Sabermetrics Versus Traditional Views

[dgalehouse]

In any industry, I think there is a certain resentment among operations managers when front office types interfere with day to day operations. I would think baseball managers would be no exception to that . It does seem that there are fewer and fewer " old school " type managers in MLB every year . More young , lower paid guys who are open to taking " suggestions " from the analytics crew .

[moonslav59]

In any industry, I think there is a certain resentment among operations managers when front office types interfere with day to day operations. I would think baseball managers would be no exception to that . It does seem that there are fewer and fewer " old school " type managers in MLB every year . More young , lower paid guys who are open to taking " suggestions " from the analytics crew .

 

Great points, and I think it's beyond "suggestions" for most teams.

[a700hitter]

I thought that this thread died a well deserved death almost 4 seasons ago.

[notin]

In any industry, I think there is a certain resentment among operations managers when front office types interfere with day to day operations. I would think baseball managers would be no exception to that . It does seem that there are fewer and fewer " old school " type managers in MLB every year . More young , lower paid guys who are open to taking " suggestions " from the analytics crew .

 

 

Wow.

 

You must have been heavily influenced by all those American Tall Tales of man vs. machine, like Paul Bunyan and John Henry with your constant rants against the march of progress.

 

Well, in case you forgot, Paul Bunyan lost and John Henry died.

 

Also, it’s always been this way in baseball. Always. There was a time when ERA was a bold new concept. (And it was originally used to quantify another bold new concept called relief pitching.). But I’m sure there were a bunch of turn-of-the-20th Century dannycater equivalents (and possibly ancestors?) back then wailing, too. “This ERA crap is ruining baseball,along with relief pitching!! Give me the good old days when Hoss Radbourn would pitch 90 games and throw 810 innings like a man!! And you know how we knew he was great?? Wins!! When Kid Nichols started, Kid Nichols finished! Now there’s a man!! And you knew he was a man cause we called him ‘Kid!’ Oh but now we have ‘relief pitchers’ coming in like their ‘heroin pills’ cause the widdle pitcher got a tummy ache!! If my 9 year old can work all day in the coal mine, you can pitch all 9 innings!!”

 

 

That’s my best early 1900’s style rant. Complete games, child labor, and Bayer brand heroin. And no ERA...

[dgalehouse]

Wow.

 

You must have been heavily influenced by all those American Tall Tales of man vs. machine, like Paul Bunyan and John Henry with your constant rants against the march of progress.

 

Well, in case you forgot, Paul Bunyan lost and John Henry died.

 

Also, it’s always been this way in baseball. Always. There was a time when ERA was a bold new concept. (And it was originally used to quantify another bold new concept called relief pitching.). But I’m sure there were a bunch of turn-of-the-20th Century dannycater equivalents (and possibly ancestors?) back then wailing, too. “This ERA crap is ruining baseball,along with relief pitching!! Give me the good old days when Hoss Radbourn would pitch 90 games and throw 810 innings like a man!! And you know how we knew he was great?? Wins!! When Kid Nichols started, Kid Nichols finished! Now there’s a man!! And you knew he was a man cause we called him ‘Kid!’ Oh but now we have ‘relief pitchers’ coming in like their ‘heroin pills’ cause the widdle pitcher got a tummy ache!! If my 9 year old can work all day in the coal mine, you can pitch all 9 innings!!”

 

 

That’s my best early 1900’s style rant. Complete games, child labor, and Bayer brand heroin. And no ERA...

 

Great response . And that is why , even in this enlightened age , Indusrial Engineers are generally not welcomed on the workroom floor .

[notin]

Great response . And that is why , even in this enlightened age , Indusrial Engineers are generally not welcomed on the workroom floor .

 

 

Speaking as an engineer, no one respects an IE...

[Bellhorn04]

We need a new stat for pitchers.

 

Why? Well, obviously, because of the often glaring differences between bWAR and fWAR for pitchers.

 

For example, our Yankee fan "friend" recently stated "You lost Wacha and Eovaldi from your rotation and added back Kluber, who isn’t very good."

 

So I looked up their WAR numbers for last year.

 

Kluber fWAR 3.0 bWAR 0.7

Eovaldi fWAR 1.0 bWAR 1.5

Wacha fWAR 1.5 bWAR 3.3

 

(Conventional numbers for Old Schoolers)

 

Kluber 10-10 4.34 164.0 IP

Eovaldi 6-3 3.87 109.1 IP

Wacha 11-2 3.32 127.2 IP

 

As we can see, Kluber was the best according to fWAR, but the worst per bWAR. Wacha led the way in bWAR.

 

Kluber has a huge difference of 2.3 between the two numbers, and Wacha's difference is also pretty large at 1.8.

 

I have a rudimentary understanding of where the differences come from (like FIP). But the discrepancies can be a bit annoying at times.

 

So what I propose is this: add the two numbers together.

 

Now simply adding two stats together sounds ridiculous, but the most popular offensive stat now of course is OPS, which does exactly that.

 

If we add together fWAR and bWAR we get this:

 

Wacha 4.8

Kluber 3.7

Eovaldi 2.5

 

So what do we call this new stat?

 

fbWAR?

 

Well, I think this is a little catchier:

 

FUBAR

[moonslav59]

We need a new stat for pitchers.

 

Why? Well, obviously, because of the often glaring differences between bWAR and fWAR for pitchers.

 

For example, our Yankee fan "friend" recently stated "You lost Wacha and Eovaldi from your rotation and added back Kluber, who isn’t very good."

 

So I looked up their WAR numbers for last year.

 

Kluber fWAR 3.0 bWAR 0.7

Eovaldi fWAR 1.0 bWAR 1.5

Wacha fWAR 1.5 bWAR 3.3

 

(Conventional numbers for Old Schoolers)

 

Kluber 10-10 4.34 164.0 IP

Eovaldi 6-3 3.87 109.1 IP

Wacha 11-2 3.32 127.2 IP

 

As we can see, Kluber was the best according to fWAR, but the worst per bWAR. Wacha led the way in bWAR.

 

Kluber has a huge difference of 2.3 between the two numbers, and Wacha's difference is also pretty large at 1.8.

 

I have a rudimentary understanding of where the differences come from (like FIP). But the discrepancies can be a bit annoying at times.

 

So what I propose is this: add the two numbers together.

 

Now simply adding two stats together sounds ridiculous, but the most popular offensive stat now of course is OPS, which does exactly that.

 

If we add together fWAR and bWAR we get this:

 

Wacha 4.8

Kluber 3.7

Eovaldi 2.5

 

So what do we call this new stat?

 

fbWAR?

 

Well, I think this is a little catchier:

 

FUBAR

 

Maybe a more realistic FUBAR would be bWAR+fWAR/2.

[Bellhorn04]

Maybe a more realistic FUBAR would be bWAR+fWAR/2.

 

No, no, no - it's more fun when you make the number big, like with OPS.

[moonslav59]

No, no, no - it's more fun when you make the number big, like with OPS.

 

LOL. Then call it Double FUBAR, because it is double wins above replacement.

 

I always thought OPS should be something like:

 

(.6 x OBP) + (.4 x SLG)

[Bellhorn04]

Using moon's suggestion the 2022 FUBAR's would be:

 

Wacha 2.4

Kluber 1.85

Eovaldi 1.25

[moonslav59]

Using moon's suggestion the 2022 FUBAR's would be:

 

Wacha 2.4

Kluber 1.85

Eovaldi 1.25

 

Don't forget Rich Hill:

0.9 bWAR

1.8 fWAR

1.35 FUBAR (better than Nate)

[notin]

I am not opposed to this…

[moonslav59]

I am not opposed to this…

 

It seems both bWAR and FWAR have their pluses and minuses. Combining the two kinda flushes those out a bit.

 

The problem is, both B-R and fangraphs are the "go to" stat sites, and neither will ever provide the FUBAR numbers.

[moonslav59]

The 2022 Red Sox FUBAR numbers (bWAR+fWAR/2)

FUBAR Player (fWAR+bWAR)

5.95 Bogey (6.1+5.8)

4.65 Devers (4.9+4.4)

2.45 Story (2.4+2.5)

1.95 Vaz (1.7+2.2)

1.20 Verdugo (1.2+1.2)

1.15 Ref (1.3+1.0) Not bad for 57 games & 177 PAs

1.05 McGuire (1.3+0.8) Not bad for 36 games & 108 PAs w Sox

1.05 JD (1.0+1.1)

0.70 Kike (0.5+0.9)

0.50 Arroyo (0.2+0.8)

0.20 Casas (0.3+0.1)

 

Pitchers

2.40 Wacha (1.5+3.3)

2.25 Scheiber (1.7+2.7)

2.05 Pivetta (1.5+2.6)

1.60 Whitlock (1.4+1.8)

1.45 Hill (1.8+0.9)

1.25 Nate (1.0+1.5)

1.15 Houck (0.7+1.6)

0.45 Bello (1.3+0.4) Not bad for 57 IP

0.35 Crawford (0.5+0.2)

0.35 Sawamura (0.0+0.7)

0.30 Strahm (0.3+0.3)

0.15 Barnes (0.1+0.2)

0.10 Kelly (0.0+0.2) 13.2 IP

 

How about Brasier? +0.5 fWAR and -0.8 bWAR= -0.15 FUBAR!

Davis at -0.5 (0.3+-0.4)

 

 

Edited January 14, 2023 by moonslav59

[Bellhorn04]

How about Brasier? +0.5 fWAR and -0.8 bWAR= -0.15 FUBAR!

 

Brasier is a classic example of the FUBAR conundrum!

[moonslav59]

Brasier is a classic example of the FUBAR conundrum!

 

It's a major swing.

 

The bWAR and fWAR differentials are much more pronounced with pitchers, ad fWAR uses FIP-based metrics way more than bWAR.

 

I think averaging the two really seems to get the placements right.

[notin]

It seems both bWAR and FWAR have their pluses and minuses. Combining the two kinda flushes those out a bit.

 

The problem is, both B-R and fangraphs are the "go to" stat sites, and neither will ever provide the FUBAR numbers.

 

 

Eh.

 

They’re no big deal to calculate. There was a time when B-R didn’t put up OPS numbers, but we managed to scramble through the complicated math to get the numbers…

[notin]

It seems both bWAR and FWAR have their pluses and minuses. Combining the two kinda flushes those out a bit.

 

The problem is, both B-R and fangraphs are the "go to" stat sites, and neither will ever provide the FUBAR numbers.

 

It seems especially useful for pitchers, because fWAR and bWAR each seem to be geared to different types of pitchers.

 

fWAR is based on FIP, which is a function of walks, strikeouts and home runs.

 

bWAR is based on Runs Allowed, which is not what many think, but rather a function of ERA+ and IP…

[notin]

So fWAR is better for high K / low BB types, particularly if they can limit home runs. bWAR works better for groundball/soft contact pitchers…

[moonslav59]

It seems especially useful for pitchers, because fWAR and bWAR each seem to be geared to different types of pitchers.

 

fWAR is based on FIP, which is a function of walks, strikeouts and home runs.

 

bWAR is based on Runs Allowed, which is not what many think, but rather a function of ERA+ and IP…

 

https://www.baseball-reference.com/about/war_explained_pitch.shtml