Joined: 25 Sep 2017
|Posted: Sun Oct 22, 2017 8:11 am Post subject: Why We Undervalue Defense
|During the latter thing about this week, Dave has discu sed defensive metrics and just how they are, or should be, treated moreso as inferential statistics than descriptive; that the results ought to be treated as data points instead of concrete and isolated performance indicators. As odd as it sounds, defense is still undervalued today. And when I say undervalued, imagine me putting a ton of emphasis to really hammer home the reality that defense just isn't considered as e sential as offense. If I would compare Manny Ramirez and Carl Crawford (as I will below), people who don't really consider defense to be valuable with scoff in the results.
Here are Crawfords and Ramirezs runs projections for 2009:
Manny Ramirez: +30 batting, -7.5 adjustment, +20 replacement, -15 defenseCarl Crawford: + 3 batting, -7.5 adjustment, +20 Andre Ellington Jersey replacement, +10 defense
Put together, this puts Ramirez at +27.5 runs and Crawford at +25.5 runs. Converted to wins, that is a mere 2.75 to two.55 advantage for ManRam, and that isnt even including baserunning metrics such as BPs equivalent baserunning runs. Now, for any second, imagine if I would continue air at ESPN and discu s how Crawford in '09 is nearly just as valuable, all in all, as Ramirez: can you think of the kind of criticism I would receive? In fact, I expect to get some because well, even though our fanbase has a tendency to value defense a bit more.
Even in my own head it sounds odd that Mannys production is only two runs higher than Crawford. I hate relying on arguments centering around the way the media shapes our views of events, but this is surely a big part of why fans focus moreso on offense, or consider offense as worth even more than defense. Only whenever a player is considered a defensive wiz may be the run prevention using the Kareem Martin Jersey glove deemed important, as well as in cases like that, people almost get carried away, stating that offense doesnt matter at all because of how solid the players glove looks.
Shows like SportsCenter only show the spectacular plays, and this is why our views on the defensive resumes of certain players (See: Derek Jeter) are warped. He makes some fantastic plays in his career, so we have seen them over and also over again, but he is not a great fielding shortstop in almost any feeling of the word. This doesnt show up in the type of errors or fielding percentage, though. Even though innate flaws appear in modern defensive metrics and our perceptions of their usage, we can all agree that fielding percentage is awful. Jeter wont make errors on certain plays, simply because his range prevents him from making these plays.
Watching a game, we have a tendency to evaluate defense solely on whether or not the play was made, not if the player had enough range to achieve said ball. If Chase Utley bobbles a ball at second base, even though he showed more range to get to the ball than any other second baseman within the league, many fans would consider it a Brittan Golden Jersey poor play. Maybe it was? I personally feel it would be an excellent sign because he was able to reach the ball, which boils down to a large point: fans are spoiled, and defense is honestly taking care of of the game where watching a game title hurts our opinions and evaluations.
Shane Victorino has terrific range in centerfield, speculate he scurries to some Flyball A and Carlos Beltran is able to glide to Flyball A, lots of people would consider Shane the better fielder. Beltran made the play look easy, and for that reason it becomes expected. He is expected to make that play and people viewing the games get spoiled into considering this normal, when in fact it is insanely impre sive fielding. When we have seen an adequate amount of something, it gradually establishes standard within our minds, and things are treated in accordance with that norm instead of the average for that league. This is the reason why many fans will consider a typical or slightly excellent defender miraculous with the glove due to the fact his predece sor had awful range and displayed poor defensive abilities.
Even with all of the defensive metrics currently available, it is really an area that still isnt concrete from an evaluative standpoint. This fact makes it difficult to justify defensive importance when statheads like us are under intense scrutiny to mathematically and logically prove our points. Im not sure how fans, myself included, could po sibly get past being spoiled or falling right into a comfort zone with what we watch instead of the way the average performer would perform, but until we reach that time, comparisons like Ramirez-Crawford previously mentioned will continue to look ridiculous. In the end, how could Crawfords defense and baserunning come even close to what Manny can do with the bat? Perhaps if your defensive metric comes out that leverages the significance level of the situation we're able to start to show this, or one that, with very educated estimates, shows what hit could have been recorded had the ball not been fielded (as with, factoring within the run values of what might have occurred had the play not been fielded) Carson Palmer Jersey , however this is still a difficult analytical facet to market.
Defense is very important, but how important is still uncertain within the eyes of many fans, primarily because of how we value errors, and just how we obtain spoiled watching certain players.