Fielding stats are difficult to interpret! Even if I could show TC/9, PO/9, A/9, DP/9, E/9 it could be subject to all matter of dissection, ie, more chances due to more balls hit in his zone, more assists and putouts because of better teammates etc. etc, but one thing I noticed when perusing MLB's sortable stats, is Adam Everret is fielding the ss position very well ! And that Young is near the top in every category. ( I grant you only Betancourt has played more innings at SS this year). I think his fielding is as underrated as the rest of his game, but as redsoxrgay pointed out, until he is post season tested, he will not be put in the 'elite' category.
I would like to see, as yerfatma pointed out, innings played, as well as a 'chances per 9 inning played', or 'chances per inning', to see if Young is having an inordinate number of balls hit in his 'zone'. Don't really know what it means (maybe somebody can explain it to me), but Young - 983 innings, 411 chances, .418 chances per inning, 3.763 chances per 9 innings Jeter - 901.2 innings, 332 chances, .368 chances per inning, 3.316 chances per 9 Tejada - 919.2 innings, 341 chances, .371 chances per inning, 3.339 chances per 9 Crosby - 795 innings, 286 chances, .360 chances per inning, 3.238 chances per 9 Guillen - 896 innings, 359 chances, .401 chances per inning, 3.606 chances per 9
The MLB.com database shows the same # of innings as you show, but with these numbers for TC's, graymatters: Young 511 Jeter 421 Tejada 486 Crosby 408 Guillen 471 what is your source, may I ask? As for what it means, ha ha, I do not pretend to know, it could in some abstract way be shown that Young gets to more balls per game, but, again, there could be many reasons for that!
si.com But I would trust mlb before I would trust si. Don't know why si's are so low. Or maybe I'm just reading it wrong. For what it's worth, revised stats: Young - 983 innings, 511 chances, .520 chances per inning, 4.679 chances per 9 innings Jeter - 901.2 innings, 421 chances, .467 chances per inning, 4.204 chances per 9 Tejada - 919.2 innings, 486 chances, .529 chances per inning, 4.758 chances per 9 Crosby - 795 innings, 408 chances, .513 chances per inning, 4.619 chances per 9 Guillen - 896 innings, 471 chances, .526 chances per inning, 4.731 chances per 9
I am probably reading it wrong, thank you for your trouble.
So....what does this prove, if anything?
Beats me. A couple of people asked for it, like it was important. Thought they could explain. I think it just shows that Young gets as many if not more chances than other shortstops, and handles them. So to say that he is not a good fielder seems ridiculous.
So....what does this prove, if anything? It proves nothing, except that, in credence, and using statistics to support my claim, Michael Young more than likely is just as good, if not better, than Jeter or Tejada, and for 8M less per year than Tejada, and for 17M less than Jeter.
ADAM EVERETT FOR MVP. WAR HOUSTON ASTROS WINNING THE WORLD SERIES.
I think it just shows that Young gets as many if not more chances than other shortstops, and handles them. So to say that he is not a good fielder seems ridiculous. Except, of course, you didn't bother to include the fly ball/ ground ball ratios of the staffs those people play for or whether the staffs include a lot of strikeout pitchers. Fielding measurement is still rough stuff and thus easy to argue about. But I do think it's fair to say E and FP are columns one can safely ignore.
Fielding measurement is still rough stuff and thus easy to argue about. I bow to your wisdom...
you haven't accounted for total innings played at the position then after I did you didn't bother to include the fly ball/ ground ball ratios of the staffs those people play for or whether the staffs include a lot of strikeout pitchers Now I understand. Whether someone is a good fielder is totally subjective. There is no stat that can be used in measurement. Soriano is probably the greatest second baseman that ever played the game. All those errors probably related to the pitching staff, because errors don't matter. It's all in the eye of the beholder. The problem is that so many are freaking blind.
because errors don't matter Interesting story from Bill James: when his job was to prepare presentations for players during their arbitration hearings, he was working for George Bell (the Blue Jay outfielder). He knew that the Jays were going to bring up his numerous errors while playing in left field. James countered that argument by detailing every single error that Bell made, and pointing out how it did not affect the outcome of the game at all. Some times, he made an error and the other team didn't score a run. When he made errors and the other team scored because of them, his team still won.
So.... now that everyone researched nearly every defensive stat they could find, we still have one issue remaining- is Young the best?? I must say, all these stats are starting to give me a headache. I personally think the top 3 is Jeter, then Tejeda, then Young, only because im a Yankees fan, and Jeter has won a ring. If Young makes it to the playoffs, then I would have him ranked at number 2. But until then, I would say Jeter is the best all around shortstop.
Jeter is having a career year, and has earned the title as the best, IMHO, taking his prior accomplishments into consideration. And, as someone else noted, he's a pretty good guy, too.
Jeter is having a career year, While this is a good year, 1999 still remains his career year. It's such a standout season for him that it almost looks like a "fluke". Even this season doesn't come close to the year he had in 1999. And I'm surprised people don't give Carlos Guillen more credit as among the best in the AL. He had an injury riddled 2005, but this season and his 2004 season put him in the elite class for the American League shortstop position.
Both middle infielders for the ChiSox are underappreciated, I think. You are correct in that 1999 was one heckuva season for Jeter, and his consistency is to be admired as well.
Whether someone is a good fielder is totally subjective. There is no stat that can be used in measurement Yes and no. There just aren't any stats that really say something as meaningful as OBP or ERA do. I was winding you up a bit by only asking for a little more each time, but my point was that almost any fielding stat you cited (other than ZR or RF) is easy enough to undercut with simple logic. Fielding is the one place where I think a trained eye is as useful as any stat we have now. But that eye needs to watch for a season or two.
It's such a standout season for him that it almost looks like a "fluke". Even this season doesn't come close to the year he had in 1999. Not really grum. His numbers this year are very comproable, aside from the power. His fielding- as stated above has been decent, and Jeter is an even better team leader than he was back in 99. His career year will most likely be in 1999, but he is having one hell of a year this season this year as well.
You are correct in that 1999 was one heckuva season for Jeter, and his consistency is to be admired as well. Oh, yes! Jeter is having a career year, and has earned the title as the best Oh, YES! Fielding is the one place where I think a trained eye is as useful as any stat we have now. But that eye needs to watch for a season or two. Oh, man, this thread is my total Love Panda in Pleasure Town. I am going to sleep well tonight.
Not really grum. His numbers this year are very comproable, aside from the power. And his batting eye (walks). That's the point. His power in 1999 is what made his season such a standout. This season is a good one, but it's almost a carbon-copy of his 2000 season. The difference in OPS (.097) is quite large. In fact, it's pretty much the same difference between Jeter (2006) and Young (2006). One more thing about the Young/Jeter comparison. In a recent poll of MLB players themselves, they asked the questions: 1) Who is the most underrated player in baseball? 2) Who is the most overrated player in baseball? The players receiving the most votes were: 1) Michael Young 2) Derek Jeter
