First baseman really shouldn’t be receiving defensive awards.

Well, having good (as opposed to bad) defense at first base is still significant; it’s just not AS significant as the difference between a good and bad defender at, say, shortstop.

First baseman really shouldn’t be receiving defensive awards. Albert Pujols may play 1B better than the other 1B starters, but isn’t that like saying, “Albert, out of all of the defenders whose defensive shortcomings landed them at first base, you’re number one – the best of the worst.”

So even on Dave’s list, Pujols receives defensive recognition, but Ichiro (a defensive god compared to Albert) doesn’t get any props.

The general point I was trying to make is that teams are only going to be consistently successful in putting a good defense on the field (and by extension, a better team) if they not only know how to identify where a player is on the spectrum of defensive ability, but also know how to figure out how big of an impact that player has on their overall defensive results.

“… the team is hoping new pitching coach Mel Stottlemyre can help salvage a project of two. “We think Mel can help someone like Horacio Ramirez, who was one confused guy most of last year,” Bavasi said.” –TNT.

I think you’re missing the evaluation vs. valuation point, Jeff. The organizations that put *good teams* on the field will be the ones that really understand how defense affects run prevention.

The point was that most teams can already recognize good defense (evaluation), but don’t know how much it’s actually worth (valuation). You don’t have to be understand how defense actually affects run prevention to put a good defense on the field. But to properly value a player or team as a whole (offense and defense), you do.