Add new comment

How exactly do we know that it was defense that was historic (what about 2002?) and not that their luck was historic? Is there randomness anywhere considered here?
I happen to believe that defensive metrics are trying to measure something that they don't have enough data to do. Think of all the unaccounted for variables:
1. Speed of batted ball
2. Angle of batted ball
3. Spin of batted ball
4. Fielder positioning
5. Fielder energy level (road trip? extra innings the night before? Cleveland snowstorm makeup games?)
6. Length of grass
7. Wind speed
8. Wind gust speed
9. Timing of wind gust versus ball height
10. Favorable or unfavorable wind (do we assume they cancel out? why?)
11. Pujols has a cold the night you play them and does not have his 'usual' batted ball trajectory
12. Umpire strike zones and which ones cause teams to have to swing at more marginal pitches
I'm sure there are many more - point being: IMHO, using UZR and other measurements for predictive value seems like fool's gold.
While I admire organizations for looking into all aspects of the game, this is one where the trained eye has to be in play.
That's my .01
-R