ah.. where's Chris Duffy? Ya gotta include Duff.. geezz..

Huh? It says second basemen at the top of the first chart.

Glad to see the numbers reflect well on Andruw. Diamond Mind gave him an average rating for the 2005 season, which I think is just miguided; and I've had Diamond Mind cheerleaders telling me that my lying eyes, which saw a pretty good Andruw last year, are wrong all wrong and that Diamond Mind's numbers cannot be disputed. BP's #s didn't think much more highly of him. I know it's popular these days to claim, despite the evidence, that Jones is now just a run of the mill fielder. He still gets to plenty of balls.

David, does your model say whether the 40 hits allowed by Griffey were singles, doubles, or triples? If you know that, you can adjust his batting totals downward, and that will tell you if he's still an effective player in CF.

Larry

Seriously...this is the Reds we're talking about. They'll be lucky if their manager can even remember who's penciled in at CF.

It's kind of surprising to see Torii Hunter in the middle of the pack...

Also, being a Cubs fan, I don't like seeing Juan Pierre towards the bottom. I would have expected to see him towards the top of the list.

I'm new to these fielding-rating systems.

Some maintain that, in assessing fielding, an error should count against the fielder no more than not getting to the ball.

Do errors get penalized? Are there only specific kinds of errors that weigh against the fielder?

I'm asking my question in relation to someone like, say, Chippers Jones. I know that most range metrics place him at the bottom end of range. However, Jones does make relatively few errors. From my observation, he rarely makes wild throwing errors or misplays routine to moderately difficult groundballs. I.e., when he gets to the ball, you don't have to hold your breath worrying that he is going to mishandle it, or zing it into the seats behind first base. (I'm assuming this could be verified; if I'm wrong about Jones, let's say there's a hypothetical guy who fits the profile.) Do most of these fielding-rating systems account for examples like this: the guy who has so-so range, but almost never boots the average to moderately difficult groundball? Isn't there some value (more than psychological) to having a third-baseman who always makes the routine plays? Or are most systems concerned solely with the number of plays the guy makes vs. number of balls hit in his zone? E.g., third baseman X got to and successfully converted 20 more gb's than thirdbaseman Z in the same number of opportunities in his zone, so he is the preferred fielder, even though 3b X had 15 more errors than 3b Z and also made 10 of those errors on average to moderately difficult GBs, while 3b Z made 0 errors on average to moderately difficult groundballs.

This are sincere questions from a novice. It's probably apparent that they haven't been thought through.

John L,

This looks at an error the same as any other ball that fails to turn into an out. If the error was on an easy play (high probability of an out), the fielder is penalized a great deal. If the error is on a tough play, he's penalized less.

Most fielding systems are more interested in the plays you made vs. the plays you don't make. You ask an interesting question, however, dealing with the psychological effect of errors on the team. In general, however, I'd rather have the fielder who made 50 more plays than the one that made 10 fewer errors.

Thank you for your answer, David.

With Rowand once against demonstrating himself as one of the top defensive center fielders I wonder how his trade to Philly will affect both him and the White Sox. How will playing in Philly for 81 games (as well as switching to a new league with different parks, different dimensions, etc.) affect him? Is there any way to tell? Also, the word is that Brian Anderson is a solid defensive player. Are there any minor league numbers that might indicate how well he can replace Rowand? I suspect White Sox pitchers may be a bit upset that Rowand is no longer patrolling the outfield.

David, do you think the fact that Nick Swisher rates so highly in Range, and that Eric Byrnes rated so highly last year, that Mark Kotsay's rating as a center fielder is hurt by his corner outfielders? And if so, how might you account for a team effect, whereby some center fielders are greedy and take every ball hit in between himself and the corner outfielder, while others allow the corner guy to take a lot of those easy flies?

Rich,

Centerfielders are supposed to be ball hogs. I was always taught the CF should get to any ball possible. If the left and right fielders are taking balls that the CF should get, that tells me the CF isn't very good.

30 outs difference between Damon and Bernie, eh? I was just musing about that number. When people talk defense they almost always inflate the impact -- 100 runs a year and all that.

But think about it: if both guys play 150 games a year, and Damon is actually catching 1 extra ball every 5 games (which would be 30 extra outs a year), isn't that a huge difference? That's huge! How many balls are hit to CF in a game anyway? 4? 6? How many of those are easy plays? 80%? 30 outs a year is a big difference.

Just reassuring myself that the Jamesian way of looking at things does, in fact, make sense. Thanks.