How Do You Decide Gold Glove Award Winners?

[kq76]

Do you rely primarily on Eff, ZR, Rng, Pct, a combination? Do you rely on ratings (reputation) at all?

Eff is a rate stat so you could have a great Eff, but if they didn't play much that's not that impressive. ZR is a counting stat so you could have a great ZR, but if they got considerably more playing time than someone else with a higher Eff, who's really more deserving? The way I look at it, you can't really control your playing time as a player, but you can control how well you play when you do. Maybe you played less than someone else because your bat wasn't as good as another player's, fine, but this is a fielding award, not a batting award. And maybe the team the player with the higher ZR just didn't have as much depth as the team with the higher Eff player had.

Does it depend on the position. If it's catcher are you all about RTO?

Below is an example. Who would you pick? McArdle, Goodrich, Arnold, someone else?

I like the idea of going off ratings (reputation) when I'm not sure, but then which of those?

[kq76]

And can someone explain this to me, Logue has more IP, TC, and a higher Eff, but a lower ZR than Brown. Brown does have a higher RF and F% so are those more important than Eff?

I don't normally put much thought into GGs, but I figure it's time to dig a little deeper into defensive metrics.

[MathBandit]

I don't have a good answer to the direct question (in terms of Eff v. ZR. v. Rng v. Ratings - though I do 100% disregard Pct), but in terms of the sub-question of playing time I do take that into account and think it matters, for me. I know players can't always control their playing time, but I also think that the award is to reward the player who most helps their team with their glove and so I think a guy who plays CF every day with great defense helped his team more than a guy who played CF half the time with insane defense.

I think of it similar to IP for pitchers. For Reliever of the Year I will vote for a guy with a 2.75 ERA, 130 K, 115 IP season every time over the guy who had a 2.00 ERA with 80 Ks over 60 IP.

[Lucas718]

I've always given the GG to the player with the highest fielding percentage, who has at least 1000 TC. In the case of multiple players with the same FP, the one with the most TC gets it.

Pitchers rarely get that many TC, so I instead of TC, I use IP for them.

It works for me.

[koohead]

I can't answer your questions as I have always had the same conflicts. I let the AI decide GG But very interested to hear what others do.

[fredbeene]

Originally Posted by kq76

And can someone explain this to me, Logue has more IP, TC, and a higher Eff, but a lower ZR than Brown. Brown does have a higher RF and F% so are those more important than Eff?

I don't normally put much thought into GGs, but I figure it's time to dig a little deeper into defensive metrics.

isn't there pop up tool tips in the game defining each metric like bbref?

[fredbeene]

Originally Posted by kq76

And can someone explain this to me, Logue has more IP, TC, and a higher Eff, but a lower ZR than Brown. Brown does have a higher RF and F% so are those more important than Eff?

I don't normally put much thought into GGs, but I figure it's time to dig a little deeper into defensive metrics.

for first basemen you look at HEIGHT.
That is why players who are taller and play other positions automatically get ratings in the 80s at first compared to the actual GG for the year.

[Eugene Church]

I'm old school... I look at total chances and fielding percentages... games played are important, too... the more games you play will give you and edge when other things are pretty equal.

I look at assists and fielding percentages for infielders and pitchers... fielding percentages, assists and putouts for the outfielders.

Sorry, I don't worry about all those EFF, ZR...WAR...WORF... oops, that a Klingon on Star Trek, I think.

[Brad K]

I figure let the game decide and like real life it will sometimes be obviously wrong. Its a good feature.

[Syd Thrift]

I don’t really have a set “best FA” thing because I don’t think that’s realistic. I tend to use the following workflow:

- Is there any one player who just lapped the field in terms of ZR or had a historical season, like Cal Ripken in 1991? If so, I’ll do what I can to reward them.
- Is the incumbent award winner at the position anywhere close to the top? If I can make a case for them, they get the award.
- For infielders, I go with ZR, although I do take previous awards into account (but also if, for example, there’s a good vet who’s never won because there was always someone in front of them, I might give them a “legacy” award over a younger player if they’re close)
- For catchers the first thing I look at is RTO% but also Framing Runs and PBs (the latter usually as a disqualifying factor, although FR and PB rate are determined by the same rating)
- For first basemen I take “reputation” (which works out to past awards) into account a bit more; this is the position where a guy once won after he played like 30 games there
- For outfielders, I will generally award the top 2 CFs and the best RF unless there’s a monster LF (see above) or there are no particularly outstanding RFs. For RF, too, I pay more attention to assists
- Pitchers are a crapshoot because of the small sample size so I will also tend to lean heavily on reputation, if for no other reason than that there’s usually not someone who’s way ahead on ZR

[Pelican]

I like Syd's approach. Comprehensive. My main goal with IF is to avoid the "Placido Polanco Effect". Polanco somehow won Golden Gloves while with the Phillies, even though he had no range. He did have soft hands and a good arm, and could catch anything hit to him at 2B or 3B. But balls whistled by him to the right and left. Guys with those credentials should never win a Golden Glove. I want the exceptional guys with great range and a strong arm and good hands. Polanco was never going to be that guy. Whether that means more focus on ZR or TC or some other metric, I don't know.