Palmero winning one playing something like 20 games at 1b and Jeter winning multiple ones have made them completely worthless in my eyes, even when a White Sox player wins one or they occasionally get one or two positions right a year.

 

You gotta wonder what percentage of baseball fans (casual and hardcore alike) actually think those two deserved it.

His last decent season was 2005. His last great one was 2003. His greatness on defense didn't last all that long.

Which despite stats I'll call bulls*** on. He's not great anymore but he was one of the best defensive cf's I've ever seen for a long time and that lasted passed 2003.

In the next two to five years the baseball world is gonna advance in monumental proportions.

 

http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/index.php/...ional_analysis/

Which despite stats I'll call bulls*** on. He's not great anymore but he was one of the best defensive cf's I've ever seen for a long time and that lasted passed 2003.

 

Perception vs. reality. It depends.

In the next two to five years the baseball world is gonna advance in monumental proportions.

 

http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/index.php/...ional_analysis/

 

Then people will finally stop b****ing about UZR being inaccurate...

 

 

Then people will finally stop b****ing about UZR being inaccurate...

 

Some of the "b****ing" is legitimate. Everybody knows what the flaws are. But it's the best tool we have right now (emphasis on right now). And it looks like it's only going to evolve. I might just get that book. Looks like a really interesting read.

Edited March 28, 201016 yr by Jordan4life

Some of the "b****ing" is legitimate. Everybody knows what the flaws are. But it's the best tool we have right now (emphasis on right now). And it looks like it's only going to evolve. I might just get that book. Looks like a really interesting read.

 

It's like being a spoiled child. Would you rather have UZR or would you rather have fielding%?

 

To totally disregard it for its few flaws and constantly b**** about it is not something you should do, especially when it's the best thing out there right now.

It's like being a spoiled child. Would you rather have UZR or would you rather have fielding%?

 

To totally disregard it for its few flaws and constantly b**** about it is not something you should do, especially when it's the best thing out there right now.

 

Like I said, some of the complaints are valid. I agree that some of the complaining is over the top. I used to be one to dismiss UZR and go strictly with my eyes. But as I've read and studied (not just UZR, but sabermetrics in general), I've come to accept and, more importantly, understand them more. And the value they bring to the table. But they're not bulletproof. How does Adam Jones go from being a + defender to a negative defender in one year? Did he have a range slump? Those kinds of questions are legitimate.

Edited March 29, 201016 yr by Jordan4life

Like I said, some of the complaints are valid. I agree that some of the complaining is over the top. I used to be one to dismiss UZR and go strictly with my eyes. But as I've read and studied (not just UZR, but sabermetrics in general), I've come to accept and, more importantly, understand them more. And the value they bring to the table. But they're not bulletproof. How does Adam Jones go from being a + defender to a negative defender in one year? Did he have a range slump? Those kinds of questions are legitimate.

 

They're legitimate to a point. A one year sample of UZR is not enough to prove the defensive capability of a player. UZR needs a large sample size, which is one of its down falls. To simply call out a large fluctuation one year and say, "hey, this doesn't make sense at all, this stat sucks" is ignorant and that's what a lot of people do.