THE BOOK--Playing The Percentages In Baseball

Wednesday, November 19, 2008

Offense by position groups by decade

Breaking all players based on their primary position class, here are the run values per 700 PA of each group, by decade:

First the Catchers:
decade LWTS700
1870 -7
1880 -21
1890 -22
1900 -26
1910 -22
1920 -18
1930 -15
1940 -18
1950 -13
1960 -15
1970 -10
1980 -14
1990 -16
2000 -19

The 1970s was the period for the best hitting catchers, and even then, they were still overall, pretty poor hitters.  Since 1980, they are -16.3 runs.

Next, the infielders (2B, SS, 3B, as a group):
decade LWTS700
1870 0
1880 -6
1890 -9
1900 -7
1910 -8
1920 -17
1930 -15
1940 -12
1950 -11
1960 -13
1970 -15
1980 -10
1990 -10
2000 -9

Alot of jumping around.  Fairly stable for the last 30 years.  Since 1980, they are -9.6.

The outfielders:
decade LWTS700
1870 2
1880 7
1890 16
1900 14
1910 14
1920 18
1930 11
1940 13
1950 11
1960 12
1970 11
1980 7
1990 6
2000 6

The 1890s through 1920s represents the big change.  And since the 1980s, quite a bit less offense.  Since 1980, OF are +6.5.

Lastly, the 1B/DH:
decade LWTS700
1870 1
1880 24
1890 7
1900 6
1910 5
1920 16
1930 26
1940 12
1950 11
1960 15
1970 15
1980 14
1990 21
2000 20

Obviously, pre-1920, it was a different game.  The offense was concentrated in the OF, not 1B.  Presumably, the better fielders were at 1B, not OF.  There was a shift in the 1920s, so that the two groups were balanced.  It has been noticeably larger gap these last two decades.  Since 1980, they are +18.4 runs.

Here’s the recap, since 1980:
C -16.3
IF -9.6
OF 6.5
1B 18.4

Compare this to the fielding positional adjustments I use:
C +12.5
IF +4.2
OF -4.2
1B -14.2 (includes DH)

To the extent that the average player in each pool should be paid the same, then my numbers are simply not good enough. And one would think they should be paid the same, because after 30 years, the equilibrium point in terms of moving players among the positions should have been settled.  I mean, there’s only so many spots for 1B, and since the hitting of 1B is so overwhelming, one would hope that a few of them would be playing 2B, 3B, or in the corner OF.  It is not happening.  Why is that? 

***

Let’s look at the SS/2B/3B dynamic, by decade, RELATIVE TO EACH OTHER:
decade 2B SS 3B
1870 1 -1 1
1880 -1 -1 2
1890 -2 -1 3
1900 4 -3 -1
1910 6 -9 3
1920 11 -11 0
1930 0 -5 5
1940 -3 -6 9
1950 -5 -9 14
1960 -6 -8 14
1970 -2 -16 18
1980 -1 -13 14
1990 1 -11 10
2000 -1 -7 8

Through the 1890s, very little separated the three positions.  In essence, they were all equals.  From 1900s through the 1920s, the offense was concentrated at 2B.  Then, since the 1930s, the offense went toward 3B.

From the 1940s through the 1960s, very little separated the SS and 2B.  The turf years (and I suppose expansion into outside North America) changed that substantially, with an enormous shift away from offense at SS.

The 2B seems to have found a happy medium between SS and 3B in offense.  However, in defense, as we know, the 3B is very very close to the 2B.  So, again, we don’t have the equilibrium that we’d expect.  Just on this one along, we see a 9-run disequilibrium.  It seems that MLB is not very efficient is spreading talent, even among positions that has alot of movement within it.  Since 1980, the gap is 10 runs between SS and 2B, and 10 runs the other way between 3B and 2B.

I’ve been using a FIVE run gap between SS and 3B, not the TWENTY run gap we see here.

Where I said this:
Here’s the recap, since 1980:
C -16.3
IF -9.6
OF 6.5
1B 18.4

If we take this line:
IF -9.6

It would expand into:
SS -19.6
2B -9.6
3B +0.4

***

Let’s look at the OF dynamic:

decade LF CF RF
1870 3 5 -8
1880 1 3 -4
1890 4 -1 -3
1900 4 -2 -2
1910 -3 2 1
1920 2 -5 3
1930 1 -9 7
1940 4 -6 2
1950 6 -3 -4
1960 1 -4 3
1970 4 -7 2
1980 3 -6 3
1990 1 -6 6
2000 5 -10 6

Through the 1900s, the lack of offense was found in RF.  The lack of offense in CF really started in the 1920s.  There was a period in the 1950s where the lack of offense was in RF.

Since the 1980s, the split is -8 in CF, and +4 in the corner OF.  That’s a 12-run gap, which is very consistent with my findings using the fielding numbers only.

The split between LF and RF shows that there’s more offense in RF since the 1980s (+5 in RF, +3 in LF).  But, as we’ve seen, that kind of disequilibrium can be expected.

Once again, here’s the recap, since 1980:
C -16.3
IF -9.6
OF 6.5
1B 18.4

If we take this line:
OF 6.5

We can create:
CF -1.5
RF 10.5
LF 10.5

Merging everything, since 1980s:
SS -19.6
C -16.3
2B -9.6
CF -1.5
3B +0.4
RF 10.5
LF 10.5
1B 18.4

That’s it for now…