An Inquirer article shows how much the Phillies computer analytics is in its infancy. We are not actually positioning OFs based upon analytics; we are positioning OFs based upon Fuld's gut and will consider the model correct, when it coincides with Fuld's gut. While this may become an expert system, which matches Fuld's gut so well that we no longer need Fuld, it is hard to see how this is actually stats, analytics, or sabermetrics. Here is the relevant quote:
"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."
So, except for changing coaches, nothing has changed... the OFs are playing where the coach's gut tell them to play. Reading the whole article, I got the impression that this positioning is independent of how the pitcher actually pitches to the batter. That's a tough one. You can't tip the pitch by how you position the fielders, while the appropriate alignment for a FB vs changeup or inside vs outside pitch obviously are different.
One wonders if the positioning of IFs is actually any more analytical than the positioning of OFs. Perhaps just different coach, different gut and the analytical R&D guys are still involved in mental masturbation and trying to model the coaches' guts.
Anyway, here's the whole article:
