QuickJones81 Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 Everyone associates Moneyball with OBP, but OBP was Beane's focus because it was an aspect of the game that was undervalued in the marketplace. So as soon as OBP became valued by all, it was time to move on to the next market inefficiency. At this point in time there seems to be a bubble if you will on defense. I call it a bubble because I believe that while defense is good, it is being dramatically overvalued. To me this is most evident in outfielders. When you see people comparing Heyward to a shutdown corner in the NFL you know this facet of the game has jumped the shark. It's good to have, but its impact does not appear to track at the current cost of attaining it. So with this premise I pose the question, is poor, or at least below average defense according to the latest trendy defensive metrics, the new market inefficiency? While others are willing to pay top dollar for lighter hitting defensive whiz outfielders like Heyward, Gordon, and Inciarte, should the smart money be on people with solid oWARs but below average defensive metrics that come at a relative discount? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baron Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 (edited) Runs saved is important. That's why Heyward's defense is so valuable. I believe the number last year in Bill James's book was he saved 23 runs. Clearly that can equate to a few losses and who knows? Maybe your team doesnt make the playoffs because of those runs not being saved. It's value is right where it should be. It's the other people who think having a negative WAR OFer will be ok that drives me crazy. Edited December 17, 2015 by Baron Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackSox13 Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 Just my opinion but pitching, speed and defense go together like P,B and J. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheFutureIsNear Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 I agree to an extent. You have to limit/avoid guys who are truly bad in the field and will hurt you though. But my overall feeling is that there is a small % of great fielders at the top of each position and a small % of truly bad fielders at the bottom. Everyone else can be separated by their bats because their defense on a 162 game scale isn't going to be the reason a team wins or loses. Just my opinion, I'm sure most will disagree with this too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dam8610 Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 I think low K rate is the new market inefficiency, look at how the Royals constructed their lineup for proof. Also, look at the expected contracts for Murphy and Upton. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 (edited) Good thread...I truly believe defense has become very overrated in terms of statistical ratings Edited December 17, 2015 by fathom Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baron Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 (edited) QUOTE (Dam8610 @ Dec 16, 2015 -> 09:38 PM) I think low K rate is the new market inefficiency, look at how the Royals constructed their lineup for proof. Also, look at the expected contracts for Murphy and Upton. What about Murphy? He would of had much more interest if he had played solid defense in the playoffs and most of the year. Edited December 17, 2015 by Baron Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dam8610 Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 QUOTE (Baron @ Dec 16, 2015 -> 09:41 PM) What about Murphy? He would of had much more interest if he had played solid defense in the playoffs and most of the year. You're illustrating the point of the OP there. His average defense is not that bad and (at least personally) his career 13.1% K rate including last year's K rate of 7.1%(!) is very attractive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baron Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 (edited) QUOTE (Dam8610 @ Dec 16, 2015 -> 09:50 PM) You're illustrating the point of the OP there. His average defense is not that bad and (at least personally) his career 13.1% K rate including last year's K rate of 7.1%(!) is very attractive. No his defense is awful. Dont beat around the bush. That's the reason he's not with the Mets. Edited December 17, 2015 by Baron Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OmarComing25 Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 Defensive metrics are still not as reliable as I'd like, but a run saved on defense is the same as a run created on offense, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunt Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 Don't think defense can ever be overvalued, it's way too important. What I learned from last season is that K% is overblown. The Cubs had one of the best rosters in baseball, but set a record for K%. It didn't matter b/c they had a bunch of guys that could also walk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 And it also relates to the amount of money Cespedes, Gordon and Upton are each going to receive. Cespedes will be an above average corner guy and borderline problem in CF. Upton's value mostly come from his offense, OBP and speed and adequate/average defensive skills overall. I guess the only way to demonstrate this is to get one of those outliers (negatively, Murphy) or Alex Gordon (positively) and see the effect overall on the entire team...it definitely seems that a tone is set (2012) or you can certainly see things get worse colletively as well, where every mistakes feeds on itself and it also affects pitchers/hitting as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dam8610 Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 QUOTE (Dunt @ Dec 16, 2015 -> 10:00 PM) Don't think defense can ever be overvalued, it's way too important. What I learned from last season is that K% is overblown. The Cubs had one of the best rosters in baseball, but set a record for K%. It didn't matter b/c they had a bunch of guys that could also walk. Then ran into a good pitching staff and lost because they struck out so much. During the postseason last year, someone here posted a statistic that the team with the better contact rate (see: lower K rate) wins a postseason series something like 70% of the time. That makes it definitely something you want in your favor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danman31 Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 QUOTE (OmarComing25 @ Dec 16, 2015 -> 10:00 PM) Defensive metrics are still not as reliable as I'd like, but a run saved on defense is the same as a run created on offense, right? It's about how often those opportunities come up. A hitter gets 3-5 at-bats per game. Defensively, how many non-routine plays can you make in a game and how many does it take to actually "save" a run? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chitownsportsfan Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 QUOTE (danman31 @ Dec 17, 2015 -> 12:23 AM) It's about how often those opportunities come up. A hitter gets 3-5 at-bats per game. Defensively, how many non-routine plays can you make in a game and how many does it take to actually "save" a run? eh it's sorta simple -- it's just based on outs and how often a play gets turned into one and then an out is worth so and so runs and thus wins. That said, how you measure an out defensively is pretty contentious. I'm inclined to agree with the OP that it can be over valued but Heyward's deal isn't a good example. H is also pretty good offensively (121 wRC+ with the bat and can motor on the bases) and if anyone is proven elite defensively it's him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danman31 Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 QUOTE (chitownsportsfan @ Dec 16, 2015 -> 11:39 PM) eh it's sorta simple -- it's just based on outs and how often a play gets turned into one and then an out is worth so and so runs and thus wins. That said, how you measure an out defensively is pretty contentious. I'm inclined to agree with the OP that it can be over valued but Heyward's deal isn't a good example. H is also pretty good offensively (121 wRC+ with the bat and can motor on the bases) and if anyone is proven elite defensively it's him. It was a rhetorical question for me. I know how they come up with the numbers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chitownsportsfan Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 QUOTE (danman31 @ Dec 17, 2015 -> 02:48 AM) It was a rhetorical question for me. I know how they come up with the numbers. You have a funny way of asking rhetorical questions if so... The question you asked is a good one -- what exactly is a "routine play" -- and is answered different ways depending on what metric you use. I'm inclined to believe that nobody really knows what a routine play is. Not until the tracker data is mature will we know that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabiness42 Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 Don't think defense can ever be overvalued, it's way too important. What I learned from last season is that K% is overblown. The Cubs had one of the best rosters in baseball, but set a record for K%. It didn't matter b/c they had a bunch of guys that could also walk. Anything can become overvalued if teams start massively overpaying for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.