The Bryce Harper Compendium (2014)

[varoadking]

Well, Nate McLouth at 0.1 does magically have more fWAR than Frandsen (-.2) and Harper (-.2). I think that's horribly unrepresentative of how Harper would have performed going forward, but we will see.

fWAR considers Harper a horrendous outfielder by the way. I hope when he comes back he starts playing well defensively.

He may not field well...but he sure can throw...

[Jordanz Meatballz]

He may not field well...but he sure can throw...

Might have to stick him at first base if he doesn't improve. If you think Zimmerman was a problem defensively... just look at the numbers for Harper.

I don't trust UZR but Harper fails the eye test for me also.

[PC]

Harper tweets "On the road to recovery..Everything went great and I'll be back soon! Thank you to all the fans for the support!"

Oooohhhhh, drugged out Bryce!!!

[Squab]

Might have to stick him at first base if he doesn't improve. If you think Zimmerman was a problem defensively... just look at the numbers for Harper.

I don't trust UZR but Harper fails the eye test for me also.

UZR is not something you can look at over one month. It takes quite a while to normalize. He's been fine in previous seasons as well.

[Jordanz Meatballz]

UZR is not something you can look at over one month. It takes quite a while to normalize. He's been fine in previous seasons as well.

He doesn't even run after every ball hit his way.

Anyway, this isn't good company to be in, except for Gerardo Parra. If you've been seeing good defense from Harper please let me know what I'm missing.

[spidernat]

He doesn't even run after every ball hit his way.

 

[Jordanz Meatballz]

 

The Marlins game where he loafed a double into a triple (saw this one live).

Some game after where Span had to chase down a ball Harper "never saw" (according to Charlie and Dave).

Tell me those two things didn't happen.

[comish4lif]

I believer Harper played catcher in high school, maybe the minors.

Definitely Harper would be more valuable in the short term as a catcher, especially with the new (in my opinion wussy) rules for catchers, but why wouldn't he be at that position? Why would the Twins move Mauer to first if that's the case? Also Napoli. It's easier to find find good defense and offense at 1B than catcher.

I'm not sure about the general consensus about Harper at catcher, but either they don't think his defense is very good at that position, or they think OF will prolong his career due to the brutal nature of the catcher position. Which is ironic, considering Harper's disagreement with fences in the first few years of his careers.

Harper's an OFer, for better or for worse at this point. His right-throwing gives more options, but it doesn't seem like Rizzo or likely he'll change positions now at this point. I think we have to live with it, he's a guy who plays hard, is prone to slumps, has a potentially great bat, and needs to learn the OF better.

Harper played in the OF exclusively in the minors. He caught in HS and JC.

[Squab]

Anyway, this isn't good company to be in, except for Gerardo Parra. If you've been seeing good defense from Harper please let me know what I'm missing.

You can't judge defensive stats from 22 games evidenced by the inclusion of Parra and Hunter in there, it just doesn't work. He's made a few good plays out there, and some great throws if I remember correctly.

The Marlins game where he loafed a double into a triple (saw this one live).
Some game after where Span had to chase down a ball Harper "never saw" (according to Charlie and Dave).
Tell me those two things didn't happen.

You're going to judge his defensive prowess after two bad plays? It doesn't work like that. Michael Taylor is supposedly an "80" fielder and he made three errors in one spring training game, does that mean he's bad forever?

Judging defense by anecdotes is subjective in the extreme. You need some form of sustained evidence. Over his first two years he's been a good not great defender, that's what we have to go on right now.

[Jordanz Meatballz]

You can't judge defensive stats from 22 games evidenced by the inclusion of Parra and Hunter in there, it just doesn't work. He's made a few good plays out there, and some great throws if I remember correctly. You're going to judge his defensive prowess after two bad plays? It doesn't work like that. Michael Taylor is supposedly an "80" fielder and he made three errors in one spring training game, does that mean he's bad forever?

Judging defense by anecdotes is subjective in the extreme. You need some form of sustained evidence. Over his first two years he's been a good not great defender, that's what we have to go on right now.

I figured that Hunter is old now, but I can see your point. Harper seems to fare much better in the DWAR on ESPN's website.

About my examples:
One indicated a lack of effort that was way worse than failing to run to first base.
The other indicated a lack of attention.

I am concerned that those two events happened. Neither of them were errors. I believe he'll come out of it, but he has to prove it first.

[TylerDC]

I figured that Hunter is old now, but I can see your point. Harper seems to fare much better in the DWAR on ESPN's website.

About my examples:
One indicated a lack of effort that was way worse than failing to run to first base.
The other indicated a lack of attention.

I am concerned that those two events happened. Neither of them were errors. I believe he'll come out of it, but he has to prove it first.

You need 3 full seasons (!!!) of data for UZR to be 100% accurate. Judging after 22 games is really silly. Look at his career metrics for a better indication of what he can do.

[spidernat]

The Marlins game where he loafed a double into a triple (saw this one live).

Well that makes you the sole authority. It's funny when people use the "I saw it in person" or "I was there!" and think that somehow adds weight to what they're saying.   

[Jordanz Meatballz]

Well that makes you the sole authority. It's funny when people use the "I saw it in person" or "I was there!" and think that somehow adds weight to what they're saying.   

TV may not have shown it. My eyes might be faster than MASN's cameras. I'm not claiming to be a sole authority; it made an impact on me in a way it may not have to a TV viewer.

But I guess you're attacking the methodology of my post since you aren't arguing with the content. Old lawyer trick maybe. Harper was loafing, but what's your agenda?

[JCA-CrystalCity]

We really ought to ban any citation of UZR based on one month;s data.  But I'm trying hard not to be an authoritarian.

[wpa2629]

We really ought to ban any citation of UZR based on one month;s data.  But I'm trying hard not to be an authoritarian.

uh oh

Stat Nazi is not pleased

[spidernat]

We really ought to ban any citation of UZR based on one month;s data.  But I'm trying hard not to be an authoritarian.

You call this "trying hard not to be an authoritarian"! 

[JCA-CrystalCity]

You call this "trying hard not to be an authoritarian"! 

I have ways to make you say I'm not authoritarian.

[Jordanz Meatballz]

Can someone with knowledge of UZR please explain how the unreliable data becomes more reliable over time?

Unless my logic is wrong he either had a bad month and UZR is indicating that or he had a good month and UZR is wrong. Can you just ban UZR altogether?

[JCA-CrystalCity]

Can someone with knowledge of UZR please explain how the unreliable data becomes more reliable over time?

Unless my logic is wrong he either had a bad month and UZR is indicating that or he had a good month and UZR is wrong. Can you just ban UZR altogether?

it has to do with meaningful sample size and error bands, basically.   

[Squab]

Can someone with knowledge of UZR please explain how the unreliable data becomes more reliable over time?

Unless my logic is wrong he either had a bad month and UZR is indicating that or he had a good month and UZR is wrong. Can you just ban UZR altogether?

It's like any stat really. You wouldn't judge a guy's ability to hit off of one month. Or even one year, especially just looking at a single stat.

[HalfSmokes]

it has to do with meaningful sample size and error bands, basically.   

It needs the average major leaguer's career length to be a somewhat accurate stat (I really hope teams have better proprietary defensive stats because UZR may be good for HOF debates, but it takes so long to build up a useable sample size that it becomes nearly worthless)

[Terpfan76]

uh oh

Stat Nazi is not pleased

Neither is punctuation Nazi

[wpa2629]

Neither is punctuation Nazi

[NationalHeat]

It's not necessarily "best", the way Simmons defines it, it's "star". It's a minor semantic difference, but with that definition, it *could* fit. Often star and best are one in the same, but not always. We'll see.

2-0! Ewing Theory!

[Jordanz Meatballz]

2-0! Ewing Theory!

I would like to submit a counter-theory:

Astros