Sammy Sofa

I'd be shocked if that was the case. Players are pretty smart about choosing when they dive now which makes the percentage a lot higher. Of course, that's part of the reason I don't want Soriano diving. He doesn't have the instincts out there and probably would make some dives that would make it a very poor percentage play. This is my thinking as well. As has been alluded to previously, players make these calculations on the fly. If they think they have a reasonable chance of catching the ball, they go for it. If not, *and* they don't have a teammate backing them up, they usually don't. All of which leads to a success rate greater than 35% for sure. I'm including when guys try to catch a ball leaping against the wall/fence and not just diving, so we're likely coming at this differently. We're also not that far apart. If there are two dozen attempts made at these types of plays in a week I'm saying they succeed 8-10 times and you're saying, what, 12-15 times? Two dozen attempts across MLB you mean? That seems low. But the rest, sure. I was just spitballing for the sake of a point. I have absolutely no clue how many times in a week MLB players are typically leaping/diving for catches in the MLB.

If that were reality you WOULD have guys taking extra bases on him left and right.

Can Jackson not play RF?

I'd be shocked if that was the case. Players are pretty smart about choosing when they dive now which makes the percentage a lot higher. Of course, that's part of the reason I don't want Soriano diving. He doesn't have the instincts out there and probably would make some dives that would make it a very poor percentage play. This is my thinking as well. As has been alluded to previously, players make these calculations on the fly. If they think they have a reasonable chance of catching the ball, they go for it. If not, *and* they don't have a teammate backing them up, they usually don't. All of which leads to a success rate greater than 35% for sure. I'm including when guys try to catch a ball leaping against the wall/fence and not just diving, so we're likely coming at this differently. We're also not that far apart. If there are two dozen attempts made at these types of plays in a week I'm saying they succeed 8-10 times and you're saying, what, 12-15 times?

So Soriano is somehow more effective by loafing after the ball than sprinting for it? And folks think I'm nuts. I think the difference between his "loafing" and "sprinting" and the bases given up because of it is negligible. He could be faster, but he's not nearly as slow as people like you think he is. Given that his injuries are leg-based I understand why he's slower and don't want him aggravating things since, again, I don't think he's giving up singles into doubles and doubles into triples at a pace anywhere even close to worrying.

I'd be shocked if that was the case. Players are pretty smart about choosing when they dive now which makes the percentage a lot higher. Of course, that's part of the reason I don't want Soriano diving. He doesn't have the instincts out there and probably would make some dives that would make it a very poor percentage play. Like I said, I have no idea if I'm right, but it wouldn't surprise me if I was. It's a [expletive] hard thing to do, and it's typically done out of desperation.

Why do you think a non-OF with limited OF defensive ability would be automatically better if he's hauling ass? Catching balls on the fly isn't easy, so why you assume he'd be better if he's stepping up the speed (which just makes it harder coupled with his wariness of getting injured again) doesn't make much sense to me.

I have absolutely no idea if this is right, but I'd bet that leaping/diving for a catch only succeeds around 35% of the time. I think you're focusing on Web Gems.

It would be crazy if we existed in a world where we could have stats that gauge how much of a liability defensively a fielder is based on the speed they display/plays they make, etc.. You'd think davearm2 would be all over that because surely it shows that Soriano as someone who obviously would benefit from busting his ass more. A), defensive metrics in their current state are unreliable, at best. But that's a totally separate discussion. The bigger issue is, B) those metrics are never ever going to be able to tell you how many more plays a particular fielder giving <100% effort would have made with 100% effort. And that's the issue at hand here. So you think Soriano would be a better OF if he ran harder out there and took more risks as a defender?

Diving/leaping in the outfield isn't necessary. Hitting is necessary. Sliding and blocking the plate aren't necessary, but you're much more likely to be succeed in your attempted task, which is more likely going to be in a critical position. Most of the time a player can lay out for a catch it's for a hit that will typically only result in a single. Most of the time if a player is close enough to dive it's going to hold a runner on 3rd if they were starting on 2nd. Basically the "gains" of an average OF laying out for a catch don't outweigh the "losses" because of the likelihood of them succeeding aren't very good. I mean, let's remember, this was started about Soriano. Soriano has his obvious limits as an OF. Him hauling ass and diving for catches is just going to exacerbate that, not make it better.

Wow that is just a whole bunch of ridiculous unsubstantiated nonsense right there. I can't really substantiate it without going through all the game tape. It's not like it's something I can look through the game log and find examples from. As others have pointed out, 20-30 bases might be overstating it. I thought of a few examples from the last month or so and then tried to extrapolate that over the entire season, assuming that he has committed around the same number of mistakes each month. That might very well be a logical fallacy. I would probably adjust it a little bit down, but knowing an exact number without the game tape is impossible. We do know from fangraphs who have tracked all these things that Ramirez and Soriano have been 2 of the worst 5 baserunners in all of baseball this season though. But thanks to the stats we also know Aramis is the best 3B offensively in the NL this year. So would the elevated risk of him busting his ass out of the box every time (and being older and somewhat injury prone) be justified? I wouldn't think so. Fangraphs has his baserunning take away a full third of his offensive value this year, but I don't think hustling on outs would help that very much as I think he just has deficiencies in that area . But I haven't even seen Ramirez be that bad at not hustling either. So is that just based mostly on his speed?

Wow that is just a whole bunch of ridiculous unsubstantiated nonsense right there. I can't really substantiate it without going through all the game tape. It's not like it's something I can look through the game log and find examples from. As others have pointed out, 20-30 bases might be overstating it. I thought of a few examples from the last month or so and then tried to extrapolate that over the entire season, assuming that he has committed around the same number of mistakes each month. That might very well be a logical fallacy. I would probably adjust it a little bit down, but knowing an exact number without the game tape is impossible. We do know from fangraphs who have tracked all these things that Ramirez and Soriano have been 2 of the worst 5 baserunners in all of baseball this season though. But thanks to the stats we also know Aramis is the best 3B offensively in the NL this year. So would the elevated risk of him busting his ass out of the box every time (and being older and somewhat injury prone) be justified?

It would be crazy if we existed in a world where we could have stats that gauge how much of a liability defensively a fielder is based on the speed they display/plays they make, etc.. You'd think davearm2 would be all over that because surely it shows that Soriano as someone who obviously would benefit from busting his ass more.

His start wasn't "horrendous" this year. He just wasn't hitting for his usual power.

Do you seriously think Soriano is on the cusp of going balls out on every play? LOL Why you think such a thing is quantifiable and isn't completely subjective and that it's something you think you can argue is baffling.

Sliding into a base is not necessary. So, can you actually explain this, or are you just taking the broad "nothing in the game is actually necessary" stance? Within the realm of what's necessary, there's no discernable difference between sliding and diving/leaping. A guy can stand up and be tagged out at a base just as easily as he can pull up and play a sinking liner on a bounce. You're beyond ridiculous at this point. The likelihood of sliding working out balance out the risk. Laying out to make a catch is such a long shot that the odds of things going wrong (injury, turning a single into a double or more, etc.) are way too high when compared to the likelihood of making the play.

Finally you're seeing the fallacy in all of this. Yes, your perspective is completely flawed.

Sliding into a base is not necessary. So, can you actually explain this, or are you just taking the broad "nothing in the game is actually necessary" stance?

Guys, what about the pitcher? They're directly in the line of fire if the batter hits a ball up the middle. Should the pitcher just pitch the ball and then dive behind the mound for cover? Lots of risk involved in pitching, y'know!

You do realize that nobody is saying or has said that players shouldn't ever be exposed to situations that could hurt them, right? You DO understand the difference between inherent risk (sliding into bases) and unnecessary risk (laying out/leaping for a catch), yes?

Oh, come on. That's a reach even for you. Nobody here honestly thinks you can't see the difference between making a typical catch and diving/leaping to make catches where the chances of injury/screwing up are drastically increased.

Because those are essential parts of the game. Flinging out in a dive for a catch isn't. Ideally nobody would have to explain to this to you.

They very easily could.

I mean, it's a good quote, but why should we accept it as true? Just because he's Joe DiMaggio? Of course he's going to say something like that. If pressed Soriano would say he's "giving it his all" or something similar.

I'd like to see someone come up with a number of the number of doubles that Soriano turned into singles with his loafing. If it's such a problem I'll bet it's a lot. And he hopped for the same reason he isn't diving all over the OF and leaping into walls; he's not a strong defender at any position, and sure as hell isn't an OF. Some guys can just get bounced around from position to position and succeed. Others can't. The hop was something that he claimed helped settle him down and improve his timing out there. And I'm sorry, but why do you buy the DiMaggio quote like it's some kind of fact? Because the guy says he played hard and hustled every single time it means he did? How is that not the usual [expletive] we hear from almost every single coach and athlete in the history of professional sports?