The Not So Golden Glove

More so that any other sport baseball is known for its history.  Fathers and sons have bonded for centuries over the trivialities of the game.  Many-of-afternoons I sat and listened as my grandfather told folktales about the great Stan Musial, while my father argued that Bob Gibson would have owned him.  Being a curious kid I thumbed through my Baseball Almanac and realized how good these players were as I marveled at all the awards they had won throughout their careers.  They certainly had to among the greatest players to ever live.

I think somewhere along the line the importance of these awards have been lost upon the voters.  They determine how players are remembered throughout history.  They may not realize it, but by naming Joe DiMaggio the 1941 MVP they determined that his 56-game hitting streak was more significant than Ted Williams hitting .403.  Personally I disagree with this decision, and over the years I have questioned the integrity of these writers, but I have always been able to understand the logic behind who they chose –even if it was twisted.

I’m not sure if I can say the same about the managers.  The Gold Glove isn’t nearly as important as the aforementioned awards, but it still holds significance.  You’d think that they would know the game better than anyone considering the fact that as a unit they see every game played, but I’m not so sure anymore. 

This year’s class was a complete atrocity.  We won’t even point out the fact that four outfielders were named in the National League.  I’m aware that there was a tie, but do something to break it.  Isn’t one of the things that make baseball great the fact that nothing ever ends in a tie?  Well, unless of course you are talking about an All-Star game.  I’m not even going to rehash the details of that dark day because I’m sure you remember.   That single has caused the whole post-season format to be completely screwed up by a completely meaningless game.

Maybe the biggest screw-up the voters made was naming Jimmy Rollins the best defensive shortstop in the NL.  I acknowledge he is one of its most valuable players but in no way did he deserve to be adorned with this honor.  His numbers weren’t too shabby. He only committed 11 errors and his .985 fielding percentage was respectable, placing him right on par with the 11 and .987 Troy Tulowitzki posted, but he also led the league in putouts, assists and double plays.  In my mind that would place him ahead of the pack and make him the most deserving player, but I guess not.  Omar Vizquel, last year’s winner, should have also been considered here.

Some day, 20 years from now, a kid is going to crack open his web browser and is going to led to believe that Andruw Jones is best defensive player of all-time because a few managers would rather make the easy choice than do their homework

I can understand the logic here. Tulowitzki is a rookie while Rollins is a seasoned vet with a reputable track record, but more importantly, he made a couple big plays down the stretch that were decisive in their playoff push.  What really dumbfounded though was the selection of Grady Sizemore over Curtis Granderson.  I could fathom this if offense was somehow tied to this award, oh wait, Granderson has him there too.  This is outrageous, he even had the highlight reel catches that the voters could hang their hats on, so what happened?  Granderson had a .989 fielding percentage, 10 assists, and 424 putouts to go along with 5 errors.  Sizemore put up a slightly better .995 with four assists, 399 putouts, and two errors.  On paper it’s closer than it should have been.  Anyone that actually saw these guys play knows that Granderson is the better defensive player.  He’s quickly becoming this generations Jim Edmonds as he lead the league in Webgems this year.

While were looking at numbers let’s take a glance at Derrek Lee, this years winner at first base in the National League.  Just for the fun of it let’s compare him to Albert Pujols’.  Lee put up a .994 percentage with 99 double plays, 7 errors, 87 assists, with 1,165 putouts.  Somehow Pujols lost out while putting up a .995 percentage with 132 double plays, 8 errors, 124 assists with 1,325 putouts.  How does this happen?

You could make arguments against several of the other candidates such as Torri Hunter, but we’ll just stop here.  I can understand the writers screwing things up, but the managers see these guys everyday and should know them better than anyone.  I disagree with a lot of things the sabrmetric guys write, but they do have an advantage in that they rarely watch games and therefore aren’t swayed by what their eyes process.  Unfortunately they also often get things wrong for the same reason, mainly they undervalue little things such as heart and leadership because they can’t be measured by an albegraic equation.  The managers screw up so often because they just base everything off their eyes, you have to find that balance between the two to get a proper feel for what really happened.  Seeing a guy play 162 times could actually be detrimental when evaluating talent.  It makes it easy to forget what actually happened and the plays become blurred overtime.  This is how a guy like Rollins steals the award by making a few big plays down the stretch.  Still that doesn’t make it excusable.

They have a historical obligation to get these things right.  I never saw Stan Musial play so all I have to judge him by is other people’s accounts and his stats.  I’d like to think that my grandfather was a credible source considering his opinion is backed by all the MVP awards he won.  I consider Musial one of the ten best players of all time and I never saw him play a game.  Why?  Because the pile of hardware he has accumulated over the years and the high acclaim he has received from his peers and colleagues. When he was active there is little doubt that he was at the zenith of his profession the same way Alex Rodriguez is today.  The writers seem to get these correct more times than not, but was he this good?  I have no other resources to make a valid case.  What it comes down to is one thing principal, trust.  I hope they were more credible than the people are today.  There were no Gold Gloves during this period of history, but I imagine they were a little smarter than the people that gave Andruw Jones 11 golden mitts in a row even though he has been declining defensively for years.

I’ve covered this topic in the past, so in case you missed it here is a recap of what I said.

“If you begin to look at the numbers you’ll realize he’s not the same guy that used to effortlessly glide around the outfield plucking sure doubles from the sky.  From 1998-2002 there wasn’t a better defensive player in the league.  He racked up more than 400 putouts in each of those seasons, almost hitting 500 in ’99, but he hasn’t reached that mark since.  His zone rating shows that this isn’t a result of fewer opportunities.  During his heyday he was among the league leaders in this stat every year, leading as recently as 2001 but he has been in the bottom five each of the last four years.  Yet somehow he has managed to maintain his Gold Glove streak.  How does that happen?  Well, the difference between first and last is about three flies a week.  So if you aren’t watching him everyday, you’d never notice.”

Jones has become the most decorated center fielders of all time, in fact only Willie Mays has won Gold Gloves as a centerfielder.  Are we really ready to say that he is the best defensive centerfielder ever?  You better get ready because if he continues to skate on his reputation he will have the credentials to make the case.  Some day, 20 years from now, a kid is going to clickk open his web browser and see this number and be lead to believe something that isn’t true because a few managers would rather make the easy choice than do their homework.  So ask yourself, is Andruw Jones the best defensive player of all-time?  Or is he just good?  I won’t argue that he’s good, because he is, but are you ready to put him ahead of the Say Hey Kid?  I’m not.