Defense at shortstop

[Doctor Gast]

Most of the teams that don't have a decent defensive SS don't advance to or do well in the PS (That's my observation). In 2019 and 2020 even with the shift many grounders bled through the Twins infield. Keeping Polanco away from SS is the key to Polanco's health and productivity. Moving Polanco back to SS and Arraez to 2B not only will produce the worst MLB mid field duo but Polanco will go to pot again.

[TheLeviathan]

I think prioritizing defense at shortstop makes sense.  However, they have to be able to hit their way out of a paper bag if you're going to pay them, say, 10M a year.

[USAFChief]

1 hour ago, TheLeviathan said:

I think prioritizing defense at shortstop makes sense.  However, they have to be able to hit their way out of a paper bag if you're going to pay them, say, 10M a year.

Concur, except to me how much they pay the guy isn't the point. 

I want guys who help you win...and that generally means they contribute on both ends, offensively AND defensively. 

Simmons, last year, wouldn't have been a bargain at $10, much less $10mil. 

[bean5302]

Since we're so bullish on moving shortstops to center field, maybe we should move Buxton to shortstop? Keep him from running into walls and all that?

[RpR]

10 hours ago, DJL44 said:

 

I disagree with the comment about catcher defense. With strikeouts and walks at all-time highs catcher framing has never been more important. Catchers are being selected for their ability to control the running game just like they have been for decades but now they are also selected for how well they frame.

Framing is more talk that reality; an artificial stat. created a little over ten years ago but some league announcers have said,  it is viewed by some  pitchers as an annoyance like the catcher coming to the mound.

Now do not quote me on this but one former top pitcher , supposedly  , would tell the catcher if he came to the mound some thing on the order of -- I throw it, you catch it, get back there and do that.

If there were a way to track it, I would like to know how many balls Jeffers passed led to a score or moved a player that scored and would not have had Jeffers not let the ball get by.

 

[bean5302]

1 hour ago, RpR said:

Framing is more talk that reality; an artificial stat. created a little over ten years ago but some league announcers have said,  it is viewed by some  pitchers as an annoyance like the catcher coming to the mound.

Now do not quote me on this but one former top pitcher , supposedly  , would tell the catcher if he came to the mound some thing on the order of -- I throw it, you catch it, get back there and do that.

If there were a way to track it, I would like to know how many balls Jeffers passed led to a score or moved a player that scored and would not have had Jeffers not let the ball get by.

 

Jeffers had a grand total of 6 passed balls last year. You can see how they stack up vs. all catchers in MLB with 300+ innings last year. In terms of innings caught between passed balls, Jeffers (111.7) and Garver (112.8) were slightly below median average (121.2). Both Jeffers (27.9) and Garver (28.2) were slightly above median average (26.0) in terms of innings caught between wild pitches. Overall, the combination puts them both slightly above average, ranked 24th and 22nd out of 60, respectively. So if there were metrics for the balls that got away from Twins catchers, they would likely be positive overall. 

Catcher	Team	Innings	Passed Balls	Inn/PB	Rank	Wild Pitches	Inn/WP	Rank	Inn/Combo	Rank
Buster Posey	SFG	892	2	446.0	6	18	49.6	2	44.6	1
Manny Pina	MIL	452.1	3	150.7	23	8	56.5	1	41.1	2
Yan Gomes	- - -	771.1	3	257.0	12	18	42.8	3	36.7	3
Cam Gallagher	KCR	308.2	1	308.2	10	8	38.5	5	34.2	4
Danny Jansen	TOR	481.1	0	Inf	3	15	32.1	12	32.1	5
J.T. Realmuto	PHI	973	6	162.2	21	25	38.9	4	31.4	6
Austin Hedges	CLE	743.2	2	371.6	8	24	31.0	13	28.6	7
Roberto Perez	CLE	364	3	121.3	30	10	36.4	7	28.0	8
Travis d'Arnaud	ATL	470.2	3	156.7	22	14	33.6	11	27.7	9
Sandy Leon	MIA	437.1	4	109.3	38	12	36.4	8	27.3	10
Sean Murphy	OAK	923.1	1	923.1	5	34	27.2	24	26.4	11
Jacob Stallings	PIT	892	0	Inf	1	35	25.5	29	25.5	12
Carson Kelly	ARI	706.2	8	88.3	49	20	35.3	9	25.2	13
Max Stassi	LAA	703	8	87.9	50	20	35.2	10	25.1	14
Tucker Barnhart	CIN	846	3	282.0	11	31	27.3	23	24.9	15
Reese McGuire	TOR	523	4	130.8	28	17	30.8	14	24.9	16
Victor Caratini	SDP	787.1	6	131.2	27	26	30.3	15	24.6	17
Cal Raleigh	SEA	333	5	66.6	58	9	37.0	6	23.8	18
Michael Perez	PIT	488.1	2	244.1	13	19	25.7	28	23.2	19
Austin Wynns	BAL	342.1	0	Inf	2	15	22.8	34	22.8	20
Will Smith	LAD	1004.2	9	111.6	36	35	28.7	18	22.8	21
Mitch Garver	MIN	451.2	4	112.8	33	16	28.2	19	22.6	22
Willson Contreras	CHC	935.2	3	311.7	9	39	24.0	32	22.3	23
Ryan Jeffers	MIN	670.2	6	111.7	35	24	27.9	20	22.3	24
Austin Barnes	LAD	442.1	3	147.4	24	17	26.0	25	22.1	25
Christian Vazquez	BOS	1051.1	10	105.1	40	38	27.7	21	21.9	26
Stephen Vogt	- - -	496	5	99.2	45	18	27.6	22	21.6	27
Kyle Higashioka	NYY	519.1	6	86.5	51	18	28.8	17	21.6	28
Tomas Nido	NYM	365.2	2	182.6	15	15	24.3	30	21.5	29
Tom Murphy	SEA	727.2	6	121.2	31	28	26.0	26	21.4	30
Daulton Varsho	ARI	319	4	79.8	55	11	29.0	16	21.3	31
Francisco Mejia	TBR	582.2	4	145.6	25	24	24.3	31	20.8	32
James McCann	NYM	826.1	8	103.3	43	32	25.8	27	20.7	33
Yadier Molina	STL	1001.1	6	166.9	20	44	22.8	35	20.0	34
Jose Trevino	TEX	713	4	178.3	16	33	21.6	39	19.3	35
Alex Jackson	- - -	324.2	3	108.1	39	14	23.2	33	19.1	36
Curt Casali	SFG	509.1	4	127.3	29	23	22.1	36	18.9	37
Andrew Knizner	STL	406.2	1	406.2	7	21	19.3	47	18.5	38
Martin Maldonado	HOU	1010.2	7	144.3	26	48	21.0	40	18.4	39
Jonah Heim	TEX	641	3	213.7	14	33	19.4	45	17.8	40
Mike Zunino	TBR	860.1	10	86.0	52	39	22.1	37	17.6	41
Dom Nunez	COL	622	6	103.7	41	30	20.7	43	17.3	42
Austin Nola	SDP	399	4	99.8	44	19	21.0	41	17.3	43
Elias Diaz	COL	775	8	96.9	46	37	20.9	42	17.2	44
Eric Haase	DET	543.1	7	77.6	57	25	21.7	38	17.0	45
Alejandro Kirk	TOR	338	2	169.0	18	18	18.8	50	16.9	46
Omar Narvaez	MIL	886.1	5	177.2	17	49	18.1	51	16.4	47
Yasmani Grandal	CHW	627.1	7	89.6	47	32	19.6	44	16.1	48
Andrew Knapp	PHI	330.2	4	82.6	54	17	19.4	46	15.7	49
Tyler Stephenson	CIN	588.1	7	84.0	53	31	19.0	48	15.5	50
Jason Castro	HOU	355.1	3	118.4	32	20	17.8	53	15.4	51
Jake Rogers	DET	310.2	3	103.4	42	18	17.2	55	14.8	52
Kurt Suzuki	LAA	557	7	79.6	56	31	18.0	52	14.7	53
Salvador Perez	KCR	1002.2	1	1002.2	4	69	14.5	57	14.3	54
William Contreras	ATL	415.2	7	59.3	59	24	17.3	54	13.4	55
Gary Sanchez	NYY	879.1	8	109.9	37	60	14.7	56	12.9	56
Zack Collins	CHW	506.1	3	168.7	19	37	13.7	59	12.7	57
Kevin Plawecki	BOS	336.2	3	112.1	34	24	14.0	58	12.5	58
Jorge Alfaro	MIA	476	13	36.6	60	25	19.0	49	12.5	59
Pedro Severino	BAL	883	10	88.3	48	66	13.4	60	11.6	60

Framing is not some whimsical made up concept. MLB teams have paid millions of dollars to coach their catchers on how to frame better, and the concept has been around for many decades, but the PitchF/X system allowed real data on how framing was working in 2008. More solid data = more attention by front offices in the post-Moneyball era.

"References to pitch-framing date back to at least the 1950s, and probably before. An organizational instruction manual prepared by the Brewers in 1982 advised catchers to catch possible strikes with “a minimum of body movement” and “very smooth hand action,” noting that “good framing technique will usually get you more marginal pitches.” And in his 1989 book The Diamond Appraised, trailblazing sabermetrician Craig R. Wright wrote that “the mark of the master is the illusion whereby balls become called strikes,” arguing that “learning to catch the ball so it looks like a strike may do more toward preventing runs than throwing out the extra base runner once a week that is the difference between the best- and worst-throwing catchers.”

 https://www.theringer.com/mlb/2018/9/21/17885820/pitch-framing-strike-zone-jorge-alfaro-tyler-flowers

 

[wsnydes]

8 hours ago, bean5302 said:

Since we're so bullish on moving shortstops to center field, maybe we should move Buxton to shortstop? Keep him from running into walls and all that?

But then you've got more players in a closer proximity to each other!  Plus base runners.  Less reaction time on the ball!  The infield is a dangerous place!

[Brock Beauchamp]

6 hours ago, bean5302 said:

"References to pitch-framing date back to at least the 1950s, and probably before. An organizational instruction manual prepared by the Brewers in 1982 advised catchers to catch possible strikes with “a minimum of body movement” and “very smooth hand action,” noting that “good framing technique will usually get you more marginal pitches.” And in his 1989 book The Diamond Appraised, trailblazing sabermetrician Craig R. Wright wrote that “the mark of the master is the illusion whereby balls become called strikes,” arguing that “learning to catch the ball so it looks like a strike may do more toward preventing runs than throwing out the extra base runner once a week that is the difference between the best- and worst-throwing catchers.”

 https://www.theringer.com/mlb/2018/9/21/17885820/pitch-framing-strike-zone-jorge-alfaro-tyler-flowers

The first time I heard of the concept of pitch framing - though the exact phrase wasn't used - was by noted "sabermetrician" Tim McCarver.

And guess what? Actual sabermetricians of the era laughed off the concept as old school nonsense (this was maybe 2001-2003 or so).

So not only is it laughably wrong to say pitch framing isn't real and not only didn't it originate from sabermetrics, but sabermetrics didn't even buy into it right away.

[Paul]

I begrudgingly agree with your point that the crowding of fielders lessons the value of the better fielders. But I’m longing for the sure to come day when hard bunts into the opposite field correct this abominable aberration we call “the shift”. 
And maybe we should be prepared for it.

[joefish]

Try signing elite pitchers with the enticement of an infield defense that isn't a priority. 

It's tough enough to bring in elite pitchers. 

[Mark G]

1 hour ago, joefish said:

Try signing elite pitchers with the enticement of an infield defense that isn't a priority. 

It's tough enough to bring in elite pitchers. 

With all due respect, I am somewhat at a loss to understand this thought process.  Donaldson, Simmons, and Polanco make a pretty decent, no, more than pretty decent infield defense.  Sano was the weak link, and if we were to put Kirilloff there it would be even better.  All I hear is people wanting to send Simmons packing, trade Donaldson to get rid of his contract, and replace that contract with a top tier SS that is just as expensive as Donaldson.  How that helps an infield defense that was already pretty damn good (without Sano) is somewhat hard for me to wrap my brain around.  If everyone is correct about the payroll being flexible, which I am not convinced of but that is another post, then we can afford Donaldson's contract, we can afford Simmons light bat, and we can move Kirilloff to first and Sano to DH/relief corner infield and come out with a pretty good infield.  The outfield?  Again, another story, but in the infield we already had the bird in the hand; why do we want to try for the two in the bush? (And, again, this is defense)

[Mark G]

11 hours ago, bean5302 said:

Jeffers had a grand total of 6 passed balls last year. You can see how they stack up vs. all catchers in MLB with 300+ innings last year. In terms of innings caught between passed balls, Jeffers (111.7) and Garver (112.8) were slightly below median average (121.2). Both Jeffers (27.9) and Garver (28.2) were slightly above median average (26.0) in terms of innings caught between wild pitches. Overall, the combination puts them both slightly above average, ranked 24th and 22nd out of 60, respectively. So if there were metrics for the balls that got away from Twins catchers, they would likely be positive overall. 

Catcher	Team	Innings	Passed Balls	Inn/PB	Rank	Wild Pitches	Inn/WP	Rank	Inn/Combo	Rank
Buster Posey	SFG	892	2	446.0	6	18	49.6	2	44.6	1
Manny Pina	MIL	452.1	3	150.7	23	8	56.5	1	41.1	2
Yan Gomes	- - -	771.1	3	257.0	12	18	42.8	3	36.7	3
Cam Gallagher	KCR	308.2	1	308.2	10	8	38.5	5	34.2	4
Danny Jansen	TOR	481.1	0	Inf	3	15	32.1	12	32.1	5
J.T. Realmuto	PHI	973	6	162.2	21	25	38.9	4	31.4	6
Austin Hedges	CLE	743.2	2	371.6	8	24	31.0	13	28.6	7
Roberto Perez	CLE	364	3	121.3	30	10	36.4	7	28.0	8
Travis d'Arnaud	ATL	470.2	3	156.7	22	14	33.6	11	27.7	9
Sandy Leon	MIA	437.1	4	109.3	38	12	36.4	8	27.3	10
Sean Murphy	OAK	923.1	1	923.1	5	34	27.2	24	26.4	11
Jacob Stallings	PIT	892	0	Inf	1	35	25.5	29	25.5	12
Carson Kelly	ARI	706.2	8	88.3	49	20	35.3	9	25.2	13
Max Stassi	LAA	703	8	87.9	50	20	35.2	10	25.1	14
Tucker Barnhart	CIN	846	3	282.0	11	31	27.3	23	24.9	15
Reese McGuire	TOR	523	4	130.8	28	17	30.8	14	24.9	16
Victor Caratini	SDP	787.1	6	131.2	27	26	30.3	15	24.6	17
Cal Raleigh	SEA	333	5	66.6	58	9	37.0	6	23.8	18
Michael Perez	PIT	488.1	2	244.1	13	19	25.7	28	23.2	19
Austin Wynns	BAL	342.1	0	Inf	2	15	22.8	34	22.8	20
Will Smith	LAD	1004.2	9	111.6	36	35	28.7	18	22.8	21
Mitch Garver	MIN	451.2	4	112.8	33	16	28.2	19	22.6	22
Willson Contreras	CHC	935.2	3	311.7	9	39	24.0	32	22.3	23
Ryan Jeffers	MIN	670.2	6	111.7	35	24	27.9	20	22.3	24
Austin Barnes	LAD	442.1	3	147.4	24	17	26.0	25	22.1	25
Christian Vazquez	BOS	1051.1	10	105.1	40	38	27.7	21	21.9	26
Stephen Vogt	- - -	496	5	99.2	45	18	27.6	22	21.6	27
Kyle Higashioka	NYY	519.1	6	86.5	51	18	28.8	17	21.6	28
Tomas Nido	NYM	365.2	2	182.6	15	15	24.3	30	21.5	29
Tom Murphy	SEA	727.2	6	121.2	31	28	26.0	26	21.4	30
Daulton Varsho	ARI	319	4	79.8	55	11	29.0	16	21.3	31
Francisco Mejia	TBR	582.2	4	145.6	25	24	24.3	31	20.8	32
James McCann	NYM	826.1	8	103.3	43	32	25.8	27	20.7	33
Yadier Molina	STL	1001.1	6	166.9	20	44	22.8	35	20.0	34
Jose Trevino	TEX	713	4	178.3	16	33	21.6	39	19.3	35
Alex Jackson	- - -	324.2	3	108.1	39	14	23.2	33	19.1	36
Curt Casali	SFG	509.1	4	127.3	29	23	22.1	36	18.9	37
Andrew Knizner	STL	406.2	1	406.2	7	21	19.3	47	18.5	38
Martin Maldonado	HOU	1010.2	7	144.3	26	48	21.0	40	18.4	39
Jonah Heim	TEX	641	3	213.7	14	33	19.4	45	17.8	40
Mike Zunino	TBR	860.1	10	86.0	52	39	22.1	37	17.6	41
Dom Nunez	COL	622	6	103.7	41	30	20.7	43	17.3	42
Austin Nola	SDP	399	4	99.8	44	19	21.0	41	17.3	43
Elias Diaz	COL	775	8	96.9	46	37	20.9	42	17.2	44
Eric Haase	DET	543.1	7	77.6	57	25	21.7	38	17.0	45
Alejandro Kirk	TOR	338	2	169.0	18	18	18.8	50	16.9	46
Omar Narvaez	MIL	886.1	5	177.2	17	49	18.1	51	16.4	47
Yasmani Grandal	CHW	627.1	7	89.6	47	32	19.6	44	16.1	48
Andrew Knapp	PHI	330.2	4	82.6	54	17	19.4	46	15.7	49
Tyler Stephenson	CIN	588.1	7	84.0	53	31	19.0	48	15.5	50
Jason Castro	HOU	355.1	3	118.4	32	20	17.8	53	15.4	51
Jake Rogers	DET	310.2	3	103.4	42	18	17.2	55	14.8	52
Kurt Suzuki	LAA	557	7	79.6	56	31	18.0	52	14.7	53
Salvador Perez	KCR	1002.2	1	1002.2	4	69	14.5	57	14.3	54
William Contreras	ATL	415.2	7	59.3	59	24	17.3	54	13.4	55
Gary Sanchez	NYY	879.1	8	109.9	37	60	14.7	56	12.9	56
Zack Collins	CHW	506.1	3	168.7	19	37	13.7	59	12.7	57
Kevin Plawecki	BOS	336.2	3	112.1	34	24	14.0	58	12.5	58
Jorge Alfaro	MIA	476	13	36.6	60	25	19.0	49	12.5	59
Pedro Severino	BAL	883	10	88.3	48	66	13.4	60	11.6	60

Framing is not some whimsical made up concept. MLB teams have paid millions of dollars to coach their catchers on how to frame better, and the concept has been around for many decades, but the PitchF/X system allowed real data on how framing was working in 2008. More solid data = more attention by front offices in the post-Moneyball era.

"References to pitch-framing date back to at least the 1950s, and probably before. An organizational instruction manual prepared by the Brewers in 1982 advised catchers to catch possible strikes with “a minimum of body movement” and “very smooth hand action,” noting that “good framing technique will usually get you more marginal pitches.” And in his 1989 book The Diamond Appraised, trailblazing sabermetrician Craig R. Wright wrote that “the mark of the master is the illusion whereby balls become called strikes,” arguing that “learning to catch the ball so it looks like a strike may do more toward preventing runs than throwing out the extra base runner once a week that is the difference between the best- and worst-throwing catchers.”

 https://www.theringer.com/mlb/2018/9/21/17885820/pitch-framing-strike-zone-jorge-alfaro-tyler-flowers

 

While every word of this is true, what happens when the leagues decide to use the technology that exists to call balls and strikes?  You can't frame a pitch for the radar like you can for the human eye, and you go back to the days when a good arm to throw out runners, etc., is more important than trying to steal pitches from borderline umpires.  Not that I am pining for those days to come; I still hope the NL keeps the pitchers hitting (I know, I know, don't holler at me).  The great part of the game is the human element, at least to a point, so I am not calling for it, but if the current pace continues it is only a matter of time, and the framing issue will be moot.  Just a thought.  

[Brock Beauchamp]

1 hour ago, Mark G said:

While every word of this is true, what happens when the leagues decide to use the technology that exists to call balls and strikes?  You can't frame a pitch for the radar like you can for the human eye, and you go back to the days when a good arm to throw out runners, etc., is more important than trying to steal pitches from borderline umpires.  Not that I am pining for those days to come; I still hope the NL keeps the pitchers hitting (I know, I know, don't holler at me).  The great part of the game is the human element, at least to a point, so I am not calling for it, but if the current pace continues it is only a matter of time, and the framing issue will be moot.  Just a thought.  

The catcher position will completely change when - not if - robot umpires are implemented in MLB. It will go from soft-handed framers to catch and throw guys because framing will be irrelevant.

Personally, I think that's a good thing. Framing's primary goal is to prevent umpire mistakes so let's just remove mistake-prone umpires and remove the necessity of framing pitches.

(not that umpires are bad at their jobs, it's incredibly difficult, but a machine will be more consistent and accurate than a human)

[Doctor Gast]

4 hours ago, joefish said:

Try signing elite pitchers with the enticement of an infield defense that isn't a priority. 

It's tough enough to bring in elite pitchers. 

Very good point. It makes a lot sense. Good luck trying to change most FOs mindset.

[Doctor Gast]

36 minutes ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

The catcher position will completely change when - not if - robot umpires are implemented in MLB. It will go from soft-handed framers to catch and throw guys because framing will be irrelevant.

Personally, I think that's a good thing. Framing's primary goal is to prevent umpire mistakes so let's just remove mistake-prone umpires and remove the necessity of framing pitches.

(not that umpires are bad at their jobs, it's incredibly difficult, but a machine will be more consistent and accurate than a human)

Umps are people, they make mistakes and are prone to prejudices and pressures to not call a fair game. For me they can't bring in robo umps fast enough. Standardize the ball & strikes so both pitchers and hitters know exactly what they are dealing with.

[Twodogs]

1 hour ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

The catcher position will completely change when - not if - robot umpires are implemented in MLB. It will go from soft-handed framers to catch and throw guys because framing will be irrelevant.

Personally, I think that's a good thing. Framing's primary goal is to prevent umpire mistakes so let's just remove mistake-prone umpires and remove the necessity of framing pitches.

(not that umpires are bad at their jobs, it's incredibly difficult, but a machine will be more consistent and accurate than a human)

I just thought of this as I was reading your response, so my response has nothing to do with yours, it's just that it's what caused me to think about it.  

 

I wonder if ground ball pitchers etc ... will become more valuable with robot umps, because theoretically with robot umps some of the best pitchers won't get questionable strike calls which in turn will probably allow the hitters to lay off of balls with spin which usually drop out of the strike zone anyway.  I wonder how much robot umps can really change the game??

[Brock Beauchamp]

1 hour ago, Twodogs said:

I wonder if ground ball pitchers etc ... will become more valuable with robot umps, because theoretically with robot umps some of the best pitchers won't get questionable strike calls which in turn will probably allow the hitters to lay off of balls with spin which usually drop out of the strike zone anyway.  I wonder how much robot umps can really change the game??

I've read quite a few pieces on how robot umps will change the game and the consensus seems to be "a lot", though how it will change differs quite a bit on opinion and how MLB implements the automated zone (for example, we've discovered that umps don't really call the rulebook strikezone but robot umps would, which creates a lot more vertical strikes).

[h2oface]

3 hours ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

The catcher position will completely change when - not if - robot umpires are implemented in MLB. It will go from soft-handed framers to catch and throw guys because framing will be irrelevant.

Personally, I think that's a good thing. Framing's primary goal is to prevent umpire mistakes so let's just remove mistake-prone umpires and remove the necessity of framing pitches.

(not that umpires are bad at their jobs, it's incredibly difficult, but a machine will be more consistent and accurate than a human)

Exactly. But I would say that Framing's primary goal is to cheat and fool the umpire, not to prevent mistakes..... but to create more mistakes. The best framer doesn't move their glove at all on the close pitches, even if they are outside. Jeffers always jerks his glove in, even if you doesn't need to. Plus, I saw a bunch of Wild Pitches scored against his battery mates that should have been caught. That doesn't show up in the stat line. Umpires are just guessing with a horrible angle, and many even miss the call when they are looking right at it over the inside shoulder and it is on the inside to the zone area. Then they are so arrogant about the calls they missed. Such a show, and not a show about baseball, and talent, but control and power. Framing is all about making something it isn't, and we are way overdue to change that.

It is hard and unreliable to rate any infielder defensively anymore, because half the time they aren't even close to playing their position anyway. I would have scored Simmons with at least twice as many errors than he was given by the charity working official scorers, who give out hits like candy.

If this team has to build an infield to accommodate inferior pitchers like Dobnak, we are really in trouble.

[Richie the Rally Goat]

2 hours ago, Twodogs said:

I just thought of this as I was reading your response, so my response has nothing to do with yours, it's just that it's what caused me to think about it.  

 

I wonder if ground ball pitchers etc ... will become more valuable with robot umps, because theoretically with robot umps some of the best pitchers won't get questionable strike calls which in turn will probably allow the hitters to lay off of balls with spin which usually drop out of the strike zone anyway.  I wonder how much robot umps can really change the game??

I think you are on to something here. I’m not sure, but if it did make sinkerballers more valuable, SS fielding would as well. Pace of play too

[Brock Beauchamp]

40 minutes ago, h2oface said:

Exactly. But I would say that Framing's primary goal is to cheat and fool the umpire, not to prevent mistakes..... but to create more mistakes. The best framer doesn't move their glove at all on the close pitches, even if they are outside. Jeffers always jerks his glove in, even if you doesn't need to. Plus, I saw a bunch of Wild Pitches scored against his battery mates that should have been caught. That doesn't show up in the stat line. Umpires are just guessing with a horrible angle, and many even miss the call when they are looking right at it over the inside shoulder and it is on the inside to the zone area. Then they are so arrogant about the calls they missed. Such a show, and not a show about baseball, and talent, but control and power. Framing is all about making something it isn't, and we are way overdue to change that.

Framing's goal isn't to cheat, it's to get as many strikes called as possible. I haven't seen data in a few years but last I saw, the byproduct of framing was getting more actual strikes than stealing balls with slick glove work.

But at the end of the day, it doesn't really matter whether framing is built to keep strikes or steal balls. The reason it exists is because human umpiring is flawed so catchers have had to completely alter their defensive game to compensate for human deficiency in umpiring.

And that's stupid. No position on the field should re-dedicate its approach to counter human error if we can EASILY remove human error and improve the overall process.

[RpR]

23 hours ago, bean5302 said:

Jeffers had a grand total of 6 passed balls last year. You can see how they stack up vs. all catchers in MLB with 300+ innings last year. In terms of innings caught between passed balls, Jeffers (111.7) and Garver (112.8) were slightly below median average (121.2). Both Jeffers (27.9) and Garver (28.2) were slightly above median average (26.0) in terms of innings caught between wild pitches. Overall, the combination puts them both slightly above average, ranked 24th and 22nd out of 60, respectively. So if there were metrics for the balls that got away from Twins catchers, they would likely be positive overall. 

Catcher	Team	Innings	Passed Balls	Inn/PB	Rank	Wild Pitches	Inn/WP	Rank	Inn/Combo	Rank
Buster Posey	SFG	892	2	446.0	6	18	49.6	2	44.6	1
Manny Pina	MIL	452.1	3	150.7	23	8	56.5	1	41.1	2
Yan Gomes	- - -	771.1	3	257.0	12	18	42.8	3	36.7	3
Cam Gallagher	KCR	308.2	1	308.2	10	8	38.5	5	34.2	4
Danny Jansen	TOR	481.1	0	Inf	3	15	32.1	12	32.1	5
J.T. Realmuto	PHI	973	6	162.2	21	25	38.9	4	31.4	6
Austin Hedges	CLE	743.2	2	371.6	8	24	31.0	13	28.6	7
Roberto Perez	CLE	364	3	121.3	30	10	36.4	7	28.0	8
Travis d'Arnaud	ATL	470.2	3	156.7	22	14	33.6	11	27.7	9
Sandy Leon	MIA	437.1	4	109.3	38	12	36.4	8	27.3	10
Sean Murphy	OAK	923.1	1	923.1	5	34	27.2	24	26.4	11
Jacob Stallings	PIT	892	0	Inf	1	35	25.5	29	25.5	12
Carson Kelly	ARI	706.2	8	88.3	49	20	35.3	9	25.2	13
Max Stassi	LAA	703	8	87.9	50	20	35.2	10	25.1	14
Tucker Barnhart	CIN	846	3	282.0	11	31	27.3	23	24.9	15
Reese McGuire	TOR	523	4	130.8	28	17	30.8	14	24.9	16
Victor Caratini	SDP	787.1	6	131.2	27	26	30.3	15	24.6	17
Cal Raleigh	SEA	333	5	66.6	58	9	37.0	6	23.8	18
Michael Perez	PIT	488.1	2	244.1	13	19	25.7	28	23.2	19
Austin Wynns	BAL	342.1	0	Inf	2	15	22.8	34	22.8	20
Will Smith	LAD	1004.2	9	111.6	36	35	28.7	18	22.8	21
Mitch Garver	MIN	451.2	4	112.8	33	16	28.2	19	22.6	22
Willson Contreras	CHC	935.2	3	311.7	9	39	24.0	32	22.3	23
Ryan Jeffers	MIN	670.2	6	111.7	35	24	27.9	20	22.3	24
Austin Barnes	LAD	442.1	3	147.4	24	17	26.0	25	22.1	25
Christian Vazquez	BOS	1051.1	10	105.1	40	38	27.7	21	21.9	26
Stephen Vogt	- - -	496	5	99.2	45	18	27.6	22	21.6	27
Kyle Higashioka	NYY	519.1	6	86.5	51	18	28.8	17	21.6	28
Tomas Nido	NYM	365.2	2	182.6	15	15	24.3	30	21.5	29
Tom Murphy	SEA	727.2	6	121.2	31	28	26.0	26	21.4	30
Daulton Varsho	ARI	319	4	79.8	55	11	29.0	16	21.3	31
Francisco Mejia	TBR	582.2	4	145.6	25	24	24.3	31	20.8	32
James McCann	NYM	826.1	8	103.3	43	32	25.8	27	20.7	33
Yadier Molina	STL	1001.1	6	166.9	20	44	22.8	35	20.0	34
Jose Trevino	TEX	713	4	178.3	16	33	21.6	39	19.3	35
Alex Jackson	- - -	324.2	3	108.1	39	14	23.2	33	19.1	36
Curt Casali	SFG	509.1	4	127.3	29	23	22.1	36	18.9	37
Andrew Knizner	STL	406.2	1	406.2	7	21	19.3	47	18.5	38
Martin Maldonado	HOU	1010.2	7	144.3	26	48	21.0	40	18.4	39
Jonah Heim	TEX	641	3	213.7	14	33	19.4	45	17.8	40
Mike Zunino	TBR	860.1	10	86.0	52	39	22.1	37	17.6	41
Dom Nunez	COL	622	6	103.7	41	30	20.7	43	17.3	42
Austin Nola	SDP	399	4	99.8	44	19	21.0	41	17.3	43
Elias Diaz	COL	775	8	96.9	46	37	20.9	42	17.2	44
Eric Haase	DET	543.1	7	77.6	57	25	21.7	38	17.0	45
Alejandro Kirk	TOR	338	2	169.0	18	18	18.8	50	16.9	46
Omar Narvaez	MIL	886.1	5	177.2	17	49	18.1	51	16.4	47
Yasmani Grandal	CHW	627.1	7	89.6	47	32	19.6	44	16.1	48
Andrew Knapp	PHI	330.2	4	82.6	54	17	19.4	46	15.7	49
Tyler Stephenson	CIN	588.1	7	84.0	53	31	19.0	48	15.5	50
Jason Castro	HOU	355.1	3	118.4	32	20	17.8	53	15.4	51
Jake Rogers	DET	310.2	3	103.4	42	18	17.2	55	14.8	52
Kurt Suzuki	LAA	557	7	79.6	56	31	18.0	52	14.7	53
Salvador Perez	KCR	1002.2	1	1002.2	4	69	14.5	57	14.3	54
William Contreras	ATL	415.2	7	59.3	59	24	17.3	54	13.4	55
Gary Sanchez	NYY	879.1	8	109.9	37	60	14.7	56	12.9	56
Zack Collins	CHW	506.1	3	168.7	19	37	13.7	59	12.7	57
Kevin Plawecki	BOS	336.2	3	112.1	34	24	14.0	58	12.5	58
Jorge Alfaro	MIA	476	13	36.6	60	25	19.0	49	12.5	59
Pedro Severino	BAL	883	10	88.3	48	66	13.4	60	11.6	60

Framing is not some whimsical made up concept. MLB teams have paid millions of dollars to coach their catchers on how to frame better, and the concept has been around for many decades, but the PitchF/X system allowed real data on how framing was working in 2008. More solid data = more attention by front offices in the post-Moneyball era.

"References to pitch-framing date back to at least the 1950s, and probably before. An organizational instruction manual prepared by the Brewers in 1982 advised catchers to catch possible strikes with “a minimum of body movement” and “very smooth hand action,” noting that “good framing technique will usually get you more marginal pitches.” And in his 1989 book The Diamond Appraised, trailblazing sabermetrician Craig R. Wright wrote that “the mark of the master is the illusion whereby balls become called strikes,” arguing that “learning to catch the ball so it looks like a strike may do more toward preventing runs than throwing out the extra base runner once a week that is the difference between the best- and worst-throwing catchers.”

 https://www.theringer.com/mlb/2018/9/21/17885820/pitch-framing-strike-zone-jorge-alfaro-tyler-flowers

 

Those are only pitches that were considered an error on the part of the catcher; I saw a lot of balls that got by Jeffers , but were called wild pitches that should have been blamed on the catcher as his lateral movement to his right was greatly restricted by his leg sticking out, while I watched MANY  opposing catchers stop balls that were far closer to a true wild pitch but they could move either direction unrestricted by they squat rather than sitting on their arse.

[bean5302]

38 minutes ago, RpR said:

Those are only pitches that were considered an error on the part of the catcher; I saw a lot of balls that got by Jeffers , but were called wild pitches that should have been blamed on the catcher as his lateral movement to his right was greatly restricted by his leg sticking out, while I watched MANY  opposing catchers stop balls that were far closer to a true wild pitch but they could move either direction unrestricted by they squat rather than sitting on their arse.

The rank above includes both wild pitches and passed balls.

[bean5302]

Umpires may make mistakes, but they're probably better at calling balls and strikes based on what the human players think they see than robots. What looks like a strike to a pitcher and a hitter might actually be a ball, though consistency will be higher. I think consistency is the best reason for the switch.

I agree catchers will just change their stances and strategies to focus on pop-up speed and throwing if robot called balls/strikes are implemented.

[stringer bell]

Back to the original topic, if shortstops are getting less chances as a result of shifts, are second basemen and third basemen getting a higher percentage of chances?

I know that fewer balls are put in play and that fewer of the balls in play are put on the ground, but if the percentage skews toward the other infielders, it would put more importance on their range and arm, correct?

My thought is that third basemen are now stationed at the traditional SS position at least 25% of the time. Having a Sanó or (going back further) Cubbage or Killebrew lined up there would be a train wreck IMHO, making the presence of having a fielder with arm strength and range at third more important. Similarly, second basemen playing on the left side become more important and a bigger arm adds value with the longer throw when shifted for right handed pull hitters and being located in short right for left handed pull hitters. 
 

In summary, shifts and less balls in play should change the relative importance of all fielders. The changes in value wouldn’t be equivalent at every position and the wise front office would be the one that improves the team’s defense at a position that relatively becomes more important. 

[jorgenswest]

Using Fangraphs it appears to be a similar change at 2B in ten years. There are many fewer opportunities and the range in team UZR is much more compressed today. Does that suggest that the impact of defense at 2B has less value today? I don’t know but hope someone on the Twins knows.

The change at 3B isn’t as dramatic and the range of team UZR at 3B in 2021 was greater than SS or 2B in 2021. Maybe relatively defense at 3B is more important than in 2011 due to shifting as stringer bell suggested. The Twins were last in team UZR at 3B last year. For those with 500 or more innings Donaldson was on the bottom for UZR/150. It wasn’t close. Is it time for Donaldson to become an expensive DH?

Similar to 3B, the outfield change in ten years isn’t as dramatic and the range between the best team UZR in the outfield is much greater than the middle infield. I wonder if the trend of trying to lift balls has made corner OF play more important relative to middle field than it was 10 years ago. I am not suggesting it is more important but I wonder if that gap is closing.

The context of a ball in play has changed. There are fewer balls in play, an emphasis on lifting the ball and more shifts. How should that factor in the Twins decision about SS for next year? How does that factor in decision about whether Martin or Lewis can play SS in the major leagues?

[DJL44]

1 hour ago, jorgenswest said:

..the range of team UZR at 3B in 2021 was greater than SS or 2B in 2021. Maybe relatively defense at 3B is more important than in 2011 due to shifting as stringer bell suggested. The Twins were last in team UZR at 3B last year. For those with 500 or more innings Donaldson was on the bottom for UZR/150. It wasn’t close. Is it time for Donaldson to become an expensive DH?

This is definitely due to the shift. 3B is getting more difficult and 2B less difficult. Donaldson has the athletic ability to be a decent first baseman.

[stringer bell]

2 hours ago, DJL44 said:

This is definitely due to the shift. 3B is getting more difficult and 2B less difficult. Donaldson has the athletic ability to be a decent first baseman.

I think second base has become more difficult as well. The throw from short right, the pivot (with a throw from short or third) and a longer throw from behind and to the left of second are all more difficult plays to make than traditional second base plays. The number of chances may have diminished, but the difficulty would be greater. 

[Twodogs]

5 hours ago, stringer bell said:

Back to the original topic, if shortstops are getting less chances as a result of shifts, are second basemen and third basemen getting a higher percentage of chances?

I know that fewer balls are put in play and that fewer of the balls in play are put on the ground, but if the percentage skews toward the other infielders, it would put more importance on their range and arm, correct?

My thought is that third basemen are now stationed at the traditional SS position at least 25% of the time. Having a Sanó or (going back further) Cubbage or Killebrew lined up there would be a train wreck IMHO, making the presence of having a fielder with arm strength and range at third more important. Similarly, second basemen playing on the left side become more important and a bigger arm adds value with the longer throw when shifted for right handed pull hitters and being located in short right for left handed pull hitters. 
 

In summary, shifts and less balls in play should change the relative importance of all fielders. The changes in value wouldn’t be equivalent at every position and the wise front office would be the one that improves the team’s defense at a position that relatively becomes more important. 

I'm not sure of the percentage, but I think a lot of the times the 3rd baseman doesn't necessarily take the shortstops position, often times if a lefty is up for instance, the 3rd baseman will go to the other side of the diamond and the SS stays put.  Not saying this happens all of the time, but I know it happens sometimes for sure.  But yeah, then the 3rd baseman will still be put in a spot where he will more likely get a ball hit to him.

[jorgenswest]

3 hours ago, stringer bell said:

I think second base has become more difficult as well. The throw from short right, the pivot (with a throw from short or third) and a longer throw from behind and to the left of second are all more difficult plays to make than traditional second base plays. The number of chances may have diminished, but the difficulty would be greater. 

Intuitively that makes sense. I wonder how we would see it in the data. If 2B play is more difficult it seems like the separation between the players should be greater now. Would we see it in the standard deviation of team UZR? Team DRS? Something else?

I am very interested in how the changes in the context of the game may have changed the defensive spectrum and the relative defensive value around the diamond. I wonder how it might be measured with the available data. 

[stringer bell]

4 hours ago, Twodogs said:

I'm not sure of the percentage, but I think a lot of the times the 3rd baseman doesn't necessarily take the shortstops position, often times if a lefty is up for instance, the 3rd baseman will go to the other side of the diamond and the SS stays put.  Not saying this happens all of the time, but I know it happens sometimes for sure.  But yeah, then the 3rd baseman will still be put in a spot where he will more likely get a ball hit to him.

Only one or two teams that the Twins played moved their 3B (Milwaukee is one), but it kind of makes sense given the skill sets of certain third basemen. 
The Twins moved Sanó to the right side of the diamond in 2018 or 2019, but haven’t done so with anyone else since.