Skip to content

Matt Wieters headlines 2011 class of “Fielding Bible Awards”

Oct 31, 2011, 11:00 PM EDT

Matt Wieters Getty

It’s tough to take the Gold Glove awards too seriously these days. Fortunately we also have the Fielding Bible Awards around to recognize the best defensive players at each position.

For those unfamiliar, the Fielding Bible Awards are voted on by a 10-person panel of experts, including Bill James, Peter Gammons, Rob Neyer, Joe Posnanski, John Dewan and the Baseball Info Solutions (BIS) scouting team. This is the sixth edition of the awards, which recognizes players from both leagues.

Below are your 2011 winners:

C – Matt Wieters, Orioles
1B – Albert Pujols, Cardinals
2B – Dustin Pedroia, Red Sox
SS – Troy Tulowitzki, Rockies
3B – Adrian Beltre, Rangers
LF – Brett Gardner, Yankees
CF – Austin Jackson, Tigers
RF – Justin Upton, Diamondbacks
P – Mark Buehrle, White Sox

Hard to find much to complain about here, as all are considered elite defenders. The biggest news here is that Wieters supplants Yadier Molina, who won the previous four Fielding Bible awards at catcher. Mark Buehrle takes the prize for a third straight year while Troy Tulowitzki and Brett Gardner also repeat at their respective positions.

By the way, we won’t have to wait too long to find out who the Gold Glove winners are. While MLB has traditionally announced them via press release, ESPN2 will unveil the winners for each league with a live one-hour telecast tomorrow night at 10 p.m. ET. Finalists for each position were announced earlier today, presumably in an effort to increase the drama, which is yet another first. Of note, last year’s Gold Glove award winner Derek Jeter is not among the finalists for shortstop in the American League while 2011 Fielding Bible award winners Albert Pujols and Justin Upton were also left off.

  1. halladaysbiceps - Oct 31, 2011 at 11:31 PM

    “It’s tough to take the Gold Glove awards too seriously these days”

    Yeah, I know. It should be a total Sabermetrics competition. So, in the case of Hall of Famer Mike Schmidt, instead of wining 10 gold gloves, he probably should have only won 5 or 6 because he was statistically not the best in those other years.

    • halladaysbiceps - Oct 31, 2011 at 11:40 PM

      The Fielding Bible awards are a fucking joke that are used solely by stats geeks to justify their existence.

      • Mark - Oct 31, 2011 at 11:45 PM

        I know right? Who do those people at Dewan +/- or Baseball info scouting think they are, watching every game and every play and then using their eyes to determine if they think a play was good or bad. They’re so uncool, watching every game and every player to make informed decisions on whether a player is a good fielder instead of arbitrarily going with the home team guy like a typical fan.

        Stupid nerds and their passion for a sport they like. Wanting to ensure stupid overrated things like accuracy and making sure the best guy actually gets the award they deserve.

      • Charles Gates - Oct 31, 2011 at 11:45 PM

        Okay, but the Golden Glove basically goes to the best offensive player at each position. So there’s that.

      • Charles Gates - Oct 31, 2011 at 11:46 PM

        Ha. Golden Glove. That’s funny.

      • halladaysbiceps - Nov 1, 2011 at 12:15 AM

        @Mark

        You said,

        “Baseball info scouting think they are, watching every game and every play and then using their eyes ”

        They don’t watch every game, idiot. The Fielding Bible Awards have always been based on stats. You are dumber than I thought, Markey boy.

      • Ari Collins - Nov 1, 2011 at 12:50 AM

        Careful HB, you’re getting back to your old insulting ways again.

        BIS does indeed use game video. They’re a scouting service. Get your facts straight, sir.

      • halladaysbiceps - Nov 1, 2011 at 1:03 AM

        Air Collins,

        You get your fact straight. They don’t go by video in selecting these awards. It’s purely stat driven. I knew this, but did some research because you guys crucify me if I don’t show you proof. Here is the best I came up with:

        “A Fielding Bible Award recognizes the best defensive player for each fielding position in Major League Baseball (MLB) based on statistical analysis.[1][2] John Dewan and Baseball Info Solutions conduct the annual selection process.[3] The awards are voted on by 10 sabermetrically inclined journalists and bloggers including Dewan, sabermetric pioneer Bill James”

        I make my point.

      • halladaysbiceps - Nov 1, 2011 at 1:09 AM

        I love it. You people are so god damn dumb. I stated a fact about this BS fielding bible award and said it was stat driven, which I am 100% correct with. Then you all thumb me down. Then I post results supporting my facts. You are by far the dumbest group of people/wesite I have ever encountered.

      • ksbuff - Nov 1, 2011 at 1:47 AM

        HB,

        How do you think they come up with the stats? Do you think the guys at BIS are rolling their 20-sided die a la D&D? As Ari pointed out they are watching game footage and scoring each defensive opportunity. If you don’t like statistics that’s fine, you’re entitled to your opinion, but when you rail against them in the comments at least have the decency to bring valid reasons. It’s getting a little old watching you try to fend off commenters that obviously have a better understanding of statistical analysis.

        Come at me bro.

      • clydeserra - Nov 1, 2011 at 2:26 AM

        ok, cepts, How are the stats compiled then ?

      • mrfloydpink - Nov 1, 2011 at 3:11 AM

        1. Is there even the slightest question that halladaysbiceps is drunk? His blather is even more asinine than usual.

        2. “used solely by stats geeks to justify their existence.” What the hell does this even mean? What stat geeks are trying to justify their existence? And to whom? For what purpose? Do you somehow think that, for example, Joe Posnanski would not have gainful employment if not for the Fielding Bible awards? I kinda think he would.

      • phillyphreak - Nov 1, 2011 at 7:13 AM

        “You are by far the dumbest group of people/wesite I have ever encountered.”

        1) It’s weBsite.
        2) Then leave. No one will miss you.

      • 18thstreet - Nov 1, 2011 at 9:47 AM

        I feels so good to have HB to kick around. Coherent arguments, random fanboy statements about the Phillies because he cares so much more than the rest of us do.

        It justifies my existence.

      • Kevin S. - Nov 1, 2011 at 1:42 PM

        Total Zone (the only advanced defensive stat available for when Schmidt played) had him a +10 defender at third base 8 times in his career and thinks he’s one of the greatest defensive third basemen of all time. But yeah, saberists wouldn’t vote for him at all.

    • JBerardi - Nov 1, 2011 at 7:14 AM

      So, in the case of Hall of Famer Mike Schmidt, instead of wining 10 gold gloves, he probably should have only won 5 or 6 because he was statistically not the best in those other years.

      Hey, way to imagine something that no one is actually suggesting and then get mad at it. Who says Schmidt wouldn’t have won ten fielding bible awards? For that matter, who says winning five is some kind of slap in the face? Being the best third baseman in the league five times would still qualify him as a great defender.

    • thefalcon123 - Nov 1, 2011 at 9:13 AM

      Yeah, what a bunch of nerds! A much better system is to have coaches vote on players they see 9 times a year (cause Gold Glove voting coaches can’t vote for players on their own team).

      Think about that. The people who vote are managers and coaches who can’t vote for their own players. The Rockies play the Mets…what…9 times last year? That means, the coach has to base his vote on a player he saw 9 times…MAX! That is an insane way to vote for these things. And that’s why you end up with guys like Ozzie Smith getting the award when he was no longer close to the best (and I say this as a Cards fan), or Palmeiro or Jeter or Michael Young.

      But go ahead, criticize the decisions of guys who study baseball, or the Dewan people who actually watch every single play. No, the gold glove makes so much more sense!

  2. halladaysbiceps - Oct 31, 2011 at 11:51 PM

    I know, DJ, that you share the opinion of many, that the Gold Glove awards don’t mean much, etc., etc., because they don’t rely on pure stats. I get it. But, to trash it, that’s disrespectful. To all the players that have won the award. MVP’s are opinion votes. CY Young’s are opinion votes. Rookie of the Year awards are opinion votes. And then you add the Bible Fielding awards. God, how many more awards are out there? Wait….The Hank Aaron award, the Roberto Clemente award, the …

    • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Nov 1, 2011 at 12:00 AM

      To all the players that have won the award

      Rafael Palmiero won a Gold Glove while playing 28 games total at first base.

      I’m going to repeat that because it bares repeating. He won a GG playing 28 games, total at first base.

      That is far more damning of an award than anything a sabrist has to say.

      • halladaysbiceps - Nov 1, 2011 at 12:09 AM

        Church,

        Respectfully, I have seen you say this numerous time. Yes, Palmiero receive the award in error. But, generally, the best defensive player in both leagues receive the award correctly and deserving.

      • Charles Gates - Nov 1, 2011 at 12:18 AM

        Jeter.

      • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Nov 1, 2011 at 12:41 AM

        Michael Young won one as well

      • drunkenhooliganism - Nov 1, 2011 at 12:48 AM

        When did Halladaysbiceps start writing like a Nigerian 419 email?

      • Reflex - Nov 1, 2011 at 1:00 AM

        It was not an error. They voted for who they thought was best. An error can be corrected, that was not.

        Also, does this mean you believe Jeter was truly an elite defensive shortstop for the past decade? And how come true defensive specialists who play full seasons never get the award? Guys like Casey Kotchman?

      • Panda Claus - Nov 1, 2011 at 7:13 AM

        This oddity aside, Palmiero was a heckuva fielding first baseman. While I’m not saying anyone should win playing only 28 games at their position, you could tell in five games of watching him that he was a great fielder.

    • flapjack3285 - Nov 1, 2011 at 12:06 AM

      I think the reason that most people don’t put too much stock in Gold Glove awards are things like Palmeiro winning while playing 28 games in the field. Or perhaps the fact that once a player wins a few, they have the tendency to keep winning when there are younger, better players. I mean Ryan Braun and Matt Holliday are nominated for one of them. I haven’t watched every Brewers/Cardinals game, but what I’ve seen, those two aren’t exactly fielders who inspire much confidence.

      • halladaysbiceps - Nov 1, 2011 at 12:10 AM

        The Palmeiro voting was an aberration. Nothing more.

      • flapjack3285 - Nov 1, 2011 at 12:19 AM

        Probably, but in the last few years, the AL has given GG to players who were moved off their position the very next season because they couldn’t field the position anymore.

      • brewcrewfan54 - Nov 1, 2011 at 2:12 AM

        I dont think Braun will ever deserve a fielding award but he isnt’t nearly as bad in the field as some of these things say he is. He has a great and accurate throwing arm and makes just about every play he should make. He also has the occasional fantastic play out there. They have yet to make a fielding statistic that I trust.

      • Reflex - Nov 1, 2011 at 3:04 AM

        Halladay – Who on that list do you disagree with? Its pretty damn elite as far as defensive players go. Who would you put in place of who there and what would you base it on, if not stats?

      • JBerardi - Nov 1, 2011 at 7:20 AM

        “I think the reason that most people don’t put too much stock in Gold Glove awards are things like Palmeiro winning while playing 28 games in the field.”

        I don’t put much stock in them because they’re simply not very good. It’s a reputation award; the best way to win a Gold Glove is to have won one the previous year.

      • JBerardi - Nov 1, 2011 at 7:52 AM

        “The Palmeiro voting was an aberration. Nothing more.”

        It’s not an aberration, it’s a result of having the players and coaches vote on the award. Players basically need to worry about themselves and maybe the opposing pitcher, and coaches are watching their team. Dudes on the Indians aren’t being held in rapt attention by Mark Ellis’ soft hands at second base on their six games against Oakland (yes, he’s gone, but he’ll always be an Athletic to me). When it comes time for those guys to vote, they basically go with someone they’ve heard of. “Best shortstop? What’s that dude with the weird name in Texas? Ah, whatever, give it to Jeter, he’s probably better anyway”.

        I mean, if players and coaches knew so much about the abilities of other players around the league, why does every single team use advance scouts?

  3. schlom - Nov 1, 2011 at 12:06 AM

    Interesting that Upton won in RF – on Fangraphs he’s behind DeJesus, Heyward and Swisher. Using Baseball Reference stats Upton is behind Heyward, DeJesus, Hunter, Stanton, Ethier, Francoeur, Joyce, Werth, and Cruz.

    • JBerardi - Nov 1, 2011 at 7:22 AM

      Wow, it’s almost like guys like Bill James and Joe Posnanski are smart, observant people who don’t just vote for whoever lead the league in UZR that year.

  4. eagles512 - Nov 1, 2011 at 12:10 AM

    Pujols doesn’t have the range anymore to be considered elite. And Rollins is still the best at SS.

    • halladaysbiceps - Nov 1, 2011 at 12:17 AM

      ???

    • Reflex - Nov 1, 2011 at 1:02 AM

      Um, Tulo smokes Rollins at SS. If you doubt that you are going blind. I love Rollins, one of my fav players, but he’s not elite defensively anymore and hasn’t been for a few years now. That said, he deserves far more GG hardware than Jeter ever did.

    • JBerardi - Nov 1, 2011 at 7:23 AM

      Pujols doesn’t have the range to be considered elite at shortstop, no. Fortunately, he plays first base.

      • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Nov 1, 2011 at 11:07 AM

        He’ll never get the $30M AAV contract if he doesn’t start making plays behind the 2nd base bag. His range to his left has definitely gotten way worse.

        /sarcasm

  5. ajbarrell - Nov 1, 2011 at 1:27 AM

    Well the problem with all of the old mainstream awards are none of the voters watch enough games so they just go off STATS to vote for them. They sometimes make mistakes with the MVP/CYyoung but its nothing overly awful of a choice. The voters look at STATS (just the hallow ones) and vote for who has the most Wins/RBI/Hr’s and call it a day since they don’t watch many if any West coast games and vice versa (Remember that east coast bias thing)

    The Gold gloves on the other hand my god every year someone wins them that was pretty bad. The only defensive stat they typically vote off of is Fielding percent and even you bicepts have to admit that’s a really bad stat that doesn’t in anyway tell who’s a good/bad fielder. Jeter winning so many when he covers such little ground, mike young getting one when hes constantly been moved defensively by the Rangers are just a few examples.

    • JBerardi - Nov 1, 2011 at 7:28 AM

      The voters look at STATS (just the hallow ones) and vote for who has the most Wins/RBI/Hr’s and call it a day

      I’ve always found it ironic that so many writers can blast basement-dwelling stat nerds who don’t watch games and aren’t in the clubhouse, etc, and then turn around and automatically vote for whoever got the most RBIs. It’s like the old principle that the most homophobic people are the ones most insecure about their own sexuality.

  6. ajbarrell - Nov 1, 2011 at 1:30 AM

    Also the point about defensive studs that play positions full time or nearly full time that dont hit well->great never get the awards typically unless they are a catcher maybe. Kotchman should have 2 probably by now atleast dudes a beast at 1st.

    • umrguy42 - Nov 2, 2011 at 9:39 AM

      Or shortstops (at least, in the case of Ozzie Smith).

  7. kiwicricket - Nov 1, 2011 at 7:37 AM

    Few too many Miller High Life’s this evening Cept’s…..???

    • Charles Gates - Nov 1, 2011 at 12:13 PM

      There is nothing wrong with Miller High Life, which is my backup beer for when Miller High Life Light is not available.

  8. bozosforall - Nov 1, 2011 at 10:14 AM

    The BIS “scouting team” is nothing more than a bunch of Red Sox homers who take themselves way too seriously and who get propped up by biased media outlets such as BSPN.

    • jwbiii - Nov 1, 2011 at 2:48 PM

      Which, oddly enough, is based in Allentown. As you know, BIS and STATS founder John Dewan is from Chicago.

  9. 18thstreet - Nov 1, 2011 at 10:35 AM

    What’s striking, when you review the ballots, is the lack of unanimity among the voters: http://www.fieldingbible.com/complete-votetally.asp

    If there was a shred of credibility to HB’s arguments — that the stat geeks just look at the numbers and choose winners — then the ballots would all look the same. Bill James — who works for the Red Sox — said that Adrian Gonzalez was the 7th best fielding first baseman, and only one other voter had him worse than 3rd.

  10. brucewaynewins - Nov 1, 2011 at 11:07 AM

    Hopefully someone notices this but if you look at the Gold Glove Finalists list the first name in every category in a smaller font. Most of the names I looked at seem as if they’d be the likely person to win “assuming” the award goes to the best fielder and not just the biggest name. I know that’s not how it works but it’d be odd if they accidently gave away the winners.

    So if thats the case … spoiler alert

    Golden Glove Winners are:

    Pitchers: Mark Buehrle, CWS and Clayton Kershaw, LAD
    Catchers : Matt Wieters, BAL and Yadier Molina, STL
    1B : Adrian Gonzalez, BOS and Joey Votto, CIN
    2B: Dustin Pedroia , BOS and Brandon Phillips, CIN
    3B: Adrian Beltre, TEX and Placido Polanco, PHI
    SS: Erick Aybar, LAA and Troy Tulowitzki, COL
    LF: Alex Gordon, KC and Gerardo Parra, ARI (eh)
    CF: Jacoby Ellsbury, BOS and Matt Kemp, LAD
    RF: Nick Markakis, BAL and Andre Ethier, LAD

    • brucewaynewins - Nov 1, 2011 at 11:26 PM

      oh look every single name I listed was correct and it was over 12 hours before anything was leaked or spoiled. How did nobody else notice this on that espn media link?

    • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Nov 1, 2011 at 11:35 PM

      Was just coming here to mention that, creepy.

      Also, how the F does Gordon win over Gardner? As someone posted on riveraveblues.com, combined UZR/150 of Gordon, Ellsbury and Markakis is 21. Brett Gardner has 29.5 UZR/150.

      But oh yeah, this is a legitimate award.

      /sarcasm

  11. spudchukar - Nov 1, 2011 at 12:05 PM

    Matt Wieters couldn’t hold Yadier Molina’s jockstrap. Sure the Golden Gloves awards have their faults, but defensive sabermetric stats are so awful, and so inconsistent that they are hardly an improvement.

    • Charles Gates - Nov 1, 2011 at 12:15 PM

      I think your argument is more based in reputation than actuals. Watch Wieters. He’s damn good behind the dish. And I’m not saying that he’s necessarily better than Molina, though he might be, but giving Wieters the award is hardly a travesty.

      • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Nov 1, 2011 at 12:50 PM

        You’re arguing with someone who didn’t know what WPA is, but knew it was BS. Don’t waste your time.

      • spudchukar - Nov 1, 2011 at 1:34 PM

        First off I have watched Wieters, enough to know that he is no Molina. Sure he is good defensively, but he is no Molina. He cannot block pitches nearly as well. He cannot throw as well, and his release is considerably longer. He isn’t as quick fielding bunts in front of the plate (this might be a surprise, due to Molina’s lack of base running speed.)

        It would be unfair to compare their respective game-calling cause with the O’s staff it hardly matters. Yadier isn’t just the best catcher in baseball in 2011, he is the best defensive catcher I have ever seen. And yes I am old enough to have watched Bench, Carter, Fisk et al in their heydays.

        The logic that says it isn’t a travesty because Wieters is also a great catcher is foolish. Molina isn’t just a great catcher, he is the Van Gogh, the Baryshnikov, he is the Mozart of catching.

      • spudchukar - Nov 1, 2011 at 1:37 PM

        Hey Church if you choose to demean my comments so be it, but get your shit straight. I didn’t research the full calculations of WPA, because it was used to place Pujols record breaking TB WS night behind numerous easily forgotten other 3-homer games. Whatever the metric it was a ridiculous comparison, and a waste of my time. It was BS then, and it is BS now. Very similar to UZR stats.

      • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Nov 1, 2011 at 2:02 PM

        Hey Church if you choose to demean my comments so be it, but get your shit straight.

        Oh you mean when you said, and I quote*:
        Whatever WPA stands for, it is meaningless.

        Which is precisely what I said above. You didn’t know what it meant and yet you still called it BS.

        Whatever the metric it was a ridiculous comparison, and a waste of my time. It was BS then, and it is BS now. Very similar to UZR stats.

        I thoroughly explained why it was so, and yet you clearly choose to ignore it. So just go on shining that light of ignorance. Another person we can essentially ignore in these conversations.

        *http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/10/24/im-struggling-to-see-how-pujols-big-world-series-changes-his-free-agency-plans/

      • spudchukar - Nov 1, 2011 at 2:58 PM

        Taking quotes out of context, is about as lame as it gets. Yep you are the Einstein of baseball, Church. Nothing more dangerous than an opinionated buffoon, with a handful of carefully chosen stats, which are treated as Gospel. You are dripping in Dogma. The game is too complex for you Church, you ought to move on to something you might understand, like Chess for example.

      • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Nov 1, 2011 at 11:42 PM

        Taking quotes out of context, is about as lame as it gets.

        What did I take out of context? Ready for this, here’s your entire quote split into pieces. Going to break this down FJM style:

        Whatever WPA stands for, it is meaningless.

        Source of my first quote, shows you A, don’t know wtf you are talking about, and B, feel informed enough to make a determination on the validity of it. Off to a great start here.

        Anyone who watched Game 3 knows that without Pujols’ big night the Cards might well have lost.

        Broke this down in the other thread as well. The other two players I mentioned hit HR far earlier in the game so the importance of their score, vis a vis the entire history of MLB baseball, was more important in determining the outcome of the game than Pujols’s HR. When Pujols came to bat before his second HR, the Cards had a 98% chance to win the game. That means in the entire history of MLB, in the hundreds of thousands of games played, in those scenarios, the team that was up with that exact scenario won 98% of the time.

        Sure the 3rd Homer was all gravy, but his productivity prior to the final at bat, kept St. Louis from blowing considerable leads.

        So you readily admit that the third one was essentially useless. I proved above that the second was useless. So only one HR helped determine the outcome of the game. This is why his Win Probability Added was so low.

        Another example of garbage in, garbage out.

        Pot meet kettle.

    • alang3131982 - Nov 1, 2011 at 2:06 PM

      You do realize that the Fielding Bible awards gave the award to Yadi the previous four years, right? So if their stats are so awful how do they determine that Yadi is good?

      He had a 37% caught stealing, Yadi had a 29% caught stealing…

      • spudchukar - Nov 1, 2011 at 3:03 PM

        Nobody tries to steal on Molina anymore. So his percentage suffers. Check out how many attempts each had. You will get it then.

        Look Wieters is a very good young catcher, perhaps the second best in the game. Certainly better defensively than Posey. He just is not in Molina’s class. You know the class of one.

      • alang3131982 - Nov 1, 2011 at 3:15 PM

        You failed to address my initial question and i’ll answer you second faulty question.

        Again, if “defensive sabermetric stats are so awful” and they awarded Yadi four of the last five fielding bible awards, then what does that say about Yadi? or is it that sometimes the stats are fine?

        Also, Yadi: 6 passed balls, 35 wild pitches, 46 stolen bases, 19 caught stealings (65 SB attempts) this year

        Wieters: 1 passed ball, 25 wild pitches, 58 stolen bases, 34 caught stealings this year

        Last year, there were 3 more (68) SB attempts against Yadi.Two years ago, there were less SB attempts (just 54); 3 years ago 52, ditto. So, if i check out how many attempts each had, it would look like Yadi’s attempts are going up while his percentage is going down — perhaps people are running on him more because they dont think he is that good?

        Got another argument? Also it might help to back your own arguments up before you write them. It took me like 2 minutes to see if “nobody tries to steal on Molina anymore.” When, in actuality, MORE PEOPLE try to steal on him.

  12. spudchukar - Nov 2, 2011 at 8:22 AM

    Alang, let me redirect you to simple arithmetic. Wieters 58 SB, 34 caught stealing Total 92 attempts
    Molina 46 SB, 19 caught stealing Total 65 attempts

    Dude, Really? Maybe next time you ought to spend more than 2 minutes.

  13. alang3131982 - Nov 2, 2011 at 9:27 AM

    Spud- you said “Nobody tries to steal on Molina anymore” when, in fact, more and more people are stealing on Molina in the last few years.

    It appears to be your contention that Wieters throws out a higher percentage of base runners than Molina because Wieters has more attempted steals. however, if this is the case, wouldnt Yadi’s caught stealing percentage have gone up the last few years when he saw more steals?

    Again, you claim “defensive sabermetric stats are so awful” yet those same statistics gave yadi an award for his defense 4/5 years. How are the stats awful if they recognize Yadi as a great defensive player?

    So, to simplify it for you, you say that Wieters has a better caught stealing percentage b/c he has more people steal against him. If there is a relation between the two, why wouldnt Yadi’s percentage have gone up the last few years when he saw more SBs?

    And just answer the question about the awards, I’ve asked you three times, cant you read?

    • spudchukar - Nov 2, 2011 at 2:17 PM

      OK for the last time. Just because the voters recognized in the previous four years that Yadier Molina is the best catcher in baseball, offers little to support either sabermetrics or the award. Any fool who watches the Cards regularly already knows that, and obviously most of the rest of baseball does also, be it Gold Gloves, Field Bible, or most anyone else.

      Defensive sabermetrics stats are awful, and they are even more awful on a one-year basis. Even the most ardent adherents admit this. If you take the time to actually read the Field Bible analysis you would notice that they chose as their primary example, a play in the LCS which could only be described as an “intangible”, which unfortunately is under appreciated by most saberfans. Only by watching would one recognize what a great play Pujols made. No stat is going to illustrate that.

      Personally, I would have voted for Alex Avila for the AL best defensive catcher. Not to dismiss the excellence of Wieters but many who watch both agree.

      I have no obligation to answer any questions, much less ones that I have already addressed, but just for you Alang, I will try this one more time. Because Molina is so difficult to steal on, most teams have all but quit. With certain Cards pitchers, namely Carpenter and Lohse, the two who are good at holding runners, steals are virtually non-existant. So the only theft attempts are against St. Louis pitchers who are poor at holding runners, like Motte or Boggs especially. And the only players who attempt steals are those who are the very best, or in situations where stealing is easier (like 1st and 3rd and less than two outs). So one’s percentages go down when only the best, in optimal situations steal.

      A perfect example is the 2011 WS. Kinsler got a great jump off of Motte, and he barely managed to be safe, thanks to a very good call by supposed Cardinal fan Ron Kulpa. In the post-game interview he was honest in his assessment and recognized how close the play was. He never attempted another steal, and was nailed on a pick-off in game 7 when he realized he didn’t have a perfect jump, and knew he was dead meat. Most runners have learned this, so very few try.

      I will except your apology regarding the stolen base attempts, I think you forgot that in your last comment.

  14. TomTom - Nov 2, 2011 at 10:59 AM

    Boy oh boy, everybody is a tough guy on the internet.

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Featured video

Orioles turn AL East on its head
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. G. Stanton (4158)
  2. R. Castillo (3050)
  3. A. Rizzo (2610)
  4. A. Pujols (2307)
  5. B. Belt (2306)
  1. J. Hamilton (2181)
  2. H. Ryu (2157)
  3. E. Gattis (2095)
  4. C. Young (2089)
  5. C. Davis (1968)