In case you were wondering…
Yes, this blog is still alive, and so am I. So those of you waiting for me to fall on my ass are going to have to wait a little longer. Suffice to say, I have shit to do, and WordPress had sucked lately, so that means less golden blogging to entertain you monkeys. They’ve changed the posting layout, so now my stupid freaking blog tags are gone. >:O
—
Now, at this very moment, I happen to be taking up space in Nowheresville, Illinois. (Note: Nowheresville isn’t a real town.) I’m here all week for some dumb conference to train me how to ask people how they feel about their problems. On an interesting note, one of the other conference-goers looks like my “Hey mayn!” neighbor (who has since moved out! ^_^). I call him Mini-Mayn. In fact, most of the conference-goers looks interesting - we have a Lance Armstrong clone (who even seems to wear yellow every day, actually), a guy who was born in Chile/grew up in Canada/has a French name/looks like Templeton from Charlotte’s Web, and a guy who looks like my 9th grade Spanish teacher.
—
I haven’t forgotten about movie moments.
—
If you take a player’s total innings (INN) played for a season at a single position, and divide it by total chances (TC), does this not provide an accurate idea of their range? After all, the total chances a player creates for himself indicates his speed and/or ability to put himself in place to make a play. I can’t be the first person to think of this, so… what is this even called? Anyway, let’s look at a few examples:
CF Aaron Rowand 2004: 1018 INN/304 TC = 3.349
CF Aaron Rowand 2007: 1373 INN/405 TC = 3.390
CF Torii Hunter 2004 1100 INN/320 TC = 3.438
CF Torii Hunter 2007 1314 INN/387 TC = 3.395
Rowand and Hunter are regarded as some of the best defensive center fielders in baseball, so let’s assume their numbers are great. To be fair, we can really only compare numbers of similar positions, even when it comes to center, left and right field. After all, we could argue that center fielders captain their outfields, and cover the most area that’s considered fair territory. So let’s compare two left fielders:
LF Pat Burrell 2004 1060 INN/230 TC = 4.609
LF Pat Burrell 2007 1028 INN/176 TC = 5.841
LF Matt Holliday 2004 917 INN/188 TC = 4.878
LF Matt Holliday 2007 1383 INN/306 TC = 4.520
So, according to this, we can assume that Pat Burrell has declined in range as he’s aged, and that Matt Holliday has slightly improved since coming into the bigs. I don’t think either Burrell or Holliday was ever thought as a great defensive player, but both have been thought of as adequate, or at least Burrell used to be.
My basic thinking is that the more chances a player has at making a play on the ball, the better his range. He’s either fast, intelligent, well prepared, lucky, well coached, or a combination of those things. We can’t include assists, since those really rely on other players to be availble to help make a play, and rely on things like arm strength and vision, which arguably have less to do with a player’s actual defensive range. Plus, even if you were to factor in assists somehow, you’d have to somehow account for the value of an assist, which is more than a standard putout.






















