Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Josh Hamilton's Unique Public Statement On His Addiction

Point Of Contention: Jeff Francoeur's Defense

Lookout Landing did a series of these "point of contention" articles earlier in the offseason, and I thought it would be a good way to flesh out some issues I had been thinking about. 

Jeff Francoeur won a gold glove in just his third season, at age 23, and has probably the best throwing arm in baseball. Yet, mostly due to the newfound popularity of MGL's UZR stat, Francoeur's defensive reputation among fans has suffered. Looking at his UZR numbers at fangraphs, it's understandable why: his Range component has gradually declined, while his best year, 2007, features an Arm rating so high it can easily be written off as an outlier. Thus, many have concluded that Francoeur is declining as a fielder, and his best years were kind of fluky to begin with. For a super-athletic 25-year-old, however, such a decline is pretty unbelievable. Consider some different, but similar measures:

year UZR Dewan Fans
2005* 13 17 81
2006 8 (4) 9 (6) 62 (9)
2007 17 (1) 19 (1) 71(4)
2008 -5 (8) -2 (NR) 54 (27)
2009 -6 (14) 8 (11) 65** (29)

*Didn't qualify for leaderboards in 2005

**The 1-100 equivalent of Tango's new 1-5 rankings

This table shows his UZR, his John Dewan runs saved, based on the equally popular plus/minus and featured in the annual "Fielding Bible," and Tango's fan scouting reports. In parentheses is his rank relative to the rest of the league. In general, the three measures agree, up until 2009, which is of course the most important year for projecting future performance. Looking at his Dewan's runs saved, however, the narrative often applied to his UZR doesn't really work. The Dewan numbers, mostly because they rank him +8 in 2009, make 2008 look like an outlier, not the beginning of a decline. 

UZR and the Field Bible numbers are, by MGL's own admission, calculated in much of the same way. The main difference, as I understand it, is Dewan measures the ball's position relative to x-y coordinates, while MGL uses "bins" or small divisions of the playing field. So what accounts for the discrepancy here? In a single season, fielding statistics can fluctuate greatly; the rule of thumb is one season of fielding numbers is the equivalent of one-third season of hitting data in terms of significance and predictive ability. Often I called Frenchy's very poor UZR numbers with the Mets as "noise." Yes, it was a measure of how he had performed, but it was probably skewed by a few bad plays not indicative of his talent. Still, while Dewan's numbers tend to be higher than UZR, 14 is quite a disparity. 

While further splitting up the data after talking about the unreliability of these stats in small samples may seem odd, here's how the two metrics compare in terms of range and arm:

Francoeurrange_medium

Here, the aforementioned UZR decline is evident, while the plus/minus numbers seemingly only fluctuate a bit, year-to-year.

Francoeurarm_medium

Also, here, the Fielding Bible data complicates idea that his 2007 throwing performance was a fluke. Talking to Mark yesterday about the numbers, he speculated that one system might be uniquely better at handling arm ratings, which would account for some of the difference. Just looking at this data, without any basis in the methodology, we might speculate that Dewan's system handles arms better. But that's just idle speculation really. 

One last point of interest that Mark also brought up in the Jason Bay discussion, is speed scores, which are available in some form on fangraphs. Francoeur's speed score declined from his rookie season: 4.2, 3.8, 2.8, 2.8, until reaching 4.3 in 2009. This would seemingly support the idea that Jeff is in no way "slowing down."

The real take-away here, I think, is that it's dangerous to assign narratives to statistical trends prematurely. Jeff Francoeur has the track-record of a great defensive outfielder, and we can probably assume he'll be at least a good one going forward. And it's no small question, for with Francoeur's offensive game, the difference between being a -5 and 10 run rightfielder is the difference between fringe-player and solid starter. 

Poll
How many runs will Jeff Francoeur's defense be worth in 2010?
15+
19 votes
10-15
24 votes
5-10
74 votes
0-5
78 votes
-5-0
24 votes
-10-(-5)
3 votes
-15 or less
6 votes

228 votes | Poll has closed

Comment 33 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Fielding stats question

Do the “arm” ratings consider the fact that after a while, opposing players stopped running against him in marginal situations? Francoeur doesn’t get as many chances to throw runners out over the last couple years since they know not to try to take an extra base on him.

by erich10031 on Dec 16, 2009 6:16 AM EST reply actions  

I believe so

"I see the job in bigger terms. Paperwork, that’s false hustle... Know what I’m sayin’?"

by Evan_S on Dec 16, 2009 6:33 AM EST up reply actions  

yes, I think so

"We're investigating the investigative procedure of the investigation of Tony Bernazard"---Omar Minaya (he really didn't say it but he would"

by firejerrynow on Dec 16, 2009 6:35 AM EST up reply actions  

Yes according to the fangraphs glossary

Outfielder’s get credit (plus or minus) depending on what the runners do on a hit or a fly ball out. A runner can stay put, advance, or get thrown out. A fielder will get credit not only if he throws out more than his share of runners, but also if he keeps more than his share of runners from advancing extra bases.

by OlStubbleBeard on Dec 16, 2009 9:38 AM EST up reply actions  

Francoeur Avenue?

"We're investigating the investigative procedure of the investigation of Tony Bernazard"---Omar Minaya (he really didn't say it but he would"

by firejerrynow on Dec 16, 2009 6:35 AM EST reply actions  

I don't think Le French

is quite the butcher in right that people make him out to be, I think he is average to a tick under average. However, I would quibble with calling him “super-athletic”. He’s pretty clunky and leaden-footed and he’s not exactly wiry.

by deadspy3 on Dec 16, 2009 9:11 AM EST reply actions  

How are SPD scores calculated?

I can’t find anything on the Fangraphs glossary, but I’m not sure they’re a great device to measure defensive speed or range if they’re an offensive metric. Luis Castillo, for example, has maintained a pretty static SPD since 2003 while his RngR has trended downward.
Obviously outfield range involves a lot more straight running and so is probably a little better correlated to baserunning speed, but I wonder if the SPD stat wouldn’t be skewed (to Frenchy’s credit) by good baserunning.

by TedBerg on Dec 16, 2009 10:00 AM EST reply actions  

Link

Here. It seems like an odd metric, a mix of stolen bases, triples and runs scored. I tend to agree with your comment.

by James Kannengieser on Dec 16, 2009 10:50 AM EST up reply actions  

In any case, I think EqBRR is a little more trustworthy

Frenchy’s recent scores (measure in runs + or -)
’06 -0.5
’07 0.0
’08 0.7
’09 -4.0

Now I’m just confused.

by OlStubbleBeard on Dec 16, 2009 11:04 AM EST up reply actions  

Yeah that is confusing, its almost like his EqBRR reverse correlates to spd

"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet

What a fool I was to defy him"

-HST

by Mark Himmelstein on Dec 16, 2009 12:14 PM EST up reply actions  

Yeah, its definitely an offensive metric

When I looked at it in terms of Bay though, I just looked at 2009, and what I found was that the only corner outfielders with negative UZRs and spd scores over 4.0 tended to be special cases. Lots of converted infielders, a couple rookies, and a couple guys who were hurt much more by their awful arm than range. Bay and Francoeur were the only real tenured and “natural” outfielders who didn’t fit, and I honestly hadn’t even realized Francoeur’s spd rating had been previously so low. Bays was 5.3, which is pretty much what its been for his whole career. And the point was that I suspect Bay’s crappy defense is more a product of poor defensive technique, as opposed to ability to cover distance, and how that related to playing in Fenway.

"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet

What a fool I was to defy him"

-HST

by Mark Himmelstein on Dec 16, 2009 12:13 PM EST up reply actions  

Excellent Post

You have enlightened me to Frenchy. Perhaps even a Frenchy revolution? Hopefully not including the ensuing “the terror”.

Travis Hafner is made of gold

by Super Mario on Dec 16, 2009 10:45 AM EST reply actions  

Storm the Bastille!

You don't cheer for the Mets. You drink for the Mets.

by Kevin H on Dec 16, 2009 11:36 AM EST up reply actions  

As someone who watched him play every day from some point in 2005-July 10, 2009

He was a legitimately good defender, on his way to being the best in the league, before he tried the “getting jacked” experiment in the 2008 pre-season.

His range completely died. It looked like he was running through molasses most of the time in 2008. It was absolutely inconceivable how someone who was an elite defender in 2007 turned into Francoeur in 2008.

The better “Baseball shape” he gets into, the better both his bat and glove will be.

He’s a dumbass.

http://www.capitolavenueclub.com/

by PWHjort on Dec 16, 2009 10:57 AM EST reply actions  

Forgot to mention that

but I suspected the 19 pounds of muscle or whatever it was, wasn’t helping.

by Sam Page on Dec 16, 2009 12:12 PM EST up reply actions  

Wow, some picture

And I have known the eyes already, known them all—
The eyes that fix you in a formulated phrase,
And when I am formulated, sprawling on a pin,
When I am pinned and wriggling on the wall,
Then how should I begin
To spit out all the butt-ends of my days and ways?
  And how should I presume?

— from The Love Song of J. Alfred Francoeur

by Pack Bringley on Dec 16, 2009 11:40 AM EST reply actions  

Another element of this

I wonder if Dewan somehow handled the CitiField park factors in a different way. This is something that’s been talked a lot about in regard to UZR and Beltran, and if you look at Francoeur’s season, during the first half, when he was still a Brave, his defense looked much more like it did pre-2008, and then plummeted when he came to the Mets.

"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet

What a fool I was to defy him"

-HST

by Mark Himmelstein on Dec 16, 2009 12:16 PM EST reply actions  

Question about UZR

One play that sticks out in my mind is where Francoeur dropped a fly ball he lost in the lights. As much as he got razzed for it at the time, it was kind of a fluke play that didn’t really indicate his defensive abilities. Presumably +/- would just rate this as a -1. I only have a basic understanding of how UZR works. I’m wondering if this type of play has a big negative impact on UZR.

You don't cheer for the Mets. You drink for the Mets.

by Kevin H on Dec 16, 2009 1:08 PM EST reply actions  

this brings up a good point

I’ve read many definitions of the various fielding stats, but I’ve yet to see an actual example of a specific play and how it was scored. That would be extremely helpful in understanding the process of arriving at those final numbers.

by Mike Clemente on Dec 16, 2009 1:27 PM EST up reply actions  

I'm not sure that information is freely available

But my understanding is that its basically calculated using all the collected fielding data and relating it to defensive “zones” and giving each play a particular value based on the frequency with which it would be made. For example, if a player makes a play that is essentially the same play that gets made by other fielders 99% of the time, its worth a tiny, tiny fraction of a positive run. If he fails, its worth a large negative value. If a player makes a play that very few other players would make comparably, its worth a large positive run value, and if he fails to make the play that most others wouldn’t, its worth a small negative run value. If my understanding is correct, then the law of small numbers would absolutely apply to this kind of play for Frenchy. Relative to other single plays, a routine play failure would have a large negative value, so in a very small sample size, that one play would carry a good deal of weight, but in a larger sample size, that includes the same player frequently making the same type of play, the effect would be reduced.

"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet

What a fool I was to defy him"

-HST

by Mark Himmelstein on Dec 16, 2009 1:45 PM EST up reply actions  

I guess my question is

how large is large? How much is a player penalized for missing a play that UZR classifies as routine? Half a run? One run? Five runs? Like you mentioned, I don’t think that these specific details are available.

You don't cheer for the Mets. You drink for the Mets.

by Kevin H on Dec 16, 2009 2:56 PM EST up reply actions  

It always depends on the possible outcomes

If the possible outcomes are a player gaining an extra base vs. not gaining a single extra base, I assume its the calculated value of one base. If its the difference between 0 bases (as in an out) or 3 bases, I’d assume the value is calculated appropriately. Again, I’m speculating to a degree here, since there isn’t really a resource that provides the UZR data and formula for its computation, but we can still think about it like this in a loose philosophical sense. I don’t remember the specific play you’re talking about, but if it yielded 2 bases as opposed to an out, in a half-season worth of opportunities, I’d imagine that one play carried significantly more weight than it should have when considered in the scope of a stable sample size.

For the sake of reference, not that I am saying 2 bases as opposed to an out has this value, according to this the value of a double, aka a two-base hit, relative to an out is 1.08 runs (remember, that’s relative to an out, not an average non-double, compared to which a double would clearly be worth less than a full run). So if we assume this one play by Francoeur was worth -1.08 runs, and the law of small numbers is applicable here, that -1.08 runs probably carries a lot more weight in the final product than it should considering the frequency with which Francoeur would usually make that play an out.

"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet

What a fool I was to defy him"

-HST

by Mark Himmelstein on Dec 17, 2009 1:40 AM EST up reply actions  

So, in effect,

That would mean that Luis Castillo’s game losing misplayed pop-up at 2B greatly reduced his value?

"The picture looked like I was in the dugout, but they got it all wrong. I absolutely was never in the dugout."

- Mr. B.V. Incognito

by sj10689 on Dec 17, 2009 4:26 AM EST up reply actions  

Good post

though it won’t matter if he OBPs at .300 again.

"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw

by squid92 on Dec 16, 2009 1:46 PM EST reply actions  

A powerpoint

of various Francoeur photos where he is flying into a fence should be made as a visual aid to this post.

Travis Hafner is made of gold

by Super Mario on Dec 16, 2009 2:00 PM EST reply actions   1 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Warningsign7vl_small
Is it time to bring back a team captain?
Nsapcs7_extr_small
Thanking The Mets
Small
Expectations for 2012
Small
Thoughts on the new Marlins stadium
Yolatengo1poster2_small
Gary Carter's Battle
Backyardbaseball_pcmacboxart_160w_small
Projecting Lucas Duda 2012: defense, defense,defense.....
Birdmanavenger-thumb_small
in my world, best lineup change
Orosco_small
I miss baseball
Small
Retort: Mike Piazza and the Tools of Ignorance
Yolatengo1poster2_small
Mike Piazza and the Tools of Ignorance

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

FanShots

Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.

Recommended FanShots

Now that banner day is back, hopefully this years will look a little like this. I know it's not great, but i don't pretend to be a professional. embiggen!
In order to raise extra capital, the Mets have explored signing Kosuke Fukudome to a minor league contract with an invitation to Spring Training (replete with curiously high uniform number).
i saw this on the marlins statue/abomination story. gif in the comments
My insta-analysis on the Prince Fielder deal.

Recent FanShots

Embiggen
NL East loaded
Josh Hamilton on the bottle again?
Mets Top 50 Prospect List (With new prospect grading system)
Nationals Sign Edwin Jackson
What would success be to the 2012 Mets?
Interesting Quotes from Ruben Amaro
Banner Day is Announced!
Mets Futures Odds

+ New FanShot All FanShots >

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Warningsign7vl_small
Is it time to bring back a team captain?
Nsapcs7_extr_small
Thanking The Mets
Small
Expectations for 2012
Small
Thoughts on the new Marlins stadium
Yolatengo1poster2_small
Gary Carter's Battle
Backyardbaseball_pcmacboxart_160w_small
Projecting Lucas Duda 2012: defense, defense,defense.....
Birdmanavenger-thumb_small
in my world, best lineup change
Orosco_small
I miss baseball
Small
Retort: Mike Piazza and the Tools of Ignorance
Yolatengo1poster2_small
Mike Piazza and the Tools of Ignorance

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


THE BIG GUY

Aa_avatar_small Eric Simon

THE INCREDIBLES

Blackfish2_small Alex Nelson

Endy_small Rob Castellano

Img_1262_small Matthew Artus

Kanye_pekka_small Sam Page

Best_infield_ever_small James Kannengieser

Metsstitches_small Eno Sarris

48900_1085732804_4466_n_small Chris McShane

Lg_rocker_ap_small Matthew Callan

Billy_and_daddy_4th_of_july_small Bill Petti

THE NEWS GURUS

Mrmet_small Steve Schreiber

3_small Stephen Schmidt

159714144_040c6c1501_small Pack Bringley

124967042_crop_340x234_small Jeffrey Paternostro