An Unchanging Truth: Positional Offense Through History

Baseball has seen many changes in the past 100 years. Some changes are significant enough, retrospectively, to define an era. There was the Deadball Era from roughly 1901 to 1919, characterized by an emphasis on pitching, defense, and a low run-scoring environment. The Liveball Era began in 1920, ushered in by Babe Ruth, cleaner baseballs that were easier for batters to see, and rule changes like banning the spitball. When the offense started to overpower the game, more changes were made to temper that environment, like the introduction of the ground-rule double in 1931. Before that, a ball that bounced on the field and over the fence was considered a home run.

There’s Jackie Robinson’s debut in 1946, and the following years when African-Americans finally were permitted to play in the majors. There’s expansion, the lowering of the pitcher’s mound, the introduction of the designated hitter in the American League, free agency, more expansion, newer ballparks, PEDs, testing for PEDs, and an ever-expanding strike zone — all marking the beginning of other, overlapping eras. And then there’s the sabermetrics revolution — using advanced statistical modeling and analysis to construct rosters, manage bullpens, and deploy extreme defensive shifts.

All of these changes in baseball and yet, for the last 100 years, the offensive hierarchy among defensive positions has remained pretty much the same. First basemen, right fielders, and left fielders produce more offense than the average player; catchers, second basemen, and shortstops produce less. It was that way in 1914, in 2014, and in nearly every season in between. Clean ball, dirty ball, higher mound, lower mound, PEDs, no PEDs — whatever the conditions in the game and on the field, first basemen, left fielders, and right fielders have dominated on offense.

Let’s examine more closely this relationship between offensive skill and defensive position — both the historical averages and outlier seasons.

We start with 1914 because that is the earliest season for which we have play-by-play information for every game, courtesy of the good folks at Retrosheet. We need play-by-play information to calculate each batter’s offensive statistics for each season.

Next we look at the weighted runs created-plus (wRC+) for each defensive position, by league, for each season. Why wRC+? It’s a composite statistic that captures a batter’s total offensive output for the year — all the singles, doubles, triples, home runs, strikeouts, walks, stolen bases, and caught stealing — and credits a hitter for how valuable each of those actions was in producing runs.

You Aren't a FanGraphs Member
It looks like you aren't yet a FanGraphs Member (or aren't logged in). We aren't mad, just disappointed.
We get it. You want to read this article. But before we let you get back to it, we'd like to point out a few of the good reasons why you should become a Member.
1. Ad Free viewing! We won't bug you with this ad, or any other.
2. Unlimited articles! Non-Members only get to read 10 free articles a month. Members never get cut off.
3. Dark mode and Classic mode!
4. Custom player page dashboards! Choose the player cards you want, in the order you want them.
5. One-click data exports! Export our projections and leaderboards for your personal projects.
6. Remove the photos on the home page! (Honestly, this doesn't sound so great to us, but some people wanted it, and we like to give our Members what they want.)
7. Even more Steamer projections! We have handedness, percentile, and context neutral projections available for Members only.
8. Get FanGraphs Walk-Off, a customized year end review! Find out exactly how you used FanGraphs this year, and how that compares to other Members. Don't be a victim of FOMO.
9. A weekly mailbag column, exclusively for Members.
10. Help support FanGraphs and our entire staff! Our Members provide us with critical resources to improve the site and deliver new features!
We hope you'll consider a Membership today, for yourself or as a gift! And we realize this has been an awfully long sales pitch, so we've also removed all the other ads in this article. We didn't want to overdo it.

FanGraphs adjusts the raw numbers to account for the effects of playing in different ballparks and different leagues, and then scales the stats by setting 100 as league average. Pitchers’ batting stats are excluded in calculating the league average.

For example, Stan Musial posted a 166 wRC+ in 1952 — the highest wRC+ in the National League that season. That means he produced 66% more runs than the average National League batter that season (not including pitchers).

To calculate the wRC+ for each defensive position for each season, FanGraphs takes the average of the wRC+ produced by each hitter who played at least 25% of his innings at a position that season. If a player splits his time between two or more defensive positions, his wRC+ for the entire season is included in the wRC+ calculation for both positions. Let’s return to Stan Musial. In 1956, Musial played 873 innings at first base and 441 innings in right field. His 138 wRC+ is included in the wRC+ for National League first baseman and National League right fielders for 1956.

With that background, here’s what the numbers show.

Those poor shortstops. The defensive wizards haven’t produced an above-average wRC+ in either the American League or the National League in the last 101 seasons. Not one time. American League catchers have the same distinction. National League catchers eked just over the average line twice: in 1935, senior circuit catchers posted a just-better-than-average 101 wRC+; and in 1977, Tim McCarver, Gary Carter and Johnny Bench pushed the National League backstops to a robust 103 wRC+.

Second basemen fared slightly better than their double-play partners. American League batters who played the keystone produced a wRC+ over 100 just once, in 1915. But in the National League, second basemen bested the 100 wRC+ mark four times — in 1921, 1924, 1925 and 1927 — thanks largely to Rogers Hornsby. Indeed, Hornsby was so prolific at the plate in 1924 that he carried second basemen to the highest wRC+ of all position players in the National League—the only time second basemen have achieved that distinction since 1914.

With that said, the fact that Hornsby was able to drag his second base brethren above the 100 wRC+ mark four times is a testament not only to his prolific offense, but to the size of the National League in the 1920s. There were only eight teams in the senior circuit until 1962, when two teams were added (New York Mets and Houston Astros). Since then five more teams have joined. Last season, second baseman combined for 12,658 plate appearances. In 1924, that number was just 5,552, so each second baseman had a greater impact on the total wRC+ for that defensive position than a second baseman would today. The same is true for the other positions, prior to 1962, which is why we see greater variation in wRC+ by position on year-by-year basis in the first 50 years of the study.

As feeble as shortstops have consistently been at the plate in the last 100 years, first basemen have been just as consistently productive. Only five times since 1914 did first basemen, as a group, fail to post a better-than-average wRC+ — in the American League, they fell below the 100 wRC+ mark in 1914, 1948 and 1957. National League first basemen also struggled at the plate in 1948, and again in 1949, producing runs at a league-average rate both seasons.

Right fielders are next in line. They beat average run production in all but 11 American League seasons and four National League seasons, with three seasons right at the 100 wRC+ mark. So out of 202 seasons (101 in each league), right fielders produced more runs than league average 184 times. For left fielders, that number drops to 180 — 13 American League seasons and nine National League seasons at or below league average in run production.

That leaves third basemen, center fielders, and designated hitters. Of course, designated hitters don’t play a defensive position — that’s the point, after all — but they do produce runs, so it’s worth exploring how a position dedicated solely to offense has fared against the league average. Pretty well, it turns out: they’ve produced only one season below the league average, in 1993. But in the 42 seasons since the DH was introduced, designated hitters have led the American League in offensive production only six times and shared the lead with either first basemen, left fielders, or right fielders another seven times.

When looking at run production over time, third basemen and center fielders appear as mirror images of each other. Center fielders as a group posted a better than league-average wRC+ all but 48 times in the 202 combined American League and National League seasons, while third basemen bested league-average run production only 53 times.

What’s interesting about those numbers is how strictly they play to type, to the point that the rigidity of the hierarchy appears to be a product of self-selection and design. Talk to any scout, manager, or GM, and you’ll hear that the backbone of a team’s defense is up the middle — catcher to shortstop and second, to center fielder — and the engine of the offense is from the corners at first and third base, and left and right field. That’s what you’ll hear now. That’s what you’ll read about how baseball was played dating back to the turn of the 20th century.

A strong defense up the middle is so integral to success in baseball that it may explain why first basemen, left fielders, and right fielders have consistently outproduced catchers, shortstops, and second basemen at the plate, year in and year out, over the last 100-plus years. Even with all the changes in rules and ballpark design; even with the inclusion of players regardless of race and ethnicity; even with the rise and fall of PEDs and the changes in training, nutrition and fitness; even with the use of sophisticated analytical tools; even with all of that and more, the fundamentals of the game remain the same.

Tory Hernandez worked for the Los Angeles Angels from 2005 to 2011, first as a player-development analyst, then as a scout and later as the manager of baseball operations. I shared the data with him and asked him why he thinks the offensive hierarchy has remained unchanged. “The game of baseball,” Hernandez replied, “is still 90 feet to first base. It’s still 60 feet, 6 inches from the mound to the plate. The outfield dimensions are pretty much the same. Through different eras and different trends, the game is still linear.”

For Hernandez, even if ballplayers today are bigger, faster and stronger than players 100 or even 50 years ago, the game remains structured around a diamond with a limited number of ways to get on base and score runs. In basketball and football, new offensive schemes, shifts in rules, and bigger, stronger players can — and have — transformed the game. Not so in baseball. Just as it did in 1914, every play in baseball in 2014 started with the ball in the pitcher’s hands, with one of a few options to begin the play — pitch to the batter, pitch out to defend against a steal attempt, or throw to a base to keep a runner close or to catch him trying to steal. Those options keep defensive pressure on the infield, particularly the catcher, shortstop and second basemen. The up-the-middle defense.

In 2014, for example, there were 48,148 fielding assists recorded in the majors. Shortstops and second basemen accounted for 27,315 of them, roughly 57%. First basemen and third basemen combined to make 12,244 assists, roughly 25%. Together, all major-league outfielders made 31,017 put outs. Center fielders had the most by far: 12,305, roughly 40% of the total.

But do you still need to sacrifice offense for good defense up the middle? Aren’t we over the days of the scrappy second baseman and lanky shortstop? Shouldn’t this be one of the modernizations made possible by 21st-century athletes? Look at Troy Tulowitzki. Look at Chase Utley. Look at what Barry Larkin and Cal Ripken and Roberto Alomar did on the field and at the plate. When Tory Hernandez looks at those players, he sees once-in-a-generation talent. If there were more Tulowitzkis out there playing professional baseball — or thinking of playing professional baseball — there’d be plenty of teams willing to play those guys at shortstop, instead of pushing them to first base or the outfield.

Brad Kullman agrees. Kullman worked in scouting and player development for the Cincinnati Reds from 1996 to 2006, including a stint as assistant general manager from 2002 to 2006. More recently, he’s worked as a pro scout for the San Diego Padres and Chicago Cubs. “Scouts are always looking for the five-tool player,” Kullman told me. “That’s been consistent over time.” But not all guys have five strong tools and when they don’t, you have to make choices. “There are two things you can’t teach to a ballplayer — running speed and arm strength,” Kullman added. Even with the influx of talent from around the world, there are only so many guys who can play shortstop at the major-league level. If they can post a 125 wRC+, that’s great, but it isn’t a job requirement.

There have been exceptions, of course. Derek Jeter and Hanley Ramirez (when he played shortstop) contributed much more to their teams at the plate than in the field. Likewise, Jeff Kent and Ray Durham were offense-first second basemen most of their careers. But it’s not easy to find a team over the last half century that emphasized offense at every position, no matter the cost on defense.

There is a job requirement for shortstops, second basemen, third basemen, and catchers, one we don’t think about often, but when it’s pointed out (like it was to the author), it’s an aha! moment. Catchers, shortstops, second basemen, and third basemen have to be right-handed or, at the least, throw with their right arm. You can’t throw across your body from the left side of the infield to the right side of the infield with your left arm. Some argue that catchers need not be right-handed but that baseball simply prefers right-handed catchers. Still, there have been no lefty-throwing catchers in baseball in the Retrosheet Era.

How does that affect the offensive hierarchy? Think about all the left-handed players who were offensive powerhouses: Babe Ruth, Barry Bonds, Lou Gehrig, Tris Speaker, Stan Musial, Tony Gwynn, Willie Stargell, Willie McCovey, Rickey Henderson, and Reggie Jackson. All Hall-of-Famers. All outfielders or first basemen (or both). In fact, 21 of the top-50 first basemen in the period from 1914 to 2014, as ranked by WAR, were left-handed. For outfielders, lefties made up 14 of the top 50 by WAR.

While it may be difficult to imagine Barry Bonds, Babe Ruth or Willie McCovey as a second baseman, shortstop, third baseman, or catcher, there have been plenty of left-handed players over the last 100 years with top-notch offensive stats who might have played one of those positions if they’d been right-handed. Guys like Kenny Lofton, Brian Giles, Will Clark, John Olerud, Don Mattingly, Fred McGriff, Wally Joyner, Jacoby Ellsbury, Steve Finley and Shawn Green all had offensive skill sets more commonly found among middle infielders or third baseman, but the essential nature of the diamond and the counter-clockwise path for runners to first, second, third, and home blocked that path for these and many more.

**********

Baseball will continue to innovate. Teams are always looking to exploit a market inefficiency. Extreme shifts are already changing where players are positioned and what they’re asked to do on any given play. The league is looking for ways to make the game more interesting and exciting. This season, we’re getting a glimpse of the breadth of data that will be available from StatCast, MLB’s tracking technology.

Perhaps the future will bring changes to the rigid offensive hierarchy of the last 100-plus years. Until then, don’t expect your team’s catcher, shortstop, second baseman, or third baseman to power the offense.





Wendy writes about sports and the business of sports. She's been published most recently by Vice Sports, Deadspin and NewYorker.com. You can find her work at wendythurm.pressfolios.com and follow her on Twitter @hangingsliders.

57 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Pale Hose
11 years ago

Wendy!

Well-Beered Englishman
11 years ago
Reply to  Pale Hose

We missed you!

K
11 years ago
Reply to  Pale Hose

This was my identical internal reaction upon seeing the FG frontpage. Very pleased to have her writing here again.

jcxy
11 years ago
Reply to  Pale Hose

Let me join the chorus here as well welcoming you back. Your stuff is always the best!

Hey, any chance you can put in a good word for NotGraphs?

Mr Punch
11 years ago
Reply to  jcxy

Yes, welcome back!

deadmanonleave
11 years ago
Reply to  Mr Punch

Let me add – great to have you back Wendy!

Chris
11 years ago

I love reading stuff on Fangraphs, and I like almost all of the articles, but this is one of the coolest things I’ve ever seen. So fun to look at how production has fared over the years! Very well done, Wendy.

Trendy
11 years ago

Great graphs! I would also like to see some curve fitting to the lines to better see the trends in positional offense. Using the eyeball method, it appears to me that 2B and SS had dips in production in the 60’s era but have now returned to their historic levels. Also interesting is that LF production in the AL has been declining in recent years– more so than in the NL– perhaps due to the DH? Also notable that there now appears to be very little difference between production among 3B, LF and CF.

Wendy, your comments about the infield and right handedness is something worth exploring. Perhaps one way to do it would be to restrict the study to right handers. If your explanation has merit, my expectation is that right handers in the non-restrictive positions should be lower than their left handed counterparts as those positions would have a talent drain to the right hand critical positions.

Darkstone42
11 years ago
Reply to  Trendy

It just seems so amazingly obvious, that positions with less restriction on handedness gives rise to a larger possible talent pool from which to draw, and therefore a higher likelihood of finding more good offensive players at first base and in the outfield.

I had always just thought of up-the-middle positions requiring a more specific defensive skill set causing the selection, and that’s almost certainly part of it, but this extra bit really does further the expectation that this offensive hierarchy by position will more or less be preserved.

pft
11 years ago
Reply to  Darkstone42

Handedness is certainly a key factor and most overlooked by those doing the position adjustments. The other thing regarding the excessive weakness of SS as hitters is defensive players are a dime a dozen relative to hitters, and its hard to find really good hitters for all 8 positions. So if a guy can’t hit, then he needs to field, and SS is the position with more chances so you look for the best RH defensive guy you can find to field that position regardless of if he can hit (unlike 1B where you are willing to sacrifice defense to get your biggest guys who can hit a place to play).

You start building your team offensively from the corner OF and corner IF positions. The best athlete or player on the field is CF due to all the running and the opportunity to save XBH (SS misplays only results in singles), and some of them were great hitters which probably skews things. Unlike SS, there is no handedness restriction in CF and LHB’ers have a platoon advantage, so CF’ers will hit better than SS overall.

Of course, not all LHB’ers are LH throwers. I think only 15% of position players are LH throwers, and there are some LHB’ers at SS

SandyK
11 years ago

WENDY’S BACK!!!!!!!!

Awesome article!

Jay B
11 years ago

Didn’t Jackie Robinson debut in 1947?

“There’s Jackie Robinson’s debut in 1946”

Jason Bourne
11 years ago

Fun article. There are several guys on your list of players that “had offensive skill sets more commonly found among middle infielders or third baseman” that I entirely don’t agree with, though.

TKDC
11 years ago
Reply to  Jason Bourne

I was going to say, Fred McGriff is my favorite all time baseball player, and there is absolutely no way he would be a third baseman if right handed.

I think in most cases a first basemen would not play another infield position if they were right handed. If they were athletic enough to handle that, they’d probably play in the outfield.

Jason Bourne
11 years ago
Reply to  TKDC

I mostly mean that the bats of guys like McGriff and Giles certainly do not profile as typical middle-infield types. At all.

TKDC
11 years ago
Reply to  Jason Bourne

Yeah, that is also true. McGriff hit 493 home runs. I guess he could be Ernie Banks or something.

Paul G.
11 years ago
Reply to  Jason Bourne

Don Mattingly started a couple of games at third base for the Yankees. I understand he did fine.

It would not surprise me if many left-handed players could play right-handed only positions. It might be a handicap but perhaps not an insurmountable one or even a particularly high one for certain skill sets.

Jason Bourne
11 years ago
Reply to  Paul G.

I’m just commenting on how a lot of those players don’t have bats that profile at those positions, they were really good hitters that hit way better than almost all middle infielders ever thought about hitting.

TKDC
11 years ago

I love the rise of the NL left fielder in the early 2000s. Does anyone have a theory for that?

dom
11 years ago
Reply to  TKDC

it’s always been the least important OF defensive position. there wasn’t an emphasis on defense the way there is today, so a lot of hulking LF’s who could really swing it got parked out there

pbeik612
11 years ago
Reply to  TKDC

I would say Barry Bonds putting up insane numbers

TKDC
11 years ago
Reply to  pbeik612

My joke may not have been as obvious as I thought it was. But, yeah, when 1/16 of the sample is wRC+ing well over 200, that’s what happens. I bet it drops 6-8 points if you take him out.

Chris Horning
11 years ago
Reply to  TKDC

Barry Bonds certainly buoyed this averages. Also Dom is absolutely correct, you see the strongest defensive outfielders playing center field or right field. You will see platoon players, first basemen who just aren’t quite good enough to start, and big lumbering guys like Mark Trumbo, Brandon Moss, Michael Morse out there in left.

These guys don’t have particularly good range or arms, but can bat. Typical baseball thinking reserves right field for guys with cannons so that offenses don’t have the capability of going first to third or turning doubles into triples easily.

Barry Bonds, Luis Gonzalez and Lance Berkman were total monsters during this time, and obviously Bonds buoyed this position with his absurd slugging and on base ability.

obsessivegiantscompulsive
11 years ago
Reply to  Chris Horning

Don’t forget the Human Statue, Adam Dunn in LF!

Let’s put the defensive spectrum in clearer light. LF is so bad defensively that a LF (Freddie Lewis) who runs in the OF like Ruben Rivera (http://www.mccoveychronicles.com/2013/5/29/4377216/ruben-rivera-video-baserunning-worst-history) on the base path, because of the worse reactions to batted balls ever, actually ended up adding value defensively per advanced defensive metrics, because of the competition he has in LF and the fact that his speed helped to make up for mistakes.

Nathan
11 years ago

I believe Mr. Dunn won a gold glove in center field good sir.

http://www.fangraphs.com/not/dangerous-experiment-a-roster-of-25-adam-dunns/

Dgood
11 years ago

I’m amazed that the numbers are still so bad even in 1999 or 2000 when you have guys like A Rod, Nomar, Derek Jeter, Miguel Tejada, Barry Larkin and the ever average Omar Visquel. IS this just qualified batters? Is it all PA at a position over a season?

LHPSU
11 years ago
Reply to  Dgood

It takes the best possible talent to be able to play SS at the major league level AND hit better than most major league players. Less so to just do one of the two.

dom
11 years ago

sooo less offense at 3B than CF? Is 3B closer to the more difficult side of the defensive spectrum than CF then?

Darkstone42
11 years ago
Reply to  dom

I would expect so. Speed, which can affect a player’s wRC+ by inflating BABIP, is the primary requirement for a center fielder. The reaction time, hands, and arm strength to play third base seem like a more limiting collection of skills.

Besides that, players are more likely to be moved to the outfield in general than the infield in general from the other, so there must be some extra challenge (probably reduced room for error on initial reads and decision making time) to playing the infield–anywhere in the infield–versus anywhere in the outfield.

LHPSU
11 years ago
Reply to  Darkstone42

You need to take into account the fact that LF, CF, RF and 1B draw from the entire talent pool of hitters, while 3B, SS, 2B and C draw only from those who can throw right handed.

Actually, come to think of it, that pretty much explains everything about why infield has less offense than outfield.

Dingbat
11 years ago

Awesome article – I could play with those graphs for hours!

Max G
11 years ago

One of my favorite fangraphs articles of recent memory. More, please!

On a side note, I noticed that the wRC+ range narrows noticeably from ~2004 forward (in the graph, less extreme positive and negative wRC+ outliers compared to previous years).

I’m not sure what that means. Have we begun turning the corner toward the future Wendy alluded to at the end of this piece? I dunno.

Separately, I was thrilled to see my all-time favorite player, John Olerud, mentioned. Smoothest swing I ever saw. He was as good, if not better, a pitcher, than he was a hitter. Too bad we never got to see that aspect of his game in the bigs.

Complements!
11 years ago

No! I did not misspell complements–just proposing a little thought experiment. Assume that over time, the grand baseball experiment has essentially optimized the value proposition at each position. I think that this is reasonable assumption because the reward mechanism — winning seasons– is both robust strong and easily measurable. Thus it would seem that the value of each position taking into account offense and defense should be equal. Therefore, defense should be the complement of offense. So let’s go through the positions comparing WAR positional adjustment and comparable offensive production. These calculations have been restricted to the post DH era– from 1973 on. To create comparable offensive numbers, I calculated the average number of runs per 600 PA during this period to be 70.2 for all of MLB. Then using the average wRC+ for the same era produced an “offensive positional adjustment” to complement the defensive positional adjustment. The comparative results are as follows, in each case showing the WAR defensive adjustment, then my calculated offensive adjustment, and finally a total:
1B: WAR -12.5, OFF +8.0, TOT -4.5
2B: WAR +2.5, OFF -7.0, TOT -4.5
3B: WAR +2.5, OFF -0.9, TOT +1.4
SS: WAR +7.5, OFF -12.7, TOT -4.2
LF: WAR -7.5, OFF +3.1, TOT -4.4
CF: WAR +2.5, OFF -0.1, TOT +2.4
RF: WAR -7.5, OFF +4.5, TOT -0.3
C : WAR +12.5, OFF -7.7, TOT +4.8
DH: WAR -17.5, OFF +5.8, TOT -11.7
Interestingly, a total around -4.5 seems to be the norm. Hopefully, I did not make some egregious error in my calculations or assumptions. That being said the positional outliers are 3B, CF and C. I have no idea what to think about DH other than than positional adjustment seems unduly harsh.

Garrett
11 years ago

It would be interesting to see if the numbers remained consistent if you removed the outliers (maybe the top and bottom 10% of the performers).

pete in TO
11 years ago

“the introduction of the ground-rule double in 1931. Before that, a ball that bounced on the field and over the fence was considered a home run.”

I did not know this, where can I find out how many of these are included in Babe Ruths totals.

Carl
11 years ago
Reply to  pete in TO

Ruth gained 6 HR’s between 1920 and 1928 like this. He also lost at least 1 HR when on a walk-off HR the winning run was already on base, ie the winning run on second, and Ruth was given a double rather than a HR. Also, hitting the foul pole and if the ball landed foul, the batter was given a double rather than a HR. Lost at least one this way too.

Tim
11 years ago
Reply to  Carl

Wow! It’s amazing how much time you can spend watching and learning about the game and still discover things you never knew!

Richard Chester
11 years ago
Reply to  Carl

Also, for a period of time during Ruth’s career, a ball that went into the stands on the fair side of the foul pole and then landed in the stands on the foul side was a foul ball. The rule making a ball that hit the foul pole and caromed into foul territory a double caused a controversy in the 1936 All-Star game. Augie Galan of the NL hit such a ball into the right field stands. It was ruled a HR but the AL protested because at that time the AL rule made it a double. The umpires ruled it a HR because the game was played in a NL park and the NL rule was that it was a HR.

obsessivegiantscompulsive
11 years ago

Loved this article! Also loved the tidbits of info, like ground-rule doubles being counted as homers, and Rajah’s dominance in the 20’s lifting up 2B above average, always love historical trivia.

S. Bartman and Goat
11 years ago

Many clubs move promising bats off of the catcher position early on in the development process (Harper). Could this adversely effect catcher hitting stats?

Phantom Stranger
11 years ago

It would have been interesting to see if Harper would have stuck at catcher a few more years if he was shorter. A lot of MLB teams don’t like catchers at his height.

Al
11 years ago

Welcome back Wendy! Hope you’ve been well.

carterMember since 2020
11 years ago

I played a lot w Jaccoby Ellsbury in high school and below. He was a damn good shortstop, and our best catcher.

Paul G.
11 years ago

Bill James defensive spectrum:

DH – 1B – LF – RF – 3B – CF – 2B – SS – C – P

Bill claims that the defensive spectrum changed once with 3B and 2B exchanging places starting in the 1920s. The reasoning was that double plays became more common and therefore the second baseman became more important in the field. Any evidence of this happening in your analysis?

Carl
11 years ago

Couple of players who hit lefty but threw righty (ie Ron Hassey at C, and Greg Nettles @ 3B) would have tilted the avgs just a bit.

Brett
11 years ago

Wendy this line: “Until then, don’t expect your team’s catcher, shortstop, second baseman, or third baseman to power the offense.” is basically why the Giants are succeeding this year. Posey/Susac (wRC+ 145/127), Crawford (131), Panik (141), and Duffy (134) are all producing better than the league and at the top of their positions. I think something could be written about the success rates of teams who over perform at these positions.

Brett
11 years ago
Reply to  Brett

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/san-francisco-has-the-best-infield-in-baseball/

So this is a thing that just went live. But I still think examining teams that have produced highly at these low offense spectrum positions would be an interesting study

Darkstone42
11 years ago

Love the article.

I do wonder, though, how the results were baserunning considered. Since CF and SS tend to be populated by, on average, faster players, while C tend to be especially slow, you might expect C to be the worst overall offensive players pretty consistently, the gap between 2B and SS to shrink, and the trend you mentioned of CF being a bit better than 3B to be more consistent and more appreciable.

pft
11 years ago

““There are two things you can’t teach to a ballplayer — running speed and arm strength,””

I sort of disagree with this. There are many players who can run fast and have strong arms in the minors and in other sports for example. What differentiates a MLB player from a non-MLB player is the ability to hit a baseball. This is the most rarest of abilities, and there are few MLB players who do this exceptionally well. It really can’t be taught, although the skills can be improved. The ability to see a 95 mile FB and react to it quickly and recognize offspeed stuff, and the eye hand coordination is largely a gift of god.

There are so many talented and gifted defensive players in the minors who can’t hit much. If they play SS they have a shot at making MLB because this is the position teams are most willing to sacrifice offense

BMarkham
11 years ago

No surprise that AL SS peaks from 2000-2005, as it dove tails with a bunch of MVP-caliber seasons from Arod (his 2000-2004 seasons are 4 of the top 5 seasons), as well as strong years from Jeter, and strong Nomar year replaced by strong Tejada years. 2005 was when Arod was traded to Yankees and thus stopped playing SS, but it was propped up by strong seasons from Michael Young, Jhonny Peralta, Jeter, and Tejada.

tornadothor
11 years ago

Ummm…Rickey Henderson was an offensive powerhouse, but he hit right-handed. He threw left.

Bill but not Ted
11 years ago

“aha moments” we’re had throughout my enjoyment of this piece, I guess the evolution in baseball has really all been about the guy who pitches first and the guy(s) that pitch after the first guy

JLRC
11 years ago

Wait, baserunning is included in wRC+? This is the first I’ve heard of this.

Tim
11 years ago
Reply to  JLRC

It’s not. Strikeouts are also not included in wRC+. It’s just a slight mistake. wRC+ is built off of wOBA which only includes uBB, HBP 1B, 2B, 3B and HR.

Mark D
11 years ago

I loved this and I will revisit this article again and again. Thanks, Wendy.

Richard Chester
11 years ago

There is a very strong correlation between Fangraphs wRC+ and baseball-reference’s OPS+. They are almost interchangeable.