Defense A Key For These Red Sox
One thing Boston has not been able to do the last few years is field a championship-caliber defensive team. There are many different reasons for that, having to do with the construction of the roster, injuries, or even just players not doing as well as they were expected to, but it's been tough to claim the Red Sox have been a top fielding club as of late regardless of the why.
In 2007, the last time they won the World Series, the Red Sox had the second-best defense in the American League (and the third in the majors) according to Defensive Efficiency. Defensive Efficiency tracks the percentage of balls in play turned into outs on a team level, and therefore is a practical way of comparing team defense -- both a hit and an error are a non-out, and therefore count against the fielder, unlike an overly simple metric like Fielding Percentage. Booted a ball? That's a non-out. Can't get to your left on a groundball? That's a non-out, too, and the team's rating is punished for that as well.
The Red Sox didn't have that problem often in 2007, as they converted 71.6 percent of balls in play into outs. The average batting average on balls in play in the majors is around .300, so converting nearly 72 percent of balls in play into outs means that particular team was allowing a .280 team BABIP. Simple, clean, and an easy way to track how well fielders are converting non-strikeouts into outs for their pitchers.
They haven't been that efficient since, though they came close in 2008. In 2009, the Red Sox had a terrible defensive team that ranked 29th in the majors, converting just 69.1 percent of balls in play into outs -- that's a BABIP allowed of about .310. Having Jason Bay in left field hurt -- and that's coming from the same team that brought you The Adventures of Manny Ramirez in left -- and Jacoby Ellsbury was very clearly still learning how to handle center field at that stage, too. Kevin Youkilis, Dustin Pedroia, and J.D. Drew were all positive defenders, but Mike Lowell was hobbled by his hip and cost the team dearly, Nick Green and Julio Lugo did their best to destroy the chance of getting any production out of shortstop for most of the year, and the Jason Varitek/Victor Martinez combination behind the plate ranks up there with some of the worst in recent memory in terms of defensive prowess -- Varitek threw out just 13 percent of opposing baserunners, and Martinez, just two years later, is the primary DH in Detroit for a reason. The fact this team won 95 games is honestly nothing short of a miracle.
Theo Epstein and Co. were aware of this, so the 2010 team focused on defense, bringing in Mike Cameron to man center field, Marco Scutaro to play shortstop, and shifting Ellsbury to left, where his routes would work better and his speed could be utilized without having to resort to last-minute dives. Adrian Beltre, aka The Greatest Defensive Third Baseman In The League, took over for Mike Lowell on a one-year deal, too, giving Boston a formidable defensive unit in both the infield and outfield. Behind the plate was still an issue, but that Martinez guy knew a thing or two about hitting, and was expected to more than make up for whatever throws he couldn't make or passed balls he allowed.
That was in theory, anyways. Cameron was hurt early, and ran the outfield like a man whose stomach was torn asunder... most likely because it was. Ellsbury barely played due to an injury you can read about in the award-winning novela, "Ode To A Bruised Rib Cage, Or, How I Figured Out My Ribs Were Broken After Weeks On Painkillers And Even More Outfield Dives." Scutaro dealt with minor injury after minor injury, eventually being forced to second base because he could still make those throws while hurt. Pedroia and Youkilis both missed significant time, keeping their gloves off of the field. But hey, at least Beltre was everything we ever wanted out of a third baseman on both sides of the ball.
Unsurprisingly, the 2010 team did not regain the defensive glory of the 2007 squad, though, even with the defensively-average Darnell McDonald in center, the offensively-oriented Bill Hall at second, and DH-With-A-Glove Daniel Nava in left, they managed to improve on 2009's abysmal effort.
Boston lost Beltre to free agency, but didn't sit back and wait for another 2009 to happen. They traded for Adrian Gonzalez, one of the few first basemen in the league who could brag about being both a better hitter and defender than Youkilis. They shifted Youkilis to this old position of third, where he was no longer expected to be a high-quality defender, but where his bat would more than make up for that difference. Cameron was made a fourth outfielder so that the team could bring in the top defensive left fielder in the game, Carl Crawford. Pedroia was back to play second for the full year, meaning no more Hall or one-armed Scutaro at the keystone, and the team handed the catcher job to Varitek and Jarrod Saltalamacchia, a combo that would not hit as well as the departed Martinez, but would most assuredly play better defense.
This revamped lineup is not only killing it on offense, but has also played well on the field. Boston is fourth in the majors and third in the American League in Defensive Efficiency, converting 72.3 percent of balls in play into outs. This defense will help out John Lackey as he struggles to regain his old form -- if he ever can -- and has been able to assist Tim Wakefield and Alfredo Aceves as they fill in for starters that were (at least in theory, were supposed to be) more capable. Andrew Miller, even if his walk rates don't look as good as they did towards the end of his Pawtucket stay, should get a boost from a defense of this quality. And Jon Lester, Clay Buchholz, and Josh Beckett, while certainly not needing as much help as your average starter, certainly won't turn down the assist for those times they don't get the out themselves. Especially Buchholz, whose game is defined by his ability to induce weaker contact than your average hurler.
Defense was the key in 2007, and while the Red Sox have almost approached those heights since, they have been all over the place in terms of quality, and unable to fully reach them. This year may be different, and, given the wonderful combined hitting ability of the fielders in question, realize that this is a special -- and positive -- thing.
46 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
On thing that I have noticed
about the Rays is how well positioned their defense always is. I think they have lead the league in Defensive Efficency the past 3 years going, and this year their Defensive Efficiency is trending towards the best in 10 years. They have a lot of good fielders but whenever I watch them there seem to be a ton of balls “hit right at” them. I really wonder if they have taken scouting to a new level as another example of “an extra 2%” or if they are just good in the field.
It's a combination
Of having talented defenders, and of positioning and shifts. Maddon squeezes every small advantage he can out of his players in both the lineup and the field, and it shows.
Twitter: @Marc_Normandin
by Marc Normandin on Jun 17, 2011 10:35 AM EDT up reply actions
Nice post
and I like the simple defensive stat. UZR gives me a popsicle headache. I tend to go by the old +/- or even test when I evaluate a player’s defense and I don’t see any liabilites on this team. Here is my simple take -
Adrian: ++
Pedrioa: +
Scutaro/Lowrie: even to -
Youk: even to +
Crawford: +
Ellsbury: + to even
Drew: even to +
Salty: even to -
Pedroia has been ++++++++++ I think.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
I agree... perhaps not to that extent.
Gonzo’s a fine 1st base… but he’s nothing on what Pedroia is (or at least has been) at second.
This is where a humorous comment goes.
Of course an exageration
I just think he’s playing some of the best second base I’ve ever seen. While not being a humongous fan of UZR, I do like it as a tool for determining the general value of a defender, I don’t accept the exact number, but rather the range relative to 0, a large positive number I can accept as exceptional defense, a large negative number, exceptionally poor, and within a few runs of 0, average. Pedroia is on pace for a very large number.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
I don't think Youk is even
he’s probably slightly below average. Definitely not above average.
DFA Rev Halofan
I'm a 7 WAR player in bed.
Official Baker of Red Sox Nation
Fear the Roar.
by TheLoneDavid on Jun 17, 2011 1:41 PM EDT up reply actions
Checking the Metrics (UZR, Rtot)
Gonzalez: 6.6, 11
Pedroia: 7.3, 7
Scutaro: 0.8, -1
Lowrie: -4.4, -7
Youkilis: -2.8, 3
Crawford: 0.3, -4
Ellsbury: -0.4, 4
Drew: 2.6, 2
Salty: -1.0, -4
While these do not tell the whole story they do validate that both Gonzo and Pedroia have been excellent defenders. Drew has been above average. Lowrie and Salty have been pretty poor and you could call Youk, Scutaro, Crawford & Ells average
Funny that we're paying Crawford 20 million per year
on the basis that his defense is “excellent.”
Can everyone else agree that I was right yet?
DFA Rev Halofan
I'm a 7 WAR player in bed.
Official Baker of Red Sox Nation
Fear the Roar.
by TheLoneDavid on Jun 17, 2011 1:43 PM EDT up reply actions
If he steps up next year I will write him a personal apology on twitter
but I’m not at all impressed.
DFA Rev Halofan
I'm a 7 WAR player in bed.
Official Baker of Red Sox Nation
Fear the Roar.
by TheLoneDavid on Jun 17, 2011 5:32 PM EDT up reply actions
No.
Confirmation bias, much? Two-plus months of advanced fielding data into a seven year deal. Two-plus months of advanced fielding data from left field at Fenway, even, meaning it’s even less reliable than those numbers based on batted-ball data and game scorers usually are. Think you might want to give that some time.
Twitter: @Marc_Normandin
by Marc Normandin on Jun 17, 2011 5:52 PM EDT up reply actions
I like the stat as a concept...
but I’m still unsure of how useful it is. I’d like to see it as compared to other teams and their ERA.
The big question is how much weight you give it with regard to the quality of the pitching. If your pitching staff consists of sinkerballers who induce slow rollers to 2nd and short for every out then the stat may not be a true indicator of defensive quality.
Defense always looks good behind good pitching.
This is where a humorous comment goes.
Defense does not always look good behind good pitching
In fact, defense can make good pitching worse. Look no further than the 2009 Red Sox for proof of that. Pitchers have some — but very little — control over balls in play. There is no pitcher who gets all their outs on slow rollers to the middle infield — the very best groundball pitchers have about 60% of their balls in play as grounders, and they aren’t necessarily all hit exactly the same or to the same place.
Twitter: @Marc_Normandin
by Marc Normandin on Jun 17, 2011 12:15 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah. True.
When I thought about it, bad defense is actually more likely to stand out visually with good pitching.
The point I was making was that the pitching may skew the figures a little one way or the other, and we’re looking at a couple of percentage points each way.
Does the stat take into account HRs?
This is where a humorous comment goes.
Homers are not counted
As fielders couldn’t get them. Those are on the pitcher, just like walks and strikeouts.
Twitter: @Marc_Normandin
by Marc Normandin on Jun 17, 2011 12:41 PM EDT up reply actions
yeah it's somewhat hard to separate
since pitching affects how well balls are hit, pitching affects defense, and since defense affect how many outs are many, defense affects how good a pitcher looks. I think this stat makes a lot of sense though when looking at a whole team over the course of a year- it kind of evens the pitching a little bit out of the equation.
Pitching affects how well balls are hit
Less and less as you move from things like high school to the major leagues. The talent level is so even that the amount of control a pitcher has is very limited. Someone like Clay Buchholz or Trevor Cahill seem to have some control over it (though it’s very early in both of their careers) but even that is limited.
Defense makes all the difference, because that’s where the differentiation is for turning balls in play into outs.
Twitter: @Marc_Normandin
by Marc Normandin on Jun 17, 2011 12:37 PM EDT up reply actions
You can't deny it has an effect though
and a pretty significant effect. Watch Beckett’s game the other day and show me one well-hit ball in that game. A stat like that is going to look different with a groundball pitcher pitching than a fly ball pitcher, or the rare major league line drive pitcher (I’m looking at you, Mr. Lackey)
of course
Marc’s point is not that on a game to game level this is not the case, or even that some outlier pitchers cannot control this, but that in general it is controlled far less than the average fan imagines.
If your statements were accepted
The best pitchers would be hit as hard as garbage pitchers, just not as often You can give examples that seem to counter the argument offered, but there are examples of the converse as well. Was last year’s Giants team good defensively? Not really, but they rated well because people weren’t squaring up their pitching. Is this year’s Pirates team good defensively? Its virtually the same team as last year, especially at critical positions, yet they are rating as pretty good versus pretty bad, et cetera.
No
it is basically a fact-you can go to fangraphs and look at a pitcher’s babip (batting average for balls in play)-basically all pichers have babip’s in the range 290-300 or so if you look over a large sample size (say 1000 or even fewer innings). There are exceptions, but far fewer than you think. It is clear some hitters (Abreu, Werth, Cabrera, Manny…) actually have higher than average babips but when averaged over all hitters even average pitchers are not worse than the best. What separates them are mostly walks, strikeouts and to a lesser degree home runs and ground balls.
Last year the Giants batting average against for balls in play was basically the same as their crappy hitters put up against other teams.
The stats do seem to confirm this in general.
A little surprising. Trevor Cahill seems to be a significant anomaly.
I did take a look at BAAbip for pitchers in the 2007 – 2010 period. Roughly 120 starts so a little less than a season, but a fair sample. Matt Cain had a .272 and Tim Lincecum .296 with the same defense behind them. A significant difference that uses a very similar calculation… Cain also had a higher HR/9 that Lincecum in the same period, which should have lifted his BAbip.
I don’t know how much to make of this other than the fact that metrics can lie.
I think I just want to mount a case for pitch to contact guys who play on shit defensive teams…
This is where a humorous comment goes.
by GJ on Jun 17, 2011 2:03 PM EDT up reply actions
BABIP
does not include home runs. I am not so sure that there is a big difference between 0.272 and 0.296. I think “pitch to contact” has pretty much been disproven by these stats. Best example-the most famous recent “pitch to contact” pitcher-Greg Maddux-career BABIP-0.284. Only a tad low and not because it got worse as he got older. i will give you that Cain has a rather low career BABIP-but it is not so low as to be a rule breaker (which a single case cannot be anyway). There will probably always be guys that tend to be on the low side (Cain) and maybe those on the high-the important thing is that the distinction is far less stark than most realize.
If you want to make the case for pitchers independent of good or crappy fielding-look at FIP, xFIP, tERA, SIERRA these remove the bias of fielding that goes into ERA.
Oops my bad... No HR in BABIP
Yep… It sort of works out to a 2% difference in fielding percentage (discounting errors).where we’re led to believe that 3% is a lot.
It’s a sample size of roughly 55-60% of a season too so it’s probably too small a sample anyway.
Thanks for those metrics… but I think I’m having enough trouble with this one!
Next thing we’ll be looking at is SLGbip!
This is where a humorous comment goes.
by GJ on Jun 17, 2011 2:55 PM EDT up reply actions
Beltre will be passing the "Best Defensive 3B" to Headley soon.
Dude is a monster.
DFA Rev Halofan
I'm a 7 WAR player in bed.
Official Baker of Red Sox Nation
Fear the Roar.
16 UZR last year
Acclaimed by the scouting reports I’ve read about him as a superb defensive 3B, in the mold of Zimmerman and Beltre. I trust this more than I trust UZR.
DFA Rev Halofan
I'm a 7 WAR player in bed.
Official Baker of Red Sox Nation
Fear the Roar.
by TheLoneDavid on Jun 17, 2011 5:34 PM EDT up reply actions
Please don't make me complain about UZR in every thread.
Headley is phenomenal defensively. You’ll get a chance to see next weekend.
Twitter: @Marc_Normandin
by Marc Normandin on Jun 17, 2011 5:53 PM EDT up reply actions
Interesting sidenote
Jim Bowden is generally a clown but in a recent ESPN piece he noted that most stats/metrics available to the general public aren’t even glanced at by the most advanced front offices. The Red Sox apparently use an in house system referred to as “Carmine” developed by Bill James. He also mentions that teams are quietly trying to get a leg up by acquiring their own Field F/X data before the system gets rolled out.
Yeah there was thing that came out maybe a year ago where Bowden had Theo talking about Carmine
He obviously didn’t give a ton of info, but from what he was saying, it sounded something similar to UZR but with their own judgements- in the same family at least, which doesn’t mean the numbers are the same.
The differences are probably pretty small
As Dave Cameron pointed out after the 2010 signing of Mike Cameron and the debate over Ellsbury’s abilities, the Red Sox actions (or intentions, really) matched UZR’s position on those two players abilities pretty well. I am sure their systems have moment where they vary from the publicly available ones, but they are not radically or fundamentally different.
The single most important thing to understand about defensive stats, however is that they are basically 100% useless in small samples sizes. Two months of UZR means basically nothing. It is similar to the batting average a player posts in a three game series, the variation is just that high. You can infer a bit form the single season numbers but at least 50% regression to the mean (or 0 in the case of UZR) is recommended by MGL. The numbers need around three years of regular play to stabilize. Lowrie hasn’t reached that at SS yet and may not do so this season, for example.
For teams though defensive efficiency is a great tool, because it is so simple. Convert balls in play to outs and you get rewarded under this system. i am glad to see the Sox starting to become efficient once again.
- Matt Sullivan
"I would change policy, bring back natural grass and nickel beer. Baseball is the belly-button of our society. Straighten out baseball, and you straighten out the rest of the world." Bill "Spaceman" Lee
www.overthemonster.com
www.spacemanspancakes.wordpress.com
by Mattsullivan on Jun 17, 2011 2:53 PM EDT up reply actions
You can infer a bit form the single season numbers but at least 50% regression to the mean (or 0 in the case of UZR) is recommended by MGL.
…still can’t defend Jeter’s gold glove with that…
This is where a humorous comment goes.
by GJ on Jun 17, 2011 3:13 PM EDT up reply actions
What kinda sucks is I'm pessimistic that FIELD F/X data will ever be made public
In recent years the amount of data available to any fan regarding hitting and pitching have gone through the roof. Anyone on the internet can make crazy detailed heat maps, access data on virtually every element of hitting and pitching patterns, etc. Yet for defense, we are basically stuck with a handful of metrics that frequently disagree with each other, are prone to misinterpretation, and have accuracy ranging from slightly uncertain to outright dubious. The disparity in available information is huge.
As far as Field F/X everything I have read indicates that it probably won’t be made free and public due to the costs of crunching all the data, since there are so many more variables to account for in a defensive play than in a pitcher/hitter interaction.
Re: stabilization
If there is bias in the numbers, three years of data just means you’re adding more bias together, though.
Twitter: @Marc_Normandin
by Marc Normandin on Jun 17, 2011 5:56 PM EDT up reply actions
Agreed, except...
…Defensive Efficiency is literally just counting non-outs, so there isn’t the same bias in it that you would find in something like UZR, which tries to gauge how good fielding is at each position in each park using batted-ball data that comes from humans recording batted-ball types from weird angles and viewpoints.
Twitter: @Marc_Normandin
by Marc Normandin on Jun 17, 2011 5:55 PM EDT up reply actions
Totally off topic
But has Boston explained why it’s called Carmine? My guess would be that it’s Latin for red., but I don’t remember seeing a “why” anywhere.
Twitter: @Marc_Normandin
by Marc Normandin on Jun 17, 2011 6:06 PM EDT up reply actions
never heard
but if I had to guess, I’d guess that you’re correct and that RED was originally an acronym that meant something.

by 


























