|
|
Post by easyheat on Apr 17, 2023 8:55:39 GMT -8
Streaking Beavers make D1's "Deans List" for second consecutive week and jump back in the fray with BA.
PAC-12 teams in D1 poll.
Stanford is #9
ASU is #19
OSU is #21
UCLA is #22
oregon is #23
PAC-12 Teams in Baseball America poll
Stanford is #11
ASU is #18
OSU is #19
oregon is #20
UCLA not ranked
|
|
|
|
Post by flyfishinbeav on Apr 17, 2023 9:51:01 GMT -8
Leading pac 12 in ERA and fielding percentage.....hell yea!
|
|
|
|
Post by irimi on Apr 17, 2023 14:53:07 GMT -8
Leading pac 12 in ERA and fielding percentage.....hell yea! That's a bit surprising to me. We've had some uncharacteristic errors. And a few more than usual. |
|
|
|
Post by nuclearbeaver on Apr 17, 2023 15:10:44 GMT -8
Leading pac 12 in ERA and fielding percentage.....hell yea! That's a bit surprising to me. We've had some uncharacteristic errors. And a few more than usual. Might have to think about whats usual. Even with sloppy play our error rate is pretty low compared to the last 20 years. |
|
|
|
Post by chinmusic on Apr 17, 2023 21:46:41 GMT -8
It's generally accepted that measuring defense is the most difficult problem in baseball.
Don't put too much stock in fielding %. It's a deeply flawed statistic. Bill James called it the most worthless stat in baseball (even worse than "saves"). It doesn't provide any useful information.
Fielding % is calculated based on a player's errors and they are highly subjective. The variables include field conditions, lighting, official scorer, routine vs difficult play, etc.
The greatest problem with the stat is the omission of plays not made - it only considers balls actually handled, not balls that might or could have been handled by a superior fielder.
Fielding % doesn't address the range or depth factors that a allow a superior fielder to play balls an average fielder would never touch.
In Analytics, the big boys measure fielding using a model called "zone rating" where all balls coming into a fielders pre-determined area are recorded and what portion were turned into outs. A hypothetical: At OSU, the model might be the outer perimeter (Zone) of where Cadyn Grenier (.960 FP) made plays on a ball. Say Grenier was able to turn 15 balls into outs that Beau Philip (.965 FP) could never reach, Grenier is the superb fielder.
Another stat used in measuring fielder performance is: putouts + assists x 9 divided by Innings played = Range Factor
UZR or Ultimate Zone Rating. Also, dSR or Defensive runs saved are commonly seen in BB Analytics.
|
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Apr 17, 2023 22:02:17 GMT -8
It's generally accepted that measuring defense is the most difficult problem in baseball. Don't put too much stock in fielding %. It's a deeply flawed statistic. Bill James called it the most worthless stat in baseball (even worse than "saves"). It doesn't provide any useful information. Fielding % is calculated based on a player's errors and they are highly subjective. The variables include field conditions, lighting, official scorer, routine vs difficult play, etc. The greatest problem with the stat is the omission of plays not made - it only considers balls actually handled, not balls that might or could have been handled by a superior fielder. Fielding % doesn't address the range or depth factors that a allow a superior fielder to play balls an average fielder would never touch. In Analytics, the big boys measure fielding using a model called "zone rating" where all balls coming into a fielders pre-determined area are recorded and what portion were turned into outs. A hypothetical: At OSU, the model might be the outer perimeter (Zone) of where Cadyn Grenier (.960 FP) made plays on a ball. Say Grenier was able to turn 15 balls into outs that Beau Philip (.965 FP) could never reach, Grenier is the superb fielder. Another stat used in measuring fielder performance is: putouts + assists x 9 divided by Innings played = Range Factor UZR or Ultimate Zone Rating. Also, dSR or Defensive runs saved are commonly seen in BB Analytics. Great stuff! Saves are worse IMHO. |
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Apr 17, 2023 22:44:51 GMT -8
Oregon State's record is .982 set in both 2021 and 2022 (although Oregon State's fielding percentage was .9824 in 2021 and .9820 in 2022). Oregon State had a better fielding percentage in 2018, as well. But Oregon State's .979 fielding percentage would be the fourth-best fielding of all time. I agree with chinmusic and his ultimate point in his post. But fielding percentage is at least moderately helpful to trying to compare defenses across time. To my eyes, that 2019 defense was awful and was a huge part of the problem and one of the reasons that I advocated getting rid of Bailes. But the defenses the past five years have otherwise been generally great, and I have no reason to believe that they are not the greatest of all time. |
|
|
|
Post by chinmusic on Apr 17, 2023 23:45:53 GMT -8
The baseball pundits have mentioned it frequently, Oregon State is built to win close games with pitching and defense.
We have an identity.
|
|
|
|
Post by irimi on Apr 18, 2023 6:57:39 GMT -8
The baseball pundits have mentioned it frequently, Oregon State is built to win close games with pitching and defense. We have an identity. This is what I see this team becoming. Teams that score loads struggle against our pitching and defense. And those teams aren’t built to survive low scoring games. sure would like to see a few more blowout wins, though. I’m getting old. |
|
|
|
Post by obf on Apr 18, 2023 14:25:53 GMT -8
It's generally accepted that measuring defense is the most difficult problem in baseball. Don't put too much stock in fielding %. It's a deeply flawed statistic. Bill James called it the most worthless stat in baseball (even worse than "saves"). It doesn't provide any useful information. Fielding % is calculated based on a player's errors and they are highly subjective. The variables include field conditions, lighting, official scorer, routine vs difficult play, etc. The greatest problem with the stat is the omission of plays not made - it only considers balls actually handled, not balls that might or could have been handled by a superior fielder. Fielding % doesn't address the range or depth factors that a allow a superior fielder to play balls an average fielder would never touch. In Analytics, the big boys measure fielding using a model called "zone rating" where all balls coming into a fielders pre-determined area are recorded and what portion were turned into outs. A hypothetical: At OSU, the model might be the outer perimeter (Zone) of where Cadyn Grenier (.960 FP) made plays on a ball. Say Grenier was able to turn 15 balls into outs that Beau Philip (.965 FP) could never reach, Grenier is the superb fielder. Another stat used in measuring fielder performance is: putouts + assists x 9 divided by Innings played = Range Factor UZR or Ultimate Zone Rating. Also, dSR or Defensive runs saved are commonly seen in BB Analytics. Derek Jeter is the prime example of this. Jeter was able to take a good fielding % (career .976, which is top 50 all time), and a penchant for making routine plays look phenomenal (and playing in NY) and turn that into a sterling defensive reputation including 5 gold gloves. While in actuality he was never once even a top 10 SS defensively in the AL let alone being the best. For his career he has a UZR/150 of -6.2. Which puts him solidly in the "Poor" category. He had many seasons below awful. | Defensive Ability | UZR | | Gold Glove Caliber | +15 | | Great | +10 | | Above Average | +5 | | Average | 0 | | Below Average | -5 | | Poor | -10 | Awful
| -15 |
|
|
|
|
Post by kersting13 on Apr 18, 2023 15:24:38 GMT -8
It's generally accepted that measuring defense is the most difficult problem in baseball. Don't put too much stock in fielding %. It's a deeply flawed statistic. Bill James called it the most worthless stat in baseball (even worse than "saves"). It doesn't provide any useful information. Fielding % is calculated based on a player's errors and they are highly subjective. The variables include field conditions, lighting, official scorer, routine vs difficult play, etc. The greatest problem with the stat is the omission of plays not made - it only considers balls actually handled, not balls that might or could have been handled by a superior fielder. Fielding % doesn't address the range or depth factors that a allow a superior fielder to play balls an average fielder would never touch. In Analytics, the big boys measure fielding using a model called "zone rating" where all balls coming into a fielders pre-determined area are recorded and what portion were turned into outs. A hypothetical: At OSU, the model might be the outer perimeter (Zone) of where Cadyn Grenier (.960 FP) made plays on a ball. Say Grenier was able to turn 15 balls into outs that Beau Philip (.965 FP) could never reach, Grenier is the superb fielder. Another stat used in measuring fielder performance is: putouts + assists x 9 divided by Innings played = Range Factor UZR or Ultimate Zone Rating. Also, dSR or Defensive runs saved are commonly seen in BB Analytics. And, even all of those "new analytics" defensive statistics are still quite questionable in sample sizes as big as a full season. Don't most analysts think that you really have to look at those defensive metrics over a long period of time to truly get a sense of a guy's value? As I recall, some of those defensive stats can vary wildly from year to year for some players. Who was our favorite OF a few years ago? Dude used to make phenomenal catches, but sometimes, it was an after-effect of taking less-than-optimal routes to the ball. If only we could distill everything into a simple number.  |
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on Apr 18, 2023 15:58:12 GMT -8
It's generally accepted that measuring defense is the most difficult problem in baseball. Don't put too much stock in fielding %. It's a deeply flawed statistic. Bill James called it the most worthless stat in baseball (even worse than "saves"). It doesn't provide any useful information. Fielding % is calculated based on a player's errors and they are highly subjective. The variables include field conditions, lighting, official scorer, routine vs difficult play, etc. The greatest problem with the stat is the omission of plays not made - it only considers balls actually handled, not balls that might or could have been handled by a superior fielder. Fielding % doesn't address the range or depth factors that a allow a superior fielder to play balls an average fielder would never touch. In Analytics, the big boys measure fielding using a model called "zone rating" where all balls coming into a fielders pre-determined area are recorded and what portion were turned into outs. A hypothetical: At OSU, the model might be the outer perimeter (Zone) of where Cadyn Grenier (.960 FP) made plays on a ball. Say Grenier was able to turn 15 balls into outs that Beau Philip (.965 FP) could never reach, Grenier is the superb fielder. Another stat used in measuring fielder performance is: putouts + assists x 9 divided by Innings played = Range Factor UZR or Ultimate Zone Rating. Also, dSR or Defensive runs saved are commonly seen in BB Analytics. And, even all of those "new analytics" defensive statistics are still quite questionable in sample sizes as big as a full season. Don't most analysts think that you really have to look at those defensive metrics over a long period of time to truly get a sense of a guy's value? As I recall, some of those defensive stats can vary wildly from year to year for some players. Who was our favorite OF a few years ago? Dude used to make phenomenal catches, but sometimes, it was an after-effect of taking less-than-optimal routes to the ball. If only we could distill everything into a simple number. Max Gordon..... |
|
|
|
Post by ag87 on Apr 18, 2023 16:46:38 GMT -8
The guy from Ashland. Ball is hit over his head. He takes two steps in, realizes he got a horrible initial read, sprints like crazy 80-feet away from home plate and makes the circus catch. Good times.
|
|
|
|
Post by chinmusic on Apr 19, 2023 18:34:20 GMT -8
Maybe an example of "fielding %" would be what we saw in the USC series. As it happened, Ruben Cedillo caught a routine fly ball by moving about 5 steps to his left, then came in a few paces to catch another routine fly ball to CF.
Dallas Macias was in an all out sprint to take a shot off the left field wall and then followed that with the "Superman" catch with a sprint and climb of the wall near the foul line.
The fielding % for both players? 1.000
|
|
|
|
Post by nuclearbeaver on Apr 19, 2023 18:43:29 GMT -8
Maybe an example of "fielding %" would be what we saw in the USC series. As it happened, Ruben Cedillo caught a routine fly ball by moving about 5 steps to his left, then came in a few paces to catch another routine fly ball to CF. Dallas Macias was in an all out sprint to take a shot off the left field wall and then followed that with the "Superman" catch with a sprint and climb of the wall near the foul line. The fielding % for both players? 1.000 Need to start an, "Oh damnnnn!!!!" Percentage |
|
