>More About the Mets’ Outfield Defense


Everyone’s UZR is lower than their Runs Saved except for Fernando Tatis – but of course Runs Saved is usually higher. 72% of the 2009 starting outfielders listed on Fangraphs’ UZR page had Runs Saved higher than their UZR’s. Using that percentage, there is about a 19% chance that all five Mets outfielders with +500 innings, the guys with the biggest samples, would all have UZR’s lower than their +/-. Not great, but maybe it’s all just noise.

Here’s some other stuff: 

2009 Mets UZR-Runs Saved Correlation: 0.71
2009 ML OF Starters UZR – Runs Saved Correlation: 0.83

This is just the correlation between UZR and +/-. The Mets’ correlation is a bit worse, but in a much smaller sample size – not sure if much can be read into this. For the league starters, I used all 64 outfielders who are listed on Fangraphs’ outfield UZR page.

Mets OF Average Difference between UZR and Runs Saved: 7.68
League Starting OF Average Difference between UZR and Runs Saved: 3.93

This is the average difference between a player’s UZR and his Runs Saved. The Mets’ difference is only for outfielders with +500 innings – so just Pagan, Beltran, Church, Francoeur, and Sheffield – because they are being compared to starters who all have closer to 1000 innings.  You can see that the Mets have a much larger difference between their UZR and their Runs Saved than everyone else. Again, this is a small sample size being compared to a huge one, so read into this what you will.



Filed under Uncategorized

2 responses to “>More About the Mets’ Outfield Defense

  1. Anonymous

    >I commented on your other, similar post with a list of things. I liked your response in the comments section and this new post. Again, like I said, I liked the post but thought you could do better by adding more and think you have, so thank you. Even though I believed your conclusions from what I remember seeing on the field, I was skeptical when I finished reading because of the things I mentioned in the other post. I also meant to add that I am no professional, and have much less experience than you, so I hope what I have to say is helpful. I didn't know that about the +/- numbers, thats silly. Baseball and all of its stats should be readily available for anyone enthused enough to be interested.I realized that the comment I left about misusing stats if you don't know how was not really what I meant, or useful. I mean you probably know more about the stats than me because, to be honest, I don't know as much about some stats, like UZR, as I would like (if you could recommend a book that, would be great); my problem is when people try to use stats in their own way (as it seemed you were doing) and then others read it, it will end up misleading people, including myself, about the nature of that stat. I assume you do this blog for you, not the (big?) guaranteed paychecks that the guys over at sites like si.com and others do, so you should make sure you do everything you can for an article to keep us readers coming back. Those guys are allowed to suck (and quite often they do, badly – not checking facts before they write opinions and often laughing in the face of logic) because people will keep reading and (if they're just casual fans) believing what they have to say; since si.com/mlb is obviously a baseball site, whereas patrickfloodblog.com could be anything. Gosh, at this point I hope you don't think I am picking on you or something; but you represent the Mets, so I am extra interested in what you have to say and, unlike the "big-timers," my thoughts will actually reach you. I could've picked on any number of posts from other blogs (except maybe Metsblog.com, which seems to not leave themselves open for such criticism), but you come off as knowing what you're talking about more so than most and have more original thought to offer, so I will therefore be coming back daily. Hope that wasn't too much a waste of cyber space, keep up the good work and I'll be back.PS – since I picked on SI and see your link on the right, I thought I should clarify that I am a fan of Joe Pos, it is the other guys who shouldn't be allowed to waste peoples time.

  2. Patrick Flood

    >@ AnonymousFirst, Joe Pos is indeed awesome.Fangraphs' Glossary is a decent place to start, but they are missing explanations for some of their stats. At some point this month I'd like to write up a glossary of the stats I use, so I hope that helps. As for UZR specifically, Fangraphs' glossary does have a lengthy 2-part explanation for it, which isn't the greatest – it reads like a technical manual. I don't know of any book that explains all the new stats, but there are a few good starting points. Tom Tango's "The Book" is newer than Baseball Prospectus' "Baseball Between the Numbers", but I would recommend "Baseball Between the Numbers" higher because it's less dry. They overlap a bit on their subject matter, but both are good.Alex Remington is also doing a fantastic job explaining some of the more common, newer stats at Yahoo Sports, if you haven't seen that already:http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/blog/big_league_stew?author=Alex+RemingtonThanks for the commenting, and I hope you come back to my blog. I like to know I'm not writing away into a void and you have been a most helpful commenter. Lastly, I now understand what you meant about misusing stats – I'll try to be more clear in the future.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s