You know, I read a book on Flood years ago, but I dont know if it was this one. Might have been. You are right, nonetheless, the Flood story is a good one.Quote:
Originally Posted by ohms_law
Printable View
You know, I read a book on Flood years ago, but I dont know if it was this one. Might have been. You are right, nonetheless, the Flood story is a good one.Quote:
Originally Posted by ohms_law
There are a number of players on the outside that surely deserve to be in, and a number of players that are in who have no place being in there.Quote:
Originally Posted by grasshopper
Only one person here is arguing that Ozzie shouldn't be in.Quote:
Originally Posted by grasshopper
What? :confused:Quote:
The Wii (is that right?) actually is giving assholes the right to criticize sports.
As Swampdog said, this has gotta be catcher.Quote:
SS is the the hardest postion on earth. I played 5 games before I asked to go to OF.
I dunno, guys. Did Ozzie look better IRL then his stats show? Is there some sort of illusion here? He seems highly...average
You're only looking at his offensive stats, where he IS average.Quote:
Originally Posted by metsguy234
He made errors nearly 3 percent of the time though. That's good, but not that great.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
As I explained to you already, that's a horrible way to judge fielding, and even if you do use it, he comes out looking very good, as his fielding percentage was .978, 12 points above average.Quote:
Originally Posted by metsguy234
You're also overlooking that Ozzie Smith had a lot more chances to make errors than other players because he had impeccable range, and that impeccable range (and good arm) is what made him the best defensive shortstop to ever play the game.
So it's bad to judge a fielder by how often he makes errors?Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
And what's range?
Errors are an extremely subjective stat, which is why they're such a poor stat to judge a fielder on.
What else do you judge a fielder on? If you mess up alot, your not good. If you mess up less, your good.Quote:
Originally Posted by YEAH DAAAAWG
Take this example. Both players are left fielders playing a ball hit to them.Quote:
Originally Posted by metsguy234
Player A has little range. He doesn't reach the ball, which rolls to the wall, allowing the runner to get a double.
Player B has great range. He reaches the ball, but it pops out of his glove as he goes to catch it. He picks it up and gets it in quickly, limiting the runner to a single, but getting charged with an error.
Range is simple - how much ground a player covers. Ozzie Smith covered a ton of ground. It allowed him to get to a lot more balls than other shortstops, balls that would get past other shortstops and roll into the outfield. Therefore, he had a lot more chances to make errors. There is way more to defense than "not making errors."
To Bring home HGM's point a little more
Derek Jeter is playing short stop. 100 balls are hit in his general vicinity. He gets to 80 of them and make 3 errors. That's a .963 fielding percentage.
Ozzie Smith is playing short stop. 100 balls are hit in his general vicinity. He gets to 90 of them and makes 4 errors. That's a .955 fielding percentage.
Derek turned 77 ground balls into outs. 77%
Ozzie turned 86 ground balls into outs. 86%
Who's better?
Yep, exactly. Turning balls into outs is the goal of a fielder. It's not to "not mess up" (even though, obviously, the two are connected).
I was about to make the same point that Filihok just made. It isn't so much the plays that you dont make (errors), its how many plays you do make. The same applies to outfielders, of course. There have been OF's that went a full season with no errors. While thats a fairly impressive feat, it really does not tell you how many balls in play they turned into outs.