I am certainly not going to claim advance SABRmetric knowledge on defensive statistics. However, I do know two things:
1. Nate McLouth has been awarded a Gold Glove for 2008.
2. There were some questions among the baseball thinkers earlier this year that Nate's defense wasn't as good as the raw numbers (as in errors committed) would lead one to believe.
Is this another case of the voting non-public having their collective noodles up their collective tushies? I think that the majority of the voters simply looked at errors allowed and his fielding average and concluded that Nate was splendid on defense. Again, not an expert, but I would surmise that something deeper than a mere glance at the surface is needed before voting on awards like these....