Omar Vizquel- HOF worthy? - Page 3

LBJ · #21 08-12-2005, 01:27 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Also, Omar's reputation defensively is over-inflated. He was a plus defender for many years that won Gold Gloves on a few spectacular plays. Ozzie was an all-time elite defender....maybe the best ever.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is easily the dumbest statement I've heard of yet in this thread. I was a season-tickets holder for the Cleveland Indians from 1994-2002 and I can tell you first-hand that Omar's reputation as a SS was because of his endurance at defense. Even the numbers can prove you wrong. If Omar has less errors and a better FEILD%, then he consistently played better and made less mistakes.

LBJ · #22 08-12-2005, 01:31 PM

[ QUOTE ]

oh yah, you really can't just add in 1000+ more at bats on a 38 year old's career and assume he's not going to decline.

[/ QUOTE ]

I already explained why you can. I am adding 1,070 at bats. Thats a little more than the rest of this season and next season. Omar is not declining right now. He's one of the best hitters and the best fielder on the Giants. It's perfectly fair to project Omar's numbers because he has stayed amazingly consistent throughout his career and shows almost no signs of slowing down. If anything, I should be the one arguing that Omar should have even better numbers than Ozzie because he will get more than 9,300 at bats. It's totally possible he will play another 3 years.

battschr · #23 08-12-2005, 01:33 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Also, Omar's reputation defensively is over-inflated. He was a plus defender for many years that won Gold Gloves on a few spectacular plays. Ozzie was an all-time elite defender....maybe the best ever.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is easily the dumbest statement I've heard of yet in this thread. I was a season-tickets holder for the Cleveland Indians from 1994-2002 and I can tell you first-hand that Omar's reputation as a SS was because of his endurance at defense. Even the numbers can prove you wrong. If Omar has less errors and a better FEILD%, then he consistently played better and made less mistakes.

[/ QUOTE ]
I found UZR ratings for 2000-2003 and Omar was 15th in UZR runs..errors and fielding % are not good metrics for measuring defensive performance.

battschr · #24 08-12-2005, 01:35 PM

Here's the link to those numbers for those interested:

http://www.tangotiger.net/UZR0003.html

LBJ · #25 08-12-2005, 01:53 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Here's the link to those numbers for those interested:

http://www.tangotiger.net/UZR0003.html

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for the numbers. Please tell me what the hell they mean. In all honesty, there are a million different stats out there that can be used for each sides of arguments. You see this in the NBA all the time. Theres a million different sites with a bunch of different stats, and many times you can use one stat to prove a player is the best and another stat to prove a player is the worst.

battschr · #26 08-12-2005, 01:58 PM

It's ultimate zone rating..it measures fielding based on how much range a fielder has and how well they field balls they get to. It's a good metrice for measuring defense, imo. However, these numbers are from 2000-2003, Vizquel's numbers would most likely be better earlier in his career. FWIW, Jeter is consistently horrible, although I think last year he had a decent defensive year.

LBJ · #27 08-12-2005, 02:01 PM

[ QUOTE ]
It's ultimate zone rating..it measures fielding based on how much range a fielder has and how well they field balls they get to. It's a good metrice for measuring defense, imo. However, these numbers are from 2000-2003, Vizquel's numbers would most likely be better earlier in his career. FWIW, Jeter is consistently horrible, although I think last year he had a decent defensive year.

[/ QUOTE ]

But how are they rated? Is it by pure numbers? My point is there really are a huge amount of different statistics you can use to illustrate your point. Some statistics can be used to help a person point and another statistic can be used go completely against a persons point. There is a reason the MLB and the public use the different set of main stats they do, so I would say stick with them.

battschr · #28 08-12-2005, 02:05 PM

The only stats MLB uses is fielding on plays where a fielder reaches a ball...they don't account for range at all. UZR uses extensive play-by-play studies.

LBJ · #29 08-12-2005, 02:10 PM

Do you have a site with Ozzie Smith's UZR for him and other shortstops during his career?

battschr · #30 08-12-2005, 02:17 PM

Nope, can't find one...have been looking though. I'm quitting now though, because when the going gets tough, quit. However, I did find an interesting article stating that Omar is the most over-rated fielder in history. I don't really agree, but it may be worth a look.

http://www.baseballthinkfactory.org/...s_2003-11-19_0