Why do first basemen have such LOW ERROR ratings for first base.

[fredbeene]

Why do first basemen have such LOW ERROR ratings for first base.
Go to fielding/Sortable Stats/ filter 1b , set to Fielding ratings

Ie GG with .995 rarelylare above 50 (1-100 scale)

Switch to all other positions and you see ratings that correspond with their actual fielding percentage


I assume it must have something to do with the HEIGHT factor trumping everything else.
I just want a first basemen who doesn't make errors. Errors is not dependent on height.

[ezpkns34]

A TON of outs are throws to first, so naturally 1B will get more chances for errors, leading to high fielding percentage as a whole for that position

.995 isn't rare and over .990 is the norm due to most outs at 1B being pretty routine

Fielding Percentage for Qualified 1B:
2019: 3 over .995, 2 under .990
2018: 6 over .995, 0 under .990
2017: 8 over .995, 2 under .990
2016: 9 over .995, 0 under .990
etc

[fredbeene]

Originally Posted by ezpkns34

A TON of outs are throws to first, so naturally 1B will get more chances for errors, leading to high fielding percentage as a whole for that position

.995 isn't rare and over .990 is the norm due to most outs at 1B being pretty routine

Thank you but question is not why 1b have high fiedling percentage.
It is why 1b have LOW RATINGS for ERROR component of Fielding rating.
There is nothing in the manual or in game help to account for why this occurs in the game, and how to use ratings to find your best fielding percentage first baseman

[ezpkns34]

Originally Posted by fredbeene

Thank you but question is not why 1b have high fiedling percentage.
It is why 1b have LOW RATINGS for ERROR component of Fielding rating.
There is nothing in the manual or in game help to account for why this occurs in the game, and how to use ratings to find your best fielding percentage first baseman

It's semi built in to be that way to prevent cheesing (presumably in online leagues mostly). If you go into commish mode and edit a player's ratings to be 100 with 200 experience at all the infield spots, then you can up his Error rating to be 150 and notice the following changes:
- Tiny bump in 1B rating
- Will go from below average to above average defensive 2B
- Will go from awful 3B to passable


Essentially, the answer is defensive spectrum. A high fielding percentage at 1B isn't necessarily correlated to dazzling glovework

[brotherblues]

Originally Posted by ezpkns34

It's semi built in to be that way to prevent cheesing (presumably in online leagues mostly). If you go into commish mode and edit a player's ratings to be 100 with 200 experience at all the infield spots, then you can up his Error rating to be 150 and notice the following changes:
- Tiny bump in 1B rating
- Will go from below average to above average defensive 2B
- Will go from awful 3B to passable


Essentially, the answer is defensive spectrum. A high fielding percentage at 1B isn't necessarily correlated to dazzling glovework

So basically to avoid possible exploits like putting a prototypical 1B at 2nd.

[ezpkns34]

Originally Posted by brotherblues

So basically to avoid possible exploits like putting a prototypical 1B at 2nd.

Yep. For instance, look at Justin Smoak's 2018. He had a .999 fielding percentage. So, according to OP, he should have a near maxed out Infield Error rating. Even with mediocre ratings for Range, Double Plays and Arm, he'd make at least an average 2B defensively


No offense to Mr Smoak, but I don't think anyone thinks that would help for accuracy in the game


Mitch Moreland had a .998 fielding percentage at First in 2018 too, not sure it would be very accurate to make someone like him a viable 2B option would help either


It takes modest defensive ratings to be a decently rated 1B as a way to adhere to the defensive spectrum (similar to how its easier for players in-game to play LF than RF and that it's much easier to play RF than CF .... or easier to play 2B than SS)


If anything, I'd say there should be a push to make 2B "less easy" to be good at than to make 1B glove magicians, in my opinion

[fredbeene]

thank you....
maybe each position could have it core components??
i know big change...
So if you put a 100 Error SS at 1b they won't actually perform better with less errors than a say GG steve garvey (45 ERROR)

[Radsmats]

Jose Offerman would like a word ...
He didn't outperform Garvey at first, but he put up a completely respectable .992 career fielding pct at first, with many of the errors coming in the "hanging on" part of his career. And he was an awful defensive SS ... 42 errors one year.
In fact, Steve Garvey might like a word. He was a pretty brutal 3B (47 errors in his first 190 GP before they moved him across the diamond).

[Syd Thrift]

I feel like the biggest limiter for 1B playing other positions are range and their throwing hand. Left handed throwers don’t play other infield positions, period. Whether the logic is sound or not, the last guy and practically the only guy to throw lefty and play more than a couple innings at 3rd since 1920 was Mike Squires, who was a defensive sub for a few games in the early 1980s. That right there should keep the AI from playing a John Olerud or a Keith Hernandez elsewhere.

Outside of that, I think it’s more of a tools issue: you have to have some amount of range to play in the middle infield and a good arm to play on the right side of it. If you have both, you can play shortstop. If you have neither, you’re probably stuck at first. That should probably be relatively agnostic to hands, although a 3B or SS with a good arm should be able to lower their actual errors committed by a small amount. Otherwise though a 190 Error guy with a 25 Arm and 30 Range shouldn’t be rated at 3B at all and if you put them there, maybe they won’t get graded for a lot of errors per se but I’d expect to see a lot of infield base hits off of them.

The latter is pretty close to what the game already does, I think, although maybe it needs to be more stringent or less forgiving of low Range or Arm, especially when it comes to right handed throwers who occasionally play outside of 1st.

[fredbeene]

Originally Posted by Radsmats

Jose Offerman would like a word ...
He didn't outperform Garvey at first, but he put up a completely respectable .992 career fielding pct at first, with many of the errors coming in the "hanging on" part of his career. And he was an awful defensive SS ... 42 errors one year.
In fact, Steve Garvey might like a word. He was a pretty brutal 3B (47 errors in his first 190 GP before they moved him across the diamond).

What you write seems to advocate for actual ratings for each invidual position.
Still not sure how game works.....i guess 45 ERROR when position = 1b equates to gold glove....ie .960 higher

[Syd Thrift]

Originally Posted by fredbeene

What you write seems to advocate for actual ratings for each invidual position.

Not really. It’s pointing out that because first base is the last position on the end of the defensive spectrum, it’s not uncommon that bad 2nd and 3rd basemen become great 1st basemen. In fact, this is slightly reductive but basically all the great fielding 1B were either converted from another, tougher position (Garvey) or were left handers who due to their throwing hand could not play elsewhere in the infield (Keith Hernandez), and even in the latter case, lefties who can throw hard enough to play 3rd or short get taught to pitch at a very early age. John Olerud is a guy I like to bring up as a seeming exception to that because a. he was a pitcher in college (and a very good one at that) and b. he played first base in the majors because the Blue Jays wanted his bat in the lineup immediately and didn’t want to wait a couple years for him to learn how to pitch professionally or play in the outfield.

[RchW]

Originally Posted by Syd Thrift

Not really. It’s pointing out that because first base is the last position on the end of the defensive spectrum, it’s not uncommon that bad 2nd and 3rd basemen become great 1st basemen. In fact, this is slightly reductive but basically all the great fielding 1B were either converted from another, tougher position (Garvey) or were left handers who due to their throwing hand could not play elsewhere in the infield (Keith Hernandez), and even in the latter case, lefties who can throw hard enough to play 3rd or short get taught to pitch at a very early age. John Olerud is a guy I like to bring up as a seeming exception to that because a. he was a pitcher in college (and a very good one at that) and b. he played first base in the majors because the Blue Jays wanted his bat in the lineup immediately and didn’t want to wait a couple years for him to learn how to pitch professionally or play in the outfield.

A modern day example is Vladdy Guerrero Jr. He was never going to be any more than average if that at 3B but shows signs that he could be an above average to very good 1B.

[Radsmats]

I haven't dived into the workings of the game yet (just picked up '22), but it IS respectable to see lousy SS become decent, even really good 1B, as Syd notes. A number worth watching if you're wondering about accuracy would be to look at the IF arm rating for the player moving. Offerman had decent range at short but was as likely to hit the camera guy as the 1B on a tough throw (OK, small exaggeration there). So at first, with little emphasis on throwing, he turned into a respectable 1B. Guys who fit that model, or who have terrible ratings at turning the DP are the guys who should see the most benefit from switching positions. A guy like Bobby Bonilla was below-average at 3B, LF, RF, 1B and (hilariously) the 10 games he played in CF, because getting the little white thing to land in the pocket of the big leather thing was just not his strong suit. If your guy just gets lousy IF defense ratings, moving across the diamond shouldn't help much ...

[fredbeene]

Originally Posted by Radsmats

I haven't dived into the workings of the game yet (just picked up '22), but it IS respectable to see lousy SS become decent, even really good 1B, as Syd notes. A number worth watching if you're wondering about accuracy would be to look at the IF arm rating for the player moving. Offerman had decent range at short but was as likely to hit the camera guy as the 1B on a tough throw (OK, small exaggeration there). So at first, with little emphasis on throwing, he turned into a respectable 1B. Guys who fit that model, or who have terrible ratings at turning the DP are the guys who should see the most benefit from switching positions. A guy like Bobby Bonilla was below-average at 3B, LF, RF, 1B and (hilariously) the 10 games he played in CF, because getting the little white thing to land in the pocket of the big leather thing was just not his strong suit. If your guy just gets lousy IF defense ratings, moving across the diamond shouldn't help much ...

i guess i don't know how to evaluate 1b, not coverted.
Right, garvey was .996 GG and his Error is 45 and overall 45 (1-100)
See screen shot above of 74 1b (mixed in our outliers like John Lowenstein who is played a few games at first)
I am pretty sure i would feel safer with garvery at first than lowenstein defensively, but the ratings don't indicate that.

So like in stratomatic 1974 garvey is 1b - 1 (best) Lowestein is a 1b 4 (worst)
opposite of ootpb.

[fredbeene]

Found on another site....something i didn't think of on 1b
.....
https://www.baseball-fever.com/forum...rvey-s-defense

suspect this is another distortion, because Billy Buck could barely move and forced the pitcher to cover the bag at first on almost any ball that he fielded. He was getting a ton of assists on plays where other 1Bmen would just go step on the bag. I remember Buckner throwing a lot better than Garvey, but the famous '86 play was due to a mobility problem that Billy Buck had for most of his career and made his defense less than stellar....

....He had good hands.The two best fielding first basemen that I have ever seen were Keith Hernandez and Wes Parker.In giving his assessment of Garvey`s defense(in a general conversation about the Gold Glove Awards),Parker stated that "Garvey was vastly overrated...he had no range,no arm,and no aggressiveness.He would hold the ball and allow opposing runners to take extra bases to avoid throwing errors.That`s how he compiled his high fielding averages at first base.Remember,he was (originally)a terrible third baseman,worst I ever saw."Sounds like the exact opposite of Parker and,especially,Hernandez to me.....x




Hard for me to believe garvey would NOT try to throw to 'pad' his stats.....

I have been basing every i know on garvey defense based on his cards i had as kid....i mean come on...look at that defense!!!! : )))

[Radsmats]

My favorite detail in the thread you linked was the observation from an apparently miffed Padres fan that in five years there he didn't start a single 3-6-3 DP.

[Syd Thrift]

That’s kind of amazing tbh. I’d always assumed Garvey really was just a great defensive 1B. I guess in reality he was limited in his own way as Bill Buckner…

[fredbeene]

Originally Posted by Syd Thrift

That’s kind of amazing tbh. I’d always assumed Garvey really was just a great defensive 1B. I guess in reality he was limited in his own way as Bill Buckner…

Imagine the fun we could have if OOTPB would tabulated everything they are able to and align with baseball ref!!!!

Well garvey may have had a weak arm, but he did not make many errors and generally led the league in his % (which is why i don't understand his fielding error rating of 45...doesn't translate)
Looks like in 78 he was average starting double plays
He also led the league in relay throws......