Julio Lugo trade talk

[cheapseats]

Fielding percentage and range factor are generally considered poor measures of defense.

 

Over his career, Lugo has been slightly above average defensively according to Clay Davenport's Rate Metric.

 

His best season was 2003, in which he had a rate of 110 and was well above average.

 

Note that Neifi's career rate is 109. Neifi is a very good defensive shortstop. Unfortunately, Neifi can't hit. I'd love to have Neifi as a late-innings replacement for Walker, but our manager won't use him that way.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Lugo also rates as one of the best defensive SS in the game in Baseball Musings' Probabilistic Model of Range.

[Balsa]

I guess defense is a lot harder than offense to commit to numbers? More something you have to watch and get a feel for?

 

I'd never heard of either of those things before...how do they break down? What stats do they use?

[goonys evil twin]

I guess defense is a lot harder than offense to commit to numbers? More something you have to watch and get a feel for?

 

Maybe, but that is often where people let impressions take over reality. People who watch Jeter everyday claim he's one of the greatest with the glove. But nearly every other source puts him in the middle of the pack at best, and quite often in the bottom half. I'd like to see somebody break down video from every ball put in play. Take all the plays that went between the 2B and 3B, time every ball from the time it leaves the bat to the time it hits the OF grass (or is fielded), measure the distance from where the SS was. There has to be a way to translate that into seeing who really were the better fielders and which guys that may look flashy actually don't get to as many balls as they should. That'd take a lot of time though, and I'm not sure if it would work.

[SonnyD]

There has to be a way to translate that into seeing who really were the better fielders and which guys that may look flashy actually don't get to as many balls as they should. That'd take a lot of time though, and I'm not sure if it would work.

 

There is such a site, or service, that actually tracks defensive players based on all of those factors. I heard him on the Score 670 in my car last week as he rated middle infielders, and I believe he was going to be on this week as well. I tried to remember the website address but I forgot. Anyone know or heard the segment as well?? It was on around noon last Tuesday I believe.

 

Pretty interesting and neat stuff. I remeber them saying that Juan Uribe was their highest rated SS, and Adrian Beltre for 3rd base.

 

I definitely would like to know what the name of that service is, and their website address if anyone has it......

[UK1679666180]

http://www.baseballmusings.com/cgi-bin/ChooseChartPlayer.py

[NYF]

There has to be a way to translate that into seeing who really were the better fielders and which guys that may look flashy actually don't get to as many balls as they should. That'd take a lot of time though, and I'm not sure if it would work.

 

There is such a site, or service, that actually tracks defensive players based on all of those factors. I heard him on the Score 670 in my car last week as he rated middle infielders, and I believe he was going to be on this week as well. I tried to remember the website address but I forgot. Anyone know or heard the segment as well?? It was on around noon last Tuesday I believe.

 

Pretty interesting and neat stuff. I remeber them saying that Juan Uribe was their highest rated SS, and Adrian Beltre for 3rd base.

 

I definitely would like to know what the name of that service is, and their website address if anyone has it......

 

 

John Dewan is on with Murph every Thursday around noon, i believe...

 

http://www.baseballinfosolutions.com/ourteam.html

[treebird]

I guess defense is a lot harder than offense to commit to numbers? More something you have to watch and get a feel for?

 

Maybe, but that is often where people let impressions take over reality. People who watch Jeter everyday claim he's one of the greatest with the glove. But nearly every other source puts him in the middle of the pack at best, and quite often in the bottom half. I'd like to see somebody break down video from every ball put in play. Take all the plays that went between the 2B and 3B, time every ball from the time it leaves the bat to the time it hits the OF grass (or is fielded), measure the distance from where the SS was. There has to be a way to translate that into seeing who really were the better fielders and which guys that may look flashy actually don't get to as many balls as they should. That'd take a lot of time though, and I'm not sure if it would work.

 

this isnt really fair though. the shortstop might be able to see what pitch the pitcher is going to throw, or have a good handle on the batter's scouting report and adjust accordingly. i think bill james wrote about this is one of his old abstracts. i think he referred to it as "invisible range."

[Transmogrified Tiger]

I guess defense is a lot harder than offense to commit to numbers? More something you have to watch and get a feel for?

 

Maybe, but that is often where people let impressions take over reality. People who watch Jeter everyday claim he's one of the greatest with the glove. But nearly every other source puts him in the middle of the pack at best, and quite often in the bottom half. I'd like to see somebody break down video from every ball put in play. Take all the plays that went between the 2B and 3B, time every ball from the time it leaves the bat to the time it hits the OF grass (or is fielded), measure the distance from where the SS was. There has to be a way to translate that into seeing who really were the better fielders and which guys that may look flashy actually don't get to as many balls as they should. That'd take a lot of time though, and I'm not sure if it would work.

 

this isnt really fair though. the shortstop might be able to see what pitch the pitcher is going to throw, or have a good handle on the batter's scouting report and adjust accordingly. i think bill james wrote about this is one of his old abstracts. i think he referred to it as "invisible range."

 

Don't all shortstops have the opportunity to do that though?

[Balsa]

http://www.baseballmusings.com/cgi-bin/ChooseChartPlayer.py

 

Yeah I'm having a lot of trouble figuring out most of that means, in addition to being completely confused by the blog's DER stuff. I looked for an explanation but couldn't find one.

[EastonBlues22]

Just say no the mediocre wife abuser please.

 

And before you tell me he was exonerated, think what one might be willing to do if their soon-to-be-millionare husband threatened to dump them if they didn't retract the charges.

So let me get this straight. You think she retracted the charges because of money? Why didn't she just settle a lawsuit and save herself the trouble of being with some guy who's abusing her? There's a lot of ways she could have cashed in on that situation without actually staying in the relationship.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Just say no the mediocre wife abuser please.

 

And before you tell me he was exonerated, think what one might be willing to do if their soon-to-be-millionare husband threatened to dump them if they didn't retract the charges.

So let me get this straight. You think she retracted the charges because of money? Why didn't she just settle a lawsuit and save herself the trouble of being with some guy who's abusing her? There's a lot of ways she could have cashed in on that situation without actually staying in the relationship.

 

IIRC, a victim severely exaggerating or even making up claims is pretty commonplace as well.

[EastonBlues22]

Just say no the mediocre wife abuser please.

 

And before you tell me he was exonerated, think what one might be willing to do if their soon-to-be-millionare husband threatened to dump them if they didn't retract the charges.

So let me get this straight. You think she retracted the charges because of money? Why didn't she just settle a lawsuit and save herself the trouble of being with some guy who's abusing her? There's a lot of ways she could have cashed in on that situation without actually staying in the relationship.

 

IIRC, a victim severely exaggerating or even making up claims is pretty commonplace as well.

This is true...but then definitively calling him a "wife abuser" would be somewhere between an embellishment and slander, wouldn't it?

[treebird]

I guess defense is a lot harder than offense to commit to numbers? More something you have to watch and get a feel for?

 

Maybe, but that is often where people let impressions take over reality. People who watch Jeter everyday claim he's one of the greatest with the glove. But nearly every other source puts him in the middle of the pack at best, and quite often in the bottom half. I'd like to see somebody break down video from every ball put in play. Take all the plays that went between the 2B and 3B, time every ball from the time it leaves the bat to the time it hits the OF grass (or is fielded), measure the distance from where the SS was. There has to be a way to translate that into seeing who really were the better fielders and which guys that may look flashy actually don't get to as many balls as they should. That'd take a lot of time though, and I'm not sure if it would work.

 

this isnt really fair though. the shortstop might be able to see what pitch the pitcher is going to throw, or have a good handle on the batter's scouting report and adjust accordingly. i think bill james wrote about this is one of his old abstracts. i think he referred to it as "invisible range."

 

Don't all shortstops have the opportunity to do that though?

 

yeah, but i think it's safe to assume that some shortstops are better at it than others. therefore, measuring only how far the player had to go to get the ball would overrate a player with great visible range but poor invisible range, and underrate a player with great invisible range but poor visible range

[CuseCubFan69]

I guess defense is a lot harder than offense to commit to numbers? More something you have to watch and get a feel for?

 

Maybe, but that is often where people let impressions take over reality. People who watch Jeter everyday claim he's one of the greatest with the glove. But nearly every other source puts him in the middle of the pack at best, and quite often in the bottom half. I'd like to see somebody break down video from every ball put in play. Take all the plays that went between the 2B and 3B, time every ball from the time it leaves the bat to the time it hits the OF grass (or is fielded), measure the distance from where the SS was. There has to be a way to translate that into seeing who really were the better fielders and which guys that may look flashy actually don't get to as many balls as they should. That'd take a lot of time though, and I'm not sure if it would work.

 

this isnt really fair though. the shortstop might be able to see what pitch the pitcher is going to throw, or have a good handle on the batter's scouting report and adjust accordingly. i think bill james wrote about this is one of his old abstracts. i think he referred to it as "invisible range."

 

Don't all shortstops have the opportunity to do that though?

 

yeah, but i think it's safe to assume that some shortstops are better at it than others. therefore, measuring only how far the player had to go to get the ball would overrate a player with great visible range but poor invisible range, and underrate a player with great invisible range but poor visible range

 

I agree and since we know that Perez likes to peek at the catchers signs when he hits I'd assume he is pretty good at it when he's playing SS. Ripken was suppose to be very good at postioning himself by seeing the sign and knowing the batter.

Edited February 1, 2006 by CuseCubFan69

[Transmogrified Tiger]

I guess defense is a lot harder than offense to commit to numbers? More something you have to watch and get a feel for?

 

Maybe, but that is often where people let impressions take over reality. People who watch Jeter everyday claim he's one of the greatest with the glove. But nearly every other source puts him in the middle of the pack at best, and quite often in the bottom half. I'd like to see somebody break down video from every ball put in play. Take all the plays that went between the 2B and 3B, time every ball from the time it leaves the bat to the time it hits the OF grass (or is fielded), measure the distance from where the SS was. There has to be a way to translate that into seeing who really were the better fielders and which guys that may look flashy actually don't get to as many balls as they should. That'd take a lot of time though, and I'm not sure if it would work.

 

this isnt really fair though. the shortstop might be able to see what pitch the pitcher is going to throw, or have a good handle on the batter's scouting report and adjust accordingly. i think bill james wrote about this is one of his old abstracts. i think he referred to it as "invisible range."

 

Don't all shortstops have the opportunity to do that though?

 

yeah, but i think it's safe to assume that some shortstops are better at it than others. therefore, measuring only how far the player had to go to get the ball would overrate a player with great visible range but poor invisible range, and underrate a player with great invisible range but poor visible range

 

I don't understand how that's bad though. Shouldn't the person with the superior positioning be rewarded?

[treebird]

I guess defense is a lot harder than offense to commit to numbers? More something you have to watch and get a feel for?

 

Maybe, but that is often where people let impressions take over reality. People who watch Jeter everyday claim he's one of the greatest with the glove. But nearly every other source puts him in the middle of the pack at best, and quite often in the bottom half. I'd like to see somebody break down video from every ball put in play. Take all the plays that went between the 2B and 3B, time every ball from the time it leaves the bat to the time it hits the OF grass (or is fielded), measure the distance from where the SS was. There has to be a way to translate that into seeing who really were the better fielders and which guys that may look flashy actually don't get to as many balls as they should. That'd take a lot of time though, and I'm not sure if it would work.

 

this isnt really fair though. the shortstop might be able to see what pitch the pitcher is going to throw, or have a good handle on the batter's scouting report and adjust accordingly. i think bill james wrote about this is one of his old abstracts. i think he referred to it as "invisible range."

 

Don't all shortstops have the opportunity to do that though?

 

yeah, but i think it's safe to assume that some shortstops are better at it than others. therefore, measuring only how far the player had to go to get the ball would overrate a player with great visible range but poor invisible range, and underrate a player with great invisible range but poor visible range

 

I don't understand how that's bad though. Shouldn't the person with the superior positioning be rewarded?

 

either im wording this wrong or you're misunderstanding me. i am saying that the person with superior positioning should be rewarded. read it again, and if you still get the same thing, we'll just agree that im too dumb to explain this but that we share the same point of view.

[goonys evil twin]

I guess defense is a lot harder than offense to commit to numbers? More something you have to watch and get a feel for?

 

Maybe, but that is often where people let impressions take over reality. People who watch Jeter everyday claim he's one of the greatest with the glove. But nearly every other source puts him in the middle of the pack at best, and quite often in the bottom half. I'd like to see somebody break down video from every ball put in play. Take all the plays that went between the 2B and 3B, time every ball from the time it leaves the bat to the time it hits the OF grass (or is fielded), measure the distance from where the SS was. There has to be a way to translate that into seeing who really were the better fielders and which guys that may look flashy actually don't get to as many balls as they should. That'd take a lot of time though, and I'm not sure if it would work.

 

this isnt really fair though. the shortstop might be able to see what pitch the pitcher is going to throw, or have a good handle on the batter's scouting report and adjust accordingly. i think bill james wrote about this is one of his old abstracts. i think he referred to it as "invisible range."

 

Don't all shortstops have the opportunity to do that though?

 

yeah, but i think it's safe to assume that some shortstops are better at it than others. therefore, measuring only how far the player had to go to get the ball would overrate a player with great visible range but poor invisible range, and underrate a player with great invisible range but poor visible range

 

I don't understand how that's bad though. Shouldn't the person with the superior positioning be rewarded?

 

either im wording this wrong or you're misunderstanding me. i am saying that the person with superior positioning should be rewarded. read it again, and if you still get the same thing, we'll just agree that im too dumb to explain this but that we share the same point of view.

 

Maybe I am to blame for poor wording. The measurement should be more about where the ball is, and if the player gets there or not. In a simple form, if you take the field as 90 degrees, with 3rd base at 0, 2B at 45, and 1B at 90, then you can say a ball that goes into the OF at the 40 degree angle in X.X seconds should be fielded by Y% of SS. It shouldn't just be about how far the SS had to run. Although teams who think they are better at positioning their guys, might be more interested in the guys who cover more ground under that measurement.

[mul21]

I guess defense is a lot harder than offense to commit to numbers? More something you have to watch and get a feel for?

 

Maybe, but that is often where people let impressions take over reality. People who watch Jeter everyday claim he's one of the greatest with the glove. But nearly every other source puts him in the middle of the pack at best, and quite often in the bottom half. I'd like to see somebody break down video from every ball put in play. Take all the plays that went between the 2B and 3B, time every ball from the time it leaves the bat to the time it hits the OF grass (or is fielded), measure the distance from where the SS was. There has to be a way to translate that into seeing who really were the better fielders and which guys that may look flashy actually don't get to as many balls as they should. That'd take a lot of time though, and I'm not sure if it would work.

 

this isnt really fair though. the shortstop might be able to see what pitch the pitcher is going to throw, or have a good handle on the batter's scouting report and adjust accordingly. i think bill james wrote about this is one of his old abstracts. i think he referred to it as "invisible range."

 

Don't all shortstops have the opportunity to do that though?

 

yeah, but i think it's safe to assume that some shortstops are better at it than others. therefore, measuring only how far the player had to go to get the ball would overrate a player with great visible range but poor invisible range, and underrate a player with great invisible range but poor visible range

 

I agree and since we know that Perez likes to peek at the catchers signs when he hits I'd assume he is pretty good at it when he's playing SS. Ripken was suppose to be very good at postioning himself by seeing the sign and knowing the batter.

 

I have to agree with Cuse here. In his later years of playing SS, Ripken was nowhere near the athlete he had been and got by on positioning to still get to a lot of ground balls. He may not have gotten to as many, but was still well above average because he knew where the ball was likely to be hit based on pitch and batter tendencies. I think that is what makes defense so hard to quantify is how much of getting to balls is athleticism vs. how much is positioning.

[rjchapma]

So we are debating about if Julio should come here or not. I think no doubt we should trade for him. No matter where we put him SS or 2B. The reason we need him is cause of his bat i dont feel comfortable with cedeno or murton batting 2nd. Murton great hitter and cedeno I think will probably become a great player, but going into the season I'd much rather have someone batting 2 that has batted in the top of the lineup before. I know he isnt a great fielder as well, but espcially what people are saying now he could play 2nd which would probably make his error numbers down. Walker i dont mind going into the season with him batting two, but id rather like speed and contact up there, rather than someone who has some pop and a decent bat. I mean i hate to say it, but small ball works and walker doesnt not = Small ball.

Thanks this is my first post hope you guys dont tear me apart!!!!

Dick out!!!!

[Balsa]

.............................................................

[davearm]

Just say no the mediocre wife abuser please.

 

And before you tell me he was exonerated, think what one might be willing to do if their soon-to-be-millionare husband threatened to dump them if they didn't retract the charges.

So let me get this straight. You think she retracted the charges because of money? Why didn't she just settle a lawsuit and save herself the trouble of being with some guy who's abusing her? There's a lot of ways she could have cashed in on that situation without actually staying in the relationship.

 

IIRC, a victim severely exaggerating or even making up claims is pretty commonplace as well.

This is true...but then definitively calling him a "wife abuser" would be somewhere between an embellishment and slander, wouldn't it?

The story I seem to recall hearing is that Lugo physically assaulted his wife in the stadium parking lot, in front of the team bus and in view of many team personnel.

 

The Astros moved swiftly to suspend him, and then shortly thereafter, they released him.

 

Regardless of the ultimate disposition of the resulting criminal case, it seems abundantly clear that whatever the Astros' brass witnessed that day met their definition of "wife abuse".

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Just say no the mediocre wife abuser please.

 

And before you tell me he was exonerated, think what one might be willing to do if their soon-to-be-millionare husband threatened to dump them if they didn't retract the charges.

So let me get this straight. You think she retracted the charges because of money? Why didn't she just settle a lawsuit and save herself the trouble of being with some guy who's abusing her? There's a lot of ways she could have cashed in on that situation without actually staying in the relationship.

 

IIRC, a victim severely exaggerating or even making up claims is pretty commonplace as well.

This is true...but then definitively calling him a "wife abuser" would be somewhere between an embellishment and slander, wouldn't it?

The story I seem to recall hearing is that Lugo physically assaulted his wife in the stadium parking lot, in front of the team bus and in view of many team personnel.

 

The Astros moved swiftly to suspend him, and then shortly thereafter, they released him.

 

Regardless of the ultimate disposition of the resulting criminal case, it seems abundantly clear that whatever the Astros' brass witnessed that day met their definition of "wife abuse".

 

I don't think any of that is true. Allegedly, it happened at his home before he was going to the ballpark that day. If you have a link verifying that there were witnesses, please post. But I think you're dead wrong.

[treebird]

The story I seem to recall hearing is that Lugo physically assaulted his wife in the stadium parking lot, in front of the team bus and in view of many team personnel.

 

The Astros moved swiftly to suspend him, and then shortly thereafter, they released him.

 

Regardless of the ultimate disposition of the resulting criminal case, it seems abundantly clear that whatever the Astros' brass witnessed that day met their definition of "wife abuse".

 

I don't think any of that is true. Allegedly, it happened at his home before he was going to the ballpark that day. If you have a link verifying that there were witnesses, please post. But I think you're dead wrong.

 

i'm with vance, im almost certain that's wrong.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Lugo charged

 

Lugo cleared after Wife says she exaggerated