Position Adjustment Wrap Up

Yesterday, we talked about center fielders and their relationship to infielders. Like with the 2B/3B conversation last week, the conclusion was mostly unsatisfying. We know how good outfielders are in relation to each other, just like we know how good infielders are in relation to each other, but trying to figure out the difference between infielders and outfielders is a much tougher task.

Some players, like Willie Harris, have skillsets that work a lot better in the outfield than in the infield, where speed is a much bigger factor. Other players, such as Scott Rolen, have the skills to be elite defensive infielders, but don’t profile as guys who would do nearly as well in the outfield. There simply isn’t a blanket statement we can make about the relative difficulties of playing infield and playing outfield that apply to everyone.

Right now, the best we can do is make generalizations that are true across large groups. In that way, perhaps the best way to think of position adjustments are similar to how we think of park factors. Safeco Field depresses offense, so when we look at park adjusted numbers, we give a bump to all hitters and downgrade all pitchers. However, Safeco doesn’t treat all hitters evenly, being brutal on RH bats and pretty friendly to LH bats. Despite this, we still have to conclude that the runs created by LH bats are more valuable, because of the depressed run environment, than they would be if the park was more hitter friendly to RH batters.

Likewise, we know that the pool of players that can play the infield is smaller than the pool that can play the outfield. Since the pool of potential outfielders is larger than the potential pool of infielders (especially 2B/3B/SS), we have to recognize the extra value that infielders provide by doing something that outfielders cannot do.

The position adjustments we have aren’t perfect – we know that. There are some players who could move between positions easier than the adjustments would suggest, and others who would be significantly worse than the adjustment level if moved to a tougher position. But, ignoring position adjustments because they aren’t perfect would be akin to ignoring park factors because they don’t treat all players the same, and I think we all agree that ignoring park factors would be a step back in the understanding of player valuation.

There’s a lot more research that can be done on the relationship between the 2B/3B/SS and CF/LF/RF groups of players. Now that FanGraphs has UZR data available, we’ll continue to explore these issues, and hopefully bring more light to the relative value of each defensive position.