Marlins with a Golden Infield?

[lou]

Even assuming that 5% number, 5% of 1,000 chances is 50 chances which is a very large number of plays which aren't judged the same.

Even if it's 1%, 10 extra errors because player X is so good and gets a glove on it it looks like an error when no one else in baseball even tries for the play, is not a very good metric for judging defense.

[Party]

I'm not saying you use it as a primary metric to measure defense. But it is helpful given proper context.

[Mainge]

I'm not saying you use it as a primary metric to measure defense. But it is helpful given proper context.

I kind of agree with this.

[Bobbob1313]

The biggest issue with errors is that there's no standard for what "should have" been caught. It's entirely up to the discretion of the official scorer. It's not based on what purrs have done or any other relative scale, it's just based on that guy's feeling.
--------------------
Also, even if you want to put some amount of stock in them, they're utterly useless for telling you how good a player is, only how bad he may be.

They really can't tell you much of value.

[nny]

Gaby is horrific defensively. He stands as a reminder that an error can only be charged if you get a glove on it.

I don't know why you stay on this vendetta because he was bad defensively back at UM when that was over 5 years ago.
--------------------

I'm not saying you use it as a primary metric to measure defense. But it is helpful given proper context.

Very true. Only using errors = dumb. Completely ignoring errors also = dumb. If two players have similar range, arm strength, et al but one is prone to errors, than he will be worse than the other player.

Hell, UZR has an error component in it; If you're using UZR, you're using errors.

[Namaste]

I think most can agree that Gaby is neither horrific nor gold glove calibre

[nny]

And it's why Gaby has such a high UZR.

Runs via DP: 0, so dead average
Runs via range: 0.9, 9th out of 23 qualifed player.
Runs via errors (In his case, prevention): 2.6, ranked 1st
Total UZR: 4.2, 7th in majors.

He's defensive numbers are going to "crash" back down to average when he starts to commit errors again since I doubt that's a sustainable rate for him based off track record, though it certainly may be perry hill magic.

If you use UZR to say Gaby is a good fielder, you are saying Gaby is a good fielder because of error prevention.

[Bobbob1313]

The ability to not make mistakes while fielding is an important one. Statistics that take this skill into account to give a complete view of a defensive player are generally ones that are doing the right thing.

The statistic known as errors is not an especially useful one, given how it is recorded and what it does not record. It gives a wholly incomplete view of a player's skill, and it's up to a single person's arbitrary decision making. Given what else we have, there's really no reason to bring them up anymore, unless you're having a discussion on who is the best at not making errors, which is a wholly different discussion than who is good at defense.

[Party]

We should not use any statistics because a scorer's arbitrary decision making affects the results. We should not use any statistics because the umpire's arbitrary decision making affects all results. Hell, the strike zone is entirely arbitrary.

The current system for determining hits and errors is sufficient. It is one person, but not really. Broadcasters, players, managers, etc can lobby the scorer to change their call (this works in many cases). The scorer has replay. Teams can appeal scoring decisions with the league.

I'd argue the system for checking scorers and tools available for them to make their decisions is vastly superior to what umpires have and thus more reliable.

There are a ton of stats that are extremely useful but give an incomplete view of a player's skill. That is why context is important.
--------------------

Very true. Only using errors = dumb. Completely ignoring errors also = dumb. If two players have similar range, arm strength, et al but one is prone to errors, than he will be worse than the other player.

Hell, UZR has an error component in it; If you're using UZR, you're using errors.

Bingo.

[Erick]

And it's why Gaby has such a high UZR.

Runs via DP: 0, so dead average
Runs via range: 0.9, 9th out of 23 qualifed player.
Runs via errors (In his case, prevention): 2.6, ranked 1st
Total UZR: 4.2, 7th in majors.

He's defensive numbers are going to "crash" back down to average when he starts to commit errors again since I doubt that's a sustainable rate for him based off track record, though it certainly may be perry hill magic.

If you use UZR to say Gaby is a good fielder, you are saying Gaby is a good fielder because of error prevention.

Wow, I just noticed that these splits are on fangraphs too.

[Marlins1]

you tell them Ramp this is the same Gaby Sanchez that was never going to be an ALL Star ,and he did it only in his 2nd year.Now it's Gaby Sanchez the ALL STAR.

[Party]

ALL STAR post.

[HUGG]

yeah, you tell them Ramp

[Ramp]

I will tell the world everything

[Swifty]

Alex Gonzalez, ALL STAR
--------------------
Ryan Dempster, ALL STAR