Jeter a bad fielder, right?

[DaveTheYankee]

I think we can all agree Jeter is a bad fielder, yet I have one friend who refuses to acknowledge this. Anyone wanna give me some evidence as to his bad fielding? My friend keeps using fielding pct, and yet, when we found a chart with the starting shortstops for 2007, he was like 10th ranked, and my friend still only focused on how he was above the bottom four. Now, I'm not trying to bash Jeter, I'm just trying to get some info.

[JacobsFan]

I don't really know much about fielding stats and metrics...but imo he can't cover the ground to his left anymore.

[ipitch]

You could show him this...
http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/what-is-zone-rating/
"Derek Jeter looks a little below average at first, but he’s even worse than that. Jeter has very limited range. Only Bartlett made fewer plays outside the zone, but Jeter played almost 50% more innings than Bartlett."

or this...
http://www.hardballtimes.com/thtstats/main/?view=fielding&league_filter

[DoubleX]

There are lots of statistics out there that show Jeter to be a poor defensive SS for his career, but I think the biggest proof is in just watching Jeter play. Tell your friend to watch some other shortstops play regularly, and he'll likely see them make plays look more routine than Jeter, particularly plays up the middle - Jeter's biggest weakness is his range up the middle. He barely flinches on balls that other shortstops seemingly get to routinely.

[Scartissue]

www.fieldingbible.com, a site run by John Dewan--a respected defense analyst, has Jeter at -34 plays for 2007. That means that he was essentially 34 plays worse than an average fielder, second to last behind Hanley Ramirez, a generally acknowledged butcher with the leather. In contrast, Troy Tulowski was +35, the best in the league under Dewan's system.

Baseball Prospectus was a little more kind to Jeter, estimating that his fielding cost the Yankees 6 runs more than an average SS would have.

[philipthegreat]

The only reason why people think that he is a great or even good shortstop is because of his flashy throws and his gold gloves.

[bigbadwolf]

To present a different view. Jeter is more than likely one of the best if not the best defensive shortstops in baseball for the past decade. I in particular do not look at fielding percentages nor gold gloves. they in essence are relatively meaningless individual stats and awards. Jeter plays always in the spotlight, on the big stage, in the big games and has helped his team to more success than any other shortstop in the game. Jeter makes plays routinely than other shortstops cannot make. His range is far and wide. There is no other shortstop in the game who charges a ball or goes back on popups better than Jeter. Jeter has made plays in pressure games that othe players only dream about. Yes, have your friend watch all the shortstops, they all make great plays at one time or another, most with no pressure and no big stage. But being the best (as Jeter is) is not only making the plays, but making them when they count and help lead your team to the playoffs, pennants and WS rings. That would be DEREK JETER.

[TonyStarks]

To present a different view. Jeter is more than likely one of the best if not the best defensive shortstops in baseball for the past decade. I in particular do not look at fielding percentages nor gold gloves. they in essence are relatively meaningless individual stats and awards. Jeter plays always in the spotlight, on the big stage, in the big games and has helped his team to more success than any other shortstop in the game. Jeter makes plays routinely than other shortstops cannot make. His range is far and wide. There is no other shortstop in the game who charges a ball or goes back on popups better than Jeter. Jeter has made plays in pressure games that othe players only dream about. Yes, have your friend watch all the shortstops, they all make great plays at one time or another, most with no pressure and no big stage. But being the best (as Jeter is) is not only making the plays, but making them when they count and help lead your team to the playoffs, pennants and WS rings. That would be DEREK JETER.

If only you knew how crazy you sound by saying "I do not look at fieldering percentages" and then claming Jeter is the best SS. So it's safe you don't look at errors or range factor either. So I do not understand how you could even say he's the best. Where was your Prince in the playoffs when his errors led to a few unearned runs?

If your saying Jeter is the best and no one charges the ball like he does then, my friend, you've never seen more than 5 Yankee games.

Because even the casual fan should be able to see that Jeter's range is very limited.....ESPECIALLY going up the middle!!

[Yankeefan90]

To present a different view. Jeter is more than likely one of the best if not the best defensive shortstops in baseball for the past decade. I in particular do not look at fielding percentages nor gold gloves. they in essence are relatively meaningless individual stats and awards. Jeter plays always in the spotlight, on the big stage, in the big games and has helped his team to more success than any other shortstop in the game. Jeter makes plays routinely than other shortstops cannot make. His range is far and wide. There is no other shortstop in the game who charges a ball or goes back on popups better than Jeter. Jeter has made plays in pressure games that othe players only dream about. Yes, have your friend watch all the shortstops, they all make great plays at one time or another, most with no pressure and no big stage. But being the best (as Jeter is) is not only making the plays, but making them when they count and help lead your team to the playoffs, pennants and WS rings. That would be DEREK JETER.

Dude, there's nothing wrong with saying that you're a Derek Jeter fan, but i know alot of Derek Jeter fans who'll say that he's far from the best SS. Jeter maybe 10 yrs ago was an average to above average SS, but his range has totally decreased. I'm not a big stats guy either but I can just see with my eyes the guy can't make certain plays. And as for that jumping throw that he does, he does it not because it's a spectacular play, he does it to make up for his range defiecincies by making it look flashy. I'll say Jeter is the best SS that makes average plays flashy to hide his defiecincies. Anyway, why is the argument still going, because it's eventually going to turn into an A-Rod is better than Jeter fight.

[DoubleX]

To present a different view. Jeter is more than likely one of the best if not the best defensive shortstops in baseball for the past decade. I in particular do not look at fielding percentages nor gold gloves. they in essence are relatively meaningless individual stats and awards. Jeter plays always in the spotlight, on the big stage, in the big games and has helped his team to more success than any other shortstop in the game. Jeter makes plays routinely than other shortstops cannot make. His range is far and wide. There is no other shortstop in the game who charges a ball or goes back on popups better than Jeter. Jeter has made plays in pressure games that othe players only dream about. Yes, have your friend watch all the shortstops, they all make great plays at one time or another, most with no pressure and no big stage. But being the best (as Jeter is) is not only making the plays, but making them when they count and help lead your team to the playoffs, pennants and WS rings. That would be DEREK JETER.

The Yankees won often in spite of Jeter's defense, not because of it. Winning does not automatically make a player great at everything, and in Jeter's case, he is bad defensively and winning doesn't change that. It's Jeter's offense at SS which is what has been his biggest contribution to winning, as his defense at times actually costs the team runs during the season. Seriously, just try watching other shortstops play regularly, particularly look at how they get to balls hit up the middle, and then compare what you see then by what you see when watching Jeter, and then come back to this discussion.

[DaveTheYankee]

Yeah the guy just won't listen, but I think in his heart of hearts he knows I'm right.

[peter123]

Derek Jeter is a great shortstop... one of the best to ever live

[peter123]

Derek Jeter is one of the greatest shortstops to play baseball.. hes got gold gloves so he cant be makin too many errrors ... hes almost at 3000 hits which he will crush that by the time hes done... the way he leads his team in that captain role is like no other captain in the game.. just having him on the field is a major uplift for the new york yankees. hes captain clutch for a reason... one of the best hitters in the postseason... ya he might not be makin all the plays he used to but that just comes with age but that doesnt mean he still isnt one of the best shortstops in the game.. compare him to any other shortstop in the game right now and name one that you could have as a clear cut favorite to be better than derek jeter. statistics will show that what i just said is goin to be hard to do

[ChrisLDuncan]

I love Jeter but he didn't deserve the gold gloves, but he did deserve the MVP IMO in 1999 and 2006.

[DaveTheYankee]

Derek Jeter is one of the greatest shortstops to play baseball.. hes got gold gloves so he cant be makin too many errrors ... hes almost at 3000 hits which he will crush that by the time hes done... the way he leads his team in that captain role is like no other captain in the game.. just having him on the field is a major uplift for the new york yankees. hes captain clutch for a reason... one of the best hitters in the postseason... ya he might not be makin all the plays he used to but that just comes with age but that doesnt mean he still isnt one of the best shortstops in the game.. compare him to any other shortstop in the game right now and name one that you could have as a clear cut favorite to be better than derek jeter. statistics will show that what i just said is goin to be hard to do

Basically exactly what my friend says

[Mike27]

Derek Jeter is one of the greatest shortstops to play baseball.. hes got gold gloves so he cant be makin too many errrors ... hes almost at 3000 hits which he will crush that by the time hes done... the way he leads his team in that captain role is like no other captain in the game.. just having him on the field is a major uplift for the new york yankees. hes captain clutch for a reason... one of the best hitters in the postseason... ya he might not be makin all the plays he used to but that just comes with age but that doesnt mean he still isnt one of the best shortstops in the game.. compare him to any other shortstop in the game right now and name one that you could have as a clear cut favorite to be better than derek jeter. statistics will show that what i just said is goin to be hard to do

Read the topic title.
Jeter, a bad FIELDER, right?

You did a good job describing why Jeter is great SS, but he's not a great SS because of his fielding. If you just watch a Yankee game, you will realize he never deserved the GG's he got. Jeter is a great player, one of my favorites, but he's not my favorite to watch in the field.

[KCGHOST]

Jeter is a great player but a mediocre defensive player.

[bigbadwolf]

Derek Jeter is a great shortstop... one of the best to ever live

Particularly defensively.

[bigbadwolf]

Read the topic title.
Jeter, a bad FIELDER, right?

You did a good job describing why Jeter is great SS, but he's not a great SS because of his fielding. If you just watch a Yankee game, you will realize he never deserved the GG's he got. Jeter is a great player, one of my favorites, but he's not my favorite to watch in the field.

Do I detect a double standard here. Jeter wins an individual award andyou claim he doesn't deserve it, while in other threads you spout how many awards so and so has won. I do not like nor do I look at individual awards. I watch guys play the guy and how they play the game and under what circumstances they play the game. That leaves Jeter numero uno.

[DoubleX]

Do I detect a double standard here. Jeter wins an individual award andyou claim he doesn't deserve it, while in other threads you spout how many awards so and so has won. I do not like nor do I look at individual awards. I watch guys play the guy and how they play the game and under what circumstances they play the game. That leaves Jeter numero uno.

Different awards have a different amount of merit depending on the history of who has received them. Gold Gloves can't really be taken seriously as an award for defense. Players win them all the time based on reputation, which is why Ivan Rodriguez continues to win and Omar Vizquel won a number that he probably shouldn't have, and why Brooks Robinson was winning well into the 70s instead of say, Graig Nettles. If you need anymore proof about how meaningless Gold Gloves can be, look at who won the 1999 AL Gold Glove at 1B - Rafael Palmeiro, who appeared just 28 games in the field in 1999 and 135 games at DH. How can you justify that and believe that Gold Gloves are accurate representations of defense?

[Mike27]

Do I detect a double standard here. Jeter wins an individual award andyou claim he doesn't deserve it, while in other threads you spout how many awards so and so has won. I do not like nor do I look at individual awards. I watch guys play the guy and how they play the game and under what circumstances they play the game. That leaves Jeter numero uno.

You are delusional. Please don't ever quote my posts again, as I really just cannot stand reading yours. I will never answer one of your posts seriously, and I usually just try to avoid reading your posts all together.

[bigbadwolf]

Different awards have a different amount of merit depending on the history of who has received them. Gold Gloves can't really be taken seriously as an award for defense. Players win them all the time based on reputation, which is why Ivan Rodriguez continues to win and Omar Vizquel won a number that he probably shouldn't have, and why Brooks Robinson was winning well into the 70s instead of say, Graig Nettles. If you need anymore proof about how meaningless Gold Gloves can be, look at who won the 1999 AL Gold Glove at 1B - Rafael Palmeiro, who appeared just 28 games in the field in 1999 and 135 games at DH. How can you justify that and believe that Gold Gloves are accurate representations of defense?

Therefore it is safe to assume here, that when you deem an individual award has merit, it is then valid as an award and has meaning. Then when you deem an individual award has no merit, that award is meaningless. Sounds like your stats.

[Mariano_Rivera]

Therefore it is safe to assume here, that when you deem an individual award has merit, it is then valid as an award and has meaning. Then when you deem an individual award has no merit, that award is meaningless. Sounds like your stats.

Yeah, so? Different awards and different stats are more meaningful or less meaningful thn others. Why is this hard to understand? Its not just some stats and awards are pulled out of a hat and those are good and others are bad.

Gold Gloves are chosen by managers who do not see every player in the league on a consisten basis. They don't really care and often just go by name recognition. THis is shown in the case of Rafael Palmeiro. Stats would show he was terrible in his GG year. People who watched him on a consisten basis would say he was a terrible choice. He barely played any games at first.

[bigbadwolf]

Yeah, so? Different awards and different stats are more meaningful or less meaningful thn others. Why is this hard to understand? Its not just some stats and awards are pulled out of a hat and those are good and others are bad.

I agree, and that defines just how unimportant individual awards and individual stats are. Who defines and determines which ones are important or not. Is every other stat or award pulled out of a hat meaningful. Or is it the second odd one and third even one. Are you guys serious. Only winning defines what is important. That leaves Jeter as the best. Even Arod had to move position to defer to the best shortstop.

[Mariano_Rivera]

I agree, and that defines just how unimportant individual awards and individual stats are. Who defines and determines which ones are important or not. Is every other stat or award pulled out of a hat meaningful. Or is it the second odd one and third even one. Are you guys serious. Only winning defines what is important. That leaves Jeter as the best. Even Arod had to move position to defer to the best shortstop.

I`m not a big fan of awards personally. Many take into account team performance for individual awards. The writers are biased and often ignore meaningful stats while using poor stats.

Their are genuine ways to decide which statistics are meaningful and which aren't.

First you need to carefully think out if that statistic is actually under the control of the player as much as can be reasonabl expected. For example, RBI's are very dependant on many factors outside of the hitters ability like batting order, the skill of hitters around him, and the baserunning skills of hitters around him. On the other hand we have home runs which is purely decided by the batter and pitcher (and very very rarely the fielder). Its as much under the batter's controls as possible.

Next consider whether a player doing well in this area will help his team win. For example, hitting home runs will help a team win. However, avoiding strike outs will not actually help a team win (strikeouts are in fact no different from any ordinary out. the value of moving runners over is offset by double plays).

In my opinion, if the stat passes these two tests then it should be considered valuable and used in the evaluation of players. People have taken this to the next level and considered the actual, exact value of events by using historical data. If you want to know how these were calculated or what they are I can give you a link.

A-Rod moved because he was a superior third baseman and the New York propaganda machine had/has people thinking Jeter was Ozzie Smith. Admit it, if Jeter had moved you would have said Jeter was being an unselfish team player putting his team first.

We already have a thread for discussion like this here (http://baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?p=1048495#post1048495). I`m reposting this there and please continue this debate there. It takes away from other discussions.

[NJMetfan4life]

Jeters a pretty good SS, not the best all time. ie Honus Wagner

[gojays]

Yes, Jeter's defensive stats slightly improved in '04, when A-Rod came to New York. Coincidence? Because of A-Rod's great range at third, Jeter was able to shade to his left(his weaker side). The only thing he has is his arm, one of the best in the league, which is the only reason he can do his 'signature' play. The jump-and-throw is actually a slower way to get the ball to first, he can only make that play because of his arm. And when he doesn't get the runner, it's credited as as hit, and dosn't hurt his fielding percentage.

http://www.theonion.com/content/node/51318

If you want to watch a great shortstop, watch John Macdonald. Great range, great hands, good arm. He led AL shortstops in fielding PCT and range factor, but didn't qualify because he only played 102 games at short.

[Scartissue]

I know this is an old topic, but I thought I would mention that this year's Hardball Times 2008 book contains another study of Jeter. Their methodology compared what percentage of outs came from the SS position when Jeter manned it, versus when someone else manned the position. For example, Clemens had both Jeter and Everett behind him at one point, and when Everett was behind Clemens, he was responsible for 14.1% of the outs, whereas Jeter was responsible for 10.6% of the outs.

The author ran numbers a few different ways--percentage of outs with different batters at the plate, all SS and the pitchers they played behind, situations with runners on, and finally park adjusted. Consistently by all these measures, Everett was at or near the very top, and Jeter was very near the bottom, generally fairing better than only Felippe Lopez.

[bigbadwolf]

Fielding and range guestimations are totally invalid and are meaningless.

[Yankeefan90]

Fielding and range guestimations are totally invalid and are meaningless.

It's not guestimations or stats when you can see with your own eyes, Derek Jeter is just not a good fielder anymore. He lacks in range, and even when he wasn't injured you can clearly see Derek Jeter was very sluggish, although it'll never happen but 1B should really be in Derek Jeter's future.

[DoubleX]

Fielding and range guestimations are totally invalid and are meaningless.

You don't seem to be understanding that many of us are basing our opinion on Jeter's defense on simple observation. Seriously, next year, please watch a few other shortstops play regularly and compare what they do to what Jeter does and then come back to this conversation. In doing so, it is easy to notice that Jeter simply just doesn't have the range, especially up the middle, that most other shortstops have, and thus is not able to make a lot of plays tha many other shortstop can make almost routinely.

[TonyStarks]

The Fielding Bible by John Dewan contains an essay by Bill James that explains why Astros shortstop Adam Everett is superior to Jeter defensively. James analyzes the available evidence (four separate methods relying on a different set of facts and based on exhaustive research), and suggests that Derek Jeter could be the worst defensive shortstop ever who has played a long career at shortstop. He concludes, "Giving [Jeter] every possible break on the unknowns, he is still going to emerge as a below average defensive shortstop." The conclusion of the analysis done by Baseball Info Solutions' method (based on systematic observation) was that Derek Jeter "was probably the most ineffective defensive player in the major leagues, at any position."

Many argue that the "clutch" label attached to Jeter is misplaced. For example, though Jeter is known as a great postseason performer, his postseason averages in categories like batting average and OPS are almost identical to his career regular season averages in those categories (his batting average, for example, is eight points lower in the postseason, and his OPS exactly the same), suggesting that Jeter performs no better in "clutch" postseason situations than in less important regular season games.

[TonyStarks]

The headline threw me for a loop.

Ever-Improving Jeter Eyes a Gold Glove

This wasn't some rag, some scandal sheet. This was The New York Times. The Sunday Times. The paper of record containing all the news that's fit to print by the Gray Lady herself.

I don't have time to read every newspaper article about baseball that's published, but this one I had to read. About a year-and-a-half ago, I sat down to write a column comparing the great shortstops, and it wound up, mostly, as an examination of Derek Jeter's value as a fielder. I looked at every objective measure I could find, and all of them suggested that Jeter was, at best, average with the glove.

I also came up with my own method. I compared Jeter's defensive statistics to the other Yankees who played shortstop since he's been on the team. If Derek Jeter were really outstanding, as so many people seemed to think, wouldn't he have better statistics than his backups? But in fact, he did not. The other Yankee shortstops, none of them considered brilliant defensive players, actually combined to post slightly better numbers than Jeter.

Nothing I'd ever written got more attention. A day or two later, I went on the radio in New York with Yankees broadcasters Michael Kay and John Sterling, and Sterling did his very best to humiliate me before their many thousands of listeners. He probably did, too. I imagine I came off like a tongue-tied geek, my nose buried in so many books that I don't have time to actually watch baseball games.

Yet, nothing that's happened since has changed my mind. A few months ago, Bill James came out with a new player evaluation method called Win Shares. His tools for evaluating defense are, in many ways, similar to those previously devised by Baseball Prospectus' Clay Davenport, so it shouldn't be a surprise that they reach the same conclusion: Jeter is not a good defensive player. In his book, James assigns defensive "grades" to players with significant career games, and Jeter gets a D+.

But while I've become convinced that Derek Jeter is not, in fact, even a good defensive shortstop -- let alone a great one -- wouldn't it be wonderful to be proved wrong? To learn that either I was wrong all along or that Jeter really has improved since the last time I checked? Wouldn't that be wonderful, to learn something like that? To be surprised?

So it was with great eagerness that I began to read Tyler Kepner's article in the Times.

Truth be told, it did not start off with a bang. Three paragraphs suggesting that Omar Vizquel has a stranglehold on the Gold Glove (that's true) thanks in part to a generous official scorer in Cleveland (probably not true).

But then we get into the meat of the argument, the reasons why Jeter perhaps does deserve to break Vizquel's nine-year streak. Unfortunately, as it turns out, there's not really any meat at all.

First, there's Jeter saying that he wants to get better. Then there's Willie Randolph saying that Jeter's big, but not so big that he can't play shortstop. Then there's Alex Rodriguez saying that Jeter was already good. Then there's Ron Coomer saying that Jeter is daring. And finally, Randolph again, saying that Jeter is still young enough to get better.

Frankly, Alex Rodriguez's opinion is very close to irrelevant. Rodriguez didn't even address the question of Jeter's supposed improvement; he couldn't, because he's only seen Jeter play a few times this season. He simply says that Jeter has "always been really good," a highly suspect assertion because 1) Rodriguez speaks glowingly of everybody, and 2) anyway, we already know there's little or no objective evidence to support the notion that Jeter has always been really good.

The funny thing is, there are some hints within the article that maybe Jeter hasn't been a great defensive player all these years.

According to Kepner, Jeter thinks he's having his best season with the glove. "More than any other year, by far," Jeter said. OK, but if he was a great fielder before this year, could he really be doing far better this year? Doesn't seem likely.

Also according to Kepner, Randolph "noted that Cal Ripken was an extraordinary shortstop despite minimal range because he positioned himself so well. Jeter, Randolph said, is learning to do the same."

The message here? Jeter is comparable to Ripken in terms of his natural range -- after all, Jeter stands six-three, just an inch shorter than Ripken -- but not until this year has he worked so hard to position himself, as Ripken did

It sounds to me like a lot of people already knew, whether they'll admit it or not, that Jeter has not been a great defensive player for most of his career. So the next question is, has he become a great defensive player this year? Does he really deserve to be considered a serious Gold Glove candidate?

Only if all that hard work is paying off. Only if he's actually increased his range. And if he had a lot more range, wouldn't that show up somewhere in the statistics?

Last season, Jeter made 3.8 plays per nine innings.
This season, Jeter has made 3.7 plays per nine innings.

Yes (you're saying), but maybe there simply aren't as many plays to be made this season. Maybe the pitchers haven't given up as many groundballs. True, for the most part they're the same pitchers from last season, but still ...

Granted. So how might we explore that issue? We can, again, look at what Jeter's backups have done. If the pitchers really are doing something to decrease the number of plays available to the shortstops, presumably the other Yankee shortstops would make fewer plays this year than they made last year.

Last season, Enrique Wilson made 4.3 plays per nine innings.
This season, Enrique Wilson has made 4.3 plays per nine innings.

So you've got two shortstops playing for the same team, and their range statistics are virtually identical from season to season, while playing behind the same pitchers. Might not we conclude from this that 1) those numbers fairly represent their skills, and 2) Wilson may well be the better defensive shortstop?

I asked Clay Davenport if he's got any evidence that Jeter's gotten better this year, and Clay was kind enough to run his Fielding Translations for 2002. And the result? "No, statistically Jeter hasn't improved at all."

To me, the conclusion is inescapable. Jeter may think he's making more plays, and he's to be commended for trying to improve. But the evidence that he's actually making more plays ... well, it's just not there. And all the wishing of all the millions of Yankees fans -- not to mention the people who broadcast and write about the Yankees -- isn't going to conjure evidence that doesn't exist.

And so I'll say what I said a year and a half ago ... Derek Jeter is a great player, but he's a great player not because he plays shortstop well, but simply because he can play shortstop. He's Cecil Travis with power.