Souhan's solution to the "Mauer Problem"

[ken]

 

Do you believe there isn't even one 1B who provides positive value to his team?

According to Fangraph, they believe that, but it's fair not to believe it.  Just like it would be fair not to believe the WAR or other calculations. 

[jimmer]

 

According to Fangraph, they believe that, but it's fair not to believe it.  Just like it would be fair not to believe the WAR or other calculations. 

And, again, the powers to be at Fangraphs says the best way to evaluate defense with the stats is to use/look at both DRS and UZR.  I haven't seen even one of them (the founder of the site or Dave Cameron or anyone else) point to the Def stat and say that's the one to hang you hat on.  In fact, if you read the description of positional adjustment (half of the Def equation) it questions itself a lot.  

 

So I'll stick to looking at the ones the experts say to use, DRS and UZR, and I'll continue to ignore Def altogether, especially since it ignores the stat I find to be the best when looking at defense, DRS.  

 

As far as not believing in WAR, I guess that depends on how you use it.  I use it to put players in categories of ability.  It makes no difference to me if a guy is rated as 4.2 WAR guy when he is actually a 4.8 guy or vice versa.  He still falls into the All Star level category.  It's not meant to be gospel truth, just to get as close as possible to telling how a player contributes overall.  

 

In conclusion to my part in our debate (and getting back to what started our debate in the first place, whether or not Mauer was a bad defender and deserving of Souhan's comments), neither UZR or DRS showed that Mauer was below average on defense at 1B either last year or this year since he was never below zero on either stat and, according to the stat explanations themselves, average is zero and -5 is below average.

[ken]

 

And, again, the powers to be at Fangraphs says the best way to evaluate defense with the stats is to use/look at both DRS and UZR.  I haven't seen even one of them (the founder of the site or Dave Cameron or anyone else) point to the Def stat and say that's the one to hang you hat on.  In fact, if you read the description of positional adjustment (half of the Def equation) it questions itself a lot.  

 

So I'll stick to looking at the ones the experts say to use, DRS and UZR, and I'll continue to ignore Def altogether, especially since it ignores the stat I find to be the best when looking at defense, DRS.  

 

As far as not believing in WAR, I guess that depends on how you use it.  I use it to put players in categories of ability.  It makes no difference to me if a guy is rated as 4.2 WAR guy when he is actually a 4.8 guy or vice versa.  He still falls into the All Star level category.  It's not meant to be gospel truth, just to get as close as possible to telling how a player contributes overall.  

 

In conclusion to my part in our debate (and getting back to what started our debate in the first place, whether or not Mauer was a bad defender and deserving of Souhan's comments), neither UZR or DRS showed that Mauer was below average on defense at 1B either last year or this year since he was never below zero on either stat and, according to the stat explanations themselves, average is zero and -5 is below average.

Here the 2015 ranking at qualified 1B for Mauer:

 

DRS: 15 out of 21

UZR: 12 out of 21

 

I just don't see calling someone in the bottom third of the defensive stats as being a poor defender is very controversial.

 

 

[jimmer]

 

Here the 2015 ranking at qualified 1B for Mauer:

 

DRS: 15 out of 21

UZR: 12 out of 21

 

I just don't see calling someone in the bottom third of the defensive stats as being a poor defender is very controversial.

Because if you are going to use the stats, you need to use the explanations of the stats as to what the results conclude. Since he didn't fall below zero in either stat in either year, and the stat explanations for both stats say zero is average for the position, then I don't see how one can conclude that he's below average. The stats themselves tell you he isn't.

 

Also, you understand that qualifying players aren't the only ones that play positions, right? You're ignoring the fact that others play 1B and that their play has an effect on how the numbers are determined.  Should we ignore Sano's offensive contributions because he didn't reach 502 PAs and, therefore, isn't a qualifying hitter, or do we acknowledge he played?

 

But whatever, if you think he's a below average defender at 1B, go for it.  We're at a stand-still.

[tobi0040]

 

Because if you are going to use the stats, you need to use the explanations of the stats as to what the results conclude. Since he didn't fall below zero in either stat in either year, and the stat explanations for both stats say zero is average for the position, then I don't see how one can conclude that he's below average. The stats themselves tell you he isn't.

 

If you have 20 professional baseball players, 15 of them cannot be above average.  They are by definition the entire pool of players, the best are above average.  The middle are average. And the guys towards the end are below average.

 

This is not one class where a teacher gives everyone an A and thinks his students are better than the rest of the students in the country.   In this case you have the entire pool of students 

[Mike Sixel]

If you have 20 professional baseball players, 15 of them cannot be above average.  They are by definition the entire pool of players, the best are above average.  The middle are average. And the guys towards the end are below average.

 

This is not one class where a teacher gives everyone an A and thinks his students are better than the rest of the students in the country.   In this case you have the entire pool of students

More than 20 guys play 1B during the year, limiting your analysis to only the 20 that qualified will tend to skew your results. So, no, you do NOT have the whole pool of 1B when you only look at qualified hitters.

[jimmer]

 

More than 20 guys play 1B during the year, limiting your analysis to only the 20 that qualified will tend to skew your results. So, no, you do NOT have the whole pool of 1B when you only look at qualified hitters.

Here is something funny.  The qualifying 1Bs played around 23,000 innings on defense. There was roughly 43,000 innings played at 1B in the majors this year.  Probably a good idea Fangraphs doesn't discard almost half the defensive data for 1Bs :-)

[kab21]

If the plan is to trade Plouffe because the Twins are signing Chris Davis then sign me up.  But realistically that isn't happening.

 

If the plan is to trade Plouffe to open up a spot for Kepler then I have pause.  I don't have enough confidence in the Twins young OF'ers that there will be extras rotting in AAA at midseason.  Injuries happen and none of them have a proven track record that suggests they are guaranteed to make it through the season without a dreadfully awful spell that results in getting benched.

 

Plouffe being a FA in 2 years doesn't matter at all.  Nobody is talking about an extension either.  The Twins have now crossed into win now where they shouldn't be getting rid of good (not great) players to make the team better 5 years from now.  If a team wants Plouffe for a boatload of prospects then he is gone but all of these Plouffe threads are about a) moving Sano to 3B Plouffe will be a FA in 2 years c) opening up DH for Vargas/Kepler/Pinto/Nunez/Kubel/Tyner/Punto :go:/mythical high dollar FA.  Those aren't reasons to trade Plouffe.

[TheLeviathan]

When you isolate the reasons of course they aren't sufficient, it's the combination.  It's that we have a ready young bat at 3B, contenders for the DH spot that are young, he has value, and he's only got two years left.

 

It's those things together that make shopping him wise, picking them apart is a disingenuous framing of the issue.

[USAFChief]

When you isolate the reasons of course they aren't sufficient, it's the combination.  It's that we have a ready young bat at 3B, contenders for the DH spot that are young, he has value, and he's only got two years left.

 

It's those things together that make shopping him wise, picking them apart is a disingenuous framing of the issue.

I would disagree. Picking apart the issue is what gives reasonable pause to an outwardly obvious decision.

 

This team should be looking to contend, seriously, in 2016, and Plouffe is a very viable MLB player, something in fairly short supply. It's not a given Sano can play third base, particularly over time. There is no obvious DH candidate. Mauer could continue to regress, making Sano an obvious first base option.

 

I would probably do it, if the return makes sense for the near future including 2016, but I think the details makes it a close call. I wouldn't, for example, make deals similar to Span/Revere, which would hurt the 2016 team.

[TheLeviathan]

The details of the deal are important and the team's status as near contenders makes pausing to consider that important.

 

But the reasons to shop him and explore options are compelling when you don't pick them apart.  Again, not that you have to trade him, but those circumstances make it ideal to explore it.

[ashbury]

It's that we have a ready young bat at 3B,

Not to plagiarize Chief or anything, but do we have a ready young glove at 3B? That's my big unknown. I wish Sano hadn't injured himself in September, relegating him to DH duties only.

[tobi0040]

 

More than 20 guys play 1B during the year, limiting your analysis to only the 20 that qualified will tend to skew your results. So, no, you do NOT have the whole pool of 1B when you only look at qualified hitters.

 

I full picture would be better, although you are looking at smaller samples when you do that.  Just to note, I was using the analysis thrown out by others. My point is maybe the calculation is off when almost everyone is better than average.  

 

I would also add that i don't think that all the players not qualified by innings are going to necessarily all be worse than Joe in the rankings, as the next ten would all have to be in order for 15 to be "average" out of 30, If anything, they are likely players between 22-26 who broke with their teams later in the year. I would argue they are likely more athletic and better defensive 1B on average than Mauer.

[Mike Sixel]

I full picture would be better, although you are looking at smaller samples when you do that.  Just to note, I was using the analysis thrown out by others. My point is maybe the calculation is off when almost everyone is better than average.  

 

I would also add that i don't think that all the players not qualified by innings are going to necessarily all be worse than Joe in the rankings, as the next ten would all have to be in order for 15 to be "average" out of 30, If anything, they are likely players between 22-26 who broke with their teams later in the year. I would argue they are likely more athletic and better defensive 1B on average than Mauer.

Isn't it more likely that FG knows that nearly 40% of innings were played by other players, and their calculations take that into account, than everything you typed being true?

[tobi0040]

 

Isn't it more likely that FG knows that nearly 40% of innings were played by other players, and their calculations take that into account, than everything you typed being true?

I think we are picking nits here.  My broader point is that if a guy is in the 25th percentile, he can't be above average.  

 

Let's say we took all the innings by every player and Mauer was in the 25th percentile, yet had positive numbers.....is it fair under that scenario to suggest maybe a glitch in the calculation or what it means?

 

 

[Mike Sixel]

I think we are picking nits here.  My broader point is that if a guy is in the 25th percentile, he can't be above average.  

 

Let's say we took all the innings by every player and Mauer was in the 25th percentile, yet had positive numbers.....is it fair under that scenario to suggest maybe a glitch in the calculation or what it means?

Actually, yes, a guy in the 25th percentile can be average. You may want to re-study your mathematical definitions.

[tobi0040]

 

Actually, yes, a guy in the 25th percentile can be average. You may want to re-study your mathematical definitions.

 

We can play with numbers all we want.  But if 22 of the 30 1B are better than he is, on a curve he is average to below average.  He certainly is not above average relative to his peers.

 

Theoretically the 8 worse players can be much worse than him and skew a formula.  But at the end of the day 22 teams are fielding a better player.  If that trend happened at every position on both sides of the ball we would be the 22nd best team in the league.  Nothing to brag about and I would have a tough time saying our team is above average.

[Mike Sixel]

We can play with numbers all we want.  But if 22 of the 30 1B are better than he is, on a curve he is average to below average.  He certainly is not above average relative to his peers.

Who is playing with numbers?....you literally don't know what average means vs median or mode, that is my point.

 

And, there are not only 30 people that played 1B......you might want to just give up on using numbers at all in this argument, because it isn't working for you at all.

[tobi0040]

 

Who is playing with numbers?....you literally don't know what average means vs median or mode, that is my point.

And, there are not only 30 people that played 1B......you might want to just give up on using numbers at all in this argument, because it isn't working for you at all.

 

Are you aware that people use the term average in different contexts?  In conversation we tend to conflate median and average.  

 

For the record I have an economics degree and an MBA in finance, both with close to a 4.00.  During which I received an A in four different statistics classes. As well as a financial modeling, treasury, and energy market experience for a fortune 500 company. I am very comfortable with these terms.

 

In my real world example, yes he could be "above average" relative to the 1B position for all 30 teams, which would have been inflated by a few very poor fielding 1B on the lowest teams.  But in reality, if we had the 22nd best player at each position we would be the 22nd best team.  This is nothing to brag about.

[Mike Sixel]

Who is bragging? And, apologies, I thought earlier someone in the thread discussed the difference between average and median and you kept going with it, my bad. The issue I think you are having is that more like 40-50 players played 1B last year, and being 22nd or whatever, puts you about "average", which is what the math says.

 

I am no Mauer "can do no wrong" guy, I'm certainly not bragging.

 

And, I don't think anyone is arguing we should be happy with the 22nd best player at every position. But I could be reading it wrong.

[tobi0040]

 

Who is bragging? And, apologies, I thought earlier someone in the thread discussed the difference between average and median and you kept going with it, my bad. The issue I think you are having is that more like 40-50 players played 1B last year, and being 22nd or whatever, puts you about "average", which is what the math says.

I am no Mauer "can do no wrong" guy, I'm certainly not bragging.

And, I don't think anyone is arguing we should be happy with the 22nd best player at every position. But I could be reading it wrong.

 

I was not bragging, you insinuated I did not know the difference between median, mode, and average and I responded to that.

 

I was going off him being 15th of 21 qualified and then assuming regardless of how many there are, he is likely in roughly the same range when they are all factored in. Not that he is 15th, there are 40, so he is 15th of 40.   It seems we weren't following each others arguments and that is fine.  No hard feelings at all.  We have had more things we have agreed to in the last 2-3 years than not and I look forward to the discussions in the future. 

 

 

[stringer bell]

Hold the phone a minute (and that's all I have). Wasn't Mauer something like 16th in one rating and 22nd in the other? The second part of this is the spread in the ratings. If Mauer is 22nd in a rating, but only .0001 from being 14th, perhaps he is average, and allowing for innings played by non-qualifiers, he could actually be above average. I would expect that however they were rated, the differences would be small at first base, since much of being a first baseman is catching chest-high throws, which pretty much any professional athlete can do. 

[tobi0040]

 

Hold the phone a minute (and that's all I have). Wasn't Mauer something like 16th in one rating and 22nd in the other? The second part of this is the spread in the ratings. If Mauer is 22nd in a rating, but only .0001 from being 14th, perhaps he is average, and allowing for innings played by non-qualifiers, he could actually be above average. I would expect that however they were rated, the differences would be small at first base, since much of being a first baseman is catching chest-high throws, which pretty much any professional athlete can do. 

 

DRS 15 of 21.  

 

UZR 12 of 21.

 

It is possible that he could be average and remotely possible that he is above average. But unlikely, even if you expand the pool.  

 

If it is a metric like WAR where he is being compared to AA players, Maybe.  But that just doesn't make a ton of sense as we were discussing his defensive chops relative to other MLB 1B.

 

 

 

 

[stringer bell]

 

DRS 15 of 21.  

 

UZR 12 of 21.

 

It is possible that he could be average and remotely possible that he is above average. But unlikely, even if you expand the pool.  

 

If it is a metric like WAR where he is being compared to AA players, Maybe.  But that just doesn't make a ton of sense as we were discussing his defensive chops relative to other MLB 1B.

Thanks for providing the information.

[ken]

 

More than 20 guys play 1B during the year, limiting your analysis to only the 20 that qualified will tend to skew your results. So, no, you do NOT have the whole pool of 1B when you only look at qualified hitters.

According to fangraphs, here's Mauer's ranking among players over 500 innings:

 

DRS                           UZR                     DEF

21 of 31                  18 of 31               23 of 31

 

I seen a lot of discussion about how horrible Hunter is in the field and here's his rank of RF over 500 inning:

 

DRS                         UZR                        DEF

24 of 30                 12 of 30                  15 of 30

 

The DEF stat according to Fangraph is one of the building blocks of WAR.  Like WAR, DEF is useful when looking at grouping of players that play different positions.  Hunter's over DEF is -5.0 and Mauer's is -9.5.  If we are going to talk about Hunter being poor defensively, we can't be offended if someone calls Mauer a poor defensive 1B.

[Mike Sixel]

I'm not defending Mauer at all......I was discussing if you could be average and still be 20th or whatever.

 

I find, from the tiny SS I have, that I think Mauer is not all that good, frankly. But none of my posts on that this topic have been about what I think, but about the numbers.

 

Personally? I don't have much confidence he'll ever be an average 1B, either defensively or offensively, and view their inability to manage his career appropriately as a huge barrier to their long term success.