TL;DR OAA is far better, as expected. Read after the break for next-season OAA prediction/commentary.

As a followup to my previous piece on defensive metrics, I decided to retest the metrics using a sane definition of opportunity. BP’s study defined a defensive opportunity as any ball fielded by an outfielder, which includes completely uncatchable balls as well as ground balls that made it through the infield. The latter are absolute nonsense, and the former are pretty worthless. Thanks to Statcast, a better definition of defensive opportunity is available- any ball it gives a nonzero catch probability and assigns to an OF. Because Statcast doesn’t provide catch probability/OAA on individual plays, we’ll be testing each outfielder in aggregate.

Similarly to what BP tried to do, we’re going to try to describe or predict each OF’s outs/opportunity, and we’re testing the 354 qualified OF player-seasons from 2016-2019. Our contestants are Statcast’s OAA/opportunity, UZR/opportunity, FRAA/BIP (what BP used in their article), simple average catch probability (with no idea if the play was made or not), and positional adjustment (effectively the share of innings in CF, corner OF, or 1B/DH). Because we’re comparing all outfielders to each other, and UZR and FRAA compare each position separately, those two received the positional adjustment (they grade quite a bit worse without it, as expected).

Using data from THE SAME SEASON (see previous post if it isn’t obvious why this is a bad idea) to describe that SAME SEASON’s outs/opportunity, which is what BP was testing, we get the following correlations:

Metric | r^2 to same-season outs/opportunity |

OAA/opp | 0.74 |

UZR/opp | 0.49 |

Catch Probability + Position | 0.43 |

FRAA/BIP | 0.34 |

Catch Probability | 0.32 |

Positional adjustment/opp | 0.25 |

OAA wins running away, UZR is a clear second, background information is 3rd, and FRAA is a distant 4th, barely ahead of raw catch probability. And catch probability shouldn’t be that important. It’s almost independent of OAA (r=0.06) and explains much less of the outs/opp variance. Performance on opportunities is a much bigger driver than difficulty of opportunities over the course of a season. I ran the same test on the 3 OF positions individually (using Statcast’s definition of primary position for that season), and the numbers bounced a little, but it’s the same rank order and similar magnitude of differences.

Attempting to describe same-season OAA/opp gives the following:

Metric | r^2 to same-season OAA/opportunity |

OAA/opp | 1 |

UZR/opp | 0.5 |

FRAA/BIP | 0.32 |

Positional adjustment/opp | 0.17 |

Catch Probability | 0.004 |

As expected, catch probability drops way off. CF opportunities are on average about 1% harder than corner OF opportunities. Positional adjustment is obviously a skill correlate (Full-time CF > CF/corner tweeners > Full-time corner > corner/1B-DH tweeners), but it’s a little interesting that it drops off compared to same-season outs/opportunity. It’s reasonably correlated to catch probability, which is good for describing outs/opp and useless for describing OAA/opp, so I’m guessing that’s most of the decline.

Now, on to the more interesting things.. Using one season’s metric to predict the NEXT season’s OAA/opportunity (both seasons must be qualified), which leaves 174 paired seasons, gives us the following (players who dropped out were almost average in aggregate defensively):

Metric | r^2 to next season OAA/opportunity |

OAA/opp | 0.45 |

FRAA/BIP | 0.27 |

UZR/opp | 0.25 |

Positional adjustment | 0.1 |

Catch Probability | 0.02 |

FRAA notably doesn’t suck here- although unless you’re a modern-day Wintermute who is forbidden to know OAA, just use OAA of course. Looking at the residuals from previous-season OAA, UZR is useless, but FRAA and positional adjustment contain a little information, and by a little I mean enough together to get the r^2 up to 0.47. We’ve discussed positional adjustment already and that makes sense, but FRAA appears to know a little something that OAA doesn’t, and it’s the same story for predicting next-season outs/opp as well.

That’s actually interesting. If the crew at BP had discovered that and spent time investigating the causes, instead of spending time coming up with ways to bullshit everybody that a metric that treats a ground ball to first as a missed play for the left fielder really does outperform Statcast, we might have all learned something useful.