Elimination of Defense in Scoring?

[Colby]

Fielding percentage has an awful correlation (24.89%) with our defensive stats.  I have been continuously running the simulation all day.  I started out with random values and then after a good 5000 runs, I took averages and standard deviations of saved values (which ones with lowest correlation were continuously replaced with higher correlated values) and mixed them with random numbers to regress values toward a maximum value.  This thing has been running all afternoon, and I have been able to achieve 72% correlation by using the following stat modifiers.

Errors: -28
Assists: 1.4
Putouts: 0.17
At-Bats: 1

I would prefer defensive innings played over at-bats, but there is obvious strong correlation between the amount of AB a player gets and how much they are on the field.  This stat is thrown in there as a normalizing statistic.

The simulation is still going on, so I will update this at the end of the afternoon with some sample stats and final weights to leave it up to a vote.  The end solution of all of this is to allow lineup flexibility during the week with call-ups, trades, and injuries.  People are split on whether they want daily or weekly lineups.  Our current defensive scoring system would not be a problem with weekly lineups.

[Colby]

The simulation appears to max out at 71.9965%...

Errors: -28
Assists: 1.4
Putouts: 0.17
At-Bats: 1

A lot of players are very close to their values.  What happens in this uniform system is that the top defensive 1B lose some of their value (Pujols, Gonzalez) while the middle infielders gain back some value.  That's not all that bad considering the middle infield has two of the most important positions on defense.  The best part of a uniform system is that it prevent abuse.

The top 100 players, offensive, with their defensive points under this system, versus their points on the current system, and the resulting difference.

Pujols, Albert : 1119.84, 713.41, -406.43
Mauer, Joe : 566.4, 605.48, 39.08
Fielder, Prince : 705.44, 695.19, -10.25
Braun, Ryan : 745.6, 641.88, -103.72
Ramirez, Hanley : 625.12, 794.17, 169.05
Utley, Chase : 980.64, 865.87, -114.77
Teixeira, Mark : 678.08, 773.34, 95.26
Gonzalez, Adrian : 972.8, 754.48, -218.32
Dunn, Adam : 468.8, 239.01, -229.79
Youkilis, Kevin : 786.56, 641.2, -145.36
Lee, Derrek : 747.52, 679.2, -68.32
Howard, Ryan : 594.88, 575.62, -19.26
Cabrera, Miguel : 825.76, 767.19, -58.57
Zobrist, Ben : 505.6, 696.36, 190.76
Choo, Shin: 595.2, 456.29, -138.91
Helton, Todd : 981.6, 823.73, -157.87
Martinez, Victor : 520, 622.16, 102.16
Holliday, Matt : 633.6, 497.55, -136.05
Jeter, Derek : 1365.12, 920.68, -444.44
Bay, Jason : 820.8, 604.7, -216.1
Sandoval, Pablo : 222.4, 459.87, 237.47
Votto, Joey : 588.48, 491.9, -96.58
Werth, Jayson : 571.2, 478.41, -92.79
Lind, Adam : 699.2, 574, -125.2
Tulowitzki, Troy : 750.24, 905.75, 155.51
Suzuki, Ichiro : 572.8, 587.89, 15.09
Reynolds, Mark : 456, 275.98, -180.02
Figgins, Chone : 1020, 683.93, -336.07
Zimmerman, Ryan : 968.16, 608.89, -359.27
Rodriguez, Alex : 607.68, 455.22, -152.46
Berkman, Lance : 859.04, 642.59, -216.45
Abreu, Bobby : 537.6, 398.73, -138.87
Bartlett, Jason : 197.12, 443.16, 246.04
Morales, Kendry : 1024, 678.98, -345.02
Longoria, Evan : 990.24, 661.67, -328.57
Span, Denard : 536, 505.9, -30.1
Drew, J.D. : 625.6, 444.14, -181.46
Upton, Justin : 304, 245.58, -58.42
Ethier, Andre : 582.4, 455.83, -126.57
Hawpe, Brad : 504, 348.21, -155.79
Roberts, Brian : 798.56, 971.13, 172.57
Crawford, Carl : 659.2, 557.99, -101.21
Swisher, Nick : 528, 397.26, -130.74
Johnson, Nick : 515.68, 422.65, -93.03
Kubel, Jason : 707.2, 532.91, -174.29
Damon, Johnny : 526.4, 455.8, -70.6
Lopez, Felipe : 575.52, 755.91, 180.39
Pena, Carlos : 504.48, 469.75, -34.73
Pedroia, Dustin : 922.72, 1065.93, 143.21
Young, Michael : 678.4, 592.44, -85.96
Wright, David : 451.68, 336.49, -115.19
Morneau, Justin : 732.16, 683.84, -48.32
Kemp, Matt : 699.2, 633.69, -65.51
Victorino, Shane : 716.8, 660.32, -56.48
Scutaro, Marco : 1634.24, 890.5, -743.74
Coghlan, Chris : 473.6, 404.07, -69.53
Butler, Billy : 635.52, 649.24, 13.72
Ramirez, Manny : 390.4, 267.83, -122.57
Jones, Chipper : 268.64, 177.65, -90.99
Uggla, Dan : 666.88, 757.28, 90.4
Cano, Robinson : 858.72, 918.45, 59.73
LaRoche, Adam : 991.84, 819.45, -172.39
Ibanez, Raul : 636.8, 492.81, -143.99
Matsui, Hideki : 681.6, 456, -225.6
Markakis, Nick : 664, 542.86, -121.14
Hill, Aaron : 1132.32, 1215.79, 83.47
Ellsbury, Jacoby : 670.4, 634.29, -36.11
Konerko, Paul : 779.84, 740.78, -39.06
Cuddyer, Michael : 670.4, 527.56, -142.84
Hunter, Torii : 539.2, 478.16, -61.04
Granderson, Curtis : 672, 620.6, -51.4
Kinsler, Ian : 815.68, 931.22, 115.54
McCann, Brian : 278.4, 390.28, 111.88
Bourn, Michael : 657.6, 600.47, -57.13
Posada, Jorge : 308.8, 367.67, 58.87
Blake, Casey : 906.72, 590.37, -316.35
Branyan, Russell : 466.08, 415.59, -50.49
Lee, Carlos : 761.6, 602.81, -158.79
Rolen, Scott : 923.04, 675.27, -247.77
Callaspo, Alberto : 1297.76, 662.45, -635.31
McCutchen, Andrew : 454.4, 435.54, -18.86
Fukudome, Kosuke : 636.8, 501.85, -134.95
Willingham, Josh : 427.2, 273.41, -153.79
Montero, Miguel : 326.4, 381.61, 55.21
Cust, Jack : 657.6, 470.13, -187.47
Overbay, Lyle : 854.4, 656.56, -197.84
Escobar, Yunel : 565.92, 769.07, 203.15
McLouth, Nate : 587.2, 544.81, -42.39
Cameron, Mike : 587.2, 506.28, -80.92
Ortiz, David : 15.04, 528.54, 513.5
Cruz, Nelson : 492.8, 360.57, -132.23
Cabrera, Asdrubal : 636, 795.17, 159.17
Napoli, Mike : 291.2, 314.62, 23.42
Hudson, Orlando : 983.52, 884.85, -98.67
Beltran, Carlos : 324.8, 291.56, -33.24
Cantu, Jorge : 334.24, 454.55, 120.31
Pence, Hunter : 571.2, 493.12, -78.08
Byrd, Marlon : 604.8, 527.84, -76.96
Jones, Garrett : 624, 402.22, -221.78
Diaz, Matt : 516.8, 316.49, -200.31

[bravesfan4]

Im only in favor of getting rid of the defense as a last resort. The most important thing is position eligibility. By making that more even to where your best OF arent infielders than it wouldnt matter. If you can come up with a new system that works better than thats pretty awesome as well. I like the defensive stats, just not when they're abused.

[Colby]

Im only in favor of getting rid of the defense as a last resort. The most important thing is position eligibility. By making that more even to where your best OF arent infielders than it wouldnt matter. If you can come up with a new system that works better than thats pretty awesome as well. I like the defensive stats, just not when they're abused.

We are trying to work on that but the thread has been rather light in conversation - http://www.profsl.com/smf/index.php?topic=9507.0

[h4cheng]

Colby no matter how good your correlations are getting, the underlying assumptions that E, PO and Field %s are good metrics for defensive prowess are still false.

[Colby]

Colby no matter how good your correlations are getting, the underlying assumptions that E, PO and Field %s are good metrics for defensive prowess are still false.

Yeah, I know your position on our current defensive scoring system, but it does a much better job than anything else.

[h4cheng]

Yeah, I know your position on our current defensive scoring system, but it does a much better job than anything else.

If I understand it correctly, you are using Field % as your response variable? Should something like UZR be a better option?

[Colby]

If I understand it correctly, you are using Field % as your response variable? Should something like UZR be a better option?

UZR would be better.  I don't have the stats readily available as of this moment.