The new Gold Glove info:
― Miss Arlington twirls for the Coal Heavers (Dr Morbius), Monday, 19 August 2013 21:33 (six years ago) link
Posnanski writes about this today:
Truth is: I don’t know the answer to these conflicts. And, to be honest, I’m not sure there is a single answer -- things are just more complicated than that...But I now wonder if the truth, as it often does, falls in the middle.
A man after my own Husker Du-ish, black-and-white-is-always-grey heart.
― clemenza, Tuesday, 20 August 2013 23:42 (six years ago) link
so yer half sticking with errors and fielding pct, huh?
― Miss Arlington twirls for the Coal Heavers (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 21 August 2013 02:41 (six years ago) link
That wasn't the point he was making: "There are things the eye sees that the numbers miss. And there are things in the numbers that the eye cannot possibly follow. What I like so much about the new Gold Gloves voting is that it will use advanced stats AND the eyes of some of the shrewdest people in the game."
― clemenza, Wednesday, 21 August 2013 03:04 (six years ago) link
I know this has been hashed over to death, but for people in Toronto, it comes back to Roberto Alomar. It's very difficult for anyone who saw him play regularly to accept the idea that he was average defensively.
― clemenza, Wednesday, 21 August 2013 03:06 (six years ago) link
Is it not possible for someone to make amazing plays and still be average defensively?
― One bad call from barely losing to (Alex in SF), Wednesday, 21 August 2013 03:18 (six years ago) link
I don't really see that as contradiction, but for some reason the "ARE YOU SAYING MY EYES ARE LYING CROWD" finds it a complete impossibility.
― One bad call from barely losing to (Alex in SF), Wednesday, 21 August 2013 03:19 (six years ago) link
It's possible, I guess--average hitters do spectacular things on occasion. They don't tend to do them consistently, though, and--I think this would be the general feeling in Toronto--Alomar did them consistently, and made all the routine plays, and pretty much did it all. I don't think I'm shouting anything about lying eyes at the top of my lungs. I'm expressing skepticism based on personal experience.
― clemenza, Wednesday, 21 August 2013 03:24 (six years ago) link
Yeah I don't know enough about the way the defense is broken down to say why Alomar is rated as average, but defensive metrics are measuring things that might be hard to discern with the naked eye (like whether or not on average a similarly positioned fielder even gets to a ball to make a routine play). Also spectacular or memorable hitting by average dudes happens all the time and some people do try to convince other people that this average hitter is really some secret clutch superstar and ohmigod we better sign him next year, etc.
― One bad call from barely losing to (Alex in SF), Wednesday, 21 August 2013 03:31 (six years ago) link
Also Gold Gloves should be a yearly measure. There is a lot of fluctuation in the defensive statistics (wtf Mike Trout) but I still think that's gotta be a better yardstick than some dude's overall impression of a player's defense based on maybe seeing him a couple of times plus consideration of reputation.
― One bad call from barely losing to (Alex in SF), Wednesday, 21 August 2013 03:33 (six years ago) link
Which is exactly Joe's point: advanced metrics, with room for first-hand observation.
I know that range is one of the hidden things that Fielding Average doesn't measure. In terms of Alomar, his range was the precise thing that was so much fun to watch. That play in the '92 Series where he was out in short right field--that was the kind of thing we were accustomed to.
I meant one specific average hitter consistently doing spectacular things, not the whole group--I might not have been clear there.
― clemenza, Wednesday, 21 August 2013 03:42 (six years ago) link
I'm not even sure what a spectacular hit really is anyway. Maybe Juan Pierre hitting a home run.
― One bad call from barely losing to (Alex in SF), Wednesday, 21 August 2013 11:54 (six years ago) link
I was thinking of spectacular one-game accomplishments by otherwise undistinguished hitters--Freddie Patek or Dioner Navarro hitting three home runs, Phil Weintraub knocking in 10--but you're right, that's not a very precise analogy to making great plays in the field.
― clemenza, Wednesday, 21 August 2013 12:42 (six years ago) link
I'm looking at Alomar's fielding stats, and he does well in range factor/game...except for his time in Toronto.
With the Padres: 2nd, 2nd, 1stWith Toronto: 5th, --, --, --, 4thLeaves Toronto: 4th, 3rd, 2nd over the next three seasons
Where he does well in Toronto is in Fielding Pct: 5th, 1st, --, 3rd, 1st.
I give up.
― clemenza, Wednesday, 21 August 2013 13:14 (six years ago) link
did he play on turf anywhere else?
― Miss Arlington twirls for the Coal Heavers (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 21 August 2013 14:25 (six years ago) link
As I sat in the dentist's chair this morning, that occurred to me too. Maybe turf boosts fielding average (truer hops) but reduces range factor (ball scoots faster, players are more cautious about diving). Or maybe the Jays had a higher-than-normal strikeout/flyball staff. I honestly don't know--I'm sure people have tried to figure these things out with regards to Alomar.
I wonder if people in L.A. and St. Louis experience the same disconnect with Jim Edmonds, whose dWAR figures seem to be fairly ordinary. I'm someone who only knew Jim Edmonds the Human Highlight Reel.
― clemenza, Wednesday, 21 August 2013 14:51 (six years ago) link
Alomar played on grass in Jack Murphy Stadium and (of course) Camden Yards, so maybe there's something there. You'd have to check how the changeover affects other players, and I'm sure many people have.
― clemenza, Wednesday, 21 August 2013 15:08 (six years ago) link
wyers wrote a good thingie on WAR and defense a few months back: http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=20569
― i wanna be a gabbneb baby (Hungry4Ass), Wednesday, 21 August 2013 15:15 (six years ago) link
we have GG "finalists"
― eclectic husbandry (Dr Morbius), Saturday, 26 October 2013 13:38 (six years ago) link
Might get a glimpse of the Fog of Glove tonight with Ortiz at first base.
― clemenza, Saturday, 26 October 2013 14:15 (six years ago) link
OK, Nolan Arenado? I def watched some Rockies this year but he flew under my radar.
― eclectic husbandry (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 30 October 2013 03:36 (six years ago) link
i never get to actually watch much baseball, so no idea if these were good calls or not - but Hardy? is he actually that good at D?
― Porto for Pyros (The Cursed Return of the Dastardly Thermo Thinwall), Wednesday, 30 October 2013 03:39 (six years ago) link
Hardy was fine, but doesn't have the range of fellow finalist Alcides Escobar, who probably should have won this one.
― eclectic husbandry (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 30 October 2013 15:12 (six years ago) link
hardy wasn't as good this year as he always is, but he's always good. he actually is a defense-first SS, despite the bombs.
― ^^ post obviously honoring and supporting Qualcomm (zachlyon), Wednesday, 30 October 2013 23:32 (six years ago) link
which surprised me when we got him. and when i say "good as he always is" i mean "basically flat out incredible, one of the best in baseball." if only he could obp.
― ^^ post obviously honoring and supporting Qualcomm (zachlyon), Wednesday, 30 October 2013 23:33 (six years ago) link
Minnesota giving up Carlos Gomez to get JJ Hardy then turning around and shipping Hardy after a bad season to B-more for a bag of balls is looking like a double bad deal at this point.
― earlnash, Thursday, 31 October 2013 22:50 (six years ago) link
the one you should be ??? about thermo is jones, he's never been more than just acceptable out there and now that the GGs split the OF awards it's especially weird, he keeps taking these awards for CF when CFs have always been the winners. it's like crowning him king of the american league outfield.
― ^^ post obviously honoring and supporting Qualcomm (zachlyon), Friday, 1 November 2013 03:04 (six years ago) link
SABR Defensive Index rankings thru mid-Aug:
― son of a lewd monk (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 27 August 2014 17:15 (five years ago) link
One of the best arguments for the validity of new defensive metrics I've read (even though the argument is between the lines). I've often mentioned that I've been very slow on the defensive side of sabermetrics, but this frames the issue in a way that makes sense to me.
― clemenza, Thursday, 4 December 2014 23:08 (five years ago) link
Although it does deal with the easy part of the question: convincing a skeptic that Torii Hunter's defensive metrics say he's not anywhere near what he used to be isn't all that difficult, as common sense says the same thing. Convincing me that Roberto Alomar in his prime wasn't anywhere near what I thought he was, that's tougher.
― clemenza, Thursday, 4 December 2014 23:17 (five years ago) link
the full SABR Defensive Index™ rankings, through games of July 12, 2015.
― skateboards are the new combover (Dr Morbius), Friday, 31 July 2015 10:55 (four years ago) link
Do you guys think putouts per inning or putouts per nine innings is a decent way of assessing an outfielder's defensive value over an entire season?
― timellison, Thursday, 8 October 2015 03:06 (four years ago) link
out of date
― skateboards are the new combover (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 8 October 2015 03:16 (four years ago) link
Obviously errors and assists are not a part of the stat, but other than that, I don't know what is missing.
― timellison, Thursday, 8 October 2015 03:20 (four years ago) link
I'll throw out the example that's bothering me: Matt Kemp 0.6 WAR for the year, Gregory Polanco 2.5 WAR.
Kemp .265/.312/.443 23 HR, 100 RBIPolanco .256/.320/.381 9 HR, 52 RBI
In right field this year:
Kemp 1282 innings, 269 putouts (8 errors, 10 assists)Polanco 1220 innings, 247 putouts (8 errors, 13 assists)
I'm assuming Matt Kemp's lower WAR is due to defense, but he has a higher number of putouts per inning than Polanco. What is being measured that accounts for the difference in WAR?
― timellison, Thursday, 8 October 2015 03:43 (four years ago) link
not really sure. maybe Kemp had a lot more balls hit towards him that he didn't get to?
there's also the base running component of WAR tho, that would probably better explain the gap.
― AKA Thermo Thinwall (The Cursed Return of the Dastardly Thermo Thinwall), Thursday, 8 October 2015 03:59 (four years ago) link
Looking at the fangraphs stats, Polanco does have more OOZ putouts - 97 vs. 71 for Kemp. They have almost exactly the same percentage of putouts per ball-in-zone.
26 more OOZ putouts gives a guy with much worse hitting stats four times the WAR as the other guy?
Polanco does have 27 stolen bases and Kemp has 12. Kemp has 38 more total bases, though.
― timellison, Thursday, 8 October 2015 04:06 (four years ago) link
Polanco has a 5.3 baserunning, while Kemp is at 0.9
― AKA Thermo Thinwall (The Cursed Return of the Dastardly Thermo Thinwall), Thursday, 8 October 2015 14:33 (four years ago) link
these are not good stats to evaluate defensive value. especially errors. scorekeepers don't generally give out errors for plays where a really slow outfielder (or one who takes bad routes or gets bad jumps) comes nowhere close to catching the ball. if they did, kemp would have like 160 errors! (sorry matt kemp)
you're using baseball-reference WAR, i think? i'm much more familiar with fangraphs, but i'd just dig into the glossary/FAQ for bWAR and figure out how they calculate defensive and baserunning value.
― 1998 ball boy (Karl Malone), Thursday, 8 October 2015 15:10 (four years ago) link
Kemp was the better offensive player by far. Thirty-eight more total bases, I think, means more than these numbers. So does forty-eight more RBIs.
scorekeepers don't generally give out errors for plays where a really slow outfielder (or one who takes bad routes or gets bad jumps) comes nowhere close to catching the ball.
But I mentioned just above that Kemp has pretty much the exact same percentage of putouts per ball-in-zone that Polanco does according to fangraphs.
― timellison, Thursday, 8 October 2015 22:58 (four years ago) link
By the way, fangraphs WAR for these two is Kemp 0.4, Polanco 2.3.
― timellison, Thursday, 8 October 2015 23:00 (four years ago) link
there does seem to be more of a disparity between the two than meets the eye initially. but i think you were on the right track before: going by FG's revised zone rating, the two converted outs equally as often for balls in their zone (.888 for kemp and .882 for polanco). that doesn't tell us much though, since balls that are in the zone, especially for outfielders, generally aren't difficult plays and there is not going to be a huge difference between the best and worst players. (kevin kiermaeir, who by some metrics had the best defensive season of anyone in about 10 years, had a revised zone rating of .928, just 3.5 points higher.) so there isn't much to be gained by being really good at catching routine fly balls, since just about anyone can do this. where outfielders can add value is by getting balls out of their zone -- balls that normally shouldn't be caught and would tend to go for doubles and triples. despite seeing significantly less action -- polanco had about 40 fewer balls hit into his zone than did kemp despite comparable innings -- polanco managed to turn 97 balls hit out of his zone into outs, compared to 71 for kemp. so again, on the balls that actually matter -- the ones that would otherwise go for extra bases -- polanco made 26 more outs.
this is obviously a very simplified answer, but it's the basis for advanced fielding stats. other things, like strength of the pitching staff, home field, etc are factored in too
― k3vin k., Thursday, 8 October 2015 23:33 (four years ago) link
Do some balls out of the zone fall in front of the outfielders for singles? I agree 26 hits is a lot, but if half of them are singles...
Ultimately, I think you've got quite a long ways to go to pull back 60 points in slugging percentage, 14 more home runs, and 48 more RBIs. I'm not sure that 26 more hits allowed does that. Or even comes close? Of course, it not only has to pull it back enough that they're even, but enough that Polanco ends up with a significantly higher WAR.
― timellison, Thursday, 8 October 2015 23:51 (four years ago) link
you gotta stop saying the r-word
kemp was not that much better at the plate. he hit for a .750 OPS to polanco's .701, good for a wRC+ of 109 to polanco's 94. meaning kemp provided 11% more value at the plate than the average hitter, and polanco 6% less. taking into account base running (which favors polanco), kemp was worth 8.1 runs above average offensively to polanco's 1.0. maybe about half a win. polanco was worth about 25 more runs in the field, by FG's calculations. sum those, and you have about a 2-win difference
― k3vin k., Friday, 9 October 2015 00:08 (four years ago) link
sorry, that should say kemp provided 9% more value than the avg hitter
― k3vin k., Friday, 9 October 2015 00:09 (four years ago) link
But I cannot see where 25 runs comes from. I can see 26 more hits allowed. Actually, I'm not sure that Kemp allowed 26 more hits. Kemp played about seven more games than Polanco and actually had 22 more putouts total. Maybe those are outs most players make but Kemp was there, recorded the putouts, and that has some value.
Most hits are hits to the outfield and not infield hits. So maybe those 26 hits are average hits. Even if they're not, they don't equate to 25 runs. If they're average hits, they maybe equate to something like ten runs.
As for RBI's, Polanco is a leadoff hitter and it's not a fair comparison. He had 83 runs scored and Kemp had 80. Polanco, with his 52 RBIs, did have good numbers with RISP this year. As did Kemp, as hitters with 100 RBI, you would think, generally do!
― timellison, Friday, 9 October 2015 01:05 (four years ago) link
yeah, i can't exactly explain where the 25 runs came from, that would be a question for dave cameron or somebody. there are more layers and adjustments that go into it than the stuff i mentioned, though that's the main idea/backbone of it. but to answer your original question, errors and putouts are not a good measure to evaluate fielders, because the extent to which they take into account range is limited. as far as these two players go, polanco was marginally worse at the plate (though some of that was mitigated by superior base running), but far better in the field. it's certainly possible that the metrics overvalued his edge on defense, but the fact that both systems came to the same conclusion makes it more likely than not that polanco was a more valuable player overall this year
― k3vin k., Friday, 9 October 2015 01:19 (four years ago) link
I don't understand wRC, but if you use James' runs created stat, Kemp had eight and a half more runs created than Polanco (80.3 vs. 71.8). So, that's about .85 of a win if we're using ten runs for a win. To account for a 1.9 difference in WAR, then, Polanco has to to make up 2.75 WAR in difference.
By having 26 more putouts.
― timellison, Friday, 9 October 2015 02:42 (four years ago) link
Polanco has to make up 2.75 WAR difference in defense, I meant
― timellison, Friday, 9 October 2015 02:43 (four years ago) link
And I'm sorry if I'm being stubborn, I understand that "more layers and adjustments" involves ways of trying to measure all of those outs - maybe how hard they were hit, how much time the fielders had to get to the balls, etc. But, again, there is such a lot of ground to be covered to account for 2.75 WAR given Kemp's better offensive numbers, same defensive numbers on balls in the zone, and maybe not that big of a difference on balls out of the zone.
― timellison, Friday, 9 October 2015 02:51 (four years ago) link
you should really take this up with someone with more expertise. suffice it to say that your back of the envelope calculations are less valid than the empirical data gathered by people who do this for a living
― k3vin k., Friday, 9 October 2015 16:34 (four years ago) link
The numbers I had last night showed that a hit for the Dodgers/Cardinals/Phillies/Marlins this year was worth about .46 runs. They're qualifying it by saying "outfield hits," but the number of infield hits expands that by .10? That would mean that infield hits make up 17.9 % of all hits.
a hit into the outfield is going to do more damage than a hit through the infield. it's not a 1:1 relationship
― k3vin k., Friday, 9 October 2015 16:36 (four years ago) link
but again, look, if it makes you feel better, you're right. kemp was the more valuable player because he had a lot of RBIs. defense doesn't matter that much. you win
― k3vin k., Friday, 9 October 2015 16:37 (four years ago) link
I was skeptical about the defensive difference between Kemp and Polanco being worth something like 27.5 runs over the season based on the numbers. That is all.
― timellison, Friday, 9 October 2015 16:47 (four years ago) link
this has been bothering me (although i love adam eaton)
doesn't really inspire me to believe in current defensive metrics tho
― mookieproof, Tuesday, 9 August 2016 00:52 (three years ago) link
no one is comparing him to Clemente yet
― The Hon. J. Piedmont Mumblethunder (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 9 August 2016 14:57 (three years ago) link
have we all seen this?
― ice cream social justice (Dr Morbius), Friday, 18 August 2017 19:15 (two years ago) link
IsBrittonInYet: When evaluating outfield defense, how much stock do you put in Statcast’s numbers (ex. outs above average, number of 5 star catches) compared to DRS/UZR? Kevin Pillar had a DRS/UZR of 15/6 in 2017 but was -2 outs above average with no 5 star catches in 34 chances.
Dave Cameron: It’s not about “stock”; it’s about what the information is telling you. So, for instance, Pillar’s value could come from positioning, which would mean that he doesn’t make as many plays where he has to run a long way in a short amount of time, but he’s still catching balls other worse-positioned CFs wouldn’t get to.
Also, it’s important to keep in mind that Statcast is just measuring range right now, so you don’t want to compare that measure to total DRS/UZR, which include errors and throwing arm. If you just look at the range portion of UZR, Pillar is at +1; his +6 came from throwing and not making many errors.
― ice cream social justice (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 16 November 2017 20:57 (two years ago) link
Colorado Rockies third baseman Nolan Arenado and Minnesota Twins center fielder Byron Buxton won the 2017 Rawlings Platinum Glove Award, presented by SABR. The winners were unveiled on Friday, November 10 during the 2017 Rawlings Gold Glove Award Ceremony, where the game's defensive stars accepted their hardware from some of baseball's greatest legends.
This is the first Rawlings Platinum Glove Award for both Arenado and Buxton. Arenado is the first infielder to start his career with five straight Rawlings Gold Glove Awards. Buxton is the first Twins center fielder to win a Rawlings Gold Glove Award since Torii Hunter in 2007.
The Rawlings Platinum Glove Award winners are determined by combining votes based on an adjusted SABR Defensive Index™ for each of the nine Rawlings Gold Glove Award winners in each League and the votes from baseball fans worldwide.
Based on the final SABR Defensive Index, Buxton was second in the American League with a 20.0 SDI, and Arenado was second in the National League with an 11.0 SDI.
― ice cream social justice (Dr Morbius), Friday, 17 November 2017 22:13 (two years ago) link
I just skimmed this. The mere fact he's writing about baseball is encouraging enough--he mostly writes about the Cleveland Browns these days.
― clemenza, Saturday, 18 November 2017 16:13 (two years ago) link
(Love seeing Devon White's name on the CF list.)
1) I totally buy the idea that players can bring significant value via defense.2) I have not seen every Cubs game this year, so maybe I'm missing something.3) I stand by my years-old contention that publicly available defensive metrics are crap when this is what they tell me. pic.twitter.com/6yo6AuoWyV— Jeff Passan (@JeffPassan) July 5, 2018
― mookieproof, Thursday, 5 July 2018 21:47 (one year ago) link
DRS thinks Machado is a historically bad shortstop and UZR thinks he’s just regular bad. Which one do you think is closer to the truth?
In general, I tend to prefer DRS to UZR because of the additional observational input beyond just batted ball type (both of which do have their biases, admittedly). But I think a good strategy when viewing defensive metrics is to be wary of the outliers, and DRS tends to have more than UZR does — the spread from top to bottom is generally wider. So I’ll go with garden-variety bad instead of historically bad.
― the ignatius rock of ignorance (Dr Morbius), Friday, 6 July 2018 15:00 (one year ago) link
the response to passan about schwarber's defense is that he has average-ish range and a good arm; passan's response was that that's reasonable in a vacuum, but is he really a better defender than almora or heyward? because that's what the stats are saying
― mookieproof, Friday, 6 July 2018 15:55 (one year ago) link
is Schwarber particularly good at positioning or something? also i guess this might make sense if he's being strictly compared to other LFers, who are a pretty slow-footed and weak-armed lot to an extent.
― omar little, Friday, 6 July 2018 16:11 (one year ago) link
sounds like they're being compared to others in the same position AND others in other positions?
― na (NA), Friday, 6 July 2018 16:38 (one year ago) link
he's got a high UZR so i think that means he does well compared to other LFers ... i am not great at reading stats though
― na (NA), Friday, 6 July 2018 16:42 (one year ago) link
is Schwarber particularly good at positioning or something
that might be a factor. dexter fowler's outfield defense was poor before and after he played for the cubs (esp after). whoever is shifting the OF in chicago around seems to be doing a good job of making the most out of mediocre defenders.
― Karl Malone, Friday, 6 July 2018 16:53 (one year ago) link
fewer BIPs, less significance for defense
Unfortunately, data before 2003 is unavailable, but the stark drop in balls in play over time should make it clear that defense has become relatively less important—perhaps ground balls and hits on the infield were less prominent and this is just a shift back in the aggregate, but the increased rate of extra-base hits would lead us to believe the contrary, that infield defense was even more important in the last millennium.
In addition to fewer balls in play, though, teams have also moved to shift far more often. As Jeff Zimmerman outlined in The Hardball Times Baseball Annual 2014, shifting is in vogue. It makes sense, after all, since between 57 and 60 percent of pulled balls result in ground balls compared to 40 to 43 percent on balls hit to center and 22 to 27 percent on balls taken the opposite way. With advanced scouting and more data available, teams can better identify hitter tendencies and adjust with less risk. The fact that 24 hitters pulled at least 200 balls in play this year makes it even easier to do for the high-pull hitters (as Zimmerman notes, the top-20 players hitting into a shift accounted for over 2,500 plays in 2013, dropping their collective BABIP by 37 points in those situations).
― a Mets fan who gave up on everything in the mid '80s (Dr Morbius), Friday, 10 August 2018 15:38 (one year ago) link
Best fielders in baseball per DRS:1. Matt Chapman2. Harrison Bader3. JaCoby Jonest4. Nick Ahmed/Lorenzo Cain/Miguel Rojas/Andrelton SimmonsWorst:1. Charlie Blackmon2. Adam Jones3. Asdrubal Cabrera4. Amed Rosario/Eduardo Núñez/Nick Castellanos/Miguel Andújar— Baseball Reference (@baseball_ref) August 16, 2018
― mookieproof, Thursday, 16 August 2018 21:07 (one year ago) link
Amed Rosario may be a terrible fielder but at least he has a 636 OPS. -1.1 bWAR this year
― Screamin' Jay Gould (The Yellow Kid), Thursday, 16 August 2018 21:29 (one year ago) link
directional outs above average: https://baseballsavant.mlb.com/directional_outs_above_average
kinda wonder if bader's numbers toward LF are skewed by marcell ozuna's shoulder injury -- recently saw bader come wayyy into left to take a sac fly attempt
― mookieproof, Tuesday, 18 September 2018 16:26 (one year ago) link
Athletics vs Yankees at 3rd BaseMatt Chapman: 29 Defensive Runs Saved (most at 3B in MLB)Miguel Andjuar: -25 Defensive Runs Saved (fewest in MLB)This image shows difference in how often Athletics/Yankees get outs on grounders near 3B pic.twitter.com/5xGiQwdSti— Sports Info Solutions (@SportsInfo_SIS) October 3, 2018
― Karl Malone, Wednesday, 3 October 2018 17:51 (one year ago) link
this seems like a more relatable, easier to understand way to communicate defensive stats
The Mets right fielder just launched himself full speed into the netting at Guaranteed Rate Field, which extends all the way down to the foul pole, to make a great catch. Extended netting is going to change some outfielders' approaches.
― Manfred Hemming-Hawing (WmC), Thursday, 1 August 2019 19:27 (nine months ago) link
Not full speed, but a dangerous play if the net hadn't been there.
― Manfred Hemming-Hawing (WmC), Thursday, 1 August 2019 20:00 (nine months ago) link
guy is hitting .331 and he's just the "Mets right fielder"? c'mon
― a Mets fan who gave up on everything in the mid '80s (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 1 August 2019 20:05 (nine months ago) link
I leave all the little details to you, Morbs.
― Manfred Hemming-Hawing (WmC), Thursday, 1 August 2019 20:08 (nine months ago) link