The Official Dead Horse Topics Thread

[Palodios]

I've been citing fWar for years, and no one has ever called me out on it. On the bright side Kimmi, it probably means people here take you more seriously than they do me:p

[Dojji]

That or you're starting fewer massive crapstorms that take over multiple threads due to your own muleheaded stubbornness. Just like Pablo's wasteline, you can only push things so far before there are consequences.

[mvp 78]

Haha. Now that's a funny joke!

 

I will argue against Fangraphs until I'm blue in the face.

[Dojji]

I didn't know you were an Andorian.

 

or perhaps you're more of a Bolian?

[iortiz]

I keep forgetting that you guys don't do Fangraphs. FTR, when I quote WAR, it's going to be fWAR.

 

2012 2.8 WAR

2013 2.9 WAR

2014 2.8 WAR

 

Yes. Nearly.

Hi Kimmi.

 

Still, those numbers makes you a solid starter (No 3-4) at best according to the FG's rules of thumb (2-3 WAR). A top of a rotation guy is arguably around 4 WAR regardless what a specific year's numbers say (which change drastically every year). i.e. In a year basis if most of the pitchers post 3 WAR, it doesn't make you a top of a rotation guy by any means, what it tells you is that this specific year most of pitchers kinda sucked, since the history of pitcher's performance is plenty wide and likely will normalize to those FG's rules of thumb. Also, those who post a 4 WAR+ consistently are rare specimens, you won't find them in trees! and Porcello by any means is in that tier. Again, while WAR is a decent barometer to mesure value, MLB teams do not even use it to correlate with salaries. The links and info that supports this has already shown earlier months ago, so let's not pretend that he deserved that contract because he didn't. Numbers are there. I think you are the only one around here who still thinks that Porcello is a top-of-the-rotation-guy and he is not, he has never been and I really doubt that he will be someday soon. If you still want to drink Ben's cool-aid, fine, but I think it is time to accept the reality, he simply doesn't have the stuff to be a No. 1-2 pitcher, and unfortunately we have to live with that.

Edited April 3, 2016 by iortiz

[jung]

I can't remember the exact numbers but I think during Pedro's most dominant years he was posting ERA over two runs better than league average. I think it was closer to 2.5 runs better than league average at its widest...just a crazy number. I think it was the last year in the NL before coming over to the Sox or the first year with the Sox.

[User Name]

Hi Kimmi.

 

Still, those numbers makes you a solid starter (No 3-4) at best according to the FG's rules of thumb (2-3 WAR). A top of a rotation guy is arguably around 4 WAR regardless what a specific year's numbers say (which change drastically every year). i.e. In a year basis if most of the pitchers post 3 WAR, it doesn't make you a top of a rotation guy by any means, what it tells you is that this specific year most of pitchers kinda sucked, since the history of pitcher's performance is plenty wide and likely will normalize to those FG's rules of thumb. Also, those who post a 4 WAR+ consistently are rare specimens, you won't find them in trees! and Porcello by any means is in that tier. Again, while WAR is a decent barometer to mesure value, MLB teams do not even use it to correlate with salaries. The links and info that supports this has already shown earlier months ago, so let's not pretend that he deserved that contract because he didn't. Numbers are there. I think you are the only one around here who still thinks that Porcello is a top-of-the-rotation-guy and he is not, he has never been and I really doubt that he will be someday soon. If you still want to drink Ben's cool-aid, fine, but I think it is time to accept the reality, he simply doesn't have the stuff to be a No. 1-2 pitcher, and unfortunately we have to live with that.

 

You don't really understand how WAR works, do you? I'm not asking this question to start an argument, but I really don't think you understand how WAR is measured. And also, for your information, WAR is one of the tools some of the more stat-inclined teams (like Houston) admittedly use when determining player salaries.

 

Also, you can make your point without coming off like a douche. The whole "drink Ben's cool aid" stuff is unnecesary and detracts from an otherwise centered argument.

[a700hitter]

Hi Kimmi.

 

Still, those numbers makes you a solid starter (No 3-4) at best according to the FG's rules of thumb (2-3 WAR). A top of a rotation guy is arguably around 4 WAR regardless what a specific year's numbers say (which change drastically every year). i.e. In a year basis if most of the pitchers post 3 WAR, it doesn't make you a top of a rotation guy by any means, what it tells you is that this specific year most of pitchers kinda sucked, since the history of pitcher's performance is plenty wide and likely will normalize to those FG's rules of thumb. Also, those who post a 4 WAR+ consistently are rare specimens, you won't find them in trees! and Porcello by any means is in that tier. Again, while WAR is a decent barometer to mesure value, MLB teams do not even use it to correlate with salaries. The links and info that supports this has already shown earlier months ago, so let's not pretend that he deserved that contract because he didn't. Numbers are there. I think you are the only one around here who still thinks that Porcello is a top-of-the-rotation-guy and he is not, he has never been and I really doubt that he will be someday soon. If you still want to drink Ben's cool-aid, fine, but I think it is time to accept the reality, he simply doesn't have the stuff to be a No. 1-2 pitcher, and unfortunately we have to live with that.

Evaluating pitching has been a weak point for the Re Sox organization for more than a decade. Maybe Ben looked at the same numbers that kimmi is posting, but he should have watched him pitch more. The stuff just isn't there.

[Kimmi]

I've been citing fWar for years, and no one has ever called me out on it. On the bright side Kimmi, it probably means people here take you more seriously than they do me:p

 

First off, I wish you would post more often.

 

Secondly, I think it means that they respect your opinions more than mine.

[a700hitter]

First off, I wish you would post more often.

 

Secondly, I think it means that they respect your opinions more than mine.

Speaking only for myself, that is not true. I respect both of you and your opinions.

[iortiz]

You don't really understand how WAR works, do you? I'm not asking this question to start an argument, but I really don't think you understand how WAR is measured. And also, for your information, WAR is one of the tools some of the more stat-inclined teams (like Houston) admittedly use when determining player salaries.

 

Also, you can make your point without coming off like a douche. The whole "drink Ben's cool aid" stuff is unnecesary and detracts from an otherwise centered argument.

 

I perfectly understand WAR, it's not rocket science as you always try to present it. Your typically "You don't really understand how WAR works or this or that" cliche/cop out that you use to sound interesting doesn't work for me.

 

FYI, FWAR is not la panacea. BWAR, neither. They are just a value barometers among a lot others. MLB teams have their own stats and methodologies to mesure value, and this has been backed up early several times with several articles months ago here, and while some teams could use it as a decent "reference" among a lot others, it is just that, a "reference", so let's not pretend they use it solely to correlate salaries.

 

Also the kool-aid thing was kinda joke. I think it is evident, but as always you take it so serious. Chill out, I've been always cool with Kim, I didn't even charge her the sig bet LOL!

 

The BL is that only Kimmi and probably you (not sure) still think that Porcello is a top-of-a-rotation, and he isn't by any means. At this point I don't see any potential in that arm either. He simply is a bad pitcher who could be mediocre at very best.

 

We'll see though.

Edited April 3, 2016 by iortiz

[iortiz]

Evaluating pitching has been a weak point for the Re Sox organization for more than a decade. Maybe Ben looked at the same numbers that kimmi is posting, but he should have watched him pitch more. The stuff just isn't there.

 

Porcello was a mistake since day one. When I think in Porcello's contract, it somehow reminds me BJ Upton's. Both were way absurd.

[Kimmi]

2012 1.5 WAR

2013 2.4 WAR

2014 4.0 WAR

 

Nearly?

 

David Price's Baseball Reference WAR (listed first) versus Fangraphs WAR for the past 3 years:

 

2013 1.9 WAR 4.4 WAR

2014 3.6 WAR 6.1 WAR

2015 2.4 WAR 6.4 WAR

 

Make of it what you will since my opinions about Sox players are meaningless.

 

But I will tell you that B-R WAR does not think Price is worth $30 mil a year.

[Spudboy]

First off, I wish you would post more often.

 

Secondly, I think it means that they respect your opinions more than mine.

 

As Ted said, this is not true.

 

I read every post you make. I don't always agree with your opinions, but I always know that what you post is well thought out and I particularly enjoy your explanations of stats and such. I try not to turn my back on an opportunity to learn.

[Northern Star]

it somehow reminds me BJ Upton's. Both were way absurd.

 

Do you mean Carl Crawford?

[Palodios]

First off, I wish you would post more often.

 

Secondly, I think it means that they respect your opinions more than mine.

 

I usually post a lot. Between a painful offseason and a new job, I've taken a bit of a talksox vacation.

[Kimmi]

I usually post a lot. Between a painful offseason and a new job, I've taken a bit of a talksox vacation.

 

I know you usually post a lot. I miss your posts. But I understand where you're coming from. Hope to see you posting more once the season starts.

[sk7326]

David Price's Baseball Reference WAR (listed first) versus Fangraphs WAR for the past 3 years:

 

2013 1.9 WAR 4.4 WAR

2014 3.6 WAR 6.1 WAR

2015 2.4 WAR 6.4 WAR

 

Make of it what you will since my opinions about Sox players are meaningless.

 

But I will tell you that B-R WAR does not think Price is worth $30 mil a year.

 

1. I think the $$/WAR number I see is from Fangraphs. It's a silly metric anyway, because every market is different - that said the Sox have a very high marginal value of victory - wins are a big boost financially for them, so they'd be on the high end of this in general.

 

2. The huge difference between bWAR and fWAR comes from the defense accounting - fWAR starts from FIP, bWAR from runs allowed. There are two competing assumptions at work here. First - bWAR is kind of starting with the pitcher getting a majority of the onus for runs allowed and works from there, fWAR starts from lower assignment of credit/blame. Second, fWAR assumes BABIP is entirely random - which is not true. Running the numbers today using 2015 qualified starters, there was a 0.43 correlation between BABIP and line drive rate. (in English, they rise and fall together, generally ... they are not independent, but they are not linearly related either) Last year Price had a 23% line drive rate, which put him in the bottom quartile and an outlier from his normal 20% or so rate (solidly above the median). So there is some cause for concern maybe - but right now, regression is the bet.

 

3. I wrote that entire #2 not realizing you (as I) misread the bbref entry. They gave him 2 lines (or 4 lines for the last 2 seasons) because he was dealt each of the last 2 seasons. His bWAR in 2015 was 6.0, and his bWAR in 2014 was 4.6 bWAR. Both are actually close to fWAR. 2013 his bWAR was 2.8. He also pitched about 40 innings less in 2013 than he did in 2015 (and 60 less than 2014!). 2014 and 2013 were two years where he had poor BABIP luck relative to other years in his career.

[Kimmi]

1. I think the $$/WAR number I see is from Fangraphs. It's a silly metric anyway, because every market is different - that said the Sox have a very high marginal value of victory - wins are a big boost financially for them, so they'd be on the high end of this in general.

 

2. The huge difference between bWAR and fWAR comes from the defense accounting - fWAR starts from FIP, bWAR from runs allowed. There are two competing assumptions at work here. First - bWAR is kind of starting with the pitcher getting a majority of the onus for runs allowed and works from there, fWAR starts from lower assignment of credit/blame. Second, fWAR assumes BABIP is entirely random - which is not true. Running the numbers today using 2015 qualified starters, there was a 0.43 correlation between BABIP and line drive rate. (in English, they rise and fall together, generally ... they are not independent, but they are not linearly related either) Last year Price had a 23% line drive rate, which put him in the bottom quartile and an outlier from his normal 20% or so rate (solidly above the median). So there is some cause for concern maybe - but right now, regression is the bet.

 

3. I wrote that entire #2 not realizing you (as I) misread the bbref entry. They gave him 2 lines (or 4 lines for the last 2 seasons) because he was dealt each of the last 2 seasons. His bWAR in 2015 was 6.0, and his bWAR in 2014 was 4.6 bWAR. Both are actually close to fWAR. 2013 his bWAR was 2.8. He also pitched about 40 innings less in 2013 than he did in 2015 (and 60 less than 2014!). 2014 and 2013 were two years where he had poor BABIP luck relative to other years in his career.

 

1. Yes, $$/WAR is from Fangraphs. I do not agree that it's a silly metric. Despite what each team's market is, the $$/WAR is an accurate reflection of how much a win cost through free agency.

 

2. Thank you for the information. I am pretty familiar with the way Fangraphs calculates WAR, much less so with B-R's and BP's WAR (or WARP). That's something I need to read up on when I get the chance. I did find it interesting that bWAR, even though it makes an adjustment for defense, begins by charging the pitcher for both earned and unearned runs.

 

I would like to clarify that I was not trying to knock Price, if that's the impression that you got from that post. I am confident that he will be worth his contract at least in the early years.

 

3. Wow, I absolutely did misread that. It's reassuring to know B-R's WAR did not value him so low. My bad.

[Bellhorn04]

Papelbon with his MLB-leading 5th save tonight.

[a700hitter]

Papelbon with his MLB-leading 5th save tonight.

He'a a bummmm!

[sk7326]

Papelbon with his MLB-leading 5th save tonight.

 

He's been fine - most of the opportunities have been on the easier side.

[User Name]

Papelbum.

[mvp 78]

Papelbum.

 

The Bobby Thigpen Hwy.

[Bellhorn04]

Papelstrong.

[mvp 78]

9/28/11

[Bellhorn04]

Even the original Rivera Highway had a couple of big bumps on it.

[a700hitter]

Game 7 2001 World Series

[mvp 78]

Crotch grabber with a tramp stamp.

[Bellhorn04]

Game 7 2001 World Series

 

Think he may have blown one in 2004 as well.