Touches

Two important plays outfielders make that never show up in stats are cutting balls off in the gaps and corners and holding runners to first or other bases becasue the ball doesn't go to the fence.

The other is bases saved because they get to the ball and get rid of it quickly or have the kind of arm that holds runners.

The third play is the better than average catch with runners on base. Only a well turned double play can turn a game faster than a running catch in the gap with two outs and the bases full.

I completely agree. What you’re describing is a QFC(Quality Fielding Chance), and is while easier to quantify than a QAB, its still something very difficult to track. Its not that it couldn’t be done, but it would take one heck of a lot of judgment that would require scorers to see and understand a lot more of the field than they do now. Those are things like charting pitchers, where if someone thinks they’re worthwhile to track, they’ll have to get someone other than the scorer to do it because s/he’s got more than enough to do already.

However, if it were done, I believe the results would lead to many interesting changes in thinking about a lot of players. Sometimes people don’t want to see things like that because it calls their “judgment” into question.

I would love to see QFC.

quote:

Originally posted by NDD:
I would love to see QFC.

There’s absolutely no reason why a coach, or anyone else couldn’t have that stat. All one has to do is define, explain it to whoever will be scoring so they can mark it, then make sure whoever’s doing the stats inputs it as a data tracking point.

For over a dozen years now, I’ve tracked MRO’s(Moved Runner Opportunity) and MRUs(Moved Runner Up). I defined an MRO as an at bat where there are runners on base, and the MRU happens when the batter moves at least the lead runner without making the 3rd out. Its 2nd nature to me, but when I have to turn the book over to someone else for some kind of break, I just tell them what it is, and have them put a big black “-“ in the at bat box when there are runners on, and change it to a “+” if the lead runner gets moved. Its no big deal to enter both the MOR and the MRU.

If I was scoring for you and you wanted QFC’s, all you’d have to do is define them in detail, and I’d do my best to mark them. There is one itty bitty problem with those kinds of things though. Where the MRO and MRU are set in concrete so there’s no judgment about them, the QFC as you described them could lead to substantial differences in judgment. That’s sure OK, but if I’m using my “best” judgment and you think its wrong, either you better define them so I can understand what you want, or you better keep your mouth shut about my judgment.

Seriously, if you’re the HC or manager, just talk to your scorer. It shouldn’t be a problem at all.

quote:

or you better keep your mouth shut about my judgment. Wink

I hear you. I might try it next spring.

I think it comes down to how important it is to the coach. If you have watched enough baseball I am going to estimate upwards of 80-90% of these plays are kind of obvious. For example R2 single to right and the kid goes hard rounds thrid and gets a late stop sign from the coach because RF has gotten to the ball, fielded it cleanly and has or is about to unload his throw. Run saved even if it is only temporary. Obviously a bigger deal with two down but still even with one out a grounder could get two and get you out of it.

quote:

Originally posted by luv baseball:
I think it comes down to how important it is to the coach. …

That’s precisely why its impossible to come up with either a Quality At Bat or Quality Pitch that everyone would agree on, and why it would be impossible to come up with a Quality Fielding chance to do it either. What makes it impossible is that everyone puts different values on every aspect of the game, and what makes it even more difficult is that the standards for even an individual change as the personnel and/or the situation changes.

But that’s the way metrics are. Everyone tries to manipulate them. A batter getting a solid line drive single off of Cliff Lee with 2 outs and the team down 9-0 in the bottom of the 9th isn’t worth as much as the same batter getting the exact same hit off of the exact same pitcher if the score’s 0-0 in the bottom of the 9th and there’s a runner on 2nd.

In an example closer to home, our HS HC has always placed a huge value on defense and base running, and it shows in the games, and his teams enjoy much success. Another local HC concentrated on fence busters who literally pummel opponents, so no matter what the teams pitching or defense is like, they still roll over almost all opponents. Now each coach appreciates something well done no matter what it is, but I know for a fact that they each put different values on the things they feel are important.

But that’s how it should be! Baseball would really suck if every coach coached exactly the same way.

In relating this thread to the other one about RF, I'm not sure I understand touches. Can you give a case example on a ground ball?

quote:

Originally posted by NDD:
In relating this thread to the other one about RF, I'm not sure I understand touches. Can you give a case example on a ground ball?

I’ll try to do that, but I warn ya, since I posted that, “touches” have changed.

The way a “touch” is defined at this particular point in time is 1) when a player is the 1st player to touch the ball on a base hit, who could be charged with an error, given an asst, or a Po, or 2) if a player makes a play that doesn’t get an out or cause problems.

Ex for 1: Batter hits a slow roller to 3rd, but beats it out for a single. Had the fielder thrown the ball away and allowed the batter to move to 2nd, he’d have been dinged with an error. Under the current methodology, he isn’t credited with anything. Another example would be a line drive double off the wall in left. Had F& bobbled the ball or made a bad throw allowing a runner to move up, he’d have been dinged.

Ex for 2: Pitcher attempts a PO at 1st. Pitcher gets a touch for making an errorless throw, and F3 gets a touch for making an errorless catch. Same would go for a catcher trying to pick off a runner.

I guess I could characterize what I’m trying to do, something like making sure every base acquired is accounted for. The way the defensive numbers are done for the most part, don’t do that. If a fielder doesn’t get a PO, Asst, or an E, there’s absolutely nothing, but that’s not how the game works in my mind.

There’s nothing that measures an outfielder cutting off a ball to keep a batter from going to 2nd or a runner scoring. There’s nothing that measures an F5 or F3 diving to knock a ball down that would have gone into a corner, or an F6 or F4 from doing the same thing on a ball between them and another fielder, but is still a base hit. I’m not advocating scorers try to guess what might have happened which would be subjective, but rather simply acknowledging that they participated in a play.

I’m not on a crusade, nor am I trying to make up numbers out of thin air. I’m just trying to give a manager/coach something else to look at and consider. FI, let’s say that a HS coach looks at the defensive numbers the way I do them, and sees his RF touches one heck of a lot of balls on hits, but seldom gets a PO, Asst, or E. If suddenly his regular RF isn’t available, he might want to 2nd guess just shoving someone out there who might allow extra bases, or worse.

The link is to a game from yesterday. Don’t get caught up in the names because I’m in the middle of changing teams, but do look at the positions and the plays. As you can easily see, it pains the outfielders in a really different light. On the one team, the 3 OFrs almost had as many plays as all 4 IFrs.

I don’t expect this to revolutionize the game, but for me at least it looks as though it’ll give me just a little more info than the guy who doesn’t do it.

http://www.infosports.com/scor.../images/touches1.pdf

I’ve decided to see how ‘touches’ look in more than a 1 team for 1 game setting. The report is for 7 MLB games. To be honest, it makes me really anxious to see what the numbers will show for an entire season of HS ball, and it sure gives me a new perspective on outfielders as a part of defense.

http://www.infosports.com/scor...r/images/TOUCHES.pdf