NL West Defense: 2008 Projections
I said I was going to do the bullpens next after having done lineups and rotations already, but I thought it might be important to insert this aspect of run prevention in this spot. Why I do this now is that I was realizing I was trying too hard to factor defense into the starting pitching evals I put up last week. Might as well just separate them out. If I were to do that, LA and San Diego both probably pass Colorado momentarily when it comes to rotational strength and the Rockies drop to the bottom. As you'll see in a moment, I don't believe it will be by far enough to make any team other than the Diamondbacks better than the Rockies at run prevention when starters are on the mound.
In 2007, defense played a critical role in determining the two teams of the four contenders that went to the playoffs, and the two that did not. Don't believe me? Look at the Davenport Translations, FRAA (Fielding Runs Above Average) for each team from 2007:
- Colorado +43
- Arizona +23
- San Francisco +8
- San Diego -15
- Los Angeles -18
Catchers 2007:
- Russell Martin, LA
- Chris Snyder, AZ
- Yorvit Torrealba, CO
- Bengie Molina, SF
- Josh Bard
Snyder: PO-K(prorated): 9.27 A-CS: 29
Torrealba: PO-K(prorated): 23.67 A-CS: 41
Martin: PO-K(prorated): 36.32 A-CS: 44
Shortstop
I was going at this in the order of the Bill James defensive spectrum to show that the Rockies advantage comes from having their strongest defenders in the positions of greatest importance.
2007:
- Troy Tulowitzki
- Omar Vizquel
- Rafael Furcal
- Stephen Drew
- Khalil Greene
Second Base:
2007:
- Orlando Hudson
- Kazuo Matsui
- Marcus Giles
- Ray Durham
- Jeff Kent
Center Field:
Doing this exercise made me realize how lackluster center field defense was across the division in 2007. There are some major discrepancies between STATS, Baseball Info Solutions and MLBAM when it comes to monitoring the play by play data at this position as well and I don't know how to untangle it, so for 2007 this is just a straight up FRAA ranking.
2007:
- Willy Taveras
- Dave Roberts
- Mike Cameron
- Chris Young
- Juan Pierre
Third Base:
2007:
- Pedro Feliz
- Mark Reynolds
- Nomar Garciaparra, et al in Los Angeles
- Kevin Kouzmanoff
- Garrett Atkins
Right Fielder:
2007
- Arizona's committee
- Randy Winn
- Ethier/Kemp
- Brian Giles
- Brad Hawpe
Left Field:
2007
- Eric Byrnes
- Matt Holliday
- San Diego's committee
- Luis Gonzalez
- Barry Bonds
First Base:
2007
- Todd Helton
- Ryan Klesko/Aurilia/Ortmeier
- Adrian Gonzalez
- Conor Jackson/Tony Clark
- Garciaparra/Loney
Pitcher:
This is actually much higher on the defensive spectrum, but it's a group effort rather than mostly individual work like the rest, so I've saved it for last.
2007
- San Diego
- Los Angeles
- Colorado
- Arizona
- San Francisco
2008 figures to see a little change. I think the Padres retain the top spot, but the gap closes between them and the Dodgers as Kuroda's purportedly pretty decent. Livan Hernandez was the second best defending pitcher in the division, and Danny Haren is a poor defender replacing him. With more innings from Morales, the Rockies should move further ahead of the Diamondbacks in third. If Kip Wells sticks the full year, that probably won't be the case.
Summary Projections:
The Rockies aren't likely to get notably weaker at any position in 2008, with a possible exception of an age related step down by Helton. Upgrades appear to be coming at second and possibly center if Taveras bounces back. Arizona's downgrading on the right side with full seasons of Upton and Jackson, although I know most scouts expect Upton to be a tremendous asset in the field someday. They do figure to get upgrades of experience with Chris Young and Mark Reynolds. San Francisco figures to be better in the outfield but worse in the infield. I don't know if I'd take that trade-off. Los Angeles has probably improved itself the most by moving Pierre, but there's still a lot of ground to make up and I really think San Diego has taken a step back this winter. The Padres might be in the -25 range as far as fielding next year.
So for 2008:
- Colorado +50? It seems very possible right now if Nix delivers.
- Arizona +25 After everything, I see them right around the same level they were in 2007.
- Los Angeles +5 to +15 depending on the playing time of LaRoche and Ethier.
- San Francisco +0 The Giants are going backwards.
- San Diego -25 I'm beginning to think the Padres might be the biggest disappointment in 2008.
0 recs |
24
comments
Comments
wow good stuff as usual
good stuff rox girl thanks
by roxfan4life on Jan 21, 2008 7:22 PM MST 0 recs
I hope Taveras gets better.
Maybe he was still getting used to not having a goofy hill and flag pole behind him.
by belt on Jan 21, 2008 7:32 PM MST 0 recs
I agree, he's sort of a wildcard
by Rox Girl on
Jan 21, 2008 7:49 PM MST
up
0 recs
Don't unestimate the impact of his injuries
by LarryB303 on
Jan 21, 2008 10:22 PM MST
up
0 recs
This is why I love Purple Row
by jcd823 on Jan 21, 2008 8:28 PM MST 0 recs
Amazing
Now that I know what a LOOGY is and what VORP means, not to mention FRAA, I'll be talking some smack down at the old watering hole! OK, so that part's not true. But still, I'm learning so much by being part of this great blog/community.
Now if it were just spring....
by rockhead on Jan 21, 2008 9:29 PM MST 0 recs
Rox Girl
by lizardlad01 on Jan 21, 2008 10:43 PM MST 0 recs
I never understood...
I hope Atkins worked on his defense this year. Last year there was improvement on balls his down the line, especially in the World Series he was amazing diving to his right and throwing out runners. If he could learn to go to his left (actually Tulo gets all of those balls), and charge a slow roller he would be an adequate third baseman. At least he would receive more gold glove consideration than Ryan Braun.
by Charlie77 on Jan 21, 2008 10:44 PM MST 0 recs
A few things
There's a spreadsheet with both STATS ZR and BIS ZR available here. I happen to think that the BIS data is screwed up, and if you examine this spreadsheet, you'll see why: almost all of the cases where the two ZR systems differ significantly are cases in which BIS has an extreme rating for a player and STATS doesn't.
- I like what you're trying to do with catchers, but there's just too much noise in the data for it to be the least bit trustworthy. Outs recorded at home plate has far more to do with a) the strength of the outfielders' arms and b) the number of baserunners the pitching staff allows than it does with the catcher. Assists minus CS doesn't mean anything unless you can figure out a way to remove the dropped third strikes from the equation. And obviously, all of this suffers from the same problem that range factor in general does - we simply have no idea how many opportunities each catcher had.
- We're in agreement on the Rockies' defense, save Nix (already discussed) and Tulo (who I presume you're counting on for a +20 or so, and who gets just a +6 based on the ZR projections, in part due to a lousy performance during his September callup).
- I think you're being too harsh on the Giants. They're only meaningfully below average at one position (Durham), and Vizquel is further from average in his direction than Durham is in his. Frandsen should be fine at 3B, they've got three center fielders in the outfield (two of whom are bad center fielders, but still)... that's a good defensive team. It's not nearly enough to make them relevant, but they should probably be in the +25-35 range, depending on whether you think Rowand is something special (I don't).
- I don't see the Padres' defense as a problem. Okay, Josh Bard is terrible. No argument there. But Gonzalez and Iguchi are average, Greene is good, Kouzmanoff is decent (-2 according to ZR), Hairston has performed very well in LF in his limited time there, Edmonds is still average, Giles is a hair below... put it all together, and they're right around average. I suppose you can subtract a few runs for the inevitable Edmonds injury, but still, this isn't a -25 team.
- Here's what my projections say:
ARI +14
COL +13
SD +1
LAD -6
I like the D'Backs' and Rockies' chances to beat those numbers. In Arizona's case, that's because the numbers see Hudson and Upton as average, which I'd be inclined to disagree with. In the Rockies' case, it's because I think Tulo is being sold short (although not by that much; Adam Everett projects at +13, so that's the de facto ceiling for these things) and because you've spent enough time extolling the virtues of Jayson Nix that I've decided to expect something in the +5-10 range (whereas the projections use Giles, who is a little below average).
by Heltonfan on Jan 21, 2008 10:53 PM MST 0 recs
Spreadsheet
by Heltonfan on
Jan 21, 2008 10:55 PM MST
up
0 recs
Why ZR?
by belt on
Jan 21, 2008 11:50 PM MST
up
0 recs
Defensive stats
ZR isn't perfect, and your criticism is accurate, but it's light-years ahead of FRAA or any other non-zone-based measure.
by Heltonfan on
Jan 22, 2008 7:40 AM MST
up
0 recs
Well
I don't know it just seems like a huge disservice to limit yourself to one stat when all of them are obviously flawed.
by belt on
Jan 22, 2008 8:24 AM MST
up
0 recs
ZR
This isn't even remotely true.
"That doesn't take into account that Tulowitzki has much better range, a much better arm, and isn't playing with near as good of a fielding third basemen."
It does take into account the first two things there, and the third would make Tulo look better by ZR, not worse.
"Not to mention it doesn't take the park into account so Rockies outfielders are already at a disadvantage because of the huge outfield and same zones."
Right, that's what park factors are for. And I use them.
by Heltonfan on
Jan 22, 2008 9:56 AM MST
up
0 recs
Maybe I'm way off the mark?
I'll never be the one to claim to be an expert on Zone Rating, but I've always been under the impression that zone rating is how they handle the balls in their zone. When a fielder goes outside of their zone, they'd be effectively expanding the size of their zone because ZR does nothing to account for the fact that ball was outside their zone and counts it as a ball that was fielded in that zone. Therefore, a player that stays in his zone, and doesn't ever range out of his zone is automatically at an advantage over someone that ranges out of their zone and has to make harder plays.
"It does take into account the first two things there, and the third would make Tulo look better by ZR, not worse."
Well, like I said to the previous point, it counts a ball out of the zone that they field the same as it counts a ball in their zone. Therefore players with better range effectively play a bigger zone and are at a disadvantage. You're right it does account for a better arm to some degree. And a poor fielding 3rd basemen wouldn't make a shortstops ZR better the way I understand it for the same reason I've already stated, the shortstop has to range further and put himself at a disadvantage.
I might be way off of the mark in my understanding of ZR, so if I am please explain where I'm going wrong.
by belt on
Jan 22, 2008 10:10 AM MST
up
0 recs
ZR
They aren't at a disadvantage, because no matter what, they don't get penalized for not making plays on balls outside of their zone.
by Heltonfan on
Jan 22, 2008 11:14 AM MST
up
0 recs
Ok.
Haha, like I said I never claimed to be an expert.
by belt on
Jan 22, 2008 11:33 AM MST
up
0 recs
So..
by Charlie77 on
Jan 23, 2008 11:09 PM MST
up
0 recs
Yes
by Heltonfan on
Jan 24, 2008 7:45 AM MST
up
0 recs
I was actually using a mix
I think we'll just have to continue in disagreement on a lot of the nitty-gritty individual position stuff until it plays out. As for catchers, I agree about too much noise with the outs, and in fact tweaked Torrealba down because of that, Pinto's PMR actually has him ahead of Martin which is nonsense. At the same time, I think just ignoring that aspect altogether leaves an incomplete picture.
I definitely think you've overrated San Fran, particularly Vizquel, who's closer to average than you think (almost all of his added defensive value came in the first half of the season, from the end of June on he was pretty mediocre) and both he and Durham are declining fairly rapidly. Add in declines at catcher (Molina's also aging poorly in regards to defense) first (Klesko and Aurillia were much better than Ortmeier will be) and third (whoever it is won't come close to Feliz) and I see a decline at every position in the infield, a couple of them significant. That's not good, and at that point I don't care how they've upgraded their outfield because it won't be enough to counter that slide.
San Diego seems to be overrated by ZR defensively in general, I don't trust the Greene and Kouzmanoff rates in particular. Hairston might be alright, but it looks like he's going to be splitting time with Chase Headley, and that downgrades that position. Overall, maybe I am underrating them a little, but there's no way they're going to be close to within fifteen runs of Colorado. I would bet a lot of money on the over if you gave me that 14 run difference in Vegas.
I can see how small or no-samples will affect your rating of the Rockies, and ZR definitely didn't like Taveras, so I can't really argue there. I think by using solely ZR you wind up penalizing teams whose pitching staffs have high contact, high GB rates like the Rockies -Toronto's another example- when in reality they wind up getting a sort of synergistic bonus in the form of DP's and better OOZ #'s than you would otherwise expect -particularly if they have decent defensive parts to begin with. I don't know if you've accounted enough for this in either your pitching forecasts or here, but it has to figure in somewhere and right now I'm not seeing it in either.
by Rox Girl on
Jan 22, 2008 7:22 AM MST
up
0 recs
expla
vr, Xei
by Xeifrank on
Jan 22, 2008 9:16 AM MST
up
0 recs
For those of you that don't know me
I noted this last week when we were talking about FIPs, and I saw how the discrepancy between FIP+ and RA+ for Colorado tended to track higher according to the pitcher's GB rates, but that for some teams, like San Diego and Arizona, this wasn't the case.
One way that I think that what I'm talking about shows up in the team's DER when high GB% pitchers are on the mound. For Colorado, you'll notice that the DER gets higher with Cook, Corpas, Morales and Jimenez but tends to track lower with lower GB rates. There were a couple of exceptions to this like Hirsh and Redman, but for the most part, the principle held.
For San Diego, the opposite occurred, high GB pitchers like Maddux, Germano and Cla Meredith had lower efficiency scores than their high FB counterparts. I usually don't like DER, especially not by itself, but I think there's something to this, and it's a big part of the reason why I think Greene and Kouzmanoff might be overrated defensively.
by Rox Girl on
Jan 22, 2008 11:29 AM MST
up
0 recs
FRAA
vr, Xei
by Xeifrank on Jan 22, 2008 1:04 AM MST 0 recs
FRAA
by belt on
Jan 22, 2008 10:13 AM MST
up
0 recs







