Brandon Crawford’s Best Defensive Plays, Statistically
FanGraphs already had Inside Edge data from the past two seasons, but David Appelman rolled out an upgrade this week with new material showing up on the leaderboards and on player pages. It’s an exciting development, providing new stuff we get to play around with while we wait for reams of reliable information from the new MLBAM project in the future. Because there’s a new feature on FanGraphs, I feel somewhat obligated to put it to immediate use in a post. In this post, Giants shortstop Brandon Crawford will be your guide through the near-impossible.
All balls in play are classified by the likelihood of a play being made. It’s somewhat subjective, but the classifications are: Impossible, Remote, Unlikely, Even, Likely and Routine. Most balls in play make for routine outs. No defender has converted an impossible play, which I suppose is in keeping with the definition. Last year, 8.3% of remote plays were converted into outs. Digging deeper, 6.0% of remote plays were converted into outs by shortstops. Last season, there were 31 players who converted exactly two remote plays. There were six more players who converted exactly three. Aaron Hicks converted four. Brandon Crawford converted five.
Put another way: At least in theory, remote plays capture the most difficult, yet makeable, plays. Brandon Crawford was the 2013 league leader in the category, turning five (of 24) remote plays into outs. So, below, let’s go over those five remote plays, in chronological order. No, the point isn’t that Crawford is the best defensive shortstop in baseball. Let’s just be content to watch Crawford at his best. You can get back to thinking about Andrelton Simmons tomorrow.
Remote Play No. 1
- Date: May 16
- Opposing Team: Rockies
- Opposing Hitter: Charlie Blackmon
- Inning: 6
At full speed, in a .gif, it’s a little hard to tell why this might’ve been classified as being so difficult. Your first instinct, then, might be to think the numbers are just silly and wrong. This was a soft bloop of a hit that dropped in front of Crawford on the dirt. If anything, maybe Crawford got himself out of position. But keep watching, and maybe then watch some more. The ball was spinning funny off of the bat, which means it was spinning funny when it landed on the ground. Notice that Crawford barehanded the ball. The ball short-hopped him, and it bounced away from him suddenly. Crawford just snared the ball by instinct. He then immediately fired an on-target rocket to throw out a pretty quick runner who was busting it down the line. Maybe this was part luck, but it was also part natural hand-eye, and most times out of 100 that ball squeaks through and Blackmon is safe. Crawford did something outstanding.
Minutes later, Crawford committed a catching error at second, allowing DJ LeMahieu to steal a base and then advance to third. Life! It’ll get you.
Going back to the Blackmon play again, here’s how Crawford responded to his own wizardry:
Remote Play No. 2
- Date: June 2
- Opposing Team: Cardinals
- Opposing Hitter: Yadier Molina
- Inning: 3
The play itself was sensational. What happened after the play was also sensational.
Yadier Molina expressed frustration and got himself ejected. At that point, he went after the first-base umpire, and then he had to be held back. Mike Matheny came storming out of the dugout and he got himself ejected, too. Afterward, Molina was given a suspension for making contact with the official. The Cardinals lost the game by two runs, and Molina’s replacement went 0-for-2 with two strikeouts. Brandon Crawford converted an amazing play. On top of that, he was somewhat responsible for further weakening the opposition. Sometimes it’s fun to give pitch-framers partial credit for home-plate ejections after borderline calls. Crawford probably deserves partial credit for getting the Cardinals’ best overall player eliminated.
A screengrab of the slow-motion replay:
So, Molina was definitely out. This was one of the better plays of the season. Crawford was overcome by his emotions.
Remote Play No. 3
- Date: June 25
- Opposing Team: Dodgers
- Opposing Hitter: Adrian Gonzalez
- Inning: 4
“It’s a pop-up,” you say. “Pop-ups are usually easily caught.” Yes, you’re right, usually they are. Usually they are not pop-ups like this, which require a shortstop to run into left field with his back to the ball. Crawford basically had to pick a spot and get there in a hurry before sliding to make a basket catch. This is a play that’s a lot more challenging than Crawford made it look. Another impressive component is a component that didn’t matter, but look how Crawford got back up. There was no one on base, but he would’ve been in throwing position. He popped right back to his feet, and just every part of this shows off the sort of athleticism and coordination that’s the difference between a good shortstop and a decent second baseman. Two pitches later, Crawford caught a Hanley Ramirez pop-up near the left-field line.
You could tell just by looking at him that Crawford knew he’d done something incredible:
Remote Play No. 4
- Date: July 8
- Opposing Team: Mets
- Opposing Hitter: Marlon Byrd
- Inning: 11
If the ball had gotten through, or if the throw had been weaker, the Mets would’ve gone up 4-3. Maybe 5-3. This was an extraordinary play in extra innings that saved the Giants one or two crucial runs. It wasn’t just that Crawford was able to knock the ball down. On its own, that might’ve spared a run. But then Crawford immediately got to his feet and fired a bullet to Brandon Belt to get Byrd by a fraction of a step. Belt visibly felt the excitement. Crawford, too.
The game proceeded to the 16th. In the top half, the Mets had runners on the corners with two out. Anthony Recker pinch-hit for Josh Edgin and rolled a grounder to shortstop. Crawford booted it, Eric Young scored, and the Mets won 4-3. I can’t tell if this is an example of baseball being the best or the worst.
Remote Play No. 5
- Date: Aug. 15
- Opposing Team: Nationals
- Opposing Hitter: Bryce Harper
- Inning: 9
That view is good. This view is better:
It wasn’t a perfectly-stung line-drive. Had it been a perfectly-stung line-drive, it would’ve made it through to the outfield for a leadoff base hit. But that ball was hit well — well enough for the crowd to briefly roar in approval — and Crawford broke immediately and went full extension to take a single away from a blossoming superstar. Sometimes line-drives are caught by dumb luck. Sometimes they’re caught easily, because a line-drive can basically be a lot like a regular hard throw. Crawford had to range back and to his left and he needed every inch of his extension to snag a liner that seemed to have a bit of curve to it. When a guy makes a play like this in the bottom of the ninth, you can forgive a little visible enthusiasm.
Brandon Crawford plays the kind of defense that makes hitters feel feelings. I’m not sure if Crawford feels feelings, himself, and as such I’m not sure if Crawford is actually human. But then, if he isn’t, that could help explain the defensive plays above. No, he’s not the very best. But sometimes the very best and Brandon Crawford can be indistinguishable. They’re all great, each and every one of them. To be even better than average is a remarkable thing.
Jeff made Lookout Landing a thing, but he does not still write there about the Mariners. He does write here, sometimes about the Mariners, but usually not.
The title is a bit misleading. I didn’t expect any gifs. So I was not only pleased but very excited about the content.
The writer is Jeff Sullivan. The only reason I opened the article was for gifs.
You thought this was a Sam Miller piece?
#4: Tough play, big situation. Remote? Eh, I don’t know. I think any SS with a plus arm can make that one.
I think the deciding factor was how quickly he got up and released the ball. Kinda like Y Molina gunning down a would-be base stealer.
IMO what can make this look like an even play is that you frequently see an SS take this angle to a ball and stretch out just as much as Crawford and make the play. Usually the SS is able to attempt to keep their shoulders somewhat/mostly square with home plate while being able to field the ball. It looks like this instance required Crawford to turn his entire body away from home plate and angle straight for where he thought he could intercept the ball and make a throw.
It doesn’t look that different but when you try fielding a grounder while moving somewhat laterally then do the same while squaring up with where you think the ball will be, you realize the latter is more difficult.
Isn’t that the point? Remote plays are those that aren’t made most of the time. Except, like, if they had a plus arm.
And still, take that one away, he still has four, which is tied for the lead.
Yeah, I just mean maybe that should have been a category down. If remote is literally the most difficult plays — right under impossible — I’d think they would be plays that showed elite range, hands, and arm. Range-wise, that one just didn’t do it for me.
But I know I’m splitting hairs. A two step dive that didn’t require full extension just seems close to Jeter range. Again, not that you make the play, but most guys GET there on that one, IMO.
Are you kidding? Stopping the ball, unlikely, but many shortstops would do that. But that transition from fully laid out going the opposite direction, to on your feet throwing a rocket to first…that’s not something most shortstops can do. Maybe either of those things many shortstops could do, but both of them together? That’s what makes a play remote.
And remember, these plays aren’t based on objective viewing. It’s based on real-game data from all batted balls.
Nevermind, inside edge is a subjective stat…my bad.
Crawford may be the plus’est. Goofing around on the mound, he’s been rumored to have a triple digit FB. He’s got faults, but arm strength isn’t one of them.
Several years ago I watched him throw with Shawon Dunston down in Scottsdale before a game. I was right along the rail, 15 feet from him and when he threw the ball I could hear the zip on it. Unbelievable arm..
I’ve never seen an MLB SS make that throw from his knees 3ft into the grass in the hole. Not only that, but the range to get there is above average. Shaded to the middle, he takes 2 more steps than the base runner infront of him during that split second of time to dive for that ball.
I looked at that Molina play a couple of times and asked myself whether Ozzie Smith would have likely made it. He certainly would have gotten to the ball and come up quickly, but I doubt that he would have had enough on the throw to get Molina. That passes the “remote” test for me, easily…
The Gonzalez pop-up was really well done, but many shortstops would get a glove on the ball and of those who do, maybe 1/2 would catch it. It’s a 15-20% play, in my view.
Crawford is a +5-6 fielder over a season according to UZR or DRS. The gifs illustrate the he can indeed be great, but that there is enough variability in the Inside Edge classification to not treat it too seriously. It might be most useful for a very young shortstop for whom there is not enough data for UZR or DRS.
Andrelton Simmons definitely would have.
Of course, if Andrelton Simmons had HIT that pop-up, it would have been ruled an infield fly. (Even with nobody on, I know…)
Check out Simmons’ remote play %. He’s average so you could reasonably argue that Crawford has more range than Simmons.
Also, can we get a GIF-fest of Derek Jeter’s most difficult looking even possibility plays? I’d say unlikely plays, but he hasn’t made one in the past two years.
Given the size of the sample we have I think it is reasonable to assume RP% is not the kind of data point which will normalize in less than 4-5 years. From what I’ve seen any argument saying Crawford has more range than Simmons would have to be based on Crawford having clearly better instincts because the eye test tells me Simmons has him beat on arm and physical ability.
If Uncle Jesse could wrangle the Olsen twins, the least he could do is make five remote plays.
Does anyone else think the first ball was catchable? I mean, it landed at his feet. Great reflexes and hand eye but if he falls forward and catches it, it’s not a big deal, probably. Hard to tell.
Crawford did the right thing by playing back on that ball. Blackmon is decently fast, but Crawford knew he had time to play it on a hop. He could have lunged for that ball, than it would have been a much harder play than if the ball had bounced like a ball is supposed to bounce, and would have risked the ball getting by him and bleeding into left field for a double. With nobody on base, there’s no real reason to try and catch that ball on the fly once he recognized it was dropping short.
how do these plays get characterized?
by “scouts”
Try Intro To Shakespeare
Crawford needs to learn the meaning of “act like you’ve been there before.” Just make the play and trot back to the dugout. All this emo reverse-celebrating is going to get him beaned with a changeup on the loose part of the jersey. Teams won’t tolerate that kind of passive aggressiveness for much longer.
That’s the thing. We Giants fins love him as a player, but his antics are just getting out of control. He’s killing the chemistry in the clubhouse.
Fortunately, Brian McCann is now in the AL, so Crawford is relatively safe.
The Wolverine facial hair pretty much proves he’s not even human.
He’s pretty much average on his own planet, no need to celebrate.
No no no. Crawford is a robot, but he’s from Earth. PENCE is the alien. And I, for one, welcome our new buggy overlord.
Out of curiosity, do defensive stats that use this kind of data (e.g. UZR) regress play difficulty towards the means? Because they probably should.
First, we should be assuming that there is some error in terms of classifying how difficult to field a ball is. There are many potential sources of this error: TV angles aren’t always great, human imperfection in classification, buckets that are big enough to contain multiple difficulties, unobserved factors that aren’t accounted for, etc.
These errors mean that we have to worry about selection bias for the plays that were made. If a play that the system classifies as extremely difficult is made, it’s likely that the play was actually easier than the system classified it due to these error terms. Maybe it was at the closer end of the bucket, maybe it had beneficial spin, maybe the human operator made a mistake, maybe the runner was a bit slow out of the box, etc.
The easiest way to correct for this kind of bias is to regress the play’s difficulty towards the mean. I don’t know the details of how these stats are constructed, but I hope that they are doing something like this.
Love this! Do some more!
Good range and instincts. Most of these are quite impressive!
I’m excited to see where Iglesias ranks on this list next year. I can think of three off the top of my head that had to be plays of this caliber including the playoffs.
He’s dreamy.
And we all really have to thank Pablo Sandoval poor range for letting us be in awe of Crawford. Just think how much more boring it would be if Crawford just played SS, instead of 3b and SS.
Sandoval has definitely had his ups and downs, but overall he’s been a pretty solid defensive player, slightly above average. 7.7 career RngR seems like no reason to take a shit on player’s range.
Pablo Sandoval has a positive career UZR, a positive career UZR/150, and made 42% of the “Unlikely/10-40%” plays available to him last year.
The effect of Sandoval’s weight on his fielding is WAY overstated. He has always been an excellent fielding third baseman. No doubt he could be truly superlative if he ever manages to stay in shape.
Not sure why Harper is wryly punching that blurry giraffe in the neck with a tiny oven mitt, but there it is.
I’m skeptical on the categorization. Crawford made 5 of 24 remote plays, while Simmons made 1 of 16. Comparing gifs and videos linked from http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/is-andrelton-simmons-having-the-best-defensive-season-ever/ to these, I think Simmons must have some “unlikely” plays that are on par with Crawford’s “remote” plays.
Are you calling shenanigans? It sounds like you’re calling shenanigans.
I don’t think there’s anything intentional going on, if that’s what you’re asking. I think the difference between remote and unlikely is very subjective and not meaningful.
Well no poo, Percival.
There was an article about his defensive wizardry when he first came up: http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/blog/big_league_stew/post/Brandon-Crawford-s-nickname-comes-straight-from-?urn=mlb-wp9475
That video is gone but I found this on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P8rHNb5pdH4
I watched it again and noticed that some of the moves he did in the GIFs above were ones he did practicing, like the one handed grab.
This video also has offensive plays, but there are some good defensive plays intermixed too: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZ183W0Ids8
What has struck me in the three seasons he’s been around, for all the talk about his defensive wizardry, none of the advanced defensive metrics has rated him as being that great a defensive presence (though clearly good). That to me suggests that while he is flashy with the glove, he’s been relatively ordinary with the majority of regular plays (or maybe even subpar sometimes).
And the Giants might be adding a guy who might be even better with the glove at SS, though he’s at best a utility MI this season, Ehire Adrianza. If his bat develops enough, I think he could take over the starting SS position in a few years, when Crawford won’t be as cheap anymore and entering free agency. Or take the starting 2B before that if Scutaro’s back keeps acting up a lot.
There’s something odd with the Inside Edge Fielding relative to UZR.
I looked at Adrelton Simmons and compared with Crawford. While Brandon clearly led in Remote, when you include Unlikely and Even together with Remote, Simmons is better, 17/42 vs. 15/48 for BCraw. That’s 40.5% vs. 31.3% but only for 42-48 plays, when there is a lot more Routine plays, 9-10 times the amount of plays. And there, they are both about the same percentage, same too for Likely, the main difference being that Simmons had a lot more routine plays, 535 Routine plays to 419 for Crawford.
Yet, Simmons UZR is much larger than Crawford’s, though at 98.7% vs. 98.1%, Simmons is not that much better on routine plays, or so it seems from the percentages. And the number of fielding plays don’t explain that difference either, particularly since most are routine plays.
So there seems to be a disconnect, which I’m probably missing, hopefully someone can explain to me. Maybe there is a tipping point on the number of routine plays made?
For one, those sample sizes are diminutive (~45 plays, psh), don’t worry too much. Second, the “disconnect” as far as data inputs go, is derived from human scouts giving qualitative data for Inside Edge, and different human scouts giving semi-quantitative data for UZR (BIS data) – so, surprise! – they both are imperfect. I’d avoid worrying about it too much, and wait to see the differences when we get MLBAM info, which is going to give us much more beyond “made the play” or “did not make play.”
What AK7007 said. Another possible explanation is that UZR is missing something with respect to the positioning of infielders. Having watched about 2/3rds of Giants game a season, I don’t think that this is the case, but it could be that Crawford is being positioned suboptimally (or atypically). UZR just makes a standard LH/RH and shift/noshift adjustment, not the actual positioning of the fielders. If so, then Crawford could be making the exceptional plays and fielding the routine plays relative to his starting position, but underpeform on UZR, which penalizes far more for missing more routine plays than it rewards for making the more exceptional plays.
This.
BTW – While I do believe that defensive metrics should be based upon outcome (ex. range plus positioning) rather than measuring just skill (range only), it would be great to meld the “difficulty” rating from the IE data to account for things like the great play Crawford made on the bad hop. Perhaps UZR can be adjusted to account for these variables.
I think he could be the second coming of Sandberg at 2B. It’s his footwork, and brains getting him to those balls. He reads pitches like an old master.
I played on the same little league team with Crawford, he definitely smiled from time to time then. Maybe laughed once, I don’t really remember middle school that well. This robot replacement is clearly that, an impostor. But I guess we shouldn’t care, as long as whatever is occupying his skin keeps making those plays that “make hitters feel feelings.”
Minor quibble with the first one. If the ball was “spinning funny” then the short stop would know that, based on its trajectory, and adjust for it. Maybe it bounced the way it did for some other reason.
I saw that play live and it was remarkable. ANYBODY else would have bailed on that play; it shouldn’t have been made period, but was.
I love that stats now has a wine crowd…
Enjoying the B-Craw love here. He’s a lot of fun to watch. Looking forward to more amazing-ness from him this season!
Giants fans have known Crawford is an emotionless robot ever since he did that Wells Fargo spot for KNBR. But as emotionless robots go, he provides pretty nice defense.
Drama is for the bedroom. Crawford rocks steady. Sorry you find his cool glide to be emotionless, and I bet you’re wrong.
Haha?
Oh, and that 16 inning game against the Mets was definitely the worst. On top of that, the next day we woke up to Jeff Francoeur. No one deserves that.
I love the reactions…this is great stuff!
Jeff, how were you able to track down when these plays occurred? Is there some sort of a game log or play log available where you can isolate the “remote” plays?
This was a great Crawford one as well from 2012:
http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20120828&content_id=37495954&vkey=news_mlb&c_id=mlb
Reminds me of #1 with his instincts and reaction time
Saw that play live and was amazed.