Comments on: Cust Cussing

By: Dave Cameron

Dave Cameron — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 18:04:52 +0000

+/- is available via subscription to Bill James Online. MGL and Tango periodically release UZR data over at The Book blog.

I like almost everything Dan Fox does. SFR is another solid tool to use when you don’t have play-by-play data to look at. When you do have that specific PBP data, though, I think the best idea is to look at that, and that’s what PMR/UZR/Plus-Minus offer.

By: doorbot

doorbot — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 16:48:37 +0000

Hey Dave, if you’re still reading back this far, what do you think of Dan Fox’s Simple Fielding Runs as a measure of defensive ability? If I remember correctly, it fared pretty well, intuitively, in comparison to Plus/Minus.

By: Jimbo

Jimbo — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 14:18:35 +0000

“All of the play by play metrics hate Custâ€™s defense, and the Aâ€™s fans who filled out Tangoâ€™s report rated him a 15 out of 100.”

I found Cust’s PMR, which definitely hates him. Can you point me to his UZR and +/-? Thanks.

By: Dave Cameron

Dave Cameron — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 04:16:31 +0000

Better defensive metrics than ZR:

Probablistic Model of Range (Baseball Musings)
Plus/Minus (Baseball Info Solutions)
UZR (Mitchel Lichtman)
Fan’s Scouting Report (Tango)

All of the play by play metrics hate Cust’s defense, and the A’s fans who filled out Tango’s report rated him a 15 out of 100. RZR is nice because it’s so available but it’s not in the same class as any of the metrics above. When it disagrees with +/-, UZR, PMR, and pro scouting reports (there’s a reason Cust has been DH’ing for years) the best assumption is that RZR is wrong.

By: philosofool

philosofool — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 21:17:38 +0000

What’s the evidence that Cust is such a terrible defender? THT’s RZR places him at .855 in RF last season (where he had most of his days in the field); that number is toward the bottom of all RFs, but NOT LAST. He produced 8 outs out of zone in 382 innings, or in 2.1% of innings played. The highest OOZ rating for an RF was Austin Kearns, 4.9%. If Cust got OOZ like Kearns, that would mean an additional three outs every 100 innings, or about once per 4 games. Yes, an extra out every 4 games is a nice thing to add, but it’s not that huge, and many other RFs have OOZ ratings like Cust’s. So can someone please show me the evidence that Cust is as bad in the outfield as everyone here seems to think?

By the way, if the problem is with Zone Ratings, I’d love to hear about it. ZR is the only quantified measure of fielding ability that I know. (Except fielding percentage, and everyone reading this knows how significant a measure that is.)

Also, Daric Barton is a good fielder, perhaps very good. He ranks in the top 1/4 of 1B right now, so I don’t think that claim has any merit at all. This is based on a small sample of BIZ, but he has 10 OOZ outs this season, which is also among the top.

By: Mike

Mike — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 20:28:00 +0000

It’s true that it’s very difficult to succeed with a league leading K-rate; but it’s also true that it’s very difficult to not succeed with a league leading BB-rate combined with a well above averaged BABIP and a high HR-rate for his entire career. He is pretty much guaranteed to have a high OBP despite all those strikeouts. As long as he continues to see a ton of breaking balls, he’ll keep up the walks, and if that does not continue, he’ll hit more HRs.

It’s also worth noting that while he’s certainly one of the worst defensive OFers, he’s not the worst, and he’s basically been fine this year in every game that was not against the Mariners, which is presumably all you’ve seen of him. He does not make horrible gaffes at the rate he did over the weekend….

By: Alec

Alec — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 19:58:45 +0000

Jose Guillen is a terrible in the field, but is nowhere near the black hole that Cust is.

By: salb918

salb918 — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 19:37:43 +0000

Cust has fallen into similar slumps before. Playing the selective endpoints game:

July 4, 2007 – Aug 3, 2007: .197/.337/.318, 35% K% in 83 PA
Mar 25, 2008 – Apr 27, 2007: .161/.373/.242, 31 % K% in 83 PA

That’s not to say the slump isn’t troubling. The best way to estimate a player’s current talent is to create a projection incorporating all the latest performance data, including (in Cust’s case) his latest awful showing. Running a continuous Marcel (such as I and studes have done at THT recently) shows the following:

Date AVG OBP SLG GPA
6/3/2007 .258 .356 .469 .277
7/3/2007 .276 .368 .507 .292
8/2/2007 .263 .363 .477 .283
9/1/2007 .268 .381 .490 .294
10/1/2007 .259 .386 .471 .291
3/29/2008 .257 .383 .464 .288
4/28/2008 .248 .382 .442 .282

(Stats are his Marcel projection on each of the respective date)

The slump has definitely changed our position on his true talent AVG and ISO, although the OBP is still there. So, while your comments are generally correct, the magnitude of the slump is only quantified when all the data are taken account and weighted appropriately. My guess is that Cust’s true talent is as a .280-.290 GPA hitter, and that’s what we’ll see for the balance of the year unless there’s something physically wrong with him.

FYI, Marcel (as of today, and knowing nothing about BIP distribution) sees Cust at a .326 BABIP and .374/.666 AVG/SLG on-contact. All three of those numbers are significantly lower than his career averages.

As for defense, I am not sure what Cust’s defensive projection (true skill) is, but to date this year he has been better (by RZR) than Jose Guillen, Emil Brown, Raul Ibanez, Brad Wilkerson, and Garret Anderson. While I don’t know how that will play out in the future, and while Cust is surely one of the worst defensive corner outfielders in the majors, he’s probably not dead last and may not be the worst even in the AL West.

By: Zachary D Manprin

Zachary D Manprin — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 19:04:18 +0000

If Jack Cust is not the worst defensive player in MLB it might be the guy the A’s have at 1st base; Daric Barton. How bad? Mike Sweeney, severe knee injury and all, is playing 1st for the A’s. The A’s have four DH’s and unfortunatley two of them have to play in the field.

By: Wally

Wally — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 18:38:04 +0000

First, I’d agree there are several “skills” that determain BB%, but you could surely break those down again as well. Like selectivity at the plate comes from pitch recignition, quickness with the bat, etc. But anyway, the guys got BBs. Even if pitchers TRY to throw him more strikes, many pitchers just aren’t good enough to do so without laying in a few meatballs. Which as you say, should drive Custs BA/SLG up. But this has yet to be seen. I agree with you no one can keep up a line of .160/.370/.220, and that type of player is not very valuable, but if anyone can keep it up for very long, its a guy like Cust (not that I think he will).

As for overall value. I have a hard time believing Andrew Jones with a line of .159/.226/.256 is making up all extra outs he creates with his bat in the field. And for that matter Jose Guillen, who’s an equally bad fielder as Cust, has a line of .177/.202/.323. There are some 30 players behind Cust in OPS, and serval ahead of him that I would argue are less valuable with the bat due to the fact that Cust still isn’t making that many outs (and 1/2 his games are coming from a pitcher friendly park), and you’re really going to argue the possitional adjustment makes them all better. Sure a slick fielding second baseman like Cano maybe (nearly .200 points of OPS is hard to make up, particularly nearly all of it comes from OBP), but there are some DHs and bad fielding corner outfielder on this list too. Garret Anderson is one ahead of him in OPS who, if I had to guess, has had less overall value to his team in the last month. His line .228/.264/.356, and last year he was a -3 in LF in only 85 games. Cust in 60 in the OF in general was -3 last year.