunities are ever equal (ignoring that he’s been dreadful - and getting worse - throughout his career and not just in a single unlucky year) and this implies that he is way more unlucky that other fielders by getting much tougher chances all the time (since he’s not admitting that he’s terribly poor).
I wonder why nobody ever shoots his offensive performance down by telling him that he’s getting meatballs all the time in the same fashion. Hey, no 2 PAs are ever equal, right? It’s not like you face the average pitcher throwing the average pitch every time, they’re men out there and maybe you’re facing the equivalent of an injured Jose Lima all the time. Gee, I wonder how can they compute BA, OBP, SLG and the like. They can’t!
It’s just frustrating to see complacent writers help him out so much instead of trying to do their job well. Unless their job is to blindly praise Derek Jeter, of course.

Actually, the Fans who vote are not necessarily people who come to this blog, as I canvass other blogs to get out the vote.  I think we can say that they are hardcore fans, but not necessarily sabermetrically inclined. 

Regardless, since I am asking for component evaluation, and there is not sabermetric stat that does any of those components, Fans will be less numbers-biased in terms of their evaluation.

At least Michael Young has the point that he’s actually a second baseman playing out of position. I went to a Rangers game a couple of years ago and, as I recall it, they started four guys who were basically second basemen—Hairston, DeRosa, Young and Kinsler.

I have Jeter as the worst, followed by Hanley, Felipe Lopez, Carlos Guillen and Michael Young (the last three are virtually even).

UZR

Jeter -31 (per 150)
Lopez -22
Guillen -19
Ramirez -17
Young -14

Jeter stands tall above the rest.  I’m sure he would be proud!

That is simply formidable. I had him as the worst by a comfortable margin (5 runs), but UZR has him a win worse than the next worst shortstop. Phenomenal. How can he not be moved? I mean, Lopez is playing there but they wanted him as a 2B. Guillen is going to be a 1B. Young is a 2B out of position. The Marlins also wanted to move Hanley. But why with Jeter do people see such a huge difference? Unbelievable to say the least.

Without disputing the claim that Jeter is in the lower half of defensive short stops, I think his quotes do hold weight. While the systems to measure defense are getting increasingly sophisticated, there are still important variables that can’t be measured. The most important among these is positioning relative to expected pitch location. From my playing experience (college and recreationally as an adult), I have always found that I made more plays when the pitcher was able to consistently hit his spots. Why? Well, when a pitcher is accurate with his location, the fielder can cheat on positioning. Conversely, when a pitcher is wild, he can expose his defenders (taking a step in the hole expecting a batter to pull an inside pitches can completely blow a chance when the pitch sails to the outside corner and is hit over the bag). It would be very useful to see how other SS’ fair playing behind the Yankees pitchers, but unfortunately no one other than Jeter has a useful sample size.

In summary, I think a simple scouts eye can tell Jeter is no better than an average fielder (and likely below average), but I don’t think statistics are sophisticated enough at this point to make definitive conclusions about “best” and “worst”. Unfortunately, when stat heads (of which I consider myself one) insist on conclusions, they lose credibility. Proving Derek Jeter is the worst defensive SS in baseball has become a sabremetric holy grail, and some seem willing to sacrifice credibility in order to attain it.

William: but somebody has to be the worst, right? Jeter has been consistently awful throughout his career, and getting worse. We’re not talking mildly below average with a one-year “poor” spike. We’re talking about dreadful.
And as I said, the same things can be said about offense: maybe offensively he has just been handed meatballs throughout his career, playing against pitchers being poor.
It takes more than one year to assess a fielder’s “true” talent level. Some say two, some say three years. Either way, he is just poor. I don’t think anybody is saying the ratings are totally perfect. Hey, maybe he just cost his team 29 runs rather than 31 as MGL is saying. But come on, he has sucked for ages now. Has he been unlucky for all this time? There are pretty similar chances he has been lucky offensively, right?
And by the way, David Pinto said that his replacements have also been better on the Yankees this season:
http://www.baseballmusings.com/archives/024934.php
And we know that other shortstops playing behind the same pitchers in different seasons have been a lot better. It would take an indecent amount of luck for factors not to even out throughout years for Jeter. Plus, for whatever it may count, he’s the worst shortstop I’ve personally ever seen, regardless of stats.
Would we be having this argument if Jeter weren’t the worst? Would anybody be claiming the same things for Felipe Lopez or Hanley Ramirez? Does anybody ever claim that the HR leader or the batting champion isn’t really as good a hitter as he looks because “no two pitches are ever the same” and so one might get really lucky… throughout not only one year but his whole career? I mean, come on… maybe Ted Williams was just a good hitter getting lucky, just as Jeter is a below average fielder getting unlucky. The sample size is just too vast to be claiming something along these lines. He’s terrible.

And by the way, I don’t think anybody is out with an agenda to show that Jeter is bad. At least I am not. I devised my own defensive metric without him in mind and he still was the worst. What am I supposed to do? Alter it and cheat just to show that he’s not that bad? Why would I do that? I don’t see anybody going out of his own way to show that he’s poor. In fact, it’s quite the opposite: he’s so poor that his praisers have been climbing on mirrors for a while.

William/17:

It would be very useful to see how other SS’ fair playing behind the Yankees pitchers, but unfortunately no one other than Jeter has a useful sample size.

You obviously have not read my WOWY article in the THT08.

Click the Amazon link at the top of this page (the green book), and buy the book.

A lot of different issues, so I’ll take them one at a time:

1) Sure, someone has to be the worst, but that doesn’t mean we need to identify him regardless of accuracy. Also, worst is a relative term. If the 30 best defensive SS of all-time were playing in the league at the same time, one of them would be the worst. Regardless, what you are calling “dreadful” is based on statistics that in my mind are not close to having attained universal validity. UZR, PMR and Rate2 are not OPS. You can’t simply cite conclusions based on metrics in dispute and expect the argument to be decided. I have a lot of reservations about the current defensive metrics being used, so I am not simply willing to ignore what my eyes (and other’s eyes) tell me.
2) I don’t think your analogy to offense is valid because: (1) we have widely accepted and understood metrics we can use; and (2) we are only interested in outcomes (who cares if a hitter is really lucky or just good) because the hitter is the only person on his team responsible for the independent action of a base hit. So, if Jeter dunks in lucky singles, they not only count the same as line drives, but no other offensive player can lay claim to the result. On defense, however, the fielder and the pitcher have a say in the outcome. Going back to my example, a SS positions himself based on an expectation that a pitcher will hit his target. If he misses, the SS’ range will take a hit because he will be out of position. It is also conceivable that a manager’s general philosophy on positioning could affect a fielder’s range. Without going on and on, I think there are so many variables on defense that don’t really exist on offense, and that’s why I don’t have a lot of confidence in the current defensive metrics.
3) Do you really want use Pinto’s conclusion that Yankee replacements were 38 plays worse than average compared to Jeter’s 40 as support for your argument? Not only is that a small amount, but I am sure the massive sample size differences would present a problem.
4) While I am not accusing anyone specifically of having an overt bias against Jeter, I do think there is a subtle element that becomes evident in the hyperbole that abounds on this topic. I’ll ask you a question. Considering the small difference between many of the fielders in the lower end of the spectrum, would we even bother to point out that Felipe Lopez was the “worst”? Would such a claim make the same headlines?

Tango/19

I am sorry, but the sample of other SS playing behind the Yankee staff (as Yankees, not on other teams at different points of their careers) is way too small for me to consider drawing meaningful conclusions.

Why would Clemens and Pettitte have to be wearing a Yanks uniform?

22/ Because in an Astros uniform, they’d be pitching in a different ball park, to different hitters (and, if league adjustments are correct, inferior hitters) and at different stages in their careers. What’s more, they be playing for a different manager (maybe Garner was less married to a strict double play depth than Torre?) and in front of different offenses (has a study been done to determine how defense is impacted by score? I know when I play defense with a big league, I don’t focus as intently on all the subtle factors that go into positioning).

In other words, there are a myriad of different variables involved.

William, but it makes absolutely no sense, allow me to say.
First, the way you want to rate fielders means that nobody can ever be compared to anybody else, because obviously only Jeter will have to make a play with Jeter fielding as the SS. You’re also ruling out Pettitte and Clemens in other uniforms, but then it’s the same for offense. You say that you don’t accept the analogy for offense, because those stats are “widely accepted”. Does that make them better? And if you want to say that on defense, it’s the pitcher and the fielder who have a say, on offense it’s not just the pitcher and the hitter, but also the opponents’ fielders.
Maybe fielders against Jeter position themselves poorly. Maybe pitchers pitch poorly on a regular basis. Or maybe those things even out, just like the balls hit to Jeter. Unless you seriously think that Jeter has been unbelievably unlucky throughout his career, fielding behind very different pitchers and against very different hitters for several years now. I really don’t know what else to say about this, aside that I find it incredible to claim that many different pitchers might have been extremely wild for several years (but not with other teams) and might have influenced negatively Jeter to this extent. We’ve got years of data, not small sample sizes. And Pinto’s was just a curiosity.

And no, Felipe Lopez wouldn’t make headlines. But to me, Jeter shouldn’t either. The people who write those headlines are those who try to discredit studies who show that he’s just not as good as many others (in fact, as all other regulars). He doesn’t deserve gold gloves. If Felipe Lopez started winning GGs, he’d be discussed as well. Jeter’s still a great hitter. He’s a very poor fielder however. As far as I’m concerned, those results just prove what I see. I guess I’m a good observer

But seriously, what is the problem with Jeter being poor? Why can’t it be?

I’d like to clarify the PMR.
It says Jeter is -40 outs above expected and the team is -38 outs. That means that the replacements for Jeter were +2 outs above expected. The replacements made about 55 outs compared to 420 for Jeter. That’s a large enough sample size to at least conclude the replacements were better.

Also if your arguing that Jeter is out of position to begin with before the ball is hit to him, then isn’t that Jeter’s fault? Your basically saying that the manager decides the exact location Jeter fields at, as if that exact spot had a little x on it and didn’t allow him to move. Well, the position of a SS before the pitch is about the same for everyteam in normal situations. Any difference will even itself out over time.

What makes Yankee pitching so unique, that it directly is the cause for his fielding difference? Missing spots? really? I didn’t know your college and old softball league had the same talent as MLB pitchers. Pitchers at the MLB level hit their spot the majority of the time within error. Are you saying that the Yankees pitching are so wild that it affects defense? Again, any difference in “wildness” will cancel out across baseball.

When every kind of defensive stat has Jeter last, doesn’t that mean something? Zone, play by play, range based, etc all have Jeter last. And it’s been this way for about 4-5 years. It’s not the systems bias, it’s not the human’s bias, it’s just an objective metric

William/23:

Because in an Astros uniform, they’d be pitching in a different ball park, to different hitters (and, if league adjustments are correct, inferior hitters) and at different stages in their careers

You REALLY need to read that article.  I DID look at how the park impacted each SS, and how each hitter impacted each SS.  I also looked to see who the runner was on first base, when Jeter was the SS.  I did not control for age.

Seriously, just read the article first, and then come back with your objections.  There’s plenty of other blogs out there where you can raise your objections without looking at the evidence provided.  This is definitely not one of those blogs.

You wouldn’t go to a book club without reading the book first, would you? (George Constanza notwithstanding.) Or go to your theological class, and not read the materials first.

We’ll wait…

24 /

That’s not true. The way I’d rate fielders--general conclusions based on observation (personal and collective) complemented by different metrics--allows me, for example, to say that Jeter is no better than average and likely below. It doesn’t allow me to say things like he is the “worst” or “horrendous”, but I am not comfortable making such claims without better defined evidence.

I didn’t say having widely accepted stats makes them better...but what it removes from the equation in the need to justify them as a basis. With OPS, for example, I think most people agree that’s a pretty good guide to measuring a hitter. Therefore, an argument citing OPS can stand on its own. We don’t have something like OPS yet on the defensive side.

Also, just to explain a little better, the reason I don’t think offense and defense equate similarly is because on offense, a hitter is alone in trying to be successful. Sure, the opposing pitcher and fielders factor in, but they are not working in tandem with the hitter. On defense, at least two members of the same team are working together. You can’t ignore one’s contribution when assessing the other.

Finally, there is nothing wrong with Jeter being poor. In fact, relative to other MLB short stops, I happen to agree with that statement. What I think a lot of Jeter detractors lose sight of, however, is that even the “worst” SS in the league has value (i.e., Jeter playing the position the “worst” isn’t like having Jason Giambi play SS). Also, just because Jeter may be in the lower 1/3 of the league in terms of defense, that doesn’t mean his bat still doesn’t warrant having him play the position. I think too many want to come to definitive conclusions and less than logical extensions.

25/

Thanks for the clarification, although I still can’t see how the disparity in the samples makes the comparison relevant. Jeter played 1,318 innings at SS last year; his replacements played 132.

As for positioning, I didn’t suggest the manager dictates where Jeter stands (although philosophy could impact enough plays to change one’s ranking). My more relevant point was that pitchers play a very important role in positioning. In addition, there are several other important variables (such as game score) that need to be taken into account. If you want to assume they just even out, that’s fine. I am not willing to make that assumption.

Once again, simply citing a group of similar defensive metrics to support your conclusion is not going to be very convincing unless you are preaching to a choir. Besides, Jeter has not always ranked last in all of them. In fact, I believe around 2003/2004 he spiked up a bit.

/26 Are you suggesting I purchase your book in order to engage in discussion on this blog? If so, I’ll have to pass. I didn’t begin discussing the merits of your article, so I don’t really see why it should be the required reading starting point for a discussion on the Jeter quotes posted above. That kind of appeal to authority is as relevant as a Gene Michael saying you REALLY need to have played SS to discuss the topic.

After following the links from this thread, I must say I was VERY surprised to see that SAFE had Bobby Higginson as the worst LF. UZR always had him near the top, and I think I blasted the Tigers at one point for not realizing that he wasn’t as worthless as they’d decided he was.

Now, if the papers were abuzz with Higginson talk, I would love to see the back and forth. But with Jeter, we’re talking about a player at the position with the largest sample (SS), a player with a very long career at a position where the advanced metrics have the most agreement, and a player whom, as far as I can recall, has never generated any significant level of disagreement among any metrics. He had that spike a few years ago when he was at or just above average in all the metrics I recall.

I think what we’re seeing here are people arguing that “Fielding Skill” is not the same as “Measured Defensive Value.” We’ve seen the UZR data for the fielding behind pitchers, and that data certainly doesn’t support the notion that the Yankees could just coincidentally have a long history of pitchers who make it tough enough on the SS to screw Jeter.

People who’ve been playing baseball for decades have had a long experience being taught what constitutes good fielding, and the emphasis in my personal experience has typically been on the so-called Fundamentals, avoiding Mental Mistakes and of course Making Maximum Effort (surely, Jeter must be playing harder than other SS because of all those jump-throws). If being a good fielder means doing it The Right Way, no amount of data is going to change people’s ideas about who is a good fielder, because being a good fielder is only verifiable through means similar to those used to determine how intimidating Jim Rice was.

So while William has, in my mind, a decent point, Jeter is an awful example for him and is really the last fielder I would ever choose to try to argue against fielding metrics.

---

“Derek doesn’t really have a sinkerball pitching staff whereas other shortstops, you sit behind certain pitchers, you’re going to get a lot of ground balls.” - scout in the NY Post article

Seriously, Chien-Ming Wang’s team? They may not have “a sinkerball pitching staff,” but who does?

William, he is suggesting that you buy and read the Hardball Times Annual, in which he has an article, but otherwise has nothing to do with.  If you are insinuating that he wants you to purchase HIS book (The Book), so he can get the 40 cents or whatever each of us gets per book, you don’t know Tango at all.  You’ll never know a more intellectually honest and least “commercial” person than he…

William/29:

I am suggesting that your objections have already been noted and addressed.  So, it makes no sense to continue arguing on the path.  The ship has left the dock, so you need to swim over.  Otherwise, your point has been made.

It is not “my” book, but THT.

Actually, I think MGL is even less commercially-inclined.

And yeah, we’re not making any money on the THT book, regardless of how many copies are sold.  And The Book will amount to just some 40 cents or so.

Really, you don’t even have to buy any book.  Just go to B&N and read it for free.

As yet another stathead with a system that shows Derek Jeter to be a really bad defender, I have to point out that he’s not the worst shortstop in baseball.

He’s just the worst who has been allowed to keep his job, playing 150 games per year, for over a decade now.  There are others who play shortstop worse than Jeter, two examples are Mark Loretta and Russ Adams.  They aren’t good enough to keep a job.

Jeter and Pettite:

Just felt like looking it up, Jeter has played behind Pettite for 68% of Pettite’s career balls in play.  Everett makes up 18%.  Of the remaining 14%, Tony Fernandez has the most with 5%.

Rally/34: right, that’s why I prefer looking at fielding+position.  From that standpoint, Jeter ends up being around the 25th percentile of all nonpitchers. 

By definition, the guy at the 50th percentile will be an average fielding 3B.  So, Jeter is somewhere below that.

Actually, I think MGL is even less commercially-inclined.

That’s probably true, but I didn’t want to include myself in the pool.

Let me add that it is absolutely, certainly possible that Jeter is “x” amount better (or worse) than any or all the metrics say that he is (one of the problems with using ALL metrics to bolster the claim that Jeter is indeed a “y” SS is that they all share some biases - i.e. they are not independent).

And yes, we can tweak those chances (that he is better or worse than the metrics suggest) based on things like observation, scouts, fans, media, whatever. It is just that the more (halfway decent) data we have, the less we should temper those things using the above-mentioned sources.  That is just the way it is.

No one knows for sure how “good” Jeter really is at SS.  Same for every other player and every other skill.  All we can do is use the best data and data crunching “systems” available and make an educated guess. We can assign an approximate certainty level to that guess if we really want to - if that makes some people happier.  And then the certainty levels or intervals or however you want to couch or present them have their own certainty levels as well…

Ditto 37.

I personally give Fans a weight of around 200 games.  That is, at 200 games of performance data, I’m 50/50 in deciding between what Fans see, and what the stats tell us.  After 800 games, I’m at 80% with the stats.

Whether the correct number is 200 games or 50, or whatnot, I’m not sure yet.

It’s official, Jeter is delusional:
http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/yankees/2008/02/23/2008-02-23_derek_jeter_intends_to_play_shortstop_fo-2.html?print=1&page=all

I like this quote, actually:

“I have to be honest with you guys, I’d much rather win (the World Series than MVP),” Jeter said.

Notice that he says “I have to be honest with you guys,” like he’s making a confession. Then imagine if he had said he’d rather be MVP.

Bias is obvious when terms like “advanced metrics” and “halfway decent” are used.

The veracity of the base data is questionable - its accuracy isn’t tested in any way and variables aren’t even measured. The methodology is crude at best. It doesn’t account for player postitioning or contribution by other players involved in a defensive play. Those are just two of a long list of factors.

Variations in any of the above can completely change the results. Concluding that something is so is more a proclamation of entrepeneurship or attachment to a clique than science.

Wrong blog.  See my comments to William.

If 40-year-old Omar Vizquel can still play shortstop, Jeter asks, why can’t he stick around there for the next six or seven years?

40 year old Jeter playing SS. The name “Bobby Bonilla” keeps popping into my head, I don’t know why

Vizquel’s last 3 years’ UZR

07 +16
06 +13
05 +14

Medical marvel or lucky (or both)?

Interesting article (#39).

If 40-year-old Omar Vizquel can still play shortstop, Jeter asks, why can’t he stick around there for the next six or seven years?

Good question.  And the answer, of course, is that how long a player sticks around at a defensive position depends on how good or bad they were and are at a certain age.  Vizquel was twice the playe Jeter was at the same age, so of course he can stick around longer.  That is a stupid analogy by whomever said it (the author or Jeter, I don’t know).

“First and foremost, I think it boils down to your body type,” Jeter said. “If you take care of yourself and you’re agile and flexible, you can do it. A lot more people are working out and conditioning all year round as opposed to the old days.”

That is basically true.  Probably the primary reason why players, especially in the middle infield, get worse defensively, is that they lose flexibility, agility, balance, and speed.

“The thing about a guy like Derek Jeter is that it’s hard to envision him not playing,” Girardi said. “There is going to come a day when he’ll retire, but in my mind, it’s too far out so I don’t really see it. Maybe if he’s playing at 47, he won’t be a shortstop.”

I will gladly offer a wager, at 10-1, that Jeter won’t be playing baseball at age 45.  I’ll also offer a wager, at even money, that if Jeter is playing at age 40, it won’t be at SS.

Many scouts believe Jeter would be able to make an easy transition to the outfield, where his speed, strong arm and terrific instincts would make him a natural. Asked about the possibility, Jeter waves off the question before it’s finished.

“I ain’t going out there,” Jeter said. “It’s not as easy as it sounds to just pick up a glove and say, ‘I’m going to be an outfielder today.’ It doesn’t work like that.”

That is probably true.  It is also somewhat of an “excuse” for Jeter not considering the possibility that he SHOULD move to the OF.

As for his current position, Jeter feels he’s a better shortstop now than he was during the early years of his career thanks to experience. By making the necessary adjustments on a regular basis, Jeter is constantly addressing what he feels are his strengths and weaknesses in the field. Just don’t ask him what those are.

Now, THAT is delusional (that he, or anyone else, is a better SS at 33 than they were when they started).  That is highly unlikely for anyone.  The data, of course, do not support that notion.

Jeter’s UZR over the years:

96 -12
97 -1
98 -10
99 -14
00 -3
01 -16
02 -18
03 -29
04 -2
05 -8
06 -15
07 -31

If you graph that, it almost looks like he “reinvents” his defense in 2004 (the first year of his 3 consecutive GG’s), and then crashes over the next 3 years.  I’m pretty sure I’m just reading too much into a normal aging curve, though.  If you attempt to draw a straight line through all the data points (which is not easy, although I’m sure there is a unique regression line), it looks like -5 to -30 over 12 years, or a decline of 2.5 runs per year, not unusual for a SS.

“You can make a poll or a study look the way you want, but it’s not going to measure a complete player,” said Girardi, who believes Jeter looks the same as he did in his rookie year of 1996. “I don’t think it takes into account his steadiness at short, that you can count on him every day to be the same guy or his leadership skills.”

Yup, that’s what a team should look for in a player - “steadiness.” “The same guy.” The same bad defender I guess is a good thing. We have another rocket scientist in Girardi to add to the managerial roster.

Jeter focused on his agility, lateral movement and speed this winter, looking to help both his fielding and baserunning. After seeing Jeter on the first day of camp, Alex Rodriguez predicted an MVP season for his teammate, who was “flattered” by the prognostication.

Bill James (or was it Rob Neyer) calls that the, “Everyone is in the best shape of their careers in Spring Training” syndrome.  It always cracks me up.  Does anyone know A-Rod personally?  I’ll wager him 1 million dollars that Jeter does NOT win MVP this season.  Surely if you “predict” something is going to happen, that means that you are at LEAST 60% sure it will happen, no?

“He took a lot of initiative this winter to do what he always does,” Girardi said. “He tries to get better each year, because that’s who Derek Jeter is.”

Whatever.

“I have to be honest with you guys, I’d much rather win (the World Series than MVP),” Jeter said. “That’s the bottom line. I’ve said it time and time again: you play to win. You always want to do well because the better you do, the better the team is going to be.”

Admirable.  Not that is hasn’t been said by almost every other player, especially the stars and superstars, in the history of every sport.

That’s precisely what Girardi wants to hear. Put any computer study you want on the manager’s desk, it doesn’t matter. He knows what he sees, and when he looks at Jeter, he sees a winning ballplayer.

This is apparently written by the author of the article.  Seems strangely out of context.

“I think 29 other teams would love to have Derek Jeter,” Girardi said. “To me, that’s the sign of the type of player you’ve got.”

Would love to have Jeter?  What does that even mean?  At his current salary?  At 50 million a year?  For free?  Couldn’t we say the same thing about ANY other player, as longer as we specify the right salary?

A linear regression gives you -7 runs in 1996, dropping by 1.2 runs a year, to -20 runs in 2007. 

r=.45

***

It’s funny, when people talk about Everett or Vizquel’s fielding, they talk about his fielding.  With Jeter, it’s about his clutch, his steadiness, and what a good hitter he is for a SS.

Who knows if it is that most athletes are poor judges of their own ability, that he is heavily influenced by the media, fans, and management, he is just saying the politically correct thing, or some combination.

Didn’t Griffey supposedly throw a hissy fit when he was replaced for defense last year?  Can there be anything in sports more delusional than that (other than Jeter thinking that he is a very good defensive SS)?

Most of these questions and comments in the media pertaining to Jeter’s defense are quite obtuse. I wonder what Jeter would say if you asked him point blank, in what quartile or decile do you think your defense ranks among SS, in terms of total runs saved or cost per some unit time, like a game or season?  More interesting would be if you asked everyone that same question and the ballots were anonymous.  My guess is that the average player at each position would end up in the top 25% or so.  Or maybe it would be closer to the middle, because the top players would understate their ability, just to appear humble, even if the ballots were anonymous.

How about if we asked all commentators to rank each catcher in terms of their “toughness?” That one was a joke.  Aren’t all catchers, “as touch as nails,” according to most commentators?

The Daily News article just seems like poor journalism to me. 

To write an article that is correctly titled:
“Derek Jeter intends to play shortstop for as long as he can”

and then include a quote that says:
“That’s the bottom line. I’ve said it time and time again: you play to win.”

without asking the question:
“What if you moving to the outfield will increase the likelihood of the team winning more games?”

seems to me to be either a flattery piece or just a poor piece.

Of course it’s a flattering piece; it’s a New York tabloid paper—they know who’s buying and how they feel about Jeter.

I mean, come on… the original Post piece on the study was headlined “YOU’VE GOT TO BE KIDDING!” and opened with the line “Talk about junk science...”

mgl, making fun of that Jeter story is just....well, it makes taking candy from a baby look like rocket science.

most athletes WANT to say bland things; most athletes are more than willing to say thing you think not just bland but outright dumb if sportswriters find those things unobjectionable.  most athletes are invested in playing as well as they can for as long as they can.  talking the way you’d like them to talk, thinking the way you’d like them to think, will not help them achieve that goal.  so why should they do so?

more specifically:  why on earth should Jeter not think he’s a very good defensive SS???  I mean, think about it, from his perspective.  think about the arc of his career from age 12 onward.  go pick a hundred or a thousand or a hundred thousand random Americans--think one of them will be a better shortshop than Jeter ?  there are, let’s say, 30 guys in the world who are clearly better than him:  the other mlb shortstops.  (throw in Japanese players, other players if you want--the number’s still tiny.)

I’m a completely saber-friendly guy, but I have to say, anyone who entertains the notion that among the possible goals of sabermetric analysis is to give players a more realistic understanding of their own abilities is extremely deluded....

...nor should people expect Jeter to be able to answer analytic hypotheticals about the effect of his moving to OF on the team’s performance.  are you even serious!?

sabermetrics is useful to Jeter in the same way that ornithology is to a bird.

...nor should people expect Jeter to be able to answer analytic hypotheticals about the effect of his moving to OF on the team’s performance.

Who was expecting that?  If you are referring to my comment, then you need to re-read it.

nick, I don’t disagree with anything you said!  Most of my comments on this thread is just “thinking out loud.”

Now, unfortunately, where it is important, such as in public policy and government, many people think and act the same way as Jeter (irrationally), and it ends up hurting us.

As you say, it is probably productive to Jeter’s career (and to baseball, the fans, etc.) for him to think and act (speak) the way he does, even if his actual words and concepts are not technically accurate.

Re: nick l

I’m a completely saber-friendly guy, but I have to say, anyone who entertains the notion that among the possible goals of sabermetric analysis is to give players a more realistic understanding of their own abilities is extremely deluded....

I disagree; if a player has a thorough understanding of his abilities, then he can leverage that knowledge to become a better ballplayer, and help his team win more games. See the link in my name for an example of this.

...nor should people expect Jeter to be able to answer analytic hypotheticals about the effect of his moving to OF on the team’s performance.  are you even serious!?

Maybe we shouldn’t expect him to answer these questions, but if Jeter realized that he might be more productive at 1b, and had told Cashman in October, “I’m getting older, all the metrics say I suck, and we have a hole at 1B (Giambi’s a DH). If you want, I can work on transitioning to 1B, and you can pick up Everett”...well I wouldn’t expect that, but why can’t we hope that players will be able to make informed decisions about their careers based on what will help their teams win? It may be a ways off, but the Brian Bannister interview (and even the USS Mariner-Felix Hernandez story in THT Annual 2008) shows us that some players are catching up (and even at the front) of sabermetric thought.

It is kind of ironic that you wouldn’t expect one of the most renowned team players of our generation to do that, but I digress

I should add that it’s not really reasonable to expect a player to be “saber-savvy”, and I don’t think any less of Jeter because he doesn’t know that much about advanced fielding metrics. Just a “wouldn’t this be cool” with Jeter as the example.

Here is a pretty good article in NY’s other rag paper:

http://www.nypost.com/seven/02242008/sports/yankees/geeks_got_it_right_99135.htm

He rededicated himself in the offseason with exercises designed to improve his lateral quickness and first-step explosiveness. One Yankee official saw this version of Jeter and said, “He set the clock back five years.”

Sure. Again, the “best shape of his life ST syndrome.”

“I’m a lot quicker, a lot more agile,” Jeter said. “Only time will tell, but that is what I worked on.”

Again, sure.

No one should be surprised if Jeter’s whole game, including his defense, soars in 2008.

Really?  No one?  Of course his defense, as measured by an advanced metric like UZR will “soar” if “soar” means “much better than 07.” In 07, his UZR was -31.  His 08 projection is only -15.  The chance that his UZR in 08 is better than in 07 is probably 95-98%, I would guess.

As far as his offense soaring, again, I have no idea what that means, but considering that his 04-07 lwts are 15, 20, 28, 22, his 08 should be right around +15.  The chance that is “soars” (let’s say that “soars” means +30 or higher) is probably around 2%.

The two best defensive seasons of his career, as measured by most modern metrics, were 2004-05.

The best were 97 and 04, followed by 99, according to UZR.  I wonder what his source is.

Rodriguez, citing the conditioning, predicted an MVP win for Jeter.

Again, I’ll take a bet with A-Rod at almost any odds (less than 10-1).

This is the elephant in the room. Will the Yanks move Jeter off of shortstop when the time comes - assuming that time is not here already - or will they be like the Orioles, who kowtowed well past Cal Ripken’s expiration date at short and hurt the organization?

How do you compare moving one of the best SS to one of the worst.  Jeter at any point in his career was probably not as good as Cal when Cal was finally moved to 3B.  In 96, his last year at SS, Cal was -5 in UZR.  In 95, he was +13!  94, +14.  (I cherry picked those years - he was a disaster in the few years prior to that.) What a comparison!