This GIF comes courtesy of Carson Cistulli of FanGraphs, who posted it in mid-September. The play itself is from an August game (how fitting is it that Jon Niese is on the mound?) It seems safe to say that this is how we feared Flores would be at shortstop. The truth is that he wasn’t bad at all in 2014.
UZR loved his defense at SS last year, giving him a +4.0 mark in 443.1 innings, which translates to a 12.5 UZR/150. Among SS with at least 400 innings played last year, that 12.5 UZR/150 was the sixth-best mark in the majors. If that was the only piece of information we had to go on, we would be pretty excited about a full year at short from Flores in 2015.
However, we know that Flores was moved from the position earlier in his career because it was thought he couldn’t play the spot in the majors. Additionally, we know that 443.1 innings is nowhere near a large enough defensive sample to form good opinions. We also have the knowledge that another respected defensive system in DRS saw that same 443.1 sample completely differently. DRS gave him a (-3) last year.
The two systems see roughly a two-win difference over a full season, which is not terribly unusual over such a small sample. But it’s a different story over a full season of playing time. Last year there were 22 SS who played enough to qualify for the FG leaderboards and only two of those players had a one-win difference. UZR saw Andrelton Simmons as the best shortstop in baseball with a 15.5 mark. DRS saw him as otherworldly, with a 28 rating. They both saw him as great, just one took it to an even further level.
The other one that had more than a one-win difference was much more interesting. UZR liked what it saw from Erick Aybar, as it had him with a 7.5 mark. Meanwhile, DRS rated him at (-3) for the year. It’s the third time in the last four years that DRS gave Aybar a negative numbers. He finished in the red in UZR just one time in that span. But 2014 was the first time there was a significant difference between the two systems. In 2011 the difference was 2.8 runs, in 2012, the year he was positive in both systems, it was 0.5 runs and in 2013 it was 0.4 runs difference as both had him as a negative fielder.
If we go back to 2013, not one of the 21 qualified shortstops had the two systems on opposite sides of the spectrum with a player and a difference of at least 10 runs. It happened three times in 2012 (Peralta, Rollins, Desmond) out of 22, with the 15.9 difference of Jimmy Rollins being the largest gap. So, over the last three years, we have only four times in 65 seasons where there was a polar difference between the two systems of at least 10 runs and not once did that difference reach the 20-run level that we extrapolated from Flores’ partial season in 2014.
What does all of that mean? If Flores plays shortstop 100 or more games in 2015, it’s extremely unlikely there will be such a difference of opinion in the results of DRS and UZR. The difference is overwhelmingly likely to be less than half of what it appeared to be this year. But we have no idea how the two systems will move to a greater consensus. It’s possible that Flores’ DRS will move into positive numbers. It’s possible his UZR will end up in negative numbers. It’s also possible that his UZR will fall some while his DRS rises a bit. Anyone who pretends to know is just guessing.
In 2014, Flores posted a 1.3 fWAR in roughly half a season. If given the chance for Flores to play SS full-time and put up a 2.6 fWAR, I would sign on the dotted line immediately. However, fWAR uses UZR and the reason Flores had such a strong season was because of his defensive numbers. Therefore, it’s possible Flores could take a step forward offensively in 2015 and not produce as much fWAR value as he did a season ago if his UZR moves strongly to match his DRS.
The only projection available now is the one from Steamer. It shows Flores with a .697 OPS and a .306 wOBA, both numbers an improvement over what he did in 2014 but not anywhere close to the .935 OPS and .399 wOBA he posted in Las Vegas in 2014. This is how it should be. We know there is a lot of air to be removed from those Vegas numbers and research suggests to remove 19% from OBP and 34% from SLG. So, our MLE for what Flores produced in Vegas last year would be a .672 OPS. As a young player, we would expect improvement from that. Is a .697 OPS the appropriate level of improvement? That’s certainly debatable but it’s hard to look at it as some horrible prediction.
The Steamer forecast also has a UZR and fWAR projection. Overall, it has him with a positive defensive worth and a 1.9 fWAR in 512 PA. It will be curious to see what ZiPS and the other projections will forecast for Flores this year. My take is that if he can post a .700 OPS the Mets can live with his defense, even if it’s not as good as what Steamer projects here. Shortstop figures to be the weakest position for the Mets in 2015 and if they can get a 1.5 fWAR from their starter at their weakest position that wouldn’t be the worst thing in the world. However, it should be pointed out that the one year Ruben Tejada cleared 500 PA (2012, when he had 501 PA) he had a 1.8 fWAR.
Brian
I agree with your thinking that Flores has to produce with the bat to make up for his glove work.The problem, as I see it, is that sub par defense puts a strain on your pitchers. With only Lagares in the projected starting line-up above par defensively, this pitching staff may fall to the notion that they will have to post very high strikeout numbers in order to survive.
This situation is a prime example of decision-making using a small market financial approach. There surely must be some people in the FO who realize that Flores does not pass the eye test with the glove. But that’s not how the Mets operate.
I think there are a lot of unknowns when it comes to the defense.
My expectation is that TDA will be better in ’15 although I will not argue with anyone who labels that wishful thinking.
My expectation is that a full season of Wright will improve the defense at 3B.
My hope is that Ruben Tejada, who had his best defensive season ever last year, is used as a def. replacement in the late innings at SS.
My hope is that MDD is used as a def. replacement in the late innings in RF.
My hope is that Granderson improves moving to LF.
Bottom line is that while I’m a bit concerned about the overall team defense, my hope is that it can be near league average overall.
I have very little confidence that TC will use Tejada or MdD as defensive replacements with any regularity.
Poor defense sabotages good pitching. Flores/Murphy does not have the range nor the ability to turn the difficult double play. Flores is an unproven commodity at the major league level, offensively and defensively. Tejada is his backup that has never achieved average. The combination of those three players does not give me confidence that this is a playoff team.
Thanks for trying to put the defensive numbers into perspective.
“sub par defense puts a strain on your pitchers”
And does a sub par offense also put a strain on pitchers?
And what a sub par pitching staff? Does that put a strain on the defenders? Or does it put too much pressure on the offense?
I dont get why some fans are so concerned with the perspective of the pitchers and make them the center of the universe. Because if one thing doesn’t go their way it’s the end of the world?
Not all decisions have to benefit the pitchers.
(disclaimer: this is in no way a support for Wilmer Flores. Just tired of hearing how our “poor” pitchers will have to suffer because of “subpar” defense or “no run support” and how it’s always “unfair” for them to play in such conditions)
Hey Name
I thought of you when I read this: http://www.fangraphs.com/community/trying-to-improve-fwar-part-1/
Be sure to read the comments section, especially the two posts by site owner Appleman.
Really good stuff. Glad you pointed me that way. Hopefully the changes will come before the season starts and we can discuss the changes. I should probably screenshot some stuff now in order to compare later.
Hey, that’s me! Thanks for spreading the article!
Hey Noah – Your article is going to have a big impact — congratulations!
Nice job. Nice article.
When you build your organization around your pitching talent (“making them the center of the universe”) you should try to help them with as many tools as possible.
Spending your penny-pinching owner’s money on questionable corner outfielders and spinning the limited-ranged young (and cheap) Flores into a major league-caliber SS is a recipe for your talented young arms to underperform.
If the Mets had a powerhouse offense I wouldn’t fret the defense so much. But they don’t. So defense becomes more important. Brian’s hopes and expectations aside, the presently constituted Mets defense could be very sub par and thus it does not hold well for the pitching staff.
“is a recipe for your talented young arms to underperform”
Proof?
Corey Kluber won the Cy young with one of the worst defenses in baseball. Collin McHugh and Max Scherzer had good seasons with bad defenses behind them.
You’re grossly overstating the effect of defense on a pitcher’s game. Defense does matter, but ultimately the pitcher’s talent is much more important. Over a long season, the effect of a great defensive play here and there or a missed ball here or there doesn’t matter much.
At the end of the year, I don’t think anyone would credit success of assign blame to a pitcher having a good/bad season because of how well the defense performed.
I was at that game in Dodger Stadium. My buddy and I looked at each other stunned when he fell on his face.
275, 15 homers, and 75 RBI and nobody will make a big deal of the errors.
I don’t trust the defensive metrics available I rather go with the eye test when it comes to defense. I love Flores as a hitter I think he will produce enough given the opportunity that a case will be able to be made that he can stay at SS for the short term. But up the middle if we have Flores and Murph at 2nd and SS we are going to be giving up a lot of hits that wouldn’t go through with two players that have average range at those spots. Add to that if TDA doesn’t take a big step forward in his throwing and blocking of pitches we will have some of the worst up the middle defense in either league even with all world Lagares in CF.
20 Wins and no one complains about Colon’s homers allowed
47 Saves and no one complains about Mejia’s WHIP
From the same source mentioned above, we have today’s entry:
http://www.fangraphs.com/community/jon-niese-is-changing-it-up/
That’s very encouraging!
This whole idea of providing a defensive metric to assess a players effectiveness is interesting, especially as the two main measurements can vary – as in the case of Flores- One labels him “pretty good”, and the other labels him “pretty bad. hmmm… I wonder- are these statistical derivatives seeking to validate what “we see with our eyes”, or are they striving to deliver some expanded understanding of a ‘totality” of what a player delivers, defensively? I believe my eyes when I see a player make a great play, when I see an ‘average’ fielder, like Jeter dive into the stands, full speed, coming up bloody, to snag a foul ball and save a game. I can Point to that play and say “in *this game*, he made a difference. The blended *season-long* measured statistics can’t deliver that. It can only deliver a projection, over time- it doesn’t pinpoint the exact moment when a game was saved or won by a single defensive play. I love the statistics, even if I might not completely understand or agree with how they are derived. As per Wilmer Flores- I don’t need a statistic to prove or disprove what I see with my eyes. Defensively, he’s not good. Athletically, he doesn’t have the tools to be good or great, defensively. I do agree that he will get better- he’ll develop a better feel of when to charge a ball, when to back up, etc- but he’ll never be an ace with the leather. I don’t need a stat to measure Juan Lagares- suffice to say, he’s very good, and any metric will end up yielding the same conclusion. Lastly- *Name* asserted that defensive effectiveness doesn’t affect pitching performance. I can only respond- Name- do you actually *watch* baseball games? Did you watch the Tigers vs. the Redsox in 2013 playoff series? Did you *see* the little things the Sox did on defense?- Game by Game? Didyou *see* the numerous defensive faux-pas the Tigers committed? The offensive heroics of Ortiz and others made the headlines, but the stellar defensive performances of the Red Sox *made the difference*, because the Sox kept it close with stellar performances, often based on *doing the little things right*, versus “great plays”, which were few, in a series-long pitchers’ duel.
“I believe my eyes when I see a player make a great play, when I see an ‘average’ fielder, like Jeter dive into the stands, full speed, coming up bloody, to snag a foul ball and save a game. I can Point to that play and say “in *this game*, he made a difference”
The point of defensive stats is to get rid of the bias you just described. A play may look great to the naked eye, but it could just be an easy play that the fielder took a bad route to and had to dive at the last second just to make the play.
In the long run, defense has a very little impact on a pitcher’s effectiveness (as in their season stats). Maybe the ERA is inflated/deflated by .10 or .15? Maybe not even that much because really bad defense would be considered errors and would not affect ERA. Maybe you pitch up to 5 fewer innings because you had to get the occasional 4th out? Good defense is not going to make a bad pitcher look that much better, and vice versa.
I think what you are stating may be true for some pitchers and not for others.
Aaron Heilmann and Mike Pelfrey are examples of two pitchers whose psychological make-up appeared to be unable to handle poor defensive work. Can I back this up with stats?
No.
But like Raff, I prefer the “eye” test, at least until there is a definitive fielding metric which is consistent and acceptable to almost all.
Name- your statement that “the point of defensive stats is to get rid of the bias” of what I see with my eyes— Plays in games which *actually affect the game’s outcome” is, in and of itself- A bias. The final derivative of the defensive stats, after all, is to “project” how many games, over time, that a player’s defensive prowess, or lack thereof, can add to wins/save games. How can a projection – especially as we’ve seen some wild variations in “projections”, be more valuable or less biased than actually seeing a player make a play which wins/saves a game? Maybe Swoboda and Agee took bad paths to their legendary catches in ’69- I don’t know. I *do know* that those plays were #1: Critical to winning the game, and even more to the point- The value of those particular plays would, undoubtedly *never* be revealed in any defensive metric, compiled and derived over time. I’m not biased against the metrics- but as they vary so much- I view the statistics themselves as *experimental in nature*. What I saw with my eyes- That actually happened.
From what i know, the underlying way most defensive system works is that the system derives the chance that a play should be made, and then gives credit for a player who makes unlikely plays while detracts when they don’t make likely plays.
A Clutch defensive plays doesn’t mean that the player is a good fielder, just like if a player gets a clutch hit, it doesn’t make them a good hitter. A walk off HR at the end of the day is still just 1 HR counted in the books. Same thing with a great clutch play that saves a game.
If you only evaluate players only during clutch situations, you might not come to the correct decision.
For the record- I agree with your last statement, and I’m not solely focused on the great play I see with my eyes. I value the defensive metrics. I’m not biased toward either- but facts are facts. Fact 1: Defensive metrics are valuable projections. Fact 2: Players make plays in actual games which contribute toward winning specific games- with the bat, with the glove, with their legs, and with their heads…