Torii Hunter gold glove?!?!?!

[Pierzynski 12]

Torii Hunter didn't deserve a gold glove when he played 90 f'n games.

[Felix]

Shouldn't you be busy figuring out how we are going to blow opening day? 

[Allsox]

I wouldn't put any stock into the Gold Glove Crap....This award lost all its credibility when Palmeiro won it only playing 30 games....The award's pure sham!

[bighurt574]

AJ and Hunter are on Best Damn Sports Show, AJ told Hunter that Rowand should have won it...

[Milkman delivers]

AJ and Hunter are on Best Damn Sports Show, AJ told Hunter that Rowand should have won it...

 

And then what happened?

[HighHeat45]

Hunter said he didnt think he would win it, but some people out there must of thought he did something.

 

You can see most of it on their site, but it will probably be down after today's show later tonight.

http://msn.foxsports.com/bestdamn

[chisoxfan79]

on the Best Damn Sports show Peroid, he was on there with Torri Hunter and he told him to his face that Rowand deserved the Gold Glove over him.

[tonyho7476]

How did Torii respond?

[retro1983hat]

Torii was pretty cool, he said he wasn't expecting to win it at all.

[aboz56]

on the Best Damn Sports show Peroid, he was on there with Torri Hunter and he told him to his face that Rowand deserved the Gold Glove over him.

[aboz56]

Holy s*** watch the end of that clip.

 

f***ing hilarious.

[RockRaines]

Every year, I swear I'm going to ignore the Gold Gloves because every year brings yet another completely ridiculous choice. Oh well, maybe in 2006. Until then, I thought I'd answer some e-mail.

 

John Kreiser: Loathe as I am to compliment a Yankee, check out Baseball Prospectus' comments on the AL shortstop Gold Glove. They don't agree with your denigration of Derek Jeter's play in 2005. Much to my surprise, Jeter wasn't a ridiculous choice this year. Maybe someone worked on positioning with him -- I don't recall as many dives (and misses). According to the comments, he was a decent choice -- not great, but not embarrassing, either.

 

As a Giant fan, I was delighted to see two of our guys win Gold Gloves, though I wouldn't have given one to either Mike Matheny or Omar Vizquel.

 

Neyer: I've received a few e-mail messages referencing Baseball Prospectus and Derek Jeter, so I did some digging. And if there's a sabermetric consensus regarding Jeter's defense, it most certainly is not that he's an outstanding fielder. BP's Clay Davenport recently described Jeter as "solidly above average," and the closest Davenport came to endorsing Jeter was when he wrote that he'd choose Jeter over Orlando Cabrera (who didn't have a particularly good season).

 

A Gold Glover isn't supposed to be "solidly above average," and anyway, that's just one method (the difference in fielding runs between the starter and his replacement). There are others. I've collected FRAR, win shares (which measures each player's contribution to his team's wins), and ultimate zone ratings (credits fielders for outs made) for every major leaguer who played at least 1,000 innings at shortstop in 2005. Below are where some of the top Gold Glove candidates ranked in each category:

 

WS UZR FRAR

Juan Uribe 1 2 2

Jhonny Peralta 2 5 1

Orlando Cabrera 3 3 3

Miguel Tejada 5 1 6

Derek Jeter 4 9 4

 

Juan Uribe is the obvious winner here. Considering that the White Sox were the biggest story in the American League, and that the key to their success was run prevention, you'd think the Gold Glove voters would have considered the possibility that maybe, just maybe, the fielders had something to do with all those low ERAs.

 

Nope. No love for Juan Uribe, or Aaron Rowand, or Joe Crede, not even for Mark Buehrle. Maybe next year. Meanwhile, here are the National Leaguers:

 

WS UZR FRAR

Rafael Furcal 1 4 2

Neifi Perez 2 2 1

Jack Wilson 3 6 3

Adam Everett 7 1 6

Omar Vizquel 6 5 5

 

Another big whiff for the voters, at least if you believe that fielding stats, interpreted with some degree of sophistication, really do make sense. Rafael Furcal would have been a fine choice, as would Neifi Perez or Jack Wilson. Vizquel was 38 this season, and his Gold Glove is just one more piece of evidence that the voters are either (at best) lazy or (at worst) willfully ignorant.

 

Tom Kennedy: Rob, back in the day, when people could read your stuff for free, I believe you commented about Jeter winning his first Gold Glove with something like "Enjoy this while you can, because he'll never win another." Now he's won another. Considering this award is voted on by managers and coaches, and not the dreaded "New York media," I imagine this comes as a bit of a shock to you.

 

What would you attribute this to? I doubt his range has improved; if anything, as one hits his 30s, I would tend to believe his physical skills have reached their peak.

 

Neyer: To what would I attribute this to? One, he might actually be making more plays lately. No, I don't think he has more range, in an athletic sense, than he had five years ago. But there's a lot of talk about the Yankees doing some odd things regarding the positioning of their middle infielders, and it's possible they've made changes that caused Jeter to make more plays. But getting back to the original issue, I really think he's won two Gold Gloves because the managers and coaches can't be bothered to figure out who the best fielders really are.

 

In 2004, Jeter's defensive stats actually were pretty good. Not Gold Glove good, but good. And there's no reason we should have been so surprised. Fielders have good years, just as hitters do. In 2000, catcher Charles Johnson -- who played for the Orioles and the White Sox that season -- batted .304 and hit 31 home runs in only 128 games. Was he really that good? Or was he just a decent hitter having a great season? In 1970, A's shortstop Bert Campaneris hit 22 home runs. He hit two home runs in 1969, and five home runs in 1971.

 

These things happen, to hitters and -- yes -- to fielders. In 2004, Derek Jeter didn't prove that he was a good fielder. He proved that occasionally a poor fielder will be a good fielder, statistically, for a season. Simple as that.

 

Rany: Rob, I'm absolutely in shock that Bobby Abreu won a Gold Glove; this might be the most surprising selection in the recent history of the award. (And yes, I'm counting Rafael Palmeiro's GG the year he played 28 games at 1B.)

 

I mean, I'm Abreu's biggest fan, and I can't fathom how he won the award. It's not just that he was -6 FRAR this year, or -34 for his career; it's that I haven't heard anyone in the game compliment his defensive skills. On the contrary, the general perception is that he's a loafer in the field. How he won the award is beyond me ... but so far, I haven't heard anyone comment on his selection. I see this as an easy column topic for you.

 

Neyer: A whole column? I don't think so. No single Gold Glove mischoice is worth a whole column anymore. It says something, though, that nobody's really talking about Abreu's Gold Glove. Just goes to show all of us how far the MSM still has to go when it comes to fielding metrics. OPS is no longer particularly esoteric, and I've actually seen VORP and win shares referenced in publications you might purchase from your neighborhood news vendor.

 

But fielding stats? The most commonly referenced fielding statistic is still fielding percentage, which has been around since the Civil War. The second most commonly referenced fielding statistic is range factor, which has been around (by that name) for roughly 30 years. And the third most commonly referenced fielding statistic is ... actually, there aren't any others, outside of the freaks and geeks (i.e. me and my friends) who know what FRAR stands for. In the next few months, John Dewan's "The Fielding Bible" will add another voice to the discussion, and in "The Hardball Times Baseball Annual," David Gassko will introduce a new fielding metric he's simply calling "range."

 

But it's a discussion that will continue to be followed almost exclusively by me and my friends. It's a slog, this fielding stuff. And I'm fairly certain that the Devil Rays will win a World Series before the Gold Glove voters pay attention to anything but what they're hearing from each other and what they're seeing on ESPN.

 

H. Alan Polk: So was a 40-year-old Greg Maddux really the best fielding pitcher? That just seems less than likely. It is so unfortunate to me that an award that should be very important seems to be cared about very little by the people that vote for it.

 

Neyer: Actually, I've argued for years that Maddux shouldn't win Gold Gloves, ever. Why? Because he doesn't pay attention to prospective base-stealers. Never has. In 2005, larcenous runners were safe 32 times, out eight times. Runners were safe 80 percent of the time against Maddux. That's actually not a terrible percentage for Maddux -- the league average is roughly 70 percent -- and he's certainly done worse in other seasons. But it seems to me that among all the pitchers in the National League, there must be somebody who's adept at fielding ground balls and holding runners on first base.

 

Joshua: Big Astros fan here who never gets to see games because I'm in the Navy in a place where sports other than baseball are big. If my very basic math is correct, Roger Clemens and Jeff Bagwell occupy a large portion of our payroll every season (Clemens, by my count, is close to 25 percent alone). If they both happen to retire, would we expect a permanent shift to first for Lance Berkman and the 'Stros fiercely pursuing someone like Adam Dunn, another hometown dude? Or does the possibility exist for them to go after a pitcher like Kevin Millwood and a mid-level outfielder? Free agency looks to be light on big swingers, and offense is definitely what the Astros could use.

 

Neyer: This is something I should have discussed in my last column, Joshua. Because yes, you're right: Any discussion of the Astros' 2006 roster is incomplete without mentioning the massive contract obligations the Astros might have next year.

 

Clemens earned $18 million this season, and presumably wouldn't take much less to come back next season. Bagwell "earned" $17 million in 2005 (not to mention another $18 million in 2006, unless the Astros pay him $7 million to just go away). So that's $35 million on just two players, one who probably won't be very good and the other who will turn 44 during the season.

 

That's going to make it tough for the Astros to get better this winter. It's easy for me to say they need to add a couple of good hitters, but they probably don't have the payroll flexibility to sign top free agents, and they don't have the organizational depth to trade for excellent hitters. Sure, the Astros could get exceptionally creative or exceptionally lucky next season. Probably not, though. They've been gambling a lot, and they've been winning. But in 2006, the odds are going to catch up with them. I'll be surprised if we see the Astros in the postseason again this decade.

 

Senior writer Rob Neyer writes for Insider two or three times per week during the season. To offer criticism, praise or anything in between, send an e-mail to [email protected].

[YASNY]

It's a slog, this fielding stuff. And I'm fairly certain that the Devil Rays will win a World Series before the Gold Glove voters pay attention to anything but what they're hearing from each other and what they're seeing on ESPN.

 

 

Neyer nailed it here. Consider the face first in the stands catches made by Jeter and Uribe. Consider the Jeter's was a regular season game vs. the Red Sox and Uribe's was the 26th out of the World Series clinching game. So, which one of those catches got more "love" from ESPN?

 

I rest my case.