range: muse you can use

there’s a good debate about the cost of eckstein’s range deficit ongoing at baseball musings --- really smart guys who actually understand math. check out the february 7 and february 8 posts over there, and the attendant comments. the consensus seems to be that 44 singles should cost somewhere in the range (very broadly speaking) of 15 to 35 runs. baseball musing’s author, david pinto, used bill james’s runs created formula to peg the cost of 44 singles at 22 runs. "So estimates from 18 to 30 do appear to be in the correct range," he concludes.

however, both pinto and chronicles of the lads, whose calculations placed the alarming 33-run price tag on eckstein’s weak range, advise us to use the data with caution. says pinto: "Because Eckstein is getting 44 fewer outs doesn't mean those outs aren't being picked up by other fielders. . . . There are going to grounders where both the third baseman and the shortstop have non-zero probabilities of fielding the ball. If the third baseman, due to superior range, cuts in front of the shortstop often he'll take outs away from the middleman. In most cases these should even out, but in some situations the shortstop will appear not to get to balls that indeed are outs."

speaking of rangy 3d basemen, chronicles of the lads’ data shows scott rolen to be the most valuable cardinal gloveman, hands down. the chronicler calculates that rolen took 23 runs off the board, which i believe translates into roughly 3 wins in the standings. the chronicler, using pinto's data, has his calculations up for all positions except left field; here’s how the cards come out:

1b pujols +7
2b womack -2
ss edgar -3
3b scotty +23
lf ?????
cf edmonds +6
rf sanders -9

by this method (pending the lf calculations), the cards defense, as a collective, saved 22 runs — about what rolen saved by himself. in other words, the rest of the cards’ strong defenders were canceled out by commensurately weak ones. defense is so flipping hard to measure, i wouldn't take these conclusions as gospel --- but i wouldn't just shrug them off as meaningless either. the cards lost two gold glovers in the offseason; the defense is an enormous concern. pinto and chronicles' range/run estimates may have limitations, but they provide an excellent starting point for understanding what may be the 2005 cardinals' make-or-break issue.