1
00:00:12,920 --> 00:00:16,159
Speaker 1: The show goes on. This is the official show on

2
00:00:16,200 --> 00:00:19,880
Speaker 1: the official on First podcast channel with me Eli Susman,

3
00:00:19,960 --> 00:00:23,040
Speaker 1: the founder of Fish on First, providing you guys with

4
00:00:23,120 --> 00:00:28,240
Speaker 1: complete Miami Marlins Dougnridge. Welcome back to the show. I

5
00:00:28,240 --> 00:00:31,000
Speaker 1: have a guest joining me very shortly. This episode is

6
00:00:31,000 --> 00:00:34,879
Speaker 1: going to be dedicated to Marlin's defense the art of

7
00:00:35,000 --> 00:00:38,120
Speaker 1: fielding that aspect of the game. Just a couple of

8
00:00:38,159 --> 00:00:42,320
Speaker 1: notes to get into before diving into that conversation about

9
00:00:42,320 --> 00:00:47,000
Speaker 1: that particular subject. I am excited while you are listening

10
00:00:47,000 --> 00:00:48,800
Speaker 1: to this. That means the article should be up on

11
00:00:48,840 --> 00:00:53,120
Speaker 1: the site right now for our Miami Marlins podcast directory.

12
00:00:53,760 --> 00:00:56,040
Speaker 1: I do this show every week. We have several other

13
00:00:56,080 --> 00:00:58,800
Speaker 1: shows under our same fish on First banner, and we

14
00:00:58,840 --> 00:01:01,800
Speaker 1: appreciate everybody that listen those rates and reviews. Of course

15
00:01:01,880 --> 00:01:04,640
Speaker 1: recommend them to friends. We're not the only ones in

16
00:01:04,640 --> 00:01:08,600
Speaker 1: this content creation space. Felt it was overdue to create

17
00:01:08,600 --> 00:01:11,639
Speaker 1: a landing page on our websitefish on first dot com

18
00:01:11,920 --> 00:01:14,600
Speaker 1: that highlights a lot of the other podcasts that are

19
00:01:14,600 --> 00:01:22,040
Speaker 1: being hosted, mainly about the team, from fans, from other journalists, etc.

20
00:01:22,400 --> 00:01:26,320
Speaker 1: Different perspectives English and Spanish. That page is now up

21
00:01:26,520 --> 00:01:30,000
Speaker 1: on our site right now. I encourage if you're listening

22
00:01:30,120 --> 00:01:32,000
Speaker 1: here to us on fish On first, you'll be able

23
00:01:32,040 --> 00:01:34,880
Speaker 1: to find most of these other shows as well on

24
00:01:34,959 --> 00:01:38,440
Speaker 1: all those same providers. So I just wanted to plug

25
00:01:38,480 --> 00:01:41,080
Speaker 1: that that that is now up on our site podcast directory,

26
00:01:41,319 --> 00:01:44,720
Speaker 1: introducing you to to the hosts of all those shows.

27
00:01:44,920 --> 00:01:47,560
Speaker 1: I have an embedded Spotify player on that page that

28
00:01:47,560 --> 00:01:52,120
Speaker 1: will automatically fill in with the latest episode from each

29
00:01:52,120 --> 00:01:55,080
Speaker 1: of those shows. Whatever it is that you're visiting that page,

30
00:01:55,120 --> 00:01:57,080
Speaker 1: you'll get the most up to date stuff about them.

31
00:01:57,320 --> 00:01:59,120
Speaker 1: And I've been a guest on most of these shows

32
00:01:59,280 --> 00:02:03,520
Speaker 1: at one point, full disclosure, not completely biased. These are

33
00:02:03,560 --> 00:02:06,520
Speaker 1: a lot of friends of mine as well. So that

34
00:02:06,520 --> 00:02:10,079
Speaker 1: thing is up on our site. Encourage to get multiple

35
00:02:10,120 --> 00:02:12,839
Speaker 1: perspectives on the Miami Marlins and people that dive into

36
00:02:12,880 --> 00:02:16,600
Speaker 1: certain topics in niches that I don't and that nobody

37
00:02:16,600 --> 00:02:19,520
Speaker 1: else here does you get a more complete understanding about

38
00:02:19,520 --> 00:02:20,880
Speaker 1: what's going on with the team. You get some good

39
00:02:20,919 --> 00:02:24,480
Speaker 1: ideas by following these people as well. So once again,

40
00:02:24,560 --> 00:02:27,960
Speaker 1: Miami Marlins podcast directory. Find that right on. It's gonna

41
00:02:27,960 --> 00:02:29,720
Speaker 1: be near the top of our homepage. If you are

42
00:02:30,040 --> 00:02:31,960
Speaker 1: listening to this, I'll be sure to share it on

43
00:02:32,000 --> 00:02:34,639
Speaker 1: all our social media places so you have a nice

44
00:02:34,639 --> 00:02:38,000
Speaker 1: place to find it. Discover these other content creators out

45
00:02:38,000 --> 00:02:40,760
Speaker 1: there that are talking about the Marlins in all sorts

46
00:02:40,840 --> 00:02:46,560
Speaker 1: of creative ways. Back to this particular episode talking defense.

47
00:02:46,960 --> 00:02:49,600
Speaker 1: As we're recording this one time through the Marlins spring

48
00:02:49,680 --> 00:02:52,520
Speaker 1: training rotation, you have to be pretty excited about what

49
00:02:52,520 --> 00:02:56,480
Speaker 1: you're seeing. Even in a Sandy ALCNTRA lists World for

50
00:02:56,560 --> 00:03:00,600
Speaker 1: twenty twenty four, just about everybody who's thrown so far

51
00:03:00,800 --> 00:03:03,639
Speaker 1: this first five ish games of the spring has looked

52
00:03:03,680 --> 00:03:06,600
Speaker 1: really good. There's reason to believe that this could be

53
00:03:06,680 --> 00:03:10,000
Speaker 1: one of the better pitching staffs in baseball. That being said,

54
00:03:10,080 --> 00:03:14,560
Speaker 1: that run prevention is a combination of pitching and also defense.

55
00:03:15,200 --> 00:03:17,320
Speaker 1: Last year, by most measures, the Marlins were a below

56
00:03:17,400 --> 00:03:20,320
Speaker 1: average defensive team. Made it all the more remarkable that

57
00:03:20,320 --> 00:03:22,480
Speaker 1: they made it as far as they did, qualifying for

58
00:03:22,480 --> 00:03:25,360
Speaker 1: the postseason, because we as we know, they were bad

59
00:03:25,440 --> 00:03:28,320
Speaker 1: offensively and also bad with the glove, and you would

60
00:03:28,320 --> 00:03:31,399
Speaker 1: think that those things would kind of preclude you from

61
00:03:31,440 --> 00:03:35,560
Speaker 1: reaching from having a winning record, much less qualifying for

62
00:03:35,680 --> 00:03:38,320
Speaker 1: the postseason itself. We're going to dive into that with

63
00:03:38,600 --> 00:03:41,800
Speaker 1: Mark Simon of Sports Infos Solutions. I don't know if

64
00:03:41,800 --> 00:03:43,320
Speaker 1: he's been on the show. I've been following his work

65
00:03:43,360 --> 00:03:45,320
Speaker 1: a long time and I've had conversations off and on

66
00:03:45,440 --> 00:03:49,120
Speaker 1: through the years with him, mainly via Twitter as well.

67
00:03:49,160 --> 00:03:51,480
Speaker 1: I think he's been on maybe one Fish Stripe show

68
00:03:51,520 --> 00:03:53,960
Speaker 1: a few years ago. Anyway, he eats does a really

69
00:03:53,960 --> 00:03:57,160
Speaker 1: good job of articulating exactly what is going on here

70
00:03:57,160 --> 00:04:00,440
Speaker 1: Sports Infos Solutions. They measured defensive runs safe and that

71
00:04:01,080 --> 00:04:03,200
Speaker 1: it was a long way for us to kind of

72
00:04:03,480 --> 00:04:07,120
Speaker 1: formulate our opinions about whether fielding is good or bad,

73
00:04:07,840 --> 00:04:11,480
Speaker 1: and we dive into a handful of particular MARLNS players

74
00:04:12,040 --> 00:04:15,400
Speaker 1: Tim Anderson, Jazz Chisholm Junior, among others, as well as

75
00:04:15,400 --> 00:04:18,720
Speaker 1: getting a better idea about how this whole pieces fit

76
00:04:18,800 --> 00:04:21,359
Speaker 1: together for twenty twenty four, whether we could expect maybe

77
00:04:21,480 --> 00:04:24,520
Speaker 1: some improvement as well, understanding that that's going to be

78
00:04:24,560 --> 00:04:29,000
Speaker 1: pretty important for this run prevention unit to reach its

79
00:04:29,000 --> 00:04:32,159
Speaker 1: full potential. Right here, I think you're gonna enjoy this

80
00:04:32,200 --> 00:04:36,520
Speaker 1: conversation quite a bit with Eli. Daniel Rodriguez was on

81
00:04:36,520 --> 00:04:40,719
Speaker 1: this one as well, hosting our interview with Mark Simon

82
00:04:40,800 --> 00:04:50,120
Speaker 1: of Sports Info Solutions. Check it out back here on

83
00:04:50,160 --> 00:04:54,400
Speaker 1: the official show, Eli s us been alongside Daniel Rodriguez.

84
00:04:54,720 --> 00:04:57,200
Speaker 1: When it comes to the fielding aspect of baseball, can

85
00:04:57,240 --> 00:05:00,160
Speaker 1: sometimes be difficult to know what you're looking at, and

86
00:05:00,160 --> 00:05:02,320
Speaker 1: when you have a clear perspective on a certain player

87
00:05:02,839 --> 00:05:05,679
Speaker 1: or specific play, how do you quantify that in factor

88
00:05:05,960 --> 00:05:09,320
Speaker 1: that into a team's overall performance. This continues to be

89
00:05:09,360 --> 00:05:12,680
Speaker 1: a challenge, but Sports Info Solutions is up for that challenge.

90
00:05:12,680 --> 00:05:15,479
Speaker 1: They've been pioneers in the sports data space since two

91
00:05:15,480 --> 00:05:19,239
Speaker 1: thousand and two. Our special guest here on the pods

92
00:05:19,320 --> 00:05:23,839
Speaker 1: Mark Simon of Sports Info Solutions. He does an outstanding job,

93
00:05:23,920 --> 00:05:27,880
Speaker 1: in my opinion, of translating that data into actionable information.

94
00:05:28,080 --> 00:05:31,240
Speaker 1: I've been following Mark stuff since his ESPN days a

95
00:05:31,279 --> 00:05:34,520
Speaker 1: long time ago, but he's been in content creation at

96
00:05:34,520 --> 00:05:36,760
Speaker 1: Sports Info Solutions for more than half a decade, and

97
00:05:36,839 --> 00:05:39,520
Speaker 1: he's here to talk to us about the Miami Marlins defense,

98
00:05:39,880 --> 00:05:42,640
Speaker 1: mainly in terms of defensive run saved and all the

99
00:05:42,680 --> 00:05:46,440
Speaker 1: factors that go into calculating that and putting a number

100
00:05:46,520 --> 00:05:49,480
Speaker 1: behind this. So thanks for joining us, Mark.

101
00:05:49,720 --> 00:05:54,320
Speaker 2: Yeah, I appreciate that very stero introduction. It was, as

102
00:05:54,360 --> 00:05:58,680
Speaker 2: we strive to be very accurate that introduction really encapsulated

103
00:05:58,839 --> 00:06:00,440
Speaker 2: I think who we are what we do.

104
00:06:00,520 --> 00:06:02,320
Speaker 3: So yeah, cool, let's do it right.

105
00:06:02,520 --> 00:06:05,360
Speaker 1: I wanted to first bring up something that I think

106
00:06:05,400 --> 00:06:08,719
Speaker 1: has faded into the background fairly quickly, in that this

107
00:06:08,839 --> 00:06:11,839
Speaker 1: time a year ago was the first time that Major

108
00:06:11,880 --> 00:06:15,400
Speaker 1: League Baseball made rule changes that restricted in fields shifting,

109
00:06:15,880 --> 00:06:20,039
Speaker 1: and I'm curious how that change that. I think people

110
00:06:20,080 --> 00:06:23,640
Speaker 1: have very quickly gotten adjusted to life with more traditional positioning.

111
00:06:24,080 --> 00:06:27,280
Speaker 1: How has that affected your work and the measurement that

112
00:06:27,320 --> 00:06:29,920
Speaker 1: Sports Info solution does. Is it more boring now that

113
00:06:30,000 --> 00:06:34,360
Speaker 1: guys have more conventional traditional positioning or does it make

114
00:06:34,400 --> 00:06:36,880
Speaker 1: it your job easier now that we have like a

115
00:06:36,960 --> 00:06:39,919
Speaker 1: clear idea of where players are supposed to be.

116
00:06:40,560 --> 00:06:43,720
Speaker 2: Yeah, I actually don't think in terms of what you're

117
00:06:43,720 --> 00:06:48,680
Speaker 2: asking specifically, it didn't impact much because in the end,

118
00:06:48,720 --> 00:06:51,640
Speaker 2: we're just looking to identify where a guy is before

119
00:06:51,720 --> 00:06:55,360
Speaker 2: every pitch, and you just have to there's an all

120
00:06:55,480 --> 00:07:01,080
Speaker 2: nine feed first for that the certain data sources have

121
00:07:01,160 --> 00:07:03,960
Speaker 2: access to that allows you to do that. So it's

122
00:07:04,040 --> 00:07:09,200
Speaker 2: just a matter of looking at the screen boring I get,

123
00:07:09,480 --> 00:07:11,920
Speaker 2: I don't know. I don't know that I would I

124
00:07:11,920 --> 00:07:17,400
Speaker 2: would classify it that way like most people, I think,

125
00:07:17,400 --> 00:07:20,800
Speaker 2: would say that baseball was more exciting last year, So

126
00:07:20,920 --> 00:07:22,760
Speaker 2: I don't know that I would. I would necessarily would

127
00:07:22,760 --> 00:07:23,720
Speaker 2: say it was more boring.

128
00:07:25,160 --> 00:07:27,960
Speaker 4: My question would have to be on a Tim Anderson

129
00:07:28,360 --> 00:07:31,760
Speaker 4: going there and his just defensive play. He grated out

130
00:07:31,880 --> 00:07:35,800
Speaker 4: pretty poorly last season. I believe he was fourth or

131
00:07:36,360 --> 00:07:39,760
Speaker 4: fifth in total drs or I should say bottom fourth

132
00:07:39,840 --> 00:07:43,880
Speaker 4: or fifth until drs last season. Do you believe that

133
00:07:43,880 --> 00:07:48,520
Speaker 4: that will continue his subpar play into this season with

134
00:07:48,600 --> 00:07:52,960
Speaker 4: the Marlins, or considering maybe his track record performance wise

135
00:07:53,000 --> 00:07:55,280
Speaker 4: with the White Sox that it maybe was just more

136
00:07:55,320 --> 00:07:57,880
Speaker 4: of a hiccup, or do you see it maybe continuing

137
00:07:57,880 --> 00:07:58,920
Speaker 4: now with the Marlins.

138
00:07:59,320 --> 00:08:03,320
Speaker 2: No, this is a good discussion, and admittedly, and I'm

139
00:08:03,360 --> 00:08:06,239
Speaker 2: perfectly willing to say this, different sources have different pieces

140
00:08:06,280 --> 00:08:10,360
Speaker 2: of information regarding this, and we are of the belief

141
00:08:10,480 --> 00:08:13,720
Speaker 2: that the last two seasons that Tim Anderson's defense has

142
00:08:13,760 --> 00:08:16,480
Speaker 2: not been good, not been particularly good at all, and

143
00:08:16,560 --> 00:08:20,400
Speaker 2: I suppose that doesn't bode well for future defensive play

144
00:08:20,680 --> 00:08:23,560
Speaker 2: He's had by our measures, he's had one really good

145
00:08:23,560 --> 00:08:27,160
Speaker 2: season in the past, and twenty twenty he was all right.

146
00:08:27,240 --> 00:08:30,720
Speaker 2: In twenty twenty one, he was okay. But he's had

147
00:08:30,760 --> 00:08:32,960
Speaker 2: a few particularly bad seasons.

148
00:08:34,800 --> 00:08:38,839
Speaker 5: Bouncing ball towards short Anderson goes off his glove in

149
00:08:38,880 --> 00:08:42,959
Speaker 5: her own scores, tried to throw it home before he

150
00:08:43,120 --> 00:08:45,920
Speaker 5: had the ball in a costly error, evens it up

151
00:08:45,920 --> 00:08:46,800
Speaker 5: here in the ninth inning.

152
00:08:47,800 --> 00:08:50,280
Speaker 2: The issue that he has, and this will be an

153
00:08:50,280 --> 00:08:54,720
Speaker 2: interesting challenge for Jody Reid and for whoever else works

154
00:08:54,760 --> 00:09:00,280
Speaker 2: with the Marlins infielders. By our numbers, Tim Anderson not

155
00:09:00,600 --> 00:09:03,600
Speaker 2: rate well at getting to the ground ball that is

156
00:09:03,679 --> 00:09:08,280
Speaker 2: hit up the middle. I would say he is as poor,

157
00:09:08,320 --> 00:09:14,240
Speaker 2: poorly rated in that as anyone in baseball. And the

158
00:09:14,280 --> 00:09:18,680
Speaker 2: way that our data works, just to I guess explain

159
00:09:18,760 --> 00:09:22,440
Speaker 2: it from a simplest terms perspective is you would imagine

160
00:09:22,480 --> 00:09:25,800
Speaker 2: the field as like a grid, and you would say, okay,

161
00:09:25,800 --> 00:09:28,920
Speaker 2: when a ball is hit here this fast by a

162
00:09:29,000 --> 00:09:32,080
Speaker 2: right handed or left handed hitter, this is how often

163
00:09:32,280 --> 00:09:35,640
Speaker 2: over a year or two that this guy of this

164
00:09:35,840 --> 00:09:40,520
Speaker 2: speed quality was turned into an out. So a ground

165
00:09:40,600 --> 00:09:43,480
Speaker 2: ball up the middle, let's say had let's say there

166
00:09:43,520 --> 00:09:46,160
Speaker 2: was a chunk of the field that was like a

167
00:09:46,240 --> 00:09:50,360
Speaker 2: sixty seventy percent out probability. Maybe for Tim Anderson it's

168
00:09:50,400 --> 00:09:53,880
Speaker 2: like a fifty percent out probability that he's just not

169
00:09:54,080 --> 00:09:57,559
Speaker 2: doing as well getting to that ball. Now, Jody Reid

170
00:09:58,360 --> 00:10:01,320
Speaker 2: and I wrote about this did very well with defensive

171
00:10:01,360 --> 00:10:04,520
Speaker 2: positioning of the Marlins infielders last year. Could some of

172
00:10:04,559 --> 00:10:06,680
Speaker 2: that have been attributed to just the fact that he

173
00:10:06,760 --> 00:10:10,040
Speaker 2: was a little too far away for himself to be

174
00:10:10,080 --> 00:10:13,440
Speaker 2: able tim to be able to reach those balls, And

175
00:10:13,520 --> 00:10:15,640
Speaker 2: maybe they put him in a better position to try

176
00:10:15,679 --> 00:10:19,439
Speaker 2: to get to them without necessarily sacrificing what he can

177
00:10:19,520 --> 00:10:23,600
Speaker 2: get going in the other direction. Maybe, So I'll be

178
00:10:23,679 --> 00:10:26,640
Speaker 2: curious to see whether it holds. I would think if

179
00:10:26,679 --> 00:10:29,280
Speaker 2: we were doing like some sort of prediction system on him,

180
00:10:29,640 --> 00:10:32,200
Speaker 2: we would have him probably as like a minus ten

181
00:10:32,360 --> 00:10:35,960
Speaker 2: kind of player, which would be bottom level in the majors.

182
00:10:37,160 --> 00:10:38,719
Speaker 2: I do want to say one other thing about him

183
00:10:38,720 --> 00:10:41,760
Speaker 2: that I think is important, and this is in particular

184
00:10:41,840 --> 00:10:44,240
Speaker 2: if you look at last year, we do a cool

185
00:10:44,320 --> 00:10:47,280
Speaker 2: thing that I think like a fan could almost do

186
00:10:47,440 --> 00:10:50,080
Speaker 2: if they had the fullest of parameters for it. What

187
00:10:50,120 --> 00:10:53,599
Speaker 2: we call good fielding plays and defensive misplays. And we

188
00:10:53,679 --> 00:10:57,600
Speaker 2: have third categories of good fielding plays, sixty categories of

189
00:10:57,960 --> 00:11:02,160
Speaker 2: bad ones, and the good ones are not just things

190
00:11:02,240 --> 00:11:04,520
Speaker 2: like making a web gem like a diving catch. That's

191
00:11:04,559 --> 00:11:07,280
Speaker 2: part of it, and that's a fair amount of it actually.

192
00:11:08,000 --> 00:11:10,080
Speaker 2: But the good ones are also like keeping the ball

193
00:11:10,120 --> 00:11:13,360
Speaker 2: in the infield on a ball, like man on first ball,

194
00:11:13,440 --> 00:11:16,480
Speaker 2: hitting in the first base second base hole, the second

195
00:11:16,480 --> 00:11:19,240
Speaker 2: baseman dives and fields it can't throw the guy out,

196
00:11:19,559 --> 00:11:21,640
Speaker 2: but the runner that was on first only gets to

197
00:11:21,720 --> 00:11:25,000
Speaker 2: second instead of going to third. You get a credit,

198
00:11:25,120 --> 00:11:27,440
Speaker 2: a chunk of a run save basically for doing that.

199
00:11:27,679 --> 00:11:29,520
Speaker 2: And those he ad up over time, and you might

200
00:11:29,559 --> 00:11:33,880
Speaker 2: accumulate positives or negatives, and Tim Anderson one of his issues,

201
00:11:34,040 --> 00:11:38,440
Speaker 2: he accumulates some negatives there. In fact, if you look

202
00:11:38,480 --> 00:11:41,600
Speaker 2: at last year in terms of good plays and you

203
00:11:41,640 --> 00:11:45,520
Speaker 2: did it like per raining, he's the he's the bottom,

204
00:11:45,559 --> 00:11:49,160
Speaker 2: like the total bottom in terms of good plays per

205
00:11:49,440 --> 00:11:53,800
Speaker 2: thousand innings. And then if you looked at misplays, like

206
00:11:53,920 --> 00:11:57,480
Speaker 2: plays that he didn't make that in our viue, he

207
00:11:57,520 --> 00:12:00,640
Speaker 2: could have made that a negative consequence happened, he slipped

208
00:12:00,640 --> 00:12:04,040
Speaker 2: and fell, any number of things. He's near the bottom

209
00:12:04,160 --> 00:12:08,120
Speaker 2: in that too. So those are with defensive run saved.

210
00:12:08,200 --> 00:12:10,600
Speaker 2: We thought he was a negative last year. With this

211
00:12:10,640 --> 00:12:12,840
Speaker 2: other stat that we've got the good plays and the

212
00:12:12,840 --> 00:12:16,000
Speaker 2: bad plays we think he's a negative shirt stop.

213
00:12:16,520 --> 00:12:18,880
Speaker 3: I'm curious to see what they can do with him.

214
00:12:18,880 --> 00:12:21,280
Speaker 2: Maybe he's not like that old, so maybe they can

215
00:12:21,280 --> 00:12:22,839
Speaker 2: fix him.

216
00:12:23,000 --> 00:12:25,000
Speaker 1: Yeah, for the people watching this on YouTube, I had

217
00:12:25,040 --> 00:12:27,800
Speaker 1: to share an error that he made against the Marlins

218
00:12:28,280 --> 00:12:30,280
Speaker 1: towards the middle of the year. It's an infamous one

219
00:12:30,320 --> 00:12:33,360
Speaker 1: because it keat a very big comeback that the team made.

220
00:12:33,360 --> 00:12:36,120
Speaker 1: That was a classic bad fielding play that was hit

221
00:12:36,480 --> 00:12:37,360
Speaker 1: directly Adam.

222
00:12:38,360 --> 00:12:41,520
Speaker 2: One of the rules for our misplays is that if

223
00:12:41,559 --> 00:12:44,040
Speaker 2: you got your glove on the ball in any way,

224
00:12:44,120 --> 00:12:49,560
Speaker 2: shape or form and you didn't and you didn't get

225
00:12:49,600 --> 00:12:52,920
Speaker 2: the out, we consider that a misplay because the idea

226
00:12:53,000 --> 00:12:56,240
Speaker 2: behind that is if you got your glove on it,

227
00:12:56,559 --> 00:12:59,720
Speaker 2: in some world, you could have made that play. Maybe

228
00:13:00,120 --> 00:13:02,480
Speaker 2: maybe it was a routinish kind of thing, maybe it

229
00:13:02,480 --> 00:13:06,120
Speaker 2: was a more difficult one. But some guys accumulate a

230
00:13:06,160 --> 00:13:08,040
Speaker 2: decent number of those. I don't know that his is

231
00:13:08,120 --> 00:13:13,000
Speaker 2: necessarily a decent number. But yeah, that's just again to

232
00:13:13,120 --> 00:13:16,920
Speaker 2: articulate how we do this sort of thing. That's another

233
00:13:17,400 --> 00:13:19,400
Speaker 2: piece of information that I think is worth knowing.

234
00:13:20,520 --> 00:13:23,760
Speaker 4: And with Tim Anderson, you know, we've heard rumblings at

235
00:13:23,760 --> 00:13:26,640
Speaker 4: the beginning that he could potentially move to second base,

236
00:13:26,720 --> 00:13:28,520
Speaker 4: but that seems like it's going to be stuck with

237
00:13:28,600 --> 00:13:31,480
Speaker 4: the rees or eyas for the foreseeable future. Do you

238
00:13:31,520 --> 00:13:35,000
Speaker 4: see him more a projecting more as a second basement

239
00:13:35,160 --> 00:13:39,080
Speaker 4: long term or do you think maybe his inconsistent defense

240
00:13:39,120 --> 00:13:41,320
Speaker 4: will just follow him to that position of loss.

241
00:13:41,720 --> 00:13:45,160
Speaker 2: So if he moved short to second in theory like

242
00:13:45,400 --> 00:13:49,559
Speaker 2: he should be at the very least a little better.

243
00:13:50,200 --> 00:13:53,080
Speaker 2: It's interesting. We actually looked this up because if Xander

244
00:13:53,120 --> 00:13:57,120
Speaker 2: Bogart's is moving short to second for the Patres and

245
00:13:57,240 --> 00:14:01,800
Speaker 2: I thought that the difference short to second was gonna

246
00:14:01,800 --> 00:14:05,480
Speaker 2: be really large. And if you look at the history,

247
00:14:05,600 --> 00:14:08,439
Speaker 2: like twenty years of data and guys that.

248
00:14:08,520 --> 00:14:11,640
Speaker 3: Did that, how good they were? I didn't.

249
00:14:12,400 --> 00:14:15,160
Speaker 2: I was surprised. There were some guys that improved. There

250
00:14:15,160 --> 00:14:19,480
Speaker 2: were some guys that didn't. Bryson Stott improved on the Phillies,

251
00:14:20,040 --> 00:14:24,080
Speaker 2: that was a significant one, or a Polanco now on

252
00:14:24,120 --> 00:14:26,840
Speaker 2: the Mariners on the Twins improved, but there were a

253
00:14:26,880 --> 00:14:27,920
Speaker 2: lot of guys that didn't.

254
00:14:28,120 --> 00:14:29,200
Speaker 3: And then I looked at it.

255
00:14:29,120 --> 00:14:31,760
Speaker 2: Like from a more narrow time frame, and it's like

256
00:14:31,800 --> 00:14:34,680
Speaker 2: the last three or four years, the guys that are

257
00:14:34,720 --> 00:14:37,560
Speaker 2: moving short to second they're seeing a nice jump, and

258
00:14:37,600 --> 00:14:41,480
Speaker 2: I'm wondering if that's just because positioning is more sophisticated

259
00:14:41,800 --> 00:14:44,880
Speaker 2: and they're able to put guys that were shortstops at

260
00:14:44,920 --> 00:14:45,560
Speaker 2: second base.

261
00:14:46,360 --> 00:14:47,320
Speaker 3: They're gonna put them in.

262
00:14:47,360 --> 00:14:51,200
Speaker 2: High level positions to succeed. And Tim Anderson like, if

263
00:14:51,240 --> 00:14:52,960
Speaker 2: you're gonna be a major league short stop, he's got

264
00:14:52,960 --> 00:14:54,640
Speaker 2: to be a good athlete. He's got to be a

265
00:14:54,720 --> 00:14:57,360
Speaker 2: terrific athlete. I would think that if he goes to

266
00:14:57,400 --> 00:14:58,880
Speaker 2: second base, he'll be at least.

267
00:14:58,760 --> 00:15:01,920
Speaker 3: A little bit better than he was.

268
00:15:02,560 --> 00:15:04,640
Speaker 2: And I think if he's going to hit how he

269
00:15:04,720 --> 00:15:06,760
Speaker 2: hit last year, he's going to have to play two

270
00:15:06,800 --> 00:15:09,040
Speaker 2: or three positions and turn himself into a Joey Wendall

271
00:15:09,120 --> 00:15:12,000
Speaker 2: type in order to survive in the major leagues.

272
00:15:13,160 --> 00:15:15,720
Speaker 1: You already mentioned this mark about the analysis you did

273
00:15:15,760 --> 00:15:19,120
Speaker 1: in the middle of last season about positioning and how

274
00:15:19,160 --> 00:15:22,080
Speaker 1: at that time the Marlins were the best in terms

275
00:15:22,120 --> 00:15:27,280
Speaker 1: of your calculation of run saved by infield positioning. Could

276
00:15:27,320 --> 00:15:29,200
Speaker 1: you just briefly walk us through how it is that

277
00:15:29,600 --> 00:15:33,160
Speaker 1: you calculate that stuff, because once again, Jody Reid was

278
00:15:33,720 --> 00:15:35,640
Speaker 1: leading that effort last year and he's back with the

279
00:15:35,640 --> 00:15:36,440
Speaker 1: Marlins this year.

280
00:15:36,840 --> 00:15:43,200
Speaker 2: Yeah. Sure, So it's a hard one to articulate verbally.

281
00:15:43,240 --> 00:15:47,680
Speaker 2: I'm gonna try. Imagine that a ball is hit, you know,

282
00:15:47,760 --> 00:15:52,400
Speaker 2: just wherever, whatever spot you're thinking, we're thinking, like up

283
00:15:52,440 --> 00:15:56,880
Speaker 2: the middle. We track a few different out probabilities for

284
00:15:56,960 --> 00:15:59,680
Speaker 2: that ball up the middle. We track it for all

285
00:15:59,760 --> 00:16:02,320
Speaker 2: balls balls hit up the middle, regardless of where someone

286
00:16:02,440 --> 00:16:05,280
Speaker 2: was playing. We track it for balls hit up the

287
00:16:05,320 --> 00:16:08,720
Speaker 2: middle where a guy was playing within a certain range

288
00:16:08,760 --> 00:16:13,200
Speaker 2: of space, which is like that happens in a game. Okay,

289
00:16:13,240 --> 00:16:16,040
Speaker 2: Joey Wendall's playing there, that's where we mark him, and

290
00:16:16,080 --> 00:16:16,920
Speaker 2: then we mark him.

291
00:16:17,560 --> 00:16:18,560
Speaker 3: We mark him.

292
00:16:19,000 --> 00:16:22,920
Speaker 2: The out probability of what it is when the ball

293
00:16:23,040 --> 00:16:26,920
Speaker 2: was actually fielded by the fielder. So a ground ball

294
00:16:27,120 --> 00:16:31,800
Speaker 2: up the middle, let's imagine that it had a twenty

295
00:16:31,840 --> 00:16:38,600
Speaker 2: one percent out probability. But and that's all, imagine that

296
00:16:38,680 --> 00:16:40,840
Speaker 2: all balls hit to that spot had a twenty one

297
00:16:40,840 --> 00:16:45,040
Speaker 2: percent out probability. Now imagine that you knew where Joey

298
00:16:45,040 --> 00:16:50,720
Speaker 2: Wendell was playing, and he was playing shaded significantly where

299
00:16:50,760 --> 00:16:51,560
Speaker 2: he could get.

300
00:16:51,400 --> 00:16:52,120
Speaker 3: To that ball.

301
00:16:52,560 --> 00:16:56,680
Speaker 2: The out probability changes from twenty one percent to seventy

302
00:16:56,720 --> 00:16:59,840
Speaker 2: eight percent. So what we're doing is we're giving the

303
00:17:00,040 --> 00:17:04,639
Speaker 2: Marlins and essentially Jody Reid here a credit for improving

304
00:17:04,680 --> 00:17:08,639
Speaker 2: their team's out probability by using their cards or whatever

305
00:17:09,720 --> 00:17:13,000
Speaker 2: positioning method they're using. By putting Joey Wendle in a

306
00:17:13,040 --> 00:17:16,119
Speaker 2: spot where instead of twenty one percent, he's got a

307
00:17:16,160 --> 00:17:19,360
Speaker 2: seventy eight percent chance to make the play. And that's

308
00:17:19,359 --> 00:17:21,520
Speaker 2: how we calculate it. We look at every play, every

309
00:17:21,520 --> 00:17:24,560
Speaker 2: ball that's hit. You add all the numbers together, you

310
00:17:24,600 --> 00:17:27,240
Speaker 2: subtract the ones that they didn't that they didn't field.

311
00:17:28,680 --> 00:17:30,360
Speaker 3: They like if I put.

312
00:17:30,240 --> 00:17:35,399
Speaker 2: Joey Wendall somewhere and a ball is hit, that's an

313
00:17:35,400 --> 00:17:38,600
Speaker 2: example of that. If I'm playing, if I'm playing the

314
00:17:38,640 --> 00:17:42,160
Speaker 2: third baseman way off the line at a ball.

315
00:17:42,040 --> 00:17:42,520
Speaker 3: Is hit.

316
00:17:43,920 --> 00:17:46,680
Speaker 2: Right to a spot that the like, if the third

317
00:17:46,680 --> 00:17:51,400
Speaker 2: baseman had been playing normally, he would have fielded nine

318
00:17:51,440 --> 00:17:54,800
Speaker 2: times out of ten, you're losing the value because you

319
00:17:54,880 --> 00:17:57,720
Speaker 2: made it harder for your player to get to that ball. Again,

320
00:17:58,000 --> 00:18:01,040
Speaker 2: hard to explain verbally. There's an article that we called

321
00:18:01,080 --> 00:18:04,040
Speaker 2: Reeling them In that I wrote in June that explains

322
00:18:04,040 --> 00:18:07,520
Speaker 2: it in more detail with images and stats and all

323
00:18:07,560 --> 00:18:10,040
Speaker 2: sorts of stuff, but basically with Joey Reid and the

324
00:18:10,040 --> 00:18:12,320
Speaker 2: Marlins were doing, and the analytics team deserves credit for

325
00:18:12,359 --> 00:18:15,480
Speaker 2: this too. Was they were putting guys in better spots

326
00:18:15,760 --> 00:18:18,560
Speaker 2: to improve the out probabilities even if they didn't make

327
00:18:18,560 --> 00:18:21,159
Speaker 2: the play, and they're like, you know, Luisa rise is

328
00:18:21,160 --> 00:18:23,679
Speaker 2: in a great spot, but he muffs the ball. Jody

329
00:18:23,680 --> 00:18:26,679
Speaker 2: Reid doesn't get punished for that, the Marlins get. The

330
00:18:26,720 --> 00:18:27,800
Speaker 2: team gets the credit for that.

331
00:18:30,359 --> 00:18:32,639
Speaker 1: I don't know if you're aware one way or another,

332
00:18:32,680 --> 00:18:34,680
Speaker 1: but during the second half of the year, were they

333
00:18:34,880 --> 00:18:37,280
Speaker 1: equally as good in that aspector that they come back

334
00:18:37,359 --> 00:18:38,080
Speaker 1: on earth a little?

335
00:18:38,359 --> 00:18:40,960
Speaker 2: So I think they got I think they were no

336
00:18:41,080 --> 00:18:43,159
Speaker 2: longer first at the end of the year, but they

337
00:18:43,160 --> 00:18:45,439
Speaker 2: were near the top. I think the Cardinals may have

338
00:18:45,600 --> 00:18:48,520
Speaker 2: ended up first in total run saved.

339
00:18:48,560 --> 00:18:49,000
Speaker 3: I think it.

340
00:18:49,000 --> 00:18:54,600
Speaker 2: Goes Cardinals, Dodgers, Marlins as the top three, so I

341
00:18:54,640 --> 00:18:56,720
Speaker 2: guess they might have sagged a little bit, or maybe

342
00:18:56,760 --> 00:19:00,920
Speaker 2: the Cardinals or Dodgers just simply we're really good down

343
00:19:00,960 --> 00:19:03,200
Speaker 2: the stretch. So it's something I think that the Marlins

344
00:19:03,200 --> 00:19:06,920
Speaker 2: should be feeling good about as they head into twenty

345
00:19:06,960 --> 00:19:08,320
Speaker 2: twenty four, that they got a guy it and knows

346
00:19:08,359 --> 00:19:09,879
Speaker 2: what he's doing when it comes to putting guys in

347
00:19:09,880 --> 00:19:10,679
Speaker 2: the right spots.

348
00:19:11,200 --> 00:19:13,160
Speaker 4: I wanted to ask and go a little bit more

349
00:19:13,240 --> 00:19:15,800
Speaker 4: on the captain position, which has just been almost a

350
00:19:15,800 --> 00:19:18,480
Speaker 4: mess for the Marlins since losing j tiro Mito and

351
00:19:18,800 --> 00:19:22,120
Speaker 4: a trade long five years ago or so. I want

352
00:19:22,160 --> 00:19:24,359
Speaker 4: to go ahead and talk about Jacob Stallings, someone that

353
00:19:24,400 --> 00:19:27,120
Speaker 4: the Marlins brought in because of his defense coming off

354
00:19:27,119 --> 00:19:31,040
Speaker 4: of Gold Glove Award winning season. Had to believe a

355
00:19:31,160 --> 00:19:34,720
Speaker 4: sixty plus sixteen defensive run saved now or last season

356
00:19:35,520 --> 00:19:38,119
Speaker 4: he just ranked zero and is now I believe a

357
00:19:38,160 --> 00:19:41,119
Speaker 4: backup with the Colorado Rockies. Just how do you believe

358
00:19:41,160 --> 00:19:44,159
Speaker 4: Jacob Stalling's just fared with the Marlins? Like what happened

359
00:19:44,160 --> 00:19:46,680
Speaker 4: there from going from a gold Glove winner to now

360
00:19:46,680 --> 00:19:48,320
Speaker 4: where he's a backup with the Rockies.

361
00:19:48,840 --> 00:19:51,119
Speaker 2: That's a good question, and this is one where I

362
00:19:51,160 --> 00:19:54,560
Speaker 2: actually feel really confident in the answer as opposed to

363
00:19:54,560 --> 00:19:57,320
Speaker 2: some of the other things that we talk about. So

364
00:19:57,359 --> 00:20:00,240
Speaker 2: what happened to Jacob Stallings was when he he was

365
00:20:00,280 --> 00:20:04,919
Speaker 2: with the Pirates, he was great at snatching that low pitch,

366
00:20:05,400 --> 00:20:08,080
Speaker 2: like setting the target and then coming up with it

367
00:20:08,320 --> 00:20:09,840
Speaker 2: and getting it in the strike zone to get a

368
00:20:09,840 --> 00:20:16,200
Speaker 2: called strike with the Marlins, I can tell you with

369
00:20:16,520 --> 00:20:20,679
Speaker 2: strong definitiveness that he was not good at this. I

370
00:20:20,720 --> 00:20:25,720
Speaker 2: don't know if that's like an injury related thing or

371
00:20:26,280 --> 00:20:30,520
Speaker 2: what that necessarily is, but I can definitely tell you,

372
00:20:30,600 --> 00:20:34,640
Speaker 2: and that is a really important part of catcher value

373
00:20:34,800 --> 00:20:37,680
Speaker 2: is being able to take that low ninety seven mile

374
00:20:37,720 --> 00:20:40,680
Speaker 2: an hour fastball that the hitter takes, that's knee high,

375
00:20:40,840 --> 00:20:43,040
Speaker 2: it's right at the border, and being able to get

376
00:20:43,080 --> 00:20:45,399
Speaker 2: your pitcher a called strike for it. He used to

377
00:20:45,480 --> 00:20:50,680
Speaker 2: be great. He's not great anymore. He's That's that's why

378
00:20:50,680 --> 00:20:54,800
Speaker 2: he's a negative statistically, and I feel like between us

379
00:20:55,080 --> 00:20:59,000
Speaker 2: and between Baseball Savant, I feel pretty strongly that that's

380
00:20:59,040 --> 00:21:01,200
Speaker 2: what it is for him.

381
00:21:01,480 --> 00:21:04,480
Speaker 1: Yeah, when they made that trade, this was supposed to

382
00:21:04,480 --> 00:21:06,840
Speaker 1: be his final year of club control, and it was

383
00:21:07,080 --> 00:21:08,840
Speaker 1: was kind of unthinkable at the time that he might

384
00:21:08,880 --> 00:21:10,800
Speaker 1: not even make it that year, that they would actually

385
00:21:11,160 --> 00:21:13,840
Speaker 1: elect to get rid of him. But the combination of

386
00:21:13,840 --> 00:21:17,480
Speaker 1: both the defense and the offense made it really tough.

387
00:21:17,560 --> 00:21:20,000
Speaker 1: Although he did set a record along the way that

388
00:21:20,040 --> 00:21:22,240
Speaker 1: Marlins fans are very aware of. He set a record

389
00:21:22,240 --> 00:21:26,040
Speaker 1: for most consecutive games without a past ball during the

390
00:21:26,080 --> 00:21:29,840
Speaker 1: past a year and a half stretch broke Johnny Bench's record.

391
00:21:29,920 --> 00:21:33,080
Speaker 1: So even though he wasn't framing well, at least he

392
00:21:33,240 --> 00:21:36,720
Speaker 1: was avoiding some of these egregious misses on balls that

393
00:21:36,840 --> 00:21:37,880
Speaker 1: were catchable for him.

394
00:21:37,960 --> 00:21:40,200
Speaker 4: I want to continue just one more question about the

395
00:21:40,240 --> 00:21:42,399
Speaker 4: catch this and you know Jacob Stallings. But on the

396
00:21:42,440 --> 00:21:44,679
Speaker 4: other hand, you have Nick Fortest, who did post a

397
00:21:44,680 --> 00:21:47,960
Speaker 4: positive DRS for the Marlins. Just what do you believe

398
00:21:48,040 --> 00:21:49,959
Speaker 4: or what are the stats saying in terms of what

399
00:21:50,040 --> 00:21:53,120
Speaker 4: he does so well to occur that positive value even

400
00:21:53,160 --> 00:21:55,199
Speaker 4: playing almost half as many games.

401
00:21:55,840 --> 00:21:58,640
Speaker 2: Yeah, so again I feel good about this one too.

402
00:21:59,040 --> 00:22:02,479
Speaker 2: We have Nick four because as I don't know, I

403
00:22:02,600 --> 00:22:05,400
Speaker 2: think he's the best. He's either best or second best

404
00:22:05,600 --> 00:22:08,399
Speaker 2: when it comes to pitch blocking last year, and this

405
00:22:08,560 --> 00:22:09,640
Speaker 2: is pretty cool.

406
00:22:09,840 --> 00:22:10,840
Speaker 3: Any pitch that's in the.

407
00:22:10,760 --> 00:22:14,520
Speaker 2: Dirt whole season, every single one, every pitch that's in

408
00:22:14,560 --> 00:22:17,040
Speaker 2: the dirt during the major league season, we note it,

409
00:22:17,280 --> 00:22:20,280
Speaker 2: and we note whether the catcher had a block or

410
00:22:20,440 --> 00:22:25,520
Speaker 2: he missed it. And that's specific to situations with a

411
00:22:25,600 --> 00:22:29,600
Speaker 2: runner on base, and that's specific to two strikes on

412
00:22:29,680 --> 00:22:32,480
Speaker 2: a batter in a situation where the batter could run

413
00:22:32,520 --> 00:22:35,480
Speaker 2: to first base if he struck out and Nick fort

414
00:22:35,520 --> 00:22:38,960
Speaker 2: Has is the best at that, So he is good

415
00:22:38,960 --> 00:22:39,239
Speaker 2: at that.

416
00:22:39,920 --> 00:22:40,520
Speaker 3: He is good.

417
00:22:40,640 --> 00:22:45,119
Speaker 2: He is a decent pitch framer by our measures, and

418
00:22:45,200 --> 00:22:47,840
Speaker 2: even though the staffy ra may have been a little

419
00:22:47,920 --> 00:22:52,159
Speaker 2: high maybe it's and instolen base numbers were quite frankly

420
00:22:52,240 --> 00:22:57,399
Speaker 2: not great, the pitch blocking overcomes that. Now it'd be

421
00:22:57,440 --> 00:23:00,000
Speaker 2: really good at that. You have to be really, really

422
00:23:00,080 --> 00:23:02,760
Speaker 2: good at that, and he was someone I think for us,

423
00:23:03,359 --> 00:23:06,280
Speaker 2: if you're like a ninety five ninety six percent, you're

424
00:23:06,320 --> 00:23:09,520
Speaker 2: like number one, and like ninety two percent is average

425
00:23:09,680 --> 00:23:13,520
Speaker 2: and really lousy guys are like eighty eight percent. But

426
00:23:13,640 --> 00:23:16,440
Speaker 2: Nick Fortez was number one for us last season when

427
00:23:16,440 --> 00:23:19,480
Speaker 2: it came to pitch blocking. That's why I think that's

428
00:23:19,520 --> 00:23:22,160
Speaker 2: why he's That's one of the big reasons why he's there.

429
00:23:22,480 --> 00:23:24,720
Speaker 2: That's one of the big reasons why he did play

430
00:23:24,760 --> 00:23:27,480
Speaker 2: one hundred something games last year, and I think that's

431
00:23:27,480 --> 00:23:29,199
Speaker 2: something to watch with him moving forward.

432
00:23:30,640 --> 00:23:33,800
Speaker 1: He could give people maybe ten guesses, and I don't

433
00:23:33,800 --> 00:23:35,919
Speaker 1: think they'd be able to tell you who led the

434
00:23:35,960 --> 00:23:39,120
Speaker 1: Marlins last year in defensive front saved because it was

435
00:23:39,200 --> 00:23:42,600
Speaker 1: a pitcher. It was Jesus Lizardo. Because of you don't

436
00:23:42,680 --> 00:23:46,119
Speaker 1: usually think of pitchers as fielders, and the number of

437
00:23:46,280 --> 00:23:49,120
Speaker 1: endings that they're out there so limited that it's highly unusual.

438
00:23:49,160 --> 00:23:53,200
Speaker 1: He was a Gold Glove finalist because of it. I'm

439
00:23:53,240 --> 00:23:56,600
Speaker 1: fascinated by what it is that you feel he did

440
00:23:56,720 --> 00:23:58,640
Speaker 1: in such a small sample too.

441
00:23:58,680 --> 00:24:00,959
Speaker 3: He should have won. Yeah, that's funny.

442
00:24:01,640 --> 00:24:07,080
Speaker 2: I did look into this thoroughly before we talked, So, Yeah,

443
00:24:07,119 --> 00:24:11,919
Speaker 2: he wound up with seven defensive unsaved, and a small

444
00:24:12,000 --> 00:24:15,800
Speaker 2: chunk of that is the pickoffs and the fact that

445
00:24:15,840 --> 00:24:18,840
Speaker 2: the stolen bases against him were not absurd, like he

446
00:24:18,880 --> 00:24:22,040
Speaker 2: gave up eleven catcher, caught three guys, he picked three

447
00:24:22,080 --> 00:24:25,320
Speaker 2: guys off, and he threw one guy out in you know,

448
00:24:25,359 --> 00:24:29,480
Speaker 2: trying to steal. So he had thirty one chances during

449
00:24:29,560 --> 00:24:34,600
Speaker 2: the season. And what can happen sometimes with defensive unsaved

450
00:24:34,880 --> 00:24:37,840
Speaker 2: is one, if you're a pitcher and you feel a

451
00:24:37,880 --> 00:24:41,639
Speaker 2: really hard hit comebacker, you're getting a nice spike for that.

452
00:24:42,160 --> 00:24:44,879
Speaker 2: And he had a couple of instances of that during

453
00:24:44,920 --> 00:24:47,480
Speaker 2: the season, So he's getting that really nice spike for

454
00:24:48,640 --> 00:24:51,400
Speaker 2: that play. I think part of it is that he's

455
00:24:51,400 --> 00:24:55,320
Speaker 2: in good fielding position as he releases the pitch in

456
00:24:55,400 --> 00:24:57,359
Speaker 2: order to allow himself to make that play, so I

457
00:24:57,359 --> 00:24:58,600
Speaker 2: think that's a big part of it.

458
00:24:58,760 --> 00:24:59,960
Speaker 3: The other was kind of fun.

459
00:25:00,560 --> 00:25:02,919
Speaker 2: I was looking at like his top ten plays of

460
00:25:02,960 --> 00:25:05,879
Speaker 2: those thirty one and two of them involved balls that

461
00:25:05,960 --> 00:25:11,159
Speaker 2: he deflected. Where a ball was hit, he got a

462
00:25:11,160 --> 00:25:13,280
Speaker 2: piece of it with his glove and they threw a

463
00:25:13,320 --> 00:25:15,080
Speaker 2: guy out at the plate. Might even be in the

464
00:25:15,080 --> 00:25:19,560
Speaker 2: same game against the Tigers in June, and he got

465
00:25:19,640 --> 00:25:22,080
Speaker 2: a nice credit for both of those, even though he

466
00:25:22,119 --> 00:25:26,880
Speaker 2: didn't actually field the ball. He is judged by our system,

467
00:25:26,920 --> 00:25:29,000
Speaker 2: whether you like it or not, he is judged to

468
00:25:29,080 --> 00:25:31,239
Speaker 2: have done something that assisted in the making of the

469
00:25:31,280 --> 00:25:37,000
Speaker 2: out by the ball smagging off his glove, and that

470
00:25:37,040 --> 00:25:38,600
Speaker 2: I'm not gonna say that gave him a full run

471
00:25:38,640 --> 00:25:41,120
Speaker 2: saved or something, but that gave him a little value

472
00:25:41,840 --> 00:25:45,000
Speaker 2: that I think some people you like, if you're watching games,

473
00:25:45,760 --> 00:25:47,399
Speaker 2: you don't know that he's getting credit for that.

474
00:25:47,880 --> 00:25:49,600
Speaker 3: But in our system, he does.

475
00:25:51,720 --> 00:25:55,119
Speaker 1: Yeah, interesting situation, some of it seems repeatable, some of

476
00:25:55,200 --> 00:25:57,520
Speaker 1: it a little lucky.

477
00:25:56,240 --> 00:25:59,640
Speaker 2: But yeah, who the heck knows with that. He had four,

478
00:26:00,000 --> 00:26:02,159
Speaker 2: but now he had seven runs saved last year. He

479
00:26:02,200 --> 00:26:04,760
Speaker 2: had four and three in the previous two years. So

480
00:26:04,800 --> 00:26:07,119
Speaker 2: I feel like that's enough of a sample to indicate, Okay,

481
00:26:07,160 --> 00:26:12,120
Speaker 2: he's all right at fielding, bad at balls, and he's

482
00:26:12,119 --> 00:26:14,679
Speaker 2: all right at denying stolen based attempts.

483
00:26:15,040 --> 00:26:16,800
Speaker 3: So repeatable.

484
00:26:16,920 --> 00:26:19,680
Speaker 2: I don't know, but I don't think he's going to

485
00:26:19,760 --> 00:26:20,680
Speaker 2: like suddenly be bad.

486
00:26:21,640 --> 00:26:25,359
Speaker 1: Yeah, just a couple more questions from Mark here. Pretty

487
00:26:26,000 --> 00:26:29,240
Speaker 1: polarizing player here that was near the bottom of the

488
00:26:29,240 --> 00:26:32,280
Speaker 1: Marlins last season in defensive run safe Jazz Chishom Junior

489
00:26:33,080 --> 00:26:37,359
Speaker 1: minus nine as an exclusive center fielder. I can't speak

490
00:26:37,400 --> 00:26:40,680
Speaker 1: from everybody. I think the general sentiment from people watching

491
00:26:40,680 --> 00:26:42,800
Speaker 1: the Marlins is that it looks like a train wreck

492
00:26:42,840 --> 00:26:44,960
Speaker 1: in spring training when he was learning the position. It

493
00:26:45,640 --> 00:26:49,400
Speaker 1: looks really concerning early in the year, in the first

494
00:26:49,440 --> 00:26:51,840
Speaker 1: couple weeks of the season, but did seem like as

495
00:26:51,880 --> 00:26:54,880
Speaker 1: the season went on that he really got comfortable there

496
00:26:54,880 --> 00:26:57,439
Speaker 1: and in a variety of ways. At least to our

497
00:26:57,840 --> 00:27:02,760
Speaker 1: untrained eye, it looked like he was settling in extremely well.

498
00:27:02,800 --> 00:27:04,960
Speaker 1: When he was actually on the field. That was limited,

499
00:27:05,000 --> 00:27:08,960
Speaker 1: of course, through injury. As you've mentioned with a couple

500
00:27:09,000 --> 00:27:11,719
Speaker 1: other players there are This is a spot where Sports

501
00:27:11,720 --> 00:27:15,840
Speaker 1: Info Solutions disagrees with some other measurements in terms of

502
00:27:15,880 --> 00:27:20,800
Speaker 1: how the positives and negatives like even out there. So

503
00:27:21,040 --> 00:27:24,520
Speaker 1: in your case, what made him come out as such

504
00:27:24,560 --> 00:27:25,920
Speaker 1: a liability last year?

505
00:27:26,280 --> 00:27:31,119
Speaker 2: Yeah, so our system graded him really, really, really really

506
00:27:31,160 --> 00:27:34,680
Speaker 2: harshly those first couple of weeks. Like I think of

507
00:27:34,720 --> 00:27:37,480
Speaker 2: that negative nine, which I think is the number that

508
00:27:37,520 --> 00:27:40,080
Speaker 2: he is in center field. I think it was something

509
00:27:40,160 --> 00:27:43,080
Speaker 2: like negative five in the first couple of weeks and

510
00:27:43,119 --> 00:27:47,840
Speaker 2: then negative four after that. I think that it is

511
00:27:48,040 --> 00:27:52,960
Speaker 2: very difficult with the eye to evaluate center fielders. It

512
00:27:53,080 --> 00:27:56,880
Speaker 2: is the most common thing that I have encountered. I literally,

513
00:27:56,960 --> 00:27:59,280
Speaker 2: I think just wrote this and published it like an

514
00:27:59,359 --> 00:28:03,440
Speaker 2: hour ago for writing about Michael Taylor. Everyone thinks their

515
00:28:03,560 --> 00:28:06,160
Speaker 2: center fielder is a good center fielder or the best

516
00:28:06,160 --> 00:28:09,280
Speaker 2: center fielder because he's a great athlete and because he

517
00:28:09,640 --> 00:28:12,880
Speaker 2: most center fielders make a number of really really good catches.

518
00:28:13,240 --> 00:28:15,360
Speaker 2: But the reality of it is that there can only

519
00:28:15,359 --> 00:28:18,040
Speaker 2: be you know, a couple of bests and a couple

520
00:28:18,080 --> 00:28:19,919
Speaker 2: of worsts, and then a lot of guys kind of

521
00:28:19,960 --> 00:28:24,040
Speaker 2: in the middle. And now over the latter part of

522
00:28:24,080 --> 00:28:26,840
Speaker 2: the season. Yeah, jass Chism was better. He wasn't if

523
00:28:26,840 --> 00:28:30,080
Speaker 2: he was negative five in two weeks, and we repeated

524
00:28:30,119 --> 00:28:32,000
Speaker 2: that for the whole year, he would have been, you know,

525
00:28:32,040 --> 00:28:34,679
Speaker 2: negative seventy. He never even he went through seeing the field,

526
00:28:34,880 --> 00:28:37,760
Speaker 2: so I think just on that he got better, he

527
00:28:37,880 --> 00:28:40,680
Speaker 2: was like negative four the rest of the year. For comparison,

528
00:28:41,000 --> 00:28:44,800
Speaker 2: let's do this. Imagine if we erased Jazz Chishom Junior's

529
00:28:44,840 --> 00:28:48,440
Speaker 2: first two weeks of the season, instead of negative nine

530
00:28:48,560 --> 00:28:53,479
Speaker 2: for the season, he's negative four. Cody Bellinger last season,

531
00:28:53,520 --> 00:28:55,960
Speaker 2: who I think people would say, looks pretty good that

532
00:28:56,040 --> 00:28:58,200
Speaker 2: in the field for the most part he was a

533
00:28:58,240 --> 00:29:03,720
Speaker 2: negative three, so you could again you could look pretty good.

534
00:29:04,200 --> 00:29:07,080
Speaker 2: But the way that our system works, it is just

535
00:29:07,120 --> 00:29:09,400
Speaker 2: it's taking the ball, it's taking the characteristics of the

536
00:29:09,400 --> 00:29:11,560
Speaker 2: batter ball, it's looking at where you're playing, and it's

537
00:29:11,560 --> 00:29:13,760
Speaker 2: saying what's the out probability, and it's saying, did you

538
00:29:13,800 --> 00:29:15,760
Speaker 2: make the catch or did you not make the catch.

539
00:29:16,000 --> 00:29:16,800
Speaker 3: There are gonna be some.

540
00:29:16,880 --> 00:29:22,360
Speaker 2: Balls that were probably hit over his head or in

541
00:29:22,400 --> 00:29:24,760
Speaker 2: front of him where maybe he got a late read

542
00:29:25,000 --> 00:29:27,400
Speaker 2: or maybe he took a bad route, and that on

543
00:29:27,520 --> 00:29:30,720
Speaker 2: TV you don't necessarily see that one bad step that

544
00:29:30,760 --> 00:29:34,680
Speaker 2: he took that turned a play that's like a seventy

545
00:29:34,680 --> 00:29:37,600
Speaker 2: five percent out probability and made it a hard play

546
00:29:37,640 --> 00:29:41,680
Speaker 2: for himself, so I think there were some of those.

547
00:29:42,400 --> 00:29:43,720
Speaker 2: Do I think he can get better?

548
00:29:43,840 --> 00:29:44,080
Speaker 3: Yeah?

549
00:29:44,080 --> 00:29:48,200
Speaker 2: Shoot, he's twenty six, right, like he has whatever number

550
00:29:48,200 --> 00:29:49,920
Speaker 2: of games in center fielder under his belt.

551
00:29:50,400 --> 00:29:51,320
Speaker 3: I think you can get better.

552
00:29:51,320 --> 00:29:53,440
Speaker 2: He showed he could get better after those awful first

553
00:29:53,520 --> 00:29:56,680
Speaker 2: two weeks, so I think it's a given time. I

554
00:29:56,720 --> 00:29:58,840
Speaker 2: think if you're expecting him to be a gold Glove,

555
00:29:58,960 --> 00:30:01,240
Speaker 2: I think that might be a little stilly. But can

556
00:30:01,240 --> 00:30:03,360
Speaker 2: he be respectable in centerfield? I think he can get there.

557
00:30:03,400 --> 00:30:05,400
Speaker 2: He's a good athlete, I would say.

558
00:30:05,440 --> 00:30:08,920
Speaker 4: My other question would just be with Larisa Arrayaz in

559
00:30:09,000 --> 00:30:12,560
Speaker 4: terms of how he performed starting second base, I believe

560
00:30:12,600 --> 00:30:14,479
Speaker 4: one of the first time's majority of his career. We've

561
00:30:14,480 --> 00:30:16,360
Speaker 4: seen him a lot on first base with the Twins

562
00:30:16,360 --> 00:30:19,720
Speaker 4: and now shifting over to second base, posting just a

563
00:30:20,320 --> 00:30:24,719
Speaker 4: two DRS. How do you believe Arise has shown himself

564
00:30:24,840 --> 00:30:27,080
Speaker 4: in second base or do you see him maybe again

565
00:30:27,720 --> 00:30:30,480
Speaker 4: long term? Could he go back to first base, which

566
00:30:30,680 --> 00:30:33,280
Speaker 4: might be more comfortable to him in terms of gaining

567
00:30:33,320 --> 00:30:36,000
Speaker 4: more DRS compared to how he was and second.

568
00:30:37,040 --> 00:30:39,120
Speaker 2: I think I think he'd be all right at second base.

569
00:30:39,280 --> 00:30:44,200
Speaker 2: We've his twenty nineteen we didn't particularly like. But if

570
00:30:44,240 --> 00:30:46,160
Speaker 2: you look at the next few years at second base

571
00:30:46,240 --> 00:30:49,600
Speaker 2: for him, he's positive. Like we have him as as

572
00:30:49,640 --> 00:30:53,400
Speaker 2: a above average second baseman. Can I tell you, like

573
00:30:53,600 --> 00:30:57,239
Speaker 2: necessarily what he's really good at. I'm looking at it

574
00:30:57,280 --> 00:31:01,200
Speaker 2: here he looks to be. Last year he was better

575
00:31:01,280 --> 00:31:03,800
Speaker 2: fielding balls in the first base second base hole when

576
00:31:03,840 --> 00:31:07,200
Speaker 2: he was going up the middle. He was good on

577
00:31:07,240 --> 00:31:09,680
Speaker 2: the double play by our percentages. We do a thing

578
00:31:09,680 --> 00:31:12,480
Speaker 2: where we check double plays, did you turn it or

579
00:31:12,480 --> 00:31:15,320
Speaker 2: did you not? His percentage of did you turn it

580
00:31:15,360 --> 00:31:19,240
Speaker 2: when the opportunity was there was good, respectable. At least

581
00:31:20,080 --> 00:31:23,840
Speaker 2: he doesn't have like an overwhelming number of misplays. He

582
00:31:23,920 --> 00:31:27,840
Speaker 2: made his fair share of decent defensive plays. I on

583
00:31:27,880 --> 00:31:31,720
Speaker 2: the list of Marlin's concerns for twenty twenty four, I

584
00:31:31,760 --> 00:31:34,760
Speaker 2: don't think I would put his defense high.

585
00:31:34,520 --> 00:31:36,280
Speaker 3: On the list. I think he'll be fine wherever they

586
00:31:36,320 --> 00:31:37,040
Speaker 3: put him.

587
00:31:38,360 --> 00:31:40,480
Speaker 1: Just to close this out, Mark, I don't think there

588
00:31:40,520 --> 00:31:45,880
Speaker 1: are formal projections you can do with DRS moving forward,

589
00:31:46,440 --> 00:31:49,440
Speaker 1: But as best as you can you know approximate how

590
00:31:49,480 --> 00:31:52,880
Speaker 1: these pieces fit together on the Marlins entering this year,

591
00:31:52,920 --> 00:31:56,160
Speaker 1: should people reasonably expect it to look similar to last

592
00:31:56,200 --> 00:31:58,760
Speaker 1: year where they were I think twenty first in team

593
00:31:59,000 --> 00:32:01,800
Speaker 1: DRS or is there do you have any strong field

594
00:32:01,840 --> 00:32:04,160
Speaker 1: one way or another in terms of how this will

595
00:32:04,160 --> 00:32:06,120
Speaker 1: compare to last year's team.

596
00:32:06,320 --> 00:32:08,760
Speaker 3: On that way, well, where did they Where did they

597
00:32:08,760 --> 00:32:09,240
Speaker 3: get better?

598
00:32:09,440 --> 00:32:12,440
Speaker 2: I guess that would be my question, Like they took

599
00:32:12,480 --> 00:32:15,600
Speaker 2: shortstop and they probably made it a little worse right

600
00:32:16,800 --> 00:32:21,200
Speaker 2: by taking Bertie out of there regularly. I think that

601
00:32:21,240 --> 00:32:23,360
Speaker 2: would be my primary question is like where did they

602
00:32:23,360 --> 00:32:26,480
Speaker 2: make it better? I don't I don't think they're necessarily

603
00:32:26,560 --> 00:32:29,360
Speaker 2: a top ten defensive team given what's out there. Unless

604
00:32:29,360 --> 00:32:31,360
Speaker 2: you can tell me somewhere that you think they made

605
00:32:31,400 --> 00:32:31,720
Speaker 2: it better.

606
00:32:33,680 --> 00:32:34,920
Speaker 3: It's yeah, it's no.

607
00:32:35,240 --> 00:32:39,440
Speaker 1: It does not look great for the moment, perhaps assuming

608
00:32:39,480 --> 00:32:43,920
Speaker 1: a little bit of improvement from Jazz with more experience

609
00:32:44,320 --> 00:32:48,000
Speaker 1: that they do have. Still, yeah, they need some marginal changes,

610
00:32:48,040 --> 00:32:50,360
Speaker 1: a little bit more Nick Gordon and left field instead

611
00:32:50,400 --> 00:32:53,240
Speaker 1: of Brian Dela Cruz. I know that Dela Cruz was

612
00:32:53,600 --> 00:32:57,280
Speaker 1: by any measure, Dela Cruz was bad over there, and

613
00:32:57,320 --> 00:32:59,920
Speaker 1: he will get more d H time a little addition

614
00:33:00,040 --> 00:33:03,320
Speaker 1: by subtract, Well, I shouldn't really say that Stallings, as

615
00:33:03,320 --> 00:33:06,000
Speaker 1: we covered he was he was a zero but maybe

616
00:33:06,160 --> 00:33:09,640
Speaker 1: Christian Benncourt. He has his positives and his negatives. So

617
00:33:09,920 --> 00:33:14,560
Speaker 1: that's a little bit unclear right there, and no, I

618
00:33:14,600 --> 00:33:17,960
Speaker 1: think overall it is. Yeah, it's a little bit. I'd

619
00:33:17,960 --> 00:33:20,440
Speaker 1: say that. The one other thing we mentioned earlier about

620
00:33:20,520 --> 00:33:23,880
Speaker 1: Jody Reid being involved with the defensive positioning and what

621
00:33:23,920 --> 00:33:26,360
Speaker 1: the Moms have done entering this year is instead of

622
00:33:26,400 --> 00:33:29,240
Speaker 1: splitting his time between being a third base coach and

623
00:33:29,320 --> 00:33:31,560
Speaker 1: doing that, I guess he's devoting a little bit more

624
00:33:31,720 --> 00:33:36,640
Speaker 1: energy towards the infield positioning. I don't know exactly how

625
00:33:36,720 --> 00:33:39,720
Speaker 1: much of a difference that will make, but yeah, it is.

626
00:33:39,800 --> 00:33:43,080
Speaker 1: It's top of mind for everybody because there is a

627
00:33:43,080 --> 00:33:46,160
Speaker 1: lot of excitement about the Marlins pitching staff, and I

628
00:33:46,200 --> 00:33:49,160
Speaker 1: have to keep reminding people that run prevention is both

629
00:33:49,200 --> 00:33:52,200
Speaker 1: the pitching and it's also the defense, and so that

630
00:33:52,280 --> 00:33:55,360
Speaker 1: is why this factor is going to be a pretty

631
00:33:55,360 --> 00:33:58,200
Speaker 1: big difference in terms of whether they're an elite run

632
00:33:58,200 --> 00:34:01,120
Speaker 1: prevention unit or whether they're too close to the middle

633
00:34:01,120 --> 00:34:03,200
Speaker 1: of the pack, and that it, you know, makes them

634
00:34:03,240 --> 00:34:05,720
Speaker 1: not as competitive, of course as they were last year.

635
00:34:06,120 --> 00:34:09,560
Speaker 2: Yeah, I'm of the belief that like Lizardo, if things

636
00:34:09,600 --> 00:34:12,959
Speaker 2: were right, could be a cy young contender, and he's

637
00:34:13,000 --> 00:34:16,040
Speaker 2: more likely although the voting, the voting block is much

638
00:34:16,080 --> 00:34:19,000
Speaker 2: more sophisticated this year. But he'll look a lot better

639
00:34:19,040 --> 00:34:23,200
Speaker 2: with the era that's three or you know, high two's

640
00:34:23,400 --> 00:34:25,680
Speaker 2: than an era that's three and a half where he's

641
00:34:25,719 --> 00:34:30,200
Speaker 2: not really a contender for a major award.

642
00:34:30,680 --> 00:34:32,759
Speaker 3: And yeah, the defense needs to be good behind them.

643
00:34:34,280 --> 00:34:37,879
Speaker 1: Yeah from Eli Suspan didn't know Rodriguez. Thanks so much

644
00:34:37,920 --> 00:34:40,960
Speaker 1: to Mark Simon and Sports Info Solutions for joining us

645
00:34:41,040 --> 00:34:43,240
Speaker 1: right here. As I mentioned up top, I've been following

646
00:34:43,560 --> 00:34:46,440
Speaker 1: him a long time, especially on Twitter, so you can

647
00:34:46,520 --> 00:34:50,000
Speaker 1: follow him there at Mark A. Simon. Mark A. Simon

648
00:34:50,120 --> 00:34:53,280
Speaker 1: says at Twitter, you can check out some of the

649
00:34:53,320 --> 00:34:55,520
Speaker 1: writing that I think you just said. You added another

650
00:34:55,560 --> 00:34:59,360
Speaker 1: one on Sports Info Solutions dot com. It's really cool analysis,

651
00:34:59,440 --> 00:35:01,520
Speaker 1: especially that on the Marlins from last year. We'll be

652
00:35:01,560 --> 00:35:03,520
Speaker 1: able to link to it on this episode that people

653
00:35:03,560 --> 00:35:06,880
Speaker 1: can read that as well and get an even deeper

654
00:35:06,960 --> 00:35:11,640
Speaker 1: conceptualization about exactly how all this these pieces fit together.

655
00:35:11,880 --> 00:35:14,000
Speaker 1: And you can get even more about all of Mark's

656
00:35:14,120 --> 00:35:18,600
Speaker 1: endeavors at Mark Simon's media dot com. So thanks a

657
00:35:18,640 --> 00:35:22,640
Speaker 1: lot for all of this stuff. And uh yeah, this

658
00:35:22,760 --> 00:35:24,760
Speaker 1: was awesome. We learned a lot great.

659
00:35:24,800 --> 00:35:26,040
Speaker 3: I'm glad I have a simple of help.

660
00:35:26,880 --> 00:35:29,040
Speaker 1: Next episode of the official show should be coming at

661
00:35:29,080 --> 00:35:31,880
Speaker 1: you on Tuesday morning. A whole lot of Marlins coverage

662
00:35:31,880 --> 00:35:34,560
Speaker 1: between now and then on fish on First dot com.

663
00:35:34,560 --> 00:35:37,239
Speaker 1: We appreciate everybody tunes in supports what we do.

664
00:35:37,719 --> 00:35:46,560
Speaker 3: Go pish