They’ve basically been below average in every season but 2006.

If I don’t nitpick somebody else will.  Should be 2005.

That doesn’t really look like the supposedly great glove we keep hearing about

One things that sticks in my mind, that I recall reading from MGL (I think on this blog, but I think the comments were on the old-site and not carried over) was that every position *except* 1B showed a decline after the age of 23 or so.  1B actually showed some improvement as players got older (to a point, of course).  So it’s possible that Tex last year “broke out” as a 1B defensively and this is his new skillset; maybe not a win better than average, but solidly above average.

Other reasons could be a one-year aberration, or a change in the way the data is collected, though I haven’t heard anything about the latter.

can we put some context around that additional win at 1B?  for example, what did Pujols or Youkilis add on defense?

I just hope people don’t freak out when his OPS is sub-.800 for April.  What am I saying, of course the NY media will freak out.

“That doesn’t really look like the supposedly great glove we keep hearing about”

I asked about this a while ago, and MC said something to the effect of There’s another born every minute.

every position *except* 1B showed a decline after the age of 23 or so

This may be true but it doesn’t make sense to me. Physiologically human males don’t peak until the mid to late 20s and even after that the decline phase isn’t to drastic for a couple of years. Granted, since baseball is such a power oriented sport the decline comes much faster but I would expect players to generally peak defensively around the same time they peak offensively, in that 25-27 range. Actually, since defense, at least infield defense, is less power oriented I would expect that peak to last much longer and perhaps even come later.

Obviously this doesn’t happen. My guess is that in an effort to maintain or improve offensive ability players often sacrifice/don’t develop the skills/abilities that would improve their defense.

As an offshoot from this, perhaps Jeter’s defensive improvement is a legitimate change in skill set. If he actually focused on becoming a better defender it may not be a outlier.

Teixeira put on a fielding clinic in the playoffs last year.  watch the highlights on MLB.com, it will warm your heart. 

he’s not Keith Hernandez in his prime, but he’s going to be very good.

This may be true but it doesn’t make sense to me

This was a couple of years ago and it may have changed slightly.  Not that the players age differently but the findings since MGL has refined his process + more data.

Also as you noted baseball focuses on offense, which of course is (or at least has been) more measureable.  23 year-old SS with a reputation of a good defender but light hitter will invariably be instructed (coaches, agents, parents) to add some muscle.  If they add 40 points of OPS but go from +5 to -5 defender they are probably less valuable (or at least haven’t added any), but will still have the rep of a good defender who can now hit.  And by 28 will be moved to 3rd, unless they are an icon at SS.

23 year-old SS with a reputation of a good defender but light hitter will invariably be instructed (coaches, agents, parents) to add some muscle.  If they add 40 points of OPS but go from +5 to -5 defender they are probably less valuable (or at least haven’t added any), but will still have the rep of a good defender who can now hit.

Exactly. However, I don’t think it has to be like this. Added bulk to increase offensive output would slow a player down, but I don’t think it would do so to the point of drastically eroding a players defense if they continued to work on and develop said defense. It is possible to develop offensively and defensively at the same time, it is not a question of either/or.

I remember reading some article or quote about how the reaction against steroids would usher in a “new era” of players more like Brett Gardner. Perhaps it will simply lead to better training by the players. We hear so much about how training has improved with weightlifting and whatnot. The Yankees were even going the right way a couple of years ago with dynamic stretching before the whole injury rash ended that. But, it seems to me that the training has been very focused in one direction rather towards building all around players.

As I noted earlier, baseball is primarily a power and skill sport. The skill part is achieved through repetition, and the power element is vital to all aspects of the game. The same energy systems that are used to hit a ball are used to field one. It seems to me that trainers have been ignoring exercises/drills that could improve fielding. And because both fielding and hitting are power oriented activities, the physical training for both would be complementary.

“Physiologically human males don’t peak until the mid to late 20s”

That’s a very broad judgment though, isn’t it?  Maybe quick-reaction time dominates (at least infield) defense and peaks early.

He basically hit his 65% projection in 2008…

And he hit those 65% projection rate stats in 2007 as well.

I wonder how the projections would have done without regressing him toward the mean.

I don’t think you can talk about a male athlete’s “physiological peak” as if it were all one thing.  Strength, speed, endurance, and agility may all have their own arcs. 

Defense, especially for infielders, depends on agility.  Gymnastics and tennis are also heavy on those skills, and athletes in those sports tend to come into their prime in their late teens, and be done by their late twenties.  Boxers with long careers noticeably lose hand speed as they get older, although they may get larger and stronger. 

I would guess that foot speed declines slightly later than agility, but certainly long before strength and endurance.  Think of the careers of track athletes, and football players.  It’s unusual for someone to retain elite speed past his mid-twenties.

It seems reasonable to me that a player’s defensive peak, dependent on agility and speed, might come at 23, while his offensive peak, more dependent on strength, might come at 27

That’s a very broad judgment though, isn’t it?

not really actually. a peak takes place at the end of development. Human males don’t finish developing physically or mentally until the mid to late 20s. Outside influences could degrade abilities, but I don’t think that reaction time would have a peak drastically different from the general physical and mental peak. (I think I’m correct on the mental peak period, obviously if I’m not then this is likely totally wrong).

Women peak earlier, they also have a less lengthy period of maintained high function, at least physically. The menstrual cycle really messes them up. Interestingly enough, this is reversed sexually with men peaking much earlier than woman and generally experiencing a quicker decline phase through senescence.

Strength, speed, endurance, and agility may all have their own arcs. 

this is true, but lets change speed out for power, because speed isn’t physiological the same with flexibility for agility. Basically given perfect conditions all of these will peak along with a person’s general physiological peak. However, outside influences seriously change this.

Power is the first thing to go, which is why most elite speed and power athletes don’t last past their late 20s. But more than any other element, except maybe flexibility, this can be degraded by injuries. Generally power athletes are very susceptible to severe muscle damage which can lead to a premature/lower peak.

Strength and endurance usually peak after the “general peak” because they can be improved with training so much. This is why most elite marathon runners are in their 30. Neither of these peaks is changed very much by injury aside from the inability to train while recovering.

Agility can be maintained and improved for longer than the other elements of fitness, basically well into senescence. It can be degraded by injury but barring severe muscle trauma, can easily return and surpass pre-injury levels.

It seems reasonable to me that a player’s defensive peak, dependent on agility and speed, might come at 23, while his offensive peak, more dependent on strength, might come at 27

I agree that this is what we see, but physiologically from my limited knowledge it doesn’t make sense to me. Everything says, contrary to visual and statistical evidence, the peaks should be simultaneous since both rely primarily on power. Strength really doesn’t play into baseball at all, aside from influencing power.

I guess what I’m trying to say is that I think most players sacrifice defense for offense because they mistakenly believe it is one or the other. I don’t think that offense or defense is a decision that must be made. It could also be a cultural thing in baseball. Perhaps defense is seen as a static skill that doesn’t need maintenance and naturally declines. I think that defense can be improved well past the common perception of a defensive peak by refocusing or widening training to incorporate elements that would benefit defense.

I see the same basic ability set in hitting and infield defense, power and reflexes. The ability to produce offensive power is analogous to the effectiveness of a first step/getting to the ball and the ability to hit/recognize a pitch analogous to to quickness of a first step. Beyond that fielding is a skill.

It seems to me that trainers have been ignoring exercises/drills that could improve fielding.

I think all you can do with stats is look at past seasons and draw conclusions from them.  E.g. MGL could study defense since year NNNN and conclude when players peak defensively.  So that’s what “has” happened.  You seem to be arguing more what “should” happen.  Which could very well explain why some players (e.g. Omar Visquel) maintain a high level of defense even into their late 30’s.  Perhaps they have focused more on the training that allows their defense to stay the best.  Hopefully this is just the normal evolution of a new system - the type of physical training going on in baseball right now is fairly new - and as it continues to improve itself there will be a better balance to maximize both offense and defense.

My main point in posting it originally though was to point out that 1B seem to age differently defensively than other positions.  So Tex’s recent improvement may be for real, rather than a single-season blip.

My main point in posting it originally though was to point out that 1B seem to age differently defensively than other positions.  So Tex’s recent improvement may be for real, rather than a single-season blip.

I’m not sure if 1B should have a different arc than the rest of the positions, but I am trying to support your assertion that Tex’s recent improvement may be for real. I’m saying that training for defense may be ignored and that a player may be able to raise his skill level if he focuses on improving his defense. Simply, if Tex’s improvement is for real there is a chance, albeit a lesser one that Jeter’s is as well.

Agility can be maintained and improved for longer than the other elements of fitness, basically well into senescence. It can be degraded by injury but barring severe muscle trauma, can easily return and surpass pre-injury levels.

I have to disagree with this.  Although I certainly never was an elite athlete, I also never experienced a severe muscle trauma.  But the accumulation of a number of relatively minor ligament and tendon traumas degraded my agility relatively rapidly and quite dramatically, without impacting my power much at all.  Basically, I think your premise that hitting and fielding depend on the same physiological attributes is off.  While the ability to generate offensive power may be analogous to the effectiveness of a first step on defense, it is not homologous.

And oh yeah, BTW, if human males peak mentally in their mid-twenties, we’re all in really deep doo-doo.

I asked about this a while ago, and MC said something to the effect of There’s another born every minute.

Please refresh my memory.  You’ve got me thinking Alzheimer’s here.

Defense is more complicated than hitting. for sure. hitting is basically power and reaction time where defense adds agility into the equation. I may be off on the agility side, but players also have access to top notch medical care, so the chances of lingering tendon or ligament issues are lessened.

Agility is difficult since its not really a physiological term. I was talking primarily about flexibility which certainly plays into agility. I know far less about agility than the other parts so I am probably way off there.

And oh yeah, BTW, if human males peak mentally in their mid-twenties, we’re all in really deep doo-doo. tongue laugh

Fortunately like endurance and strength the mental peak can be extended and put off by training.

I think.

Fortunately like endurance and strength the mental peak can be extended and put off by training.

I think you’re missing my point.  Personal experience leads me to the belief that males peak mentally much, much later than their mid-twenties, and to devoutly hope that I am right about this.  The older I get, the dumber I was when I was young, and the longer it took for me to get to be as smart as I am now. 

Well, there is most likely a difference between mental peak and intellectual peak.  One has to do with gross capabilities, the other also includes experience and retained learnings.

I understand what your saying, but I think your missing the meaning of peak, it really has little to do with “smartness.” Smartness is linked with experience, clearly since you are older you know more. But mentally you probably don’t function quite as quickly in your 40s as you do in your 20s. I think the idea of the mental peak refers to learning ability and acuity rather than intelligence or smartness.

Ok, so “There’s one born every minute” is a somewhat energetic reading of the following from 19 Jan:

Me:
“Teixeira’s numbers seem odd.  Was his defense really stellar last year after being slightly-below-average-to-poor the previous three?  Is he just sort of average, and we got sold a bill of goods re his glove?”

MC:
“Is he just sort of average, and we got sold a bill of goods re his glove?

Yes.”

can we put some context around that additional win at 1B?  for example, what did Pujols or Youkilis add on defense?

Here are the top 20 defensive 1B seasons using combined ZR and UZR from 2005-2008.

Here are the top projected defensive 1B for 2009, again using a combination of ZR and bUZR.

It seems like the spread of defensive talent at first base is pretty small, at least based on what these metrics record, so Teixeira does project to be one of the better defensive 1B, but the run value of that is not all that big.

I wonder how the projections would have done without regressing him toward the mean.

Not sure, it depends how much each system regresses and what they regress towards.  I can show you what CAIRO would say if he is not regressed:

80%: .317/.430/.611 vs. .315/.427/.607 (2 run difference)
65%: .305/.410/.576 vs. .303/.407/.572 (2 run difference)
Base: .293/.391/.540 vs. .291/.388/.536 (2 run difference)
35%: .282/.371/.505 vs. .280/.368/.501 (2 run difference)
20%: .270/.351/.470 vs. .268/.349/.466 (1 run difference)

For an established major leaguer like Teixeira who consistently gets 600+ PA, the regression component is pretty small.

Is that all it was, rilke?  You had me thinking I’d been cleverly quoting PT Barnum and Leo Durocher only to have quickly forgotten all about it.

And as for you two, Clay and DaPuj, how many goofy freakin’ smiley thingies do I have to throw in to get you guys to realize that I’m not exactly being completely serious here?

“Is that all it was, rilke?”

Yeah, sorry, call it poetic license.  I did write, “said something to the effect of”, which you sort of did, reading between the [lack of] lines.

how many goofy freakin’ smiley thingies do I have to throw in to get you guys to realize that I’m not exactly being completely serious here?

I think one more would have done it.

I hadn’t argued in a while.  A little trigger-happy maybe.

Re: the defense, we’re still talking on the order of a win just from 1B defensive improvement over the last few years, even if he’s only slightly above average.  I like what I see.

I hadn’t argued in a while.  A little trigger-happy maybe.

Same here. I kinda knew you weren’t serious but I couldn’t help myself.

I´m not sure all male physical abilities peak at the same time. IIRC a human male sexual peak happens in the late teens, not the early to mid twenties. The human body is not a engeneried machine with a single functioning purpose, it is the result of chance changes (I really hope Don doesn´t come here to try and deny this) and the maturation process of each of the different systems have no reason to peak at the same time.

Mental peak is also a very coarse description. There are various different factors and abilities. Some of them are more basic processes like geometrical perception, spacial recognition, logical reasoning, memory acquisition, and some of these should peak early. Other, like total memory clearly don´t. But other more complex things we are able to do, like problem solving, involve acquired experience and should not peak early simply because your experience is a growing function of time, up until your alzheirmer kicks in. Personally, when talking about mental peak, problem solving would be one of my main things to measure.

Also, if IIRC, your ability to recognize and produce new sounds also peaks early, around age 2 or 3, and starts declining around age 5 or so. It is very hard to learn how to speak a new language without accent after your childhood.

The human body is not a engeneried machine with a single functioning purpose…

Actually, it pretty much is.  All those other functions are either supportive of the main one or purely fortuitous.  Which sort of brings us back to Clay’s point about current training regimes favoring offense over defense—chicks dig the long ball.

“the main one”

Cue PED joke.

Who else is amused by the fact that Viagra, a “performance enhancer,” is sponsor of MLB network?

the discussion of his defense seems to be a case of losing sight of the forest while looking at the soil.

That Pujols dude is good.

Who else is amused by the fact that Viagra, a “performance enhancer,” is sponsor of MLB network?

Who else was amused when Rafael Palmeiro lost his gig endorsing Viagra because he got caught using PEDs?

That Pujols dude is good.

Eh, he’s one of those all-glove, no-stick defensive whizzes.  Give me a 1B with some pop in his bat, like Miguel Cairo.  Now we’re talking.

“That Pujols dude is good.”

DaPuj dude is good.

SG, Youkilis doesn’t even make the top ten for 2009 projections? I officially hate defensive metrics.

the discussion of his defense seems to be a case of losing sight of the forest while looking at the soil.

Multitasking! We can look at the forest (offense) and the soil (D), no?

a gamer, a gamer, just.. grit, old school.

Was that Mo pitching?

Give me a 1B with some pop in his bat, like Miguel Cairo

You joke, but he really was a great situational hitter.

Was that Mo pitching?

He was scheduled to, and the boxscore says he pitched a perfect inning, striking out two.  Tonight, he heard the lamentation of the women.

I highly recommend the director’s commentary of Conan the Barbarian.  Arnold barely knows what’s going on and keeps talking about his cigar-nights, while John Milius keeps having to correct him.  Very amusing.

19 days till Mo can cut down some batters in a real game!

19 days till the cutter can mow down some batters in a real game.

Seattle Sox Fan, yes of course. I just believe that when it comes to 1b the offense is SOOOO much more important, and the talent spread is so relatively narrow and, and the “advanced defensive metrics” don’t incorporate pop ups or scoopiness. So i just can’t get worked up that Tex doesn’t sport the highest UZR.

There’s no other 1b man that would help the team win more games, other than Albert.

Well, they dissed Youkilis, so I’m all in favor of dismissing defensive metrics.

Kepner: “Manager Joe Girardi said the Yankees were considering Kei Igawa for the open long relief spot. Igawa, who has been a $46 million bust, has worked 12 scoreless innings this spring and is competing with Alfredo Aceves, Dan Giese, Jason Johnson and Brett Tomko.”

I think I’d actually rather see Igawa than Tomko.

And oh yeah, BTW, if human males peak mentally in their mid-twenties, we’re all in really deep doo-doo.

Hehe, you said “doo-doo.”

Uh-oh, its starting already…..

Well, they dissed Youkilis, so I’m all in favor of dismissing defensive metrics.

There’s a 10 run ugly beard penalty in my projections.

Youkilis’s projection is suppressed by his 2006 zone rating.  He was -7 plays compared to average, -5 runs saved by zone rating.  His UZR was actaully +2 runs saved, so he could have faced an inordinate number of difficult chances, something that UZR would adjust for and regular ZR would not.

Anyway, like I said in the entry, there are aspects to 1B defense that are not considered in these metrics which can probably change the ratings slightly.  Youkilis projects around +1.7 so he really just missed my top 10 cutoff, and I wasn’t going to stretch it to 11 for a Red Sock, dammit.