This offseason, the Orioles somehow convinced Adam Jones to play deeper in center field. It's long been posited that Jones would net better defensive metrics, and therefore the Orioles would be improved, by his playing deeper in the outfield. The theory is that Jones, like most outfielders, is faster coming in on the ball than running away from home plate. Jones, for his part, has resisted this change for at least a little while and relied on his knowledge of hitters and counts before relenting.
Whether Jones' playing deeper has helped his cause is questionable, however. On average, Jones is playing 323 feet from home plate in 2017, compared to 300 feet in 2015 and 307 feet in 2016. According to Statcast, not one of the 65 balls in play to center field have gone for hits so far this season. In 2016, just two of the 402 balls in play to center field went for hits.
Jones' ultimate zone rating per 150 innings (UZR/150) in 2016, one of the stats that suffered in 2016, was -9.9. This followed two years of UZR/150 of over 8.0. Early returns in 2017 are less than ideal; Jones' UZR/150 this season is -7.5 - slightly better than last year but still worse than average.
The Orioles' outfield UZR/150 sits at -7.0 so far in 2017, another slight improvement from -11.2 in 2015. The UZR/150 of the outfield in 2015 was just -1.0. While outfield personnel changes, and the combination of Rickard/Mancini/Trumbo is not helping the overall ability of the outfield, that's not a marked improvement from year to year. At the same time, it's hard to know what would have happened but for Jones playing deeper. Perhaps his playing deeper has like Wayne Kirby told Jon Meoli, allowed for more flexibility in the positioning of the less capable outfielders on the roster and helped the team defense compared to what it would be if Jones played 15 feet in.
More important than any of the on-field outcomes is how this story has played out between Jones and the front office. Per Jon Meoli's excellent article on the rationale and early returns, the decision was less of a conversation and more of an edict. Jones claims to have wanted to further his understanding of the team's defensive metrics and voice his opinion as, you know, the guy who actually had to carry out the change, but was never given the opportunity.
The way this played out is less than ideal. I don't want to be the "never played the game" guy - I never played the game - but it's important for analysts in the front office to understand what such a change means for Jones, the man responsible for following their recommendations. I don't mean to assume that the professional analysts simplified the rationale into aggregates, but "playing deeper" means something different when speaking about averages compared to trusting a player's intuition on individual pitches. While recommendations may have been given for scenarios, Jones is certainly not receiving advice on his positioning in-game. Following general orders to "play deeper" takes away the experience Jones has accrued over years of playing decent outfield defense.
At the same time, trusting Jones to know exactly what's best not only for himself but for his partners in the outfield would be naive. The best situation would have been for the Orioles to have Jones and the analysts to sit and work together, to communicate, and to formulate a plan in a partnership between the subject matter expert and the consultant. Even if the result was identical, the fact that Jones was unhappy enough to say it to the press is less than ideal and instructive for the Orioles, other Major League teams, and all professional organizations in existence. It's important to understand and appreciate nuance, and involve the people carrying out the work in the decision-making process.