What the article Allentown keeps referencing basically says is that the data department doesn't watch video. They are processing multiples seasons of batted-ball information to make their positioning recommendations. Then Fuld incorporates scouting to interpret and adjust those numbers.
I don't find this to be a big deal in and of itself. But regardless of whether it's bad data, bad scouting or bad execution of combining the two, it certainly doesn't seem to be working.
A few days before the start of each series, Fuld spends two or three hours reviewing the information from the computer model, which outlines how many steps the fielder should take for each batter. Fuld watches video and combs through data to determine the accuracy of the computer's suggestion.
"It's essentially putting a bit of a human spin on what our R&D group does," Fuld said.
In the beginning, the model was new and imperfect, and corrections were substantial — Fuld often had to change the computer's determination by 10 steps. But the Phillies, Fuld said, have improved the model so much that now he feels comfortable correcting it by just two or three steps.
After the game, the computer model that told the players where to stand publishes a "postmortem" for Kapler and his coaches to review....
The report, compiled by a member of the R&D department, displays the result of each at-bat. It outlines where the fielder was positioned and compares it with where the computer suggested he play and to where the coaching staff told him to play.
"What's cool is if you look at our actual positioning versus what the card said, we've actually done better," Fuld said. "Not only is what our card says doing better than traditional straight-up positioning, but on top of that, where they are actually standing is better than purely where the card told them.
"They're listening to their instincts. They're adjusting for the right reasons. They're looking at wind. They're putting themselves in a better position."
