First data for Freeman's defense at 3b

[Enscheff]

The first data for Freeman's defense at 3B is in...and it ain't pretty. Small sample caveats obviously apply but:

BRef: -39 runs per year
FG: -89 runs per 150 games

So....yeah. It's pretty damn bad.

So far, it's even worse than the -20 I expected.

[msstate7]

Don't remember many opportunities for him

[Enscheff]

Don't remember many opportunities for him

That's because the "eye test" is terrible at picking up plays that weren't even attempted due to lack of range.

These metrics are less about making errors on balls hit right at guys, and more about guys making the non-routine plays. If an average defender at 3B makes 50% of the non-routine plays, and Freeman makes 0% of them, that's a huge hit to his defensive value.

[bravesfanMatt]

How much is his one error hampering those numbers. I haven't watched every game.. but has there really been many balls that could have even been up for debate?

[Enscheff]

How much is his one error hampering those numbers. I haven't watched every game.. but has there really been many balls that could have even been up for debate?

Again, these metrics are less about making errors on balls hit right at guys, and more about guys making the non-routine plays. If an average defender at 3B makes 50% of the non-routine plays, and Freeman makes 0% of them, that's a huge hit to his defensive value.

[Southcack77]

Again, these metrics are less about making errors on balls hit right at guys, and more about guys making the non-routine plays. If an average defender at 3B makes 50% of the non-routine plays, and Freeman makes 0% of them, that's a huge hit to his defensive value.

While I anticipate that the trend will hold and Freeman will prove to be this bad at 3B, it's probably not enough data to go on yet.

[bravesfanMatt]

Again, these metrics are less about making errors on balls hit right at guys, and more about guys making the non-routine plays. If an average defender at 3B makes 50% of the non-routine plays, and Freeman makes 0% of them, that's a huge hit to his defensive value.

Right, but does it give how many chances. I understand the SSS caveat.. But this seems Super SSS.. I can think of one right now that might have been in question.. (double down the line)

[chop2chip]

Granted I haven't watched every inning but I can't recall a single ball hit to him yet except a pop up (which he caught).

I would draw exactly negative seven conclusions from this data.

[Enscheff]

Granted I haven't watched every inning but I can't recall a single ball hit to him yet except a pop up (which he caught).

I would draw exactly negative seven conclusions from this data.

If you can't recall a single ball hit to him, then you haven't watched much at all.

Anyways, I completely expected pozzies to dismiss this data since it goes against their belief that Freeman can play 3B.

I doubt he will be -80 or -40 runs per year bad, but it shouldn't take long to realize he is unplayable at 3B.

[bravesfanMatt]

Granted I haven't watched every inning but I can't recall a single ball hit to him yet except a pop up (which he caught).

I would draw exactly negative seven conclusions from this data.

there was a double down the line that would have been a tough play. He has handled a couple of ground outs.. there was an error which I missed a couple of games ago. I just don't see how there is even enough data to put these numbers together...

[bravesfanMatt]

If you can't recall a single ball hit to him, then you haven't watched much at all.

Anyways, I completely expected pozzies to dismiss this data since it goes against their belief that Freeman can play 3B.

I doubt he will be -80 or -40 runs per year bad, but it shouldn't take long to realize he is unplayable at 3B.

I wasn't disagreeing with him playing or not.. this just feels like a guy hitting .750 after 2 games irrelevant.

[sturg33]

If you can't recall a single ball hit to him, then you haven't watched much at all.

Anyways, I completely expected pozzies to dismiss this data since it goes against their belief that Freeman can play 3B.

I doubt he will be -80 or -40 runs per year bad, but it shouldn't take long to realize he is unplayable at 3B.

I'm guessing the sample size is so small that that error actually crushed his numbers. That's a play that is made 99/100 times, and he booted it. Considering his lack of reps, I'd imagine that did his numbers in so far.

I can recall another two plays where a good third basemen probably makes the play

I'm sure time will show he can't hack it over there. I'm hoping we're just trying to use this time to help Adams' value inch up a little bit more before 7/31.

With the emergance of Camargo and SRod coming back, there is no way this experiment continues

[chop2chip]

If you can't recall a single ball hit to him, then you haven't watched much at all.

Anyways, I completely expected pozzies to dismiss this data since it goes against their belief that Freeman can play 3B.

I doubt he will be -80 or -40 runs per year bad, but it shouldn't take long to realize he is unplayable at 3B.
Honest question, do you really believe this data means anything yet?

I think everybody acknowledges Freddie is going to be horrible at third. It's just that this data isn't any more of a bit of proof than Camargo going 3-4 and being labeled the next A-Rod.

[chop2chip]

I'm guessing the sample size is so small that that error actually crushed his numbers. That's a play that is made 99/100 times, and he booted it. Considering his lack of reps, I'd imagine that did his numbers in so far.

I can recall another two plays where a good third basemen probably makes the play

I'm sure time will show he can't hack it over there. I'm hoping we're just trying to use this time to help Adams' value inch up a little bit more before 7/31.

With the emergance of Camargo and SRod coming back, there is no way this experiment continues
Perfectly stated.

[Enscheff]

Honest question, do you really believe this data means anything yet?

I think everybody acknowledges Freddie is going to be anything but horrible at third. It's just that this data isn't any more of a bit of proof then Camargo going 3-4 and being labeled the next A-Rod.

Like I said, it's highly unlikely Freeman is a -80 or -40 defender at 3B.

However, it is highly likely this data is already showing he is unplayable at 3B.

If you want to dismiss the data, the onus is on you to do it with your own data. Go use FG's split leader boards to find other 40 inning stretches by guys at 3B that resulted in -80, and see where that data leads you. Is it common for average or below average defenders to have 40 inning stretches that bad?

Idle speculation is worthless, it's just being contrarian and contributes nothing to the discussion.

[chop2chip]

When reliable data is available, I will be glad to parse it and I'm sure it will show FF is unplayable at third.

Until then, I don't see the need to make any conclusions off of an enormously small sample size.

[Russ2dollas]

You can watch him move and know he can't play 3B. This is silly.

he's bad. Adams is not that good. Even his 850-900 OPS version of himself isn't that great at 1B. It's cheap production but it's not special.

I'd rather have Chase Hedley at 3B (as part of a salary dump to get a good midlevel Yankees piece) plus freeman at 1B than Freeman and adams on opposite sides of the diamond.

I don't see how anyone can want Allard and Soroka even thinking about pitching in MLB with that defense behind them.

I'm not mister defensive metrics but we can't just punt on the corners and put bottom 10% defenders in every corner spot.

I'd rather play Rio over there and hope Rio can turn 24/25 years old and get a little more power. I'd feel better about Rio finding a way to an 800 OPS with average or a little better defense than Freeman and Adams.

[nsacpi]

I'm guessing Adams is going to only play against righties going forward...that'll improve the terms of the defense/offense tradeoff

[thewupk]

I'm guessing the sample size is so small that that error actually crushed his numbers. That's a play that is made 99/100 times, and he booted it. Considering his lack of reps, I'd imagine that did his numbers in so far.

I can recall another two plays where a good third basemen probably makes the play

I'm sure time will show he can't hack it over there. I'm hoping we're just trying to use this time to help Adams' value inch up a little bit more before 7/31.

With the emergance of Camargo and SRod coming back, there is no way this experiment continues

For UZR that is certainly the case. He is at -0.7 in errors and -0.5 in range. Now I certainly don't think he's going to be something like -20 or -30 runs just in errors alone because that is absurd. But the -0.5 in range so far is pretty troubling and not all that surprising. Those per 150 game numbers will improve as he gets more playing time there but they still won't be pretty.

[Enscheff]

For UZR that is certainly the case. He is at -0.7 in errors and -0.5 in range. Now I certainly don't think he's going to be something like -20 or -30 runs just in errors alone because that is absurd. But the -0.5 in range so far is pretty troubling and not all that surprising. Those per 150 game numbers will improve as he gets more playing time there but they still won't be pretty.

This is why I can't stand the idiotic argument folks make when they say "he catches what he gets to", as if that's all it takes to be a competent defender.

If his range is so limited he can't get to much of anything, he is a terrible defender.

This is precisely why the "eye test" is such a terrible way to judge defenders. Hell, we just had a poster in this very thread say, "I haven't seen him get any plays", and then proceed to question these defensive numbers. He was using the eye test...yet hasn't even SEEN any of the plays in question.

It is comical how bad fans are at judging defense. No wonder they have no idea how to value it. Unfortunately, the Braves FO doesn't seem to be much better.

[chop2chip]

This is precisely why the "eye test" is such a terrible way to judge defenders. Hell, we just had a poster in this very thread say, "I haven't seen him get any plays", and then proceed to question these defensive numbers. He was using the eye test...yet hasn't even SEEN any of the plays in question.

I mean, sure, that's one way of interpreting what I said. It's wrong, but god bless you anyways.

Please enjoy the rest of your afternoon yelling at the clouds.

[Southcack77]

I've got quite a bit of bias into my "eye test" observations, but to me he looks slow and awkward at 3B. He has made some routine plays, but I thought he looked less than fluid in doing it.

The Astros game with the doubles --- I think some most 3B would have had a better reaction to, though I'm not sure if they'd have made the play.

[Freshmaker]

I mean, sure, that's one way of interpreting what I said. It's wrong, but god bless you anyways.

Please enjoy the rest of your afternoon yelling at the clouds.

http://i0.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/019/304/old.jpg

[Freshmaker]

what everyone seems to be ignoring is that Freeman now qualifies at 3B in fantasy and that is by far the most important thing here

[Managuarantano's Volunteers]

what everyone seems to be ignoring is that Freeman now qualifies at 3B in fantasy and that is by far the most important thing here

Coppolella is making bank off his fantasy team and will reinvest it into the Braves so we can afford Mike Trout.

[smootness]

This is an extremely small sample, so it doesn't show much one way or the other, but it does support what is obvious - Freeman is going to be atrocious at 3B.

I actually think a -40 number is possible and -20 is also possible but optimistic.

[Freshmaker]

Coppolella is making bank off his fantasy team and will reinvest it into the Braves so we can afford Mike Trout.

http://i0.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/facebook/000/022/138/reece.jpg

[RazorbackBrave]

I think it was very easy to see in the first game that Freeman would not be able to be a serviceable 3B. On the double hit down the line, I thought most third basemen would have gotten. It looked like FF was guarding the line and still couldn't get there.

I'm not sure FF could play there if the Braves had an elite SS and elite LF much less with Swanson and Kemp out there. (I'm not saying Swanson is as bad as Kemp either. Just not elite.)

[Russ2dollas]

This is why I can't stand the idiotic argument folks make when they say "he catches what he gets to", as if that's all it takes to be a competent defender.

If his range is so limited he can't get to much of anything, he is a terrible defender.

This is precisely why the "eye test" is such a terrible way to judge defenders. Hell, we just had a poster in this very thread say, "I haven't seen him get any plays", and then proceed to question these defensive numbers. He was using the eye test...yet hasn't even SEEN any of the plays in question.

It is comical how bad fans are at judging defense. No wonder they have no idea how to value it. Unfortunately, the Braves FO doesn't seem to be much better.

It's the same argument for Kemp. He catches what he gets to.

Neither guy is falling down or looking lost like gattis or Adams in LF. Both are terrible unless we have some amazing data that positions them in exactly the right place.

[msstate7]

So far has the run production of having Adams and FF out there exceeded the runs given up?

[nsacpi]

I think it was very easy to see in the first game that Freeman would not be able to be a serviceable 3B. On the double hit down the line, I thought most third basemen would have gotten. It looked like FF was guarding the line and still couldn't get there.

I'm not sure FF could play there if the Braves had an elite SS and elite LF much less with Swanson and Kemp out there. (I'm not saying Swanson is as bad as Kemp either. Just not elite.)

He reacted very slowly to that double. I think Camargo would knock it down and keep the ball in the infield.

[cajunrevenge]

3b could still be a nice option in the future on a limited basis. Versatility is always helpful. Not sure our manager would take advantage of it though.

[bravesfanMatt]

He reacted very slowly to that double. I think Camargo would knock it down and keep the ball in the infield.

I don't think any 3B could get that one. It was hit very hard and landed a few feet fowl after crossing over the bag. FF might have been slow to react, but I don't think JO-gun gets to that one either.

[Enscheff]

I don't think any 3B could get that one. It was hit very hard and landed a few feet fowl after crossing over the bag. FF might have been slow to react, but I don't think JO-gun gets to that one either.

Which is why the "eye test" is useless and has been replaced with defensive metrics.

[Knucksie]

So far has the run production of having Adams and FF out there exceeded the runs given up?

That's a really good question. The exercise is short term anyway, just to showcase Adams.

[gilesfan]

Obviously, he's going to be terrible at 3B. We all know that. To what degree is the question. But, using this limited of a data set is pretty dumb.

[clvclv]

Can't see the genius' posts, but I'm guessing sample size only makes a difference when it fits your point, right???

We all know he's not a 3B, this makes you "smart"??? Might oughta get back to dealing cards.

[bravesfanMatt]

Which is why the "eye test" is useless and has been replaced with defensive metrics.

Do they have individual plays marked yet? I wasn't saying my eyes are better than metric. We were just debating a particular play. I would be interested to see if that one play was marked as a 3 star or 5 star attempt.

[Enscheff]

Can't see the genius' posts, but I'm guessing sample size only makes a difference when it fits your point, right???

We all know he's not a 3B, this makes you "smart"??? Might oughta get back to dealing cards.

LOL, how's that blog coming? Have you penned any more insightful articles about the Braves going with a 24 man roster, or them already trading Garcia? How about some more trade scenarios where the Braves get an Ace for 3-4 spare parts? Maybe you can explain to us again how Wilser and Folty are equivalent pitchers?

It's hilarious being criticized by the dumbest poster on these boards haha!

[Freshmaker]

Which is why the "eye test" is useless and has been replaced with defensive metrics.

Which shows us that you obviously didn't see the play. There's not a 3B in baseball that gets a glove on that ball unless they're standing on the line.

[Enscheff]

Which shows us that you obviously didn't see the play. There's not a 3B in baseball that gets a glove on that ball unless they're standing on the line.

Ok bud. I'm sure your eye test honed by years of watching baseball from your couch makes you a better judge of defensive value than these metrics. You're right and both FG and BRef are wrong.

I wonder, why don't you have your own popular baseball analysis website since you're so insightful?

[Managuarantano's Volunteers]

Which shows us that you obviously didn't see the play. There's not a 3B in baseball that gets a glove on that ball unless they're standing on the line.
Ultimately, defensive metrics rely on people to judge whether that one play was extremely difficult or not anyway. Aka the stats aren't 100% set in stone yet, but he's bad like everyone knows. Now it's time to wait to see if he is totally unplayable.

[Enscheff]

Ultimately, defensive metrics rely on people to judge whether that one play was extremely difficult or not anyway. Aka the stats aren't 100% set in stone yet, but he's bad like everyone knows. Now it's time to wait to see if he is totally unplayable.

What I find most amusing is all the derptards commenting as if I didn't expressly state in the OP that this data is based off an extremely limited sample.

[JohnAdcox]

Which is why the "eye test" is useless and has been supplemented/enhanced with defensive metrics.

Fixed your typo.

[clvclv]

He reacted very slowly to that double. I think Camargo would knock it down and keep the ball in the infield.

Just because the hullaballaloo is about the metrics, can you back up that claim? Or was that the eye-test?




(Sorry, just had to. LOL.)

[Enscheff]

Just because the hullaballaloo is about the metrics, can you back up that claim? Or was that the eye-test?




(Sorry, just had to. LOL.)

As usual, a completely useless response.

Considering Camargo has been +16 UZR/150 and +13 DRS/yr so far at 3B, I think it's safe to assume he would have made a couple plays Freeman didn't.

Which plays exactly is completely irrelevant.

[chop2chip]

Freddie is at +2 DRS through 66 innings at 3B so far.

Extrapolated over a full season that comes out to +42 DRS.

Chipper with the bat and Brooks Robinson with the glove.

[bravesfanMatt]

Freddie is at +2 DRS through 66 innings at 3B so far.

Extrapolated over a full season that comes out to +42 DRS.

Chipper with the bat and Brooks Robinson with the glove.

He has looked good.

[thethe]

Freddie is at +2 DRS through 66 innings at 3B so far.

Extrapolated over a full season that comes out to +42 DRS.

Chipper with the bat and Brooks Robinson with the glove.

This is full of LOLZ.

It was clear that one error (a 1 star play messed up) threw the figures away. But I suppose its more fun to use fangraphs stats without actually any further comprehension of said stats.

[msstate7]

Freddie is at +2 DRS through 66 innings at 3B so far.

Extrapolated over a full season that comes out to +42 DRS.

Chipper with the bat and Brooks Robinson with the glove.

Now it's SSS... just forget the sample is larger ;)

[chop2chip]

Now it's SSS... just forget the sample is larger ;)
Don't get me wrong, this data means nothing.

I'm just trolling our good natured derp master.

[Orphan Black]

I think Freddie has looked fine over there.

While playing a position isn't like riding a bike, I'm sure him playing all through high school has helped the transition quite a bit.

Sure he doesn't have the quickest first step, but as long as he makes the routine plays and the one's hit at him he'll be okay.

[msstate7]

Don't get me wrong, this data means nothing.

I'm just trolling our good natured derp master.
Haha

[Garmel]

Don't get me wrong, this data means nothing.

I'm just trolling our good natured derp master.

Be prepared for the inevitable "loser leaves board" bet.

[Enscheff]

Freddie is at +2 DRS through 66 innings at 3B so far.

Extrapolated over a full season that comes out to +42 DRS.

Chipper with the bat and Brooks Robinson with the glove.

Freeman's Rtot/yr is -18 at 3B.

[sturg33]

889226430747475970

[Managuarantano's Volunteers]

Let's be honest, we all knew 3B was easy when we saw Chris Johnson do it.

[mfree80]

Freeman's Rtot/yr is -18 at 3B.

I was curious so I looked up Rtot. I found an good explantion including this footnote:

Players with very little playing time can have skewed numbers though when extrapolated to a full year of play. Tigers outfielder Clete Thomas, for example, had a -39.6 in 2008 in Center Field, but that was based on just 12 games and 118 innings. It is close to impossible to be that bad over a full season and such a number isn’t accurate. Remember, it’s not the stats that lie, it’s the poor use of them.

I am not, by any means suggesting Freddie is going to be good over a larger sample size, but sounds like a bad Rtot over a SSS is not very meaningful... of course neither is DRS, or any other objective measure. Let's just agree that he is not good, but maybe not as bad as some of us thought he might be. I doubt any of us want to see this continue.

[smootness]

Almost all of his chances have been routine so far. He's done ok on those plays, but it'll be interesting to see what happens when he starts getting more balls that are outside that category. Probably not gonna look pretty.

[GovClintonTyree]

Almost all of his chances have been routine so far. He's done ok on those plays, but it'll be interesting to see what happens when he starts getting more balls that are outside that category. Probably not gonna look pretty.

He makes even the toughest plays look routine. He's freaking Brooks Robinson over there.

[Enscheff]

I was curious so I looked up Rtot. I found an good explantion including this footnote:

Players with very little playing time can have skewed numbers though when extrapolated to a full year of play. Tigers outfielder Clete Thomas, for example, had a -39.6 in 2008 in Center Field, but that was based on just 12 games and 118 innings. It is close to impossible to be that bad over a full season and such a number isn’t accurate. Remember, it’s not the stats that lie, it’s the poor use of them.

I am not, by any means suggesting Freddie is going to be good over a larger sample size, but sounds like a bad Rtot over a SSS is not very meaningful... of course neither is DRS, or any other objective measure. Let's just agree that he is not good, but maybe not as bad as some of us thought he might be. I doubt any of us want to see this continue.

He's looked clunky, but fine over there to me. He certainly hasn't embarrassed himself, which is what I was afraid would be the worst case scenario. At a bare minimum, he has shown he can be an occasional fill in at 3b...a bit like sticking Prado at SS about 5 years ago.

Of course I put very little stock in my own eye test. I'll continue to wait and see how the numbers shake out. If he keep playing 3b during the rest of this season we still won't have enough data to know his exact value over there, but he will demonstrate whether is playable, unplayable, or capable of an occasional fill in at 3b.

None of this changes the fact that it's silly to downgrade the 3b defense to get a platoon bat in the lineup that Snit is going to bat 7th.

[mfree80]

He's looked clunky, but fine over there to me. He certainly hasn't embarrassed himself, which is what I was afraid would be the worst case scenario. At a bare minimum, he has shown he can be an occasional fill in at 3b...a bit like sticking Prado at SS about 5 years ago.

Of course I put very little stock in my own eye test. I'll continue to wait and see how the numbers shake out. If he keep playing 3b during the rest of this season we still won't have enough data to know his exact value over there, but he will demonstrate whether is playable, unplayable, or capable of an occasional fill in at 3b.

None of this changes the fact that it's silly to downgrade the 3b defense to get a platoon bat in the lineup that Snit is going to bat 7th.

Can't disagree with this take.