A Realistic View at 2020: Part I

[S5Dewey]

Would it help if you knew those numbers were NOT oWAR and dWAR? The Offense component is batting and baserunning runs above average. And the Defense number is defense runs above average with a positional adjustment...

 

I can plainly see that WAR is not Rocket Science. It's more complicated than that.

[harmony]

I can plainly see that WAR is not Rocket Science. It's more complicated than that.

https://library.fangraphs.com/misc/war/

 

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

[Slasher9]

That's all fine and good but when a fan who's NOT a geek looks at the WAR of two players does that fan then think, "Yes' but Player A has played in 35 more games than Player B. Therefore it's not a fair comparison.

 

In fact, does anyone here do that, or do we just accept that a player with a better WAR is the better player?

Think about it.

 

Great point! People throw war out there all the time comparing players and NEVER point out who has played in more or less games. Another reason War is a joke.

[jacksonianmarch]

What about using WAR per game?

[moonslav59]

Great point! People throw war out there all the time comparing players and NEVER point out who has played in more or less games. Another reason War is a joke.

 

Playing more has value and if you know one player has played way more you can figure out that a player might be better when he plays vs someone with a higher WAR. Not knowing what WAR is measuring is a problem for those who dislike it.

[Slasher9]

Playing more has value and if you know one player has played way more you can figure out that a player might be better when he plays vs someone with a higher WAR. Not knowing what WAR is measuring is a problem for those who dislike it.

 

Give me a break. Moon, you very damn well know that NOBODY lists games played or AB’s when throwing out war numbers for 2 players. But yeah I just don’t understand war because I called it a joke. Actually you war folk should use WAA which at least shows some actual value and maybe I wouldn’t bitch so much.

War on its own is a joke. Is that better for you?

[moonslav59]

Give me a break. Moon, you very damn well know that NOBODY lists games played or AB’s when throwing out war numbers for 2 players. But yeah I just don’t understand war because I called it a joke. Actually you war folk should use WAA which at least shows some actual value and maybe I wouldn’t bitch so much.

War on its own is a joke. Is that better for you?

 

I rarely use WAR, but it has value in a way OPS does not. I don't always list ABs when I give Marco's OPS, but maybe I should. His lack of ABs makes his OPS mean much less, and people know it without me pointing out the low ABS. Why not expect people to think the same way with WAR?

[S5Dewey]

Would it help if you knew those numbers were NOT oWAR and dWAR? The Offense component is batting and baserunning runs above average. And the Defense number is defense runs above average with a positional adjustment...

 

Baseball is comprised of two elements for position players, offense and defense and WAR evaluates players on those two criteria. Regardless of how they're calculated and how they're named at the end of the day they're either offensive stats or defensive stats.

 

It's not unrealistic to believe that offensive stats + defensive stats = total stats.

[notin]

Great point! People throw war out there all the time comparing players and NEVER point out who has played in more or less games. Another reason War is a joke.

 

Seriously?

[notin]

Of course the difference is that WAR is cumulative whereas BA & ERA are averages (hence the "A" )

 

Wow. Ok.

 

If Player A has 120 hits in 500 AB and Player B has 100 hits in 300 AB, do you think “Wow. Player A is a much better hitter.”

 

Are you seriously saying you’ve never looked at time played for any cumulative stat?

[notin]

Baseball is comprised of two elements for position players, offense and defense and WAR evaluates players on those two criteria. Regardless of how they're calculated and how they're named at the end of the day they're either offensive stats or defensive stats.

 

It's not unrealistic to believe that offensive stats + defensive stats = total stats.

 

No it’s not. But it’s also unrealistic to add up runs and expect them to equal wins...

[notin]

Great point! People throw war out there all the time comparing players and NEVER point out who has played in more or less games. Another reason War is a joke.

 

Actually people mention games played all the time

[S5Dewey]

Let's compare two players who used to play in the outfield for the Red Sox, Jackie Jensen and Jimmy Piersall.

 

Jensen has a career WAR of 27.9. Piersall had a career WAR of 29.4. Pretty much the same player, right? Piersall was maybe a little bit better.

 

Then when one looks it up they find that they weren't the same player at all. Piersall got his 29.4 WAR over 16 seasons and Jensen got his 27.9 over just 11 seasons. Jensen was by far the better player but WAR would lead the casual fans to believe that Piersall was better because his career WAR was higher.

[S5Dewey]

Actually people mention games played all the time

 

When talking about WAR? Posters essentially NEVER mention games played when discussing WAR.

[harmony]

When talking about WAR? Posters essentially NEVER mention games played when discussing WAR.

Check post #182 in this thread:

 

https://www.talksox.com/forum/threads/19439-Countdown-to-Playoffs-2019-edition?p=1278065#post1278065

[moonslav59]

Here's exactly why WAR is not a useful tool, at least in this situation:

1) IIRC we've already discussed and agreed (?) that JBJ's WAR is reduced because he has Mookie beside him and Mookie keeps JBJ from getting to balls he would otherwise get to thereby deflating JBJ's WAR.

 

2)

BR:

JBJ's WAR = 1.6, Hamilton's WAR = 0.0

 

Fangraphs:

JBJ: oWAR = -2.6, dWAR = 0.1, WAR = 0.9

BH: oWAR = -17.2, dWAR = 9.7, WAR = 0.3

 

Two comments: Doesn't the disparity in these two methods strike anyone else as being odd? I mean, -17.2 vs. -2.6? 9.7 vs. 0.1?

 

Further, assuming that a player's WAR should be a total of his offense and defense...

In what world does -2.6 + 0.1 = 0.9?

In what world does -17.2 + 9.7 = 0.3?

Is that this "new math" we've been hearing about? Or is it just something that's beyond the comprehension of us mere mortals?

 

And you wonder why i question WAR.

 

Nothing odd here to me.

[moonslav59]

That's all fine and good but when a fan who's NOT a geek looks at the WAR of two players does that fan then think, "Yes' but Player A has played in 35 more games than Player B. Therefore it's not a fair comparison.

 

In fact, does anyone here do that, or do we just accept that a player with a better WAR is the better player?

Think about it.

 

WAR is not necessarily intended to mean who is the better player.

 

Take Porcello, for an example, I know he is not as good as other pitchers, but his WAR is higher because he gives innings- way more than some. Giving innings has value, especially when you give them year after year. WAR does not say Porcello is better per inning or game.

 

Not understanding what WAR is or what its uses are is what the problem is.

 

If I told you Marco was a better offensive player than Beni this year, because he has a higher OPS, you'd immediately bring up the PA disparity, and rightly so.

 

Beni is worth more, because he plays more. .817 over 528 PAs is worth way more than .820 over 85 PAs. WAR works in a similar way. More games and innings have value as long as you are plus. That doesn't necessarily mean you are better. Maybe had Marco his .820 over 520 PAs, we could say he was better. What about 500? 450? We always have to look at more than one stat of metric to get the true value. WAR tries to measure the total value a player produced over a set time. Yes, it's affected by who plays next to him on defense. It's not perfect. Yes, it's affected by innings pitched or PAs disparities, but it is measuring total value not who is better per AB or PA or IP or batter faced. It's not meant for measuring that, but it seems like some think that is what it is trying to determine.

[moonslav59]

Let's compare two players who used to play in the outfield for the Red Sox, Jackie Jensen and Jimmy Piersall.

 

Jensen has a career WAR of 27.9. Piersall had a career WAR of 29.4. Pretty much the same player, right? Piersall was maybe a little bit better.

 

Then when one looks it up they find that they weren't the same player at all. Piersall got his 29.4 WAR over 16 seasons and Jensen got his 27.9 over just 11 seasons. Jensen was by far the better player but WAR would lead the casual fans to believe that Piersall was better because his career WAR was higher.

 

The casual fan should not be using WAR, if they don't know what it means.

 

Both Piersall and Jensen gave the same total value to their team, but over way different lengths of time.

 

I'll ask you if you think this was fair:

 

When Hank Aaron broke Babe Ruth's HT record, did the casual fan know or care about the fact that he had over 3,300 more PAs than the Babe? What a rip off that HR stat is! Only brainiacs can figure it all out!

 

Red Sox fans know how great Ted Williams was, and some of us have gone back and looked over his numbers and wondered where he'd be on the all time charts had he not enetered the service twice in his glorious career. We can figure he was a lot better than his cumulative numbers placed him.

 

We do it all the time. Maybe the casual fan does not, and there's nothing wrong with that, but maybe it's easier to look at HRs and OPS and PAs and try to figure it all out. We can look at career HR/PA, and stats like OPS are in some ways PA independent when sample sizes are large enough or somewhat similar when comparing a players full career vs another, but when there is a significant difference, one should weigh that value accordingly and depending on what sort of value yo want to determine.

 

A casual fan might look at Moreland's OPS this year and say he's having a great year. Most Sox fans know he killed us by being out so long, and that he mostly just a platoon player. His numbers vs LHPs and his proneness to injury was a major reason we signed Pearce instead of a RP'er, but I digress.

 

All stats and metrics are flawed.Nobody has said otherwise. WAR is for measuring something different from OPS or HRs or wRC+ of UZR/150. It tries to add a bunch of stuff together and say how mush value a player gave his team. Some of that value is from playing more than others or most players. Some is from doing great, sometimes in much fewer PAs or IP'd. It's not perfect, but neither is any other single stat or metric or something like OPS.

[S5Dewey]

Nothing odd here to me.

 

That's sarcasm, right?

 

Wouldn't you find it "odd" if two entities, say, BR & fangraphs, were calculating the same player's OPS and one of them calculated it to be .600 and the other as .900, both defended their calculations, and everyone assumed that they were both right and used them interchangeably?

 

Nope, nothing odd about that!

[notin]

Inciarte is under contract for 2 more years at about 6 mill per.

Pillar is in final arb year and will probably get about 8 mill.

 

Plus you have to give up something for them.

 

All in all not a big saving.

 

Inciarte’s AAV could be half of what Bradley gets in arbitration. It actually would be a big deal...

[notin]

That's sarcasm, right?

 

Wouldn't you find it "odd" if two entities, say, BR & fangraphs, were calculating the same player's OPS and one of them calculated it to be .600 and the other as .900, both defended their calculations, and everyone assumed that they were both right and used them interchangeably?

 

Nope, nothing odd about that!

 

 

By that logic, eye tests data are useless, too. It’s certainly possible for multiple people to watch the same thing and get different results...

[notin]

That's all fine and good but when a fan who's NOT a geek looks at the WAR of two players does that fan then think, "Yes' but Player A has played in 35 more games than Player B. Therefore it's not a fair comparison.

 

In fact, does anyone here do that, or do we just accept that a player with a better WAR is the better player?

Think about it.

 

Is the pitcher with the better ERA the better pitcher? Know how many people think that’s true?

 

Really this is a flaw with batting average as well. Tons of people think higher BA = better PLAYER (not hitter, player)..

 

Even though that’s not what WAR measures, it’s closer to true with WAR than other stats with that sand flaw...

[Bellhorn04]

Let's compare two players who used to play in the outfield for the Red Sox, Jackie Jensen and Jimmy Piersall.

 

Jensen has a career WAR of 27.9. Piersall had a career WAR of 29.4. Pretty much the same player, right? Piersall was maybe a little bit better.

 

Then when one looks it up they find that they weren't the same player at all. Piersall got his 29.4 WAR over 16 seasons and Jensen got his 27.9 over just 11 seasons. Jensen was by far the better player but WAR would lead the casual fans to believe that Piersall was better because his career WAR was higher.

 

Casual fans can EASILY find all this stuff on Baseball-Reference. And even the casual fan understands that games played is a crucial number.

Edited August 25, 2019 by Bellhorn04

[Bellhorn04]

Inciarte’s AAV could be half of what Bradley gets in arbitration. It actually would be a big deal...

 

But we also have to trade something of value for Inciarte.

[S5Dewey]

Casual fans can EASILY find all this stuff on Baseball-Reference. And even the casual fan understands that games played is a crucial number.

 

You greatly overestimate the casual fan. I know people who consider themselves to be more than casual fans who barely know BR exists.

[notin]

But we also have to trade something of value for Inciarte.

 

Not sure how valuable it has to be.

 

Baseballtradevalues.com, for example, gives him a very low surplus value. He’s in the higher-paid years of his contract. And having a down year.

 

What if Atlanta would take Brian Johnson or Travis Lakins for him?

[notin]

You greatly overestimate the casual fan. I know people who consider themselves to be more than casual fans who barely know BR exists.

 

And yet your argument hinges on these people looking up WAR values?

[Bellhorn04]

You greatly overestimate the casual fan. I know people who consider themselves to be more than casual fans who barely know BR exists.

 

Well, I guess there are degrees of casual.

 

I think most Red Sox fans know that Ted Williams's career numbers were lower than they could have been because of his years of military service, for example.

[S5Dewey]

And yet your argument hinges on these people looking up WAR values?

 

Did I say that?

[notin]

Casual fans can EASILY find all this stuff on Baseball-Reference. And even the casual fan understands that games played is a crucial number.

 

I really don’t see the tragedy in fans “misinterpreting” WAR values. It’s not like there is a ironclad right or wrong answer in a lot of cases. Certain people value certain aspects of the game differently, and that can lead to a multitude of responses.

 

Heck some fans think a player’s abilities should be solely measured by rings. Trying to say “WAR is flawed because it allows fans to disagree with me” doesn’t really sound like a critical flaw in that case....