From: steph@cs.uiuc.edu (Dale Stephenson)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: AL Rookie of Year Award?
Date: 29 Sep 92 22:12:43 GMT
Article-I.D.: pegasus.steph.717804763
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL

In <86_pvbk@lynx.unm.edu> kbos@carina.unm.edu (Kurt "Some Guy" Bose) writes:

>In article <steph.717717072@pegasus.cs.uiuc.edu> steph@cs.uiuc.edu (Dale Stephenson) writes:
>>In <1992Sep25.050240.2328@panix.com> spira@panix.com (Greg "Sarcasm Is A Way Of Life" Spira) writes:
>>
>>>But the basic "problem" with Lofton is this: the best centerfielder in
>>>baseball probably isn't worth as much defensively as the worst defensive
>>>shortstop.  
>>
>>This seems too strong to me.
>>
>Agreed, but...

>>Thought to ponder:  if Frank Thomas (with existing range, arm, and glovework)
>>were placed at shortstop, would he really be more valuable defensively than
>>Wally Joyner or Mark McGwire?

>Oh, please!  I don't mean to be abusive or anything here, but you have to admit
>this is a stupid argument.  I'm not just referring to your "thought" here, but
>the whole point.

It is meant to be an *extreme* argument, to point out the problem with the
equally extreme "worst shortstop is more valuable" comment.

>First of all, with the Listach/Lofton comment, it's silly to even attempt to
>argue that Listach is a butcher, since he's above average defensively, and
>it's silly to annoint Lofton as a god of CF because of his assist total at this
>point.  Until you have the data to show that a high number of baserunners were
>trying to take a base on the rookie, the raw numbers of assists don't show the
>whole story.  How many players tried to take a base on Lofton?  On the average 
>CF?

I have no such data, nor do I have any reason to believe that Listach is the
hypothetical "worst shortstop".  According to everything I've heard, Listach
*is* more valuable defensively than Lofton.

>The other point is that shortstop _IS_ a more difficult position than center
>fielder.  You don't see CFs coming in to play SS; you see a SS learning how to
>play in center (cf. Robin Yount, Eric Davis).  Got a thought to ponder for you:
>would Listach at CF be more valuable than Lofton at SS?

Probably.  Though I don't think it's a given that Listach would be an above
average outfielder.  (Rafael Ramirez always looked pathetic in the outfield.
Then again, Raffy looked pathetic at shortstop :->).

>Look, you and I both know what Greg's statement means.  If a player in CF could 
>play SS, he'd be playing SS. (This is on a regular basis; one inning in a long
>game doesn't cut it.)  There is no "replacement level" for that; either you 
>can or you can't.  Lofton is playing CF rather than SS; therefore he's worse
>at SS than Mark Lewis.

I'm not proposing putting Lofton at shortstop.  I'm proposing putting the
hypothetical replacement level shortstop in for Listach, and the hypothetical
replacement level centerfielder in for Lofton, and comparing how many extra
hits each team gives up.  It's basically the same thing that is done all
the time offensively in the Fielder vs. Everybody debate.

Secondly, I saw Ted Simmons play a few games at shortstop for the Braves, so I
am a living witness that anyone can be put at shorstop.  I think there is a 
scale defensively, just as there is offensively -- not a matter of can/can't.
And this varies from position to position.  Lofton may not be as good a SS
as Lewis, but Lewis may not be as good a CF as Lofton.

>We could argue semantics all week about whether Andy Van Slyke is more valuable
>defensively than Rafael Ramirez, but who gives a damn?  

I do.  I am very interested in determining defensive value, partially because
I want to improve the defense algorithms in my own private simulation.  
Unfortunately, PO, A, and E tell me very little about how much defensive worth.
But I would think that with DA numbers (which I unfortunately don't have) and
normalized chances per defensive zone, the value of a player defensively *can*
be determined accurately, and used with equal effect to comparing players
offensively.  If nothing else, having both defensive and offensive numbers 
could throw more fuel on the Fryman vs. Fielder debate.

>The question is Lofton
>vs. Listach, and it's been repeatedly established that a good SS is more 
>valuable than a good CF.  Listach isn't a butcher, and Lofton isn't a god.

No argument here.  I'm voting for Listach.  But if it were Andy Van Slyke vs.
Jose Offerman... :->
--
Dale J. Stephenson |*| (steph@cs.uiuc.edu) |*| Baseball fanatic

  "It is considered good to look wise, especially when not 
   overburdened with information" -- J. Golden Kimball
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball