Chris Duffy and Franquelis Osoria Get Through Waivers

by Charlie on Aug 8, 2008 12:01 AM EDT Comment 6 comments

Chris Duffy and Franquelis Osoria have both passed through waivers and will be sent to Class AAA, the Post-Gazette reports.

Rule of thumb--if two guys as old as Duffy and Osoria get through irrevocable waivers, they aren't worth anything. The days when the Braves or Marlins or whomever might have had interest in Duffy passed long ago. It would have been nice if the Bucs had shipped him off in the Adam LaRoche deal; Brent Lillibridge, who the Pirates gave up instead, has hardly had a great career since the deal, but he'd have made a potential Jack Wilson deal easier to take, since he's better than all the other shortstop options besides Wilson currently in the Pirates organization.

0 recs | Comment 6 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

McLouth's defense

So how do people who understand defensive statistics better than me take the claims being made about McLouth’s defense? Fielding metrics have him as one of, if not the, worst CFers in the league, as this article at baseball think factory demostrates:

http://www.baseballthinkfactory.org/files/dialed_in/discussion/nl_defensive_stats_to_date/

DK has a very bad reaction to this article, listing the defensive responsibilities that McLouth has performed well, and asking people to “trust the eyes”.

Opinions? I was very surprised to see people saying he was one of the worst defensive CFers, but there have been many times I’ve questioned his positioning because of balls falling in behind him.

by hisjazziness on Aug 8, 2008 4:10 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Trust the eyes?

There are probably some flaws in the defensive metrics – but my eyes tell me that McClouth is probably better suited for RF. He would be fine there if he can keep up the hitting that he’s been doing over the past 1.5 seasons. He is not an optimal CFer.

“Trusting the eyes” is a great way to make bad assumptions about a player’s defensive abilities. If a guy is making a lot of running backhanded catches, then it might suggest that he’s struggling to get to balls that a more accomplished fielder would get to more easily.

by EStreet on Aug 8, 2008 6:52 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

if you “trust your eyes” Derek Jeter looks great because he makes all those jump throws. but if you really pay attention you realize that a “good” defensive shortstop would make those plays seem routine. Bay was also a poor defensive outfielder, especially in the big leftfield at PNC.

by Blyleven Curve Ball on Aug 8, 2008 11:05 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Is the inverse CW possible?

I’m really asking—if a good defense can “make a pitcher better”, could better pitching make defenders look better? Maybe if McLouth didn’t have so many balls flying over his head, he’d make more routine catches?

by azibuck on Aug 8, 2008 2:26 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Relatedly, can anyone link to or summarize the methodology here? I didn’t post this myself because I couldn’t figure out what the methodology was and because it said:

1) That the no-kneed Jody Gerut was the top CF in the NL, and 22 runs better than McLouth, despite only playing half the season;

2) That Pat Burrell and Juan Pierre were the best LFs in the league;

3) That all the catchers in the league except Geovany Soto were within one run of being average (wouldn’t one or two plays at the plate, all by themselves, make the range between the best and merely average greater than one run?);

4) That Troy Glaus is an excellent defensive third baseman;

5) That Luis Rivas has been an above-average shortstop;

6) That the immobile Brian Giles has been an excellent right fielder.

These things don’t make a lot of sense to me. I understand that every defensive metric will contain surprising results, but I want to know a lot more about this one before anyone goes tarring and feathering Nate McLouth or Jason Bay over what this says.

by Charlie on Aug 8, 2008 2:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs