White Sox 2nd least shifts per batted ball in baseball last year.

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

I've always had a hard time believing in advanced statistics for defense but I'm starting to come around . Yesterday Clubhouse Confidential with Brian Kenny on the MLB Network had on a guy with Baseball Info Solutions. Among other things I learned the White Sox were 2nd to last in the Majors last year on shifts per batted ball in play. Seems as if the Sox front office is a bit slow getting around to the idea that shifts can help the team and in particular its overall defense and pitchers stats.

 

Some other things I learned were only last year did these stat heads start looking at the starting position of a fielder when determining range on a batted ball . Seems they were more interested in the speed and trajectory of the ball. Unless I misunderstood that seems like its an impossible thing to overlook. I think they mostly were using video but now have people at games to track these things.

They mostly were talking about DRS ( Defensive Runs Saved) rather than UZR and Andrelton Simmons and Gerardo Parra were tied for the best DRS at 41 runs .

 

The Oriole ,Rays and even the Cubs were among the leaders in shifts per batted ball. They also said shifts can take 30 to 40 points off an individuals batting average. I think we've all seen Dunn have hits taken away so the more prevalent defensive shifting has become the worse Dunn has looked.

 

I tried to find the video to what I saw on MLB Network .com but they look like theyre over 2 months delayed to airing something and putting it online to see at least for Clubhouse Confidential. Maybe its on youtube but I didn't look.

 

Anyone think the Sox may soon address this glaring hole in their thinking . Any signs point to a change in philosophy at all ?

 

 

Someone please change Solotions to Solutions in the title.

Edited February 18, 2014 by CaliSoxFanViaSWside

[Eminor3rd]

The reason they never used to look at the starting position of the fielder wasn't because it was overlooked, it was because they didn't have the technology/math to factor it in. What they did instead was simply throw out all plays where an abnormal shift was detected, and allow the fielder's instinct as to where to position himself get baked into the total number at the cost of precision. But with the frequency of extreme shifting continuing to increase, I'm glad they've found a way to start factoring it into defensive measurements.

 

As far as the Sox go, I can't see any reason for them NOT to start using it, especially given the fact that, outside of Sale, our pitchers aren't exactly "high K" guys. I will say, however, that the shift seems to be primarily a trick to improve range, whereas a lot of what made the Sox defense bad last year was physical and mental errors.

[Balta1701]

So perhaps the problem was that the White Sox were so focused on this that they didn't pay attention to the regular details like catching the ball? because that team just convinced me that shifts are the worst thing ever.

 

Any chance they're just getting counted for extra "shifts" because Alexei plays off towards the 3b bag compared with some other SS's?

[Eminor3rd]

So perhaps the problem was that the White Sox were so focused on this that they didn't pay attention to the regular details like catching the ball? because that team just convinced me that shifts are the worst thing ever.

 

Any chance they're just getting counted for extra "shifts" because Alexei plays off towards the 3b bag compared with some other SS's?

 

Second FEWEST shifts

[Balta1701]

Second FEWEST shifts

Ah. I'll blame that on a morning misread then. I believe "fewest" shifts a whole lot more.

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

The reason they never used to look at the starting position of the fielder wasn't because it was overlooked, it was because they didn't have the technology/math to factor it in. What they did instead was simply throw out all plays where an abnormal shift was detected, and allow the fielder's instinct as to where to position himself get baked into the total number at the cost of precision. But with the frequency of extreme shifting continuing to increase, I'm glad they've found a way to start factoring it into defensive measurements.

 

As far as the Sox go, I can't see any reason for them NOT to start using it, especially given the fact that, outside of Sale, our pitchers aren't exactly "high K" guys. I will say, however, that the shift seems to be primarily a trick to improve range, whereas a lot of what made the Sox defense bad last year was physical and mental errors.

A trick to improve range doesn't seem entirely accurate . I would call it more like position the defenders where certain players have proven to hit the ball more often.

[Eminor3rd]

A trick to improve range doesn't seem entirely accurate . I would call it more like position the defenders where certain players have proven to hit the ball more often.

 

Correct, I'm saying that that achieves the same thing as extra range. As opposed to accuracy or any other component of defense.

[ILMOU]

The reason they never used to look at the starting position of the fielder wasn't because it was overlooked, it was because they didn't have the technology/math to factor it in. What they did instead was simply throw out all plays where an abnormal shift was detected, and allow the fielder's instinct as to where to position himself get baked into the total number at the cost of precision. But with the frequency of extreme shifting continuing to increase, I'm glad they've found a way to start factoring it into defensive measurements.

 

As far as the Sox go, I can't see any reason for them NOT to start using it, especially given the fact that, outside of Sale, our pitchers aren't exactly "high K" guys. I will say, however, that the shift seems to be primarily a trick to improve range, whereas a lot of what made the Sox defense bad last year was physical and mental errors.

 

I've maintained that defense will be much better evaluated when all players' positions are accurately GPS'ed. Featherweight sensors that could be put in the belt area of the pants could easily be done with present technology, I believe. Would players' union have a beef with this?

Edited February 18, 2014 by Stan Bahnsen

[witesoxfan]

I've maintained that defense will be much better evaluated when all players' positions are accurately GPS'ed. Featherweight sensors that could be put in the belt area of the pants could easily be done with present technology, I believe. Would players' union have a beef with this?

 

I would hope not. That type of information would be so helpful in determining a ton of things - how fast a player is, how well they takes routes to the ball, how well they run the bases. Seems like it would be a bit spendy, but nothing MLB couldn't handle.

[ILMOU]

I would hope not. That type of information would be so helpful in determining a ton of things - how fast a player is, how well they takes routes to the ball, how well they run the bases. Seems like it would be a bit spendy, but nothing MLB couldn't handle.

 

I agree. Make it so.

[ptatc]

I've always had a hard time believing in advanced statistics for defense but I'm starting to come around . Yesterday Clubhouse Confidential with Brian Kenny on the MLB Network had on a guy with Baseball Info Solutions. Among other things I learned the White Sox were 2nd to last in the Majors last year on shifts per batted ball in play. Seems as if the Sox front office is a bit slow getting around to the idea that shifts can help the team and in particular its overall defense and pitchers stats.

 

Some other things I learned were only last year did these stat heads start looking at the starting position of a fielder when determining range on a batted ball . Seems they were more interested in the speed and trajectory of the ball. Unless I misunderstood that seems like its an impossible thing to overlook. I think they mostly were using video but now have people at games to track these things.

They mostly were talking about DRS ( Defensive Runs Saved) rather than UZR and Andrelton Simmons and Gerardo Parra were tied for the best DRS at 41 runs .

 

The Oriole ,Rays and even the Cubs were among the leaders in shifts per batted ball. They also said shifts can take 30 to 40 points off an individuals batting average. I think we've all seen Dunn have hits taken away so the more prevalent defensive shifting has become the worse Dunn has looked.

 

I tried to find the video to what I saw on MLB Network .com but they look like theyre over 2 months delayed to airing something and putting it online to see at least for Clubhouse Confidential. Maybe its on youtube but I didn't look.

 

Anyone think the Sox may soon address this glaring hole in their thinking . Any signs point to a change in philosophy at all ?

 

 

Someone please change Solotions to Solutions in the title.

Does "shifts" imply that the SS or 3B moves to other side of 2B? I saw Ramierez and Beckham play "in the hole" or "the other way" quite a bit last year.

[Dick Allen]

Does "shifts" imply that the SS or 3B moves to other side of 2B? I saw Ramierez and Beckham play "in the hole" or "the other way" quite a bit last year.

It would be interesting to see what qualifies as a shift. A step here, a step there may not seem obvious or qualify but make a huge difference, and unless they shifted some OFs to the bleachers when Axelrod and Danks were pitching, I don't recall the Sox being burned too badly by that last year. Actually catching the ball was a problem.

[ptatc]

It would be interesting to see what qualifies as a shift. A step here, a step there may not seem obvious or qualify but make a huge difference, and unless they shifted some OFs to the bleachers when Axelrod and Danks were pitching, I don't recall the Sox being burned too badly by that last year. Actually catching the ball was a problem.

^^^

[Balta1701]

I've maintained that defense will be much better evaluated when all players' positions are accurately GPS'ed. Featherweight sensors that could be put in the belt area of the pants could easily be done with present technology, I believe. Would players' union have a beef with this?

I actually don't know that a very lightweight GPS tag would be accurate enough to do this effectively, not with the amount of movement done by most humans. If you're jogging/biking/driving you can average things out, but over a distance of 30 meters and times of a few seconds, I don't think you'd get accurate enough data.

[ScottyDo]

I actually don't know that a very lightweight GPS tag would be accurate enough to do this effectively, not with the amount of movement done by most humans. If you're jogging/biking/driving you can average things out, but over a distance of 30 meters and times of a few seconds, I don't think you'd get accurate enough data.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure you could do it better with RF transmitters and sensors triangulating signals. I can't imagine that would be all that costly either.

[harfman77]

I would say this is because there are not many other players in the division that you would perform a shift against, perhaps Prince, but not really anyone else I can think of. And the Sox have Dunn, which means teams are shifting at least four times a game against us.

[Balta1701]

I would say this is because there are not many other players in the division that you would perform a shift against, perhaps Prince, but not really anyone else I can think of. And the Sox have Dunn, which means teams are shifting at least four times a game against us.

You're thinking about the "3 person on the side overshift". That's only the farthest extreme of what this type of data is referring to. This is talking about moving a player a couple feet to the side rather than across the entire field, I believe.

[harfman77]

You're thinking about the "3 person on the side overshift". That's only the farthest extreme of what this type of data is referring to. This is talking about moving a player a couple feet to the side rather than across the entire field, I believe.

 

Ahh... Thanks.

[witesoxfan]

Still, I think that point is valid. You can probably shift guys to the left side a bit with Cabrera because he does pull a few more balls, but he generally puts balls all over the field. Mauer sprays it even better. Without looking at relevant data (thus, going off what I've seen of Mauer), you may be able to play the shortstop straight up the middle with the 3B playing in the hole a bit where the SS normally plays, but then you're asking him to hit a gimme double down the line.

[ILMOU]

Yeah, I'm pretty sure you could do it better with RF transmitters and sensors triangulating signals. I can't imagine that would be all that costly either.

 

Sure, there are several ways, the key will be a high degree of accuracy.

 

They can already track ball movement very accurately on pitches - IF you can track it that effectively throughout the field of play and foul territory, and have that movement synchronized with exact player positions - from their starting-point to the time at which a ball would travel through their possible fielding zone, then you would have accurate measures of range for infielders and outfielders. Lots and lots of data, but it must be coming before too long.

Edited February 18, 2014 by Stan Bahnsen

[Balta1701]

Still, I think that point is valid. You can probably shift guys to the left side a bit with Cabrera because he does pull a few more balls, but he generally puts balls all over the field. Mauer sprays it even better. Without looking at relevant data (thus, going off what I've seen of Mauer), you may be able to play the shortstop straight up the middle with the 3B playing in the hole a bit where the SS normally plays, but then you're asking him to hit a gimme double down the line.

If you actually look at Mauer's spray charts though, there's an obvious pattern. He hits a lot of fly balls to left field and a lot of ground balls to right field. There's even a couple fly ball clusters. If you moved the CF by about 5-10 steps to the opposite field and moved the LF towards the line and perhaps in a bit, you're actually going to take away a good number of hits from him.

 

Cabrera sprays it in the OF better but there's a strong tendency to ground the ball to the LH side, particularly to the 3b line side of where the SS plays. A few steps by the SS and 3b could quite possibly cut off a few hits.

[Vance Law]

I've maintained that defense will be much better evaluated when all players' positions are accurately GPS'ed. Featherweight sensors that could be put in the belt area of the pants could easily be done with present technology, I believe. Would players' union have a beef with this?

 

While I would love seeing that type of data, I wonder if teams would prefer to keep that info proprietary. Perhaps some are already using some version of this and not releasing the info?

[caulfield12]

Or they could just set some type of baseline for the "average" MLB team positional arrangement of the defense against every player in the majors and then look for statistical deviations from that standard book.

 

The problem is that you're also having to take into account individual pitches within an-bat as well....such as shading to the opposite side with someone like Scherzer or Verlander pitching or playing pull when guys like Dylan Axelrod are on the mound, or guys like Gavin Floyd are pounding hitters with curveballs.

 

It would be interesting to see if the White Sox, for example, shifted at all when Santiago was throwing a screwball vs. his standard repertoire of pitches. Or how much more they were playing pull when Dank was pitching post-surgery as opposed to with his best stuff.

Edited February 18, 2014 by caulfield12

[Balta1701]

Or they could just set some type of baseline for the "average" MLB team positional arrangement of the defense against every player in the majors and then look for statistical deviations from that standard book.

 

The problem is that you're also having to take into account individual pitches within an-bat as well....such as shading to the opposite side with someone like Scherzer or Verlander pitching or playing pull when guys like Dylan Axelrod are on the mound, or guys like Gavin Floyd are pounding hitters with curveballs.

 

It would be interesting to see if the White Sox, for example, shifted at all when Santiago was throwing a screwball vs. his standard repertoire of pitches. Or how much more they were playing pull when Dank was pitching post-surgery as opposed to with his best stuff.

With the data currently available through pitch-Fx, all of these things can be produced readily. The one thing you'd have to worry about is that you don't completely give away the pitch (i.e. the CF or 2b move a huge amount when they know an offspeed pitch is coming), but otherwise that's a tractable problem.

 

It'd be difficult to do with the OF's because they couldn't see the signs being put down, but you could certainly have your 2b and SS trained to catch the sign and move a few steps when the pitch is thrown.

[Eminor3rd]

While I would love seeing that type of data, I wonder if teams would prefer to keep that info proprietary. Perhaps some are already using some version of this and not releasing the info?

 

This is the key. Pitch F/X being released was a total accident, they won't make the same mistake with Hit F/X and Field F/X.