SF Giants defense might not be as strong as one stat would suggest

The SF Giants are in a three-way tie for the second-fewest errors committed at seven. Only the Atlanta Braves (6) have recorded fewer errors this season, but has the defense been as strong as their .990 fielding percentage would indicate?

SF Giants defense might not be as strong as one stat would suggest

Errors are one of those stats that lost all comparability from one era to another. In the past, scorekeepers were a little harsher at assigning errors. With the advent of Statcast, more context has been added to plays, and that is not necessarily a bad thing.

For example, if a player does not field a ball cleanly on a hard-hit ball, that is not automatically an error. In the past, in many instances, that would be the case. If the ball had an exit velocity of 110 MPH, then you might consider that the ball is just too hard to field.

In a previous era, if your glove made contact with the ball, it was generally scored as an error. The Giants have had a few plays in recent days where miscues have not been ruled an error. On Thursday, a hard-hit ball off the bat of Nick Castellanos bounced off of Luis Matos' glove in deep center field. Despite this, it was ruled an RBI triple.

In Friday night's 2-0 loss to the Los Angeles Angels, Willy Adames was unable to scoop up a one-hopper off Zach Neto's bat. Nolan Schanuel scored on the play, and Neto was rewarded with a double because he did hit the ball hard.

This is all to say that errors are generally not a good indicator of defensive acumen. Fangraphs and Baseball Savant have developed metrics to better evaluate a defense. Most notable, Defensive Runs Saved (DRS), Outs Above Average), and Fielding Run Value (FRV) attempt to measure defensive acumen.

These metrics use zero as a baseline and estimate how far away a player's defense deviates from that baseline. In terms of DRS, the Giants have been neutral with zero. However, they have graded out much worse with -7 OAA. Only the Seattle Mariners (-9 OAA) and Athletics (-13 OAA) have graded out worse than the Giants. When these metrics disagree, I tend to put more weight in OAA.

For the Giants, the breakdown is both in the infield with -3 OAA and outfield with -4 OAA. Those units have been below average compared to the rest of the league in that metric.

On paper, the Giants should have a good defense with Matt Chapman and Patrick Bailey as the reigning NL Gold Glove winners at third base and catcher, respectively. It should be noted that Bailey's defense is not factored into the team's -7 OAA.

FRV does evaluate defensive acumen behind the plate. Not surprisingly, Bailey is tied for the league lead with +2 FRV.

I should caution that defensive metrics in small samples such as the first few weeks of the season can be misleading. At this point, it is just a signal that they are viewed as a below-average defensive team. It might be a bit too early to be concerned, but this should be on the radar, and something to check back on in a few weeks.