from Amazon
Wednesday, March 31, 2010
Troy Tulowitzki: saberist?
He says:
Tulowitzki is very aware of the zone ratings measurment, but says it only goes so far in accurately assessing how effectively a shortstop plays the position.
“Say a ball is hit in the hole (between third and short),’’ he said. “Some guys will take an angle that may or may not get them to the ball, knowing that’s what they need to do to get the out.
“And some guys will take an angle that will get them to the ball, just so they can get to it, but not have much chance to throw the (runner) out. That makes their rating look better.’’
I’m trying to follow his logic. Let’s see. In one version of Zone Rating, an out-of-zone play counts in the denominator (and numerator), if you get the out. If you don’t get the out, it doesn’t count (in either numerator or denominator). In another version of Zone Rating, an out-of-zone play does not count in the denominator, even if you get the out. (An out counts in the numerator.) So, on out-of-zone plays, it doesn’t matter if you reach the ball and not make the out. It’s not going to hurt more.
Tulo is thinking that you get credit for “touches”, whether it leads to an out or not. He should feel assured that the bigshot fielding metrics are not doing what he’s criticizing them for.
The Mariners GM says this:
I’m amazed over the course of my career about the (scouts) who have put their necks on the line because of what they knew about a player, and they turned out to be right. In the same sense, you have to look at the numbers to confirm things.
That is one thing the scouts have over the numbers guys. The numbers guys will have a high uncertainty level with a small sample size. A scout’s uncertainty level will not change much after a certain point. This is why the Fans’ Scouting Report is so powerful. A fan doesn’t need to see a player alot to cast his judgement. But, UZR and the other fielding metrics have a high level of uncertainty to them. Once you’re up to 3+ years of fielding data, then, yeah, the scale tips towards the numbers guys. But at less than one year, it’s the scout that counts the most. And that’s why a scout will always be important, because he can provide the low uncertainty level that the numbers-guy can’t, in the face of limited sample size.
Recent comments
Older comments
Page 1 of 344 pages 1 2 3 > Last »Complete Archive – By Category
Complete Archive – By Date