[JohnnyV13]

As many know, metrics like UZR and Dewan's +/- depend on observer evaluations of batted balls. Frankly, Escobar and Gordon have some really screwy ratings (I know, I know, 1/2 a season is a really small sample size for defense). To cite from my latest study:

Escobar, Gordon and Defensive Metrics

To me, there also could be even more insidious forms of bias at play---forms that are more personal and directly related to perceptions about the player closest to the batted ball. In short, I am suggesting that Escobar's sudden reduced range could be an unconscious "backlash" created by raised expectations about his fielding ability from such things as his "SS Jesus" knickname to his highlights on ESPN's Web Gems. [Note that 2011 SS Gold Glove winner Eric Ayabar also has a -UZR (-1.4) in 2012 after he won last season's award despite a pedestrian 1.2 UZR]

In Gordon's case, he caught many observes by surprise when he won the 2011 Gold Glove for his defensive work in LF (most sabermetric fans expected the award to go to Brett Gardner who led all of baseball with a UZR of 25.2, dwarfing Gordon's 9.6). Gordon's "rep" was that he earned the award mostly for his cannon arm (AL league leading 20 outfield assists) rather than his range. Gordon's "new" fielding prowess gives him the highest UZR of any LF in baseball and a UZR/150 much closer to Gardner's outstanding 31.0 from 2011.

Is it possible that many observers believed Gordon to be a statue in LF and now overrate him when, by the eyeball test, he does not meet that prior expectation? Does this smell like confirmation bias (he's a Gold Glover, let's rate him like one) to anyone else---or am I the only cynic in the room?

[Note: Gordon's UZR is 2nd for all positions. Is a LF really saving more runs than anyone else besides Seattle SS Brendan Ryan? This after Gardner saved more runs from LF than anyone else in 2011. Is LF the new premium defensive position?]

To see full article, click link below: