It'd be akin to concluding that Matt Holliday is a bad LFer because of that horrible dropped ball a couple of seasons back in the playoffs. That just wouldn't be true. He is also a plus defensive player and Upton is going to improve in every area despite already being great. Remember how young he is.
Offensively, he is fantastic but how can you justify 12 errors? I realize I don't watch him on an everyday basis but people who do...state the obvious. Since you seem to watch him on a regular basis, where have those errors come from?
I don't watch him on a regular basis. That's my whole point and why I look at 3 years of data and place more value in that than what my eyes tell me from seeing him as little as you. If I were a fan of another team and watched that 2 or 3 game stretch from Bourn earlier this season, I might say, "Wow! How did that dude win 2 GGs?" The stats say that Upton makes a lot of plus plays and has terrific range. No matter batter how bad he's looked tonight (and he's been awful), those stats tell a completely different story. I bet if we saw a reel of every play he made over the last 3 years, the stats would make a lot of sense.
Oh, and errors don't tell the entire story - not even close. For example, Corey Hart, Andre Ethier and Jeff Francoeur have all committed far fewer errors than Upton over the last 3 years but none are even average defensively overall. Hart and Ethier are actually bad... really bad... the worst 2 among all NL qualifiers over that span. Those metrics look at a lot of things that are difficult to discern by the naked eye, esp. when you only see the guy play once in a blue moon.
Last point on this from me, I'm not making that judgement strictly from what i've seen these 4 games. I'm using that judgement along with 12 errors and comments/statements I've heard around the league about him. I'm also taking into account, what I believe, is a flawed metric system but that's just me. Only thing I will take back is that he can improve and become a good OF, after all he is only 24 years old. Edit - He leads all RF in errors...sorry good OF don't do that.
Have you ever read some of the laugh out loud garbage that Dicky Justice puts out on the Astros and baseball in general? Well, he's considered a beat writer... Not saying all of them are bad. Zach Levine is pretty solid for example. You just can't use that as validation without knowing anything about the guy.
Defensive metrics are far from perfect... but over that time frame, they are meaningful. If you saw they are flawed, how so? Kind of an empty statement without explaining why you think that.
He's doing it... Ichiro Suzuki has the 2nd most errors among AL RFers over the last half decade and the 3rd most since coming into the league in 2001. Much more to it than errors.
I already explained why, whether you agree or disagree is fine but I provided my reasoning earlier. A system that praises Carlos as an OF, gives WAY to much credit to Upton and not enough to Bourn is still way to flawed.
Ichiro has committed 31 errors over a 10 year career and never over 5 in any one season...try again, if you'd like.
Carl Crawford has the 2nd most errors among AL LFers over the last 4 years. You could go on and on...
He also came into the league more polished. No question that Upton commits an inordinate amount of errors, esp. for the good defensive player that he is. That's why it's important to realize that number of errors, even a big number, only tells a small part of the whole story. Upton is apparently just that good in other areas that he more than compensates for it.
CC 27 errors over a 9 year career and never more then 4 in a season. Upton has 12...12 this season alone and 42 in his 4 year career...42.
Sample size... with defensive metrics, good to look at at least 3 years... or more. Over the last 3 years, Carlos Lee is the 2nd worst NL LFer by those same advanced stats. Only Ryan Braun has been worse which makes total sense. Braun isn't good defensively, based on the eye or the numbers. Partial year defensive stats, esp. for OFers, aren't very significant.
If errors meant as much to the whole story in terms of saving runs and what not, your argument would be one thing... but they don't. You're hung on that one metric. There are tons of additional areas where a player can compensate for another area, like Upton has done. The point I was making is that errors don't tell the whole story by any stretch. Regardless of the number, Crawford and Suzuki commit "relatively" more errors than almost anybody at their positions. Forget comparing the numbers to Upton for a second. Just think about that concept. They are still good despite that which proves that errors don't say much alone, assuming you consider either or both of them good OFers.
Yea, time to let it go... good discussion. I just get a little annoyed at overreactions, positive or negative, to small sample sizes in this sport.
