Is there a correlation between this?...

Gromit · 12-07-2002, 10:25 AM

In our online league, the predominately unsuccessful teams are sporting the best fielding percentage. OTOH, the best teams seem to be stinking up the diamond with their defense.

The bad teams:

The White Sox are 5-18, but have a fielding percentage of .992

The Royals (my team) are 9-16, but also have a fielding percentage of .992

The Rangers are 7-18, but have a fielding percentage of .991

The first place teams:

The Blue Jays are 21-2, but have a fielding percentage of .979

The Twins are 18-8, but have a fielding percentage of .977

The Phillies are 18-7, but have a fielding percentage of .984

The Athletics are 18-7, but have a fielding percentage of .980

Is this too much of a coincidence, or is something going on here? Is anyone else seeing this in their leagues? Should I start seeking players with horrible fielding percentages?

Lamorak · 12-07-2002, 12:07 PM

Some Possibilites:
1- Team that can't get good bats will try to make due with good gloves instead. But it's a compesation but not a replacement, resulting in the poor record.

2- Too small a sample (a coincidence?) to make conclusions by.

3- Good fielding percentages occassionally hide a lack of range. That's been an occassional (fair or unfair...) criticism of some players. Steve Garvey for example has one of the best field percentages in baseball history. But many fans claimed he only made an effort on the easy plays but held back on the harder ones- letting them go for hit's or even error's attributed to other fielders.

FP is only a fraction of the defense equation. Range is critical and the ablilty to 'turn two' for middle infielders can be huge.

12-07-2002, 10:25 AM	#1
Gromit Minors (Double A) Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Holloman AFB, NM Posts: 164	Is there a correlation between this?... In our online league, the predominately unsuccessful teams are sporting the best fielding percentage. OTOH, the best teams seem to be stinking up the diamond with their defense. The bad teams: The White Sox are 5-18, but have a fielding percentage of .992 The Royals (my team) are 9-16, but also have a fielding percentage of .992 The Rangers are 7-18, but have a fielding percentage of .991 The first place teams: The Blue Jays are 21-2, but have a fielding percentage of .979 The Twins are 18-8, but have a fielding percentage of .977 The Phillies are 18-7, but have a fielding percentage of .984 The Athletics are 18-7, but have a fielding percentage of .980 Is this too much of a coincidence, or is something going on here? Is anyone else seeing this in their leagues? Should I start seeking players with horrible fielding percentages?

12-07-2002, 12:07 PM	#2
Lamorak Minors (Double A) Join Date: Mar 2002 Posts: 195	Some Possibilites: 1- Team that can't get good bats will try to make due with good gloves instead. But it's a compesation but not a replacement, resulting in the poor record. 2- Too small a sample (a coincidence?) to make conclusions by. 3- Good fielding percentages occassionally hide a lack of range. That's been an occassional (fair or unfair...) criticism of some players. Steve Garvey for example has one of the best field percentages in baseball history. But many fans claimed he only made an effort on the easy plays but held back on the harder ones- letting them go for hit's or even error's attributed to other fielders. FP is only a fraction of the defense equation. Range is critical and the ablilty to 'turn two' for middle infielders can be huge. Last edited by Lamorak; 12-07-2002 at 12:09 PM.