A Realistic View at 2017 Part II

[mvp 78]

Look, I don't want to sound snarky about this but WAR is a lot like the federal budget. It's so big and so convoluted that it's virtually impossible for laypeople to understand and if one can't understand it they can't find specifically what's wrong with it. Therefore we just have to assume that it's right.

 

https://www.nationalpriorities.org/budget-basics/federal-budget-101/spending/

 

The federal budget is large, but I can't say is complicated or convoluted. Just because something is big, doesn't mean it's overly complicated. You could say that IRS rules are needlessly complex.

[S5Dewey]

https://www.nationalpriorities.org/budget-basics/federal-budget-101/spending/

 

The federal budget is large, but I can't say is complicated or convoluted. Just because something is big, doesn't mean it's overly complicated. You could say that IRS rules are needlessly complex.

 

OK. I'll go with the IRS thing then.

 

See? I'm not that hard to get along with! LOL

[S5Dewey]

WAR is the normalized sum of every measurable thing a baseball player does.

 

If that were true then it would be like OPS and they wouldn't have to have "trained observers" watching every game. They'd be able to just take the box scores and build their WAR from there. However, WAR also uses some immeasurable things. Range factor comes to mind immediately.

[moonslav59]

Look, I don't want to sound snarky about this but WAR is a lot like the federal budget. It's so big and so convoluted that it's virtually impossible for laypeople to understand and if one can't understand it they can't find specifically what's wrong with it. Therefore we just have to assume that it's right.

 

My bigger and global problem with WAR is that regardless of how much lip service people want to give to the fact that it's not the be-all, end-all they treat it like it is when they're in a debate. For some reason saying that Player A's WAR is better than Player B's War makes Player A a better player - and that is the defining moment in the discussion.

 

I'll have a lot more faith in WAR when B-R (or someone else) qualifies WAR values by saying that the Margin of Error is 'x.xx" rather than saying "Welllll..... it might not be perfect... but it's close!" In my mind when someone assigns a numerical value to something without specifying a margin of error they're saying that the numerical value is what it is - and not somewhere close to it.

 

Since WAR is a product of skill plus time, a player who is better but plays less might have a lower WAR, but I think we all agree, being on the field playing is a plus.

 

Personally, I've never used WAR as a debate ender, and I don't see many others doing it.

 

I'll say again, I think the onus is on the poster to try sand show why a lesser WAR player is better than another. I've attempted this myself a few times by using these arguments:

 

1) Player B was hurt, but he is clearly better "when healthy". (Maybe the player has no history of always being hurt.)

2) I think SS defense is under-scored by WAR, but I can't prove my theory is better than WAR's methodology for determining how SS defense compares in value to other positions.

3) Catcher "defense" cannot quantify how a catcher gets the best (or worst) out of the pitchers he catches. There's a big hole here, but that hole exists in traditional measurements as well.

 

There's probably more that I can't think of.

 

In general, I like the idea of trying to put one number to measure the totality of a player's value. WAR uses statistical data from many many years to determine the co-relation between a stat and a run scored or saved from being scored. They use that data to determine which stats are more important and weigh these factors into their formula. I don't have to understand every permutation to trust that they are pretty close to what really counts towards a player's value. The runs are converted to wins above replacement player value and there's the number. I kind of like it, but I realize it is not perfect, but because it factors in so many valuable things a player can do or not do, it's better than any other single stat.

 

That's all it is to me. It doesn't mean I totally agree with every single number, but it always seems to be very close to what I think, so I think they've done a good job at trying to factor everything into one number.

 

[moonslav59]

If that were true then it would be like OPS and they wouldn't have to have "trained observers" watching every game. They'd be able to just take the box scores and build their WAR from there. However, WAR also uses some immeasurable things. Range factor comes to mind immediately.

 

And that's a good thing.

 

Remember all the clowns who used Fldg% and only Fldg% to rate a player's defense?

 

BTW, I don't think RF is used. They are more advanced than that. UZR/150 is better than RF/9 by a long shot.

 

It took a while for fldg% guys to even listen to the RF/9 argument.

[mvp 78]

If that were true then it would be like OPS and they wouldn't have to have "trained observers" watching every game. They'd be able to just take the box scores and build their WAR from there. However, WAR also uses some immeasurable things. Range factor comes to mind immediately.

 

OPS doesn't measure everything a player does though. It doesn't factor in running, fielding, throwing, etc. OPS also doesn't normalize jack s***.

[Spudboy]

If Beni puts the work in, he can be a great defender.

 

Absolutely.

[notin]

That's a terrible analogy. I agree that the automobile is a better mode of transportation that the horse-drawn carriage, but not because of the number of moving parts. Both the horse-drawn carriage and the automobile get us where we want to go. The advent of the internal combustion engine just made travel quicker and easier even though the automobile had more moving parts. It's a trade-off.

 

While I do own vehicles with power windows & doors, a GPS system, an EGR system and fuel injection I long for the days when I could rebuild a carburetor or change a fuel pump beside the road (I've done both). Now when my car stops running I have to call the garage and open my wallet. Does that make the current version of the car "better"?

 

WAR is a lot like that GPS I spoke of, only with one exception. When my GPS fails to operate correctly it's immediately obvious but when WAR isn't operating properly some people tend to say, "Gee, it says that so it must be right". If we applied that to the GPS some people would occasionally end up in Albuquerque firmly believing they were in Boston (or wherever they wanted to go).

 

It's not a terrible analogy. It disproves your sweeping generalization that just because something is more complicated, it must be worse. I can give you 1000 other examples if you like.

[moonslav59]

OPS doesn't measure everything a player does though. It doesn't factor in running, fielding, throwing, etc. OPS also doesn't normalize jack s***.

 

OPS+ does a little bit.

[harmony]

My bigger and global problem with WAR is that regardless of how much lip service people want to give to the fact that it's not the be-all, end-all they treat it like it is when they're in a debate. For some reason saying that Player A's WAR is better than Player B's War makes Player A a better player - and that is the defining moment in the discussion.

WAR does not end the debate but I can think of no better publicly available statistic to begin the debate.

[notin]

If that were true then it would be like OPS and they wouldn't have to have "trained observers" watching every game. They'd be able to just take the box scores and build their WAR from there. However, WAR also uses some immeasurable things. Range factor comes to mind immediately.

 

WAR doesn't use Range Factor, which is just (putouts + assists)/game. It's a useless stat unless comparing two players who play the same position on the same team, as it depends on park and pitching staff...

[sk7326]

If that were true then it would be like OPS and they wouldn't have to have "trained observers" watching every game. They'd be able to just take the box scores and build their WAR from there. However, WAR also uses some immeasurable things. Range factor comes to mind immediately.

 

OPS measures offense ... and imperfectly ... the two stats have different denominators and OBP in reality is much more important than slugging.

 

The observers are trained "surveyors" of defense - that is measurement ... it is not clean and easy ... and it is less evolved than, say slugging percentage. The baserunning is measured too - in terms of runs added.

[mvp 78]

I demand robot umps AND robot observers now!

[moonslav59]

OPS measures offense ... and imperfectly ... the two stats have different denominators and OBP in reality is much more important than slugging...

 

I think an improvement on OPS would be...

 

(OBP x 3) + (SLG x 2)

5

 

This way, OBP counts as 60% of the number and SLG 40%.

[sk7326]

I demand robot umps AND robot observers now!

 

Oh robot umps ... if only ...

[Nick]

Well I don't need to see WAR to know that we have a special player in Sale.

[Emp9]

I think an improvement on OPS would be...

 

(OBP x 3) + (SLG x 2)

5

 

This way, OBP counts as 60% of the number and SLG 40%.

 

I like that. I'm of the opinion that, by simply not making an Out (on offense, of course) is more valuable than anything else. The exception to this would be a Run producing Sacrifice Fly ( or bunt.. or a base-running sacrifice .or really any type of sacrifice that scores a run).

[Nick]

Beltran and Hanley only DHs without a homer so far.

[mvp 78]

Beltran and Hanley only DHs without a homer so far.

 

We don't need Papi! Traditional DH's don't matter anymore! Our offense will be fine!

[Emp9]

Beltran and Hanley only DHs without a homer so far.

 

Victor Martinez, Mauer, Bautista also zero HRs

[sk7326]

2nd in OBP, 9th in wRC+ ... if this is struggling (and it is to a degree) there is plenty of hope

[Emp9]

Evan Gattis is another DH

 

Other notables beyond DH without a HR:

 

AGone, Abreu, Kyle Seager, Altuve, Utley, M. Cabrera, Walker...

[Nick]

Evan Gattis is another DH

 

Other notables beyond DH without a HR:

 

AGone, Abreu, Kyle Seager, Altuve, Utley, M. Cabrera, Walker...

 

are you sure they are all DH?

[Nick]

We don't need Papi! Traditional DH's don't matter anymore! Our offense will be fine!

 

Chris Sale would disagree.

 

fyi...Sale was 14-2 on after July 2nd start last year. Then he went 3-8 to finish 17-10.

Edited April 20, 2017 by Nick

[Nick]

JF won't use Kimbrel for 4 out situation but not a big deal to use him for 6 outs? OK.... Edited April 20, 2017 by Nick

[Emp9]

are you sure they are all DH?

 

no that's why i said beyond DH. The 4 others DH though. AllI'msayingis there are a lot of known power hitters overall that haven't. I doubt it means anything besides the fact that the season is still very young yet.

[harmony]

Well I don't need to see WAR to know that we have a special player in Sale.

For what it's worth, entering the game at Toronto, Chris Sale did not have the highest fWAR of any American League lefthander scheduled today for his fourth start of the season.

 

That honor would go to Seattle southpaw James Paxton, who posted 1.0 WAR and an ERA of 0.00 in three starts covering 21 innings while Sale had a WAR of 0.9 and as ERA of 1.25 in 21.2 innings.

 

Paxton, who is nearly five months older than Sale, will be hard-pressed to match Sale's performance when the Mariner lefthander faces the Athletics tonight in Oakland.

[Emp9]

For what it's worth, entering the game at Toronto, Chris Sale did not have the highest fWAR of any American League lefthander scheduled today for his fourth start of the season.

 

That honor would go to Seattle southpaw James Paxton, who posted 1.0 WAR and an ERA of 0.00 in three starts covering 21 innings while Sale had a WAR of 0.9 and as ERA of 1.25 in 21.2 innings.

 

Paxton, who is nearly five months older than Sale, will be hard-pressed to match Sale's performance when the Mariner lefthander faces the Athletics tonight in Oakland.

 

I drafted Paxton for fantasy. Oh, I'm also giving Haniger a try in my OF since Marte's suspension.

[harmony]

I drafted Paxton for fantasy. Oh, I'm also giving Haniger a try in my OF since Marte's suspension.

I have James Paxton in fantasy as well but failed in my bid to get Mitch Haniger. My team likewise is reeling from Starling Marte's suspension. For the second April in a row my fantasy team lost a base-stealer with the club's second-highest salary to an 80-day PED suspension. Last year it was Dee Gordon.

[Wade Boggs]

Chris Sale would disagree.

 

fyi...Sale was 14-2 on after July 2nd start last year. Then he went 3-8 to finish 17-10.

 

The White Sox team went south as well. That 3-8 finish had something with uniforms, asking for a trade, tired of losing, not being in the race.. The Laroche thing with his kid. It all took a toll. If the Red Sox can get healthy between injuries and the flu, they will have a good year. The only thing that could stop Sale is an injury. The only way he can go 3-8 in the second half is lack of run support with the Red Sox. I be more concerned with the velocity dip as opposed a 3-8 after all star break record.

 

Ask yourself this. If they didn't trade for Sale..