sk7326

it's not an error - it is a perspective ...

The formula for WAR is complicated - because there is a lot of normalization (to get numbers measured on different scales to add up) - but the fact that bWAR and fWAR are calculated differently should INCREASE your confidence. The two sites differ in WAR, because they have a couple of fundamentally different assumptions about player performance. That is great - better to have a couple of perspectives on this question than a stat like fielding percentage which tells you literally nothing helpful. One of the major differences between the two was the notion of what "replacement level" is - but they have come to some sort of consensus on that. This is big, as it at least puts the two on the same scale. But you look at position players - WAR is essentially identical between the two. The differences are in defensive measurement, and neither of those differences are that huge. Pitcher WAR differs, but it differs because the two sites have different ways of trying to separate a pitcher's contribution to run prevention. Fangraphs fundamentally gives pitchers less control over batted balls in play Baseball Reference does. This explains the huge gap in David Price's season for instance. The key thing is - I don't think that the question is settled (how separable is pitcher and fielding performance in terms of run prevention), and it is worthwhile to see how tweaking the assumptions changes the picture. The two versions of WAR ask fans to basically engage the numbers and why they are the way they are - the fundamental assumptions about player value, and why good stuff happens. Remember, RBIs are also a made up stat - arbitrarily assigning credit for a run scoring. You are right to a certain degree about offense vs defense. Chicks dig the longball - so people will always talk about homers and hitting and such - there is an inherent bias there. At the same time, defensive measurement IS much flimsier than offensive measurement. So yes, if I see two players with close WAR and one builds it with defensive value (see Victorino in 2013), it would move them down the rankings for me a little bit. But the defensive value is there - and it is nice that we can at least bound the contribution. When Bradley stunk at the plate, we DID hear about his defensive brilliance - because we knew that the equation could work if he hit enough. But he was so dreadful offensively, that no defense could overcome it. Outfield assists are a great extra parlor trick Bradley has - uncommonly good for a CF - but outfield assists are generally fairly random and a function of opportunity. And in a sense, your best bet to get outfield assists is to have an above average arm, but not a great one (because then nobody would run on you).

They DO have that kind of money (they ALWAYS have that kind of money) ... it is whether Steel Drivin John Henry wants to.

They didn't need him really. Yes, 3B sucked - and it would be awesome if Moncada could fix it. It is worth a look. But - if Benintendi gets back (and there is some question there), the Red Sox are average at worst offensively in 7 of the 8 regular positions. They could live with "solid defense, occasionally dangerous" at 3B. I am happy to get a look at Moncada - but we know command and breaking stuff is a different level at the show - and so a guy who had significant contact problems as Double-A was a high risk of flailing at the big league level. From his minor league stats - it seems like approach on some level is sound - he does walk quite a bit. But the craft has to catch up to the athleticism - and that's cool, he's still a baby relatively - and it is probably not going to happen during the season. I will be delighted to be proven wrong here.

Not sugarcoating - but at least you had a guy who missed bats up there, that's all.

With Napoli it carried over. Listen, I am excited to see Moncada - and I think he can be really good. I also am cautious because of his issues making contact - since I do not know whether it was a Napoli-esque calculation, or some real blind spots. And - while I am not worried about him defensively per se ... there is no reason to believe the (run production + run prevention) total package is a clear upgrade on Shaw (at least right now). You can live with Shaw's production if the run prevention impact is significant after all. He is a good sort of guy to have at the bottom of the lineup - solid defensively and can mash from time to time. I am open minded - and baseball is fun. This is cool.

If Holt doesn't make the error - at least it puts the strikeout in play (which he is more than capable of doing). He was not sharp - had not gotten much work in ... some of that could be put on Farrell, but circumstance is what it is sometimes. For the record - I did not love the Kimbrel trade ... not because he was not good, but I just did not see the marginal value of that position.

Will make getting to October a challenge - I doubt Wright cracks the playoff rotation either way.

Somehow, whether by design or luck - our rotation is not a problem.

They sort of have to announce themselves. Hell, bringing Kimbrel into the 9th was exactly the right call - and something most managers don't do!

The team has had some trouble hitting the last two games. Both parks are bad for hitters generally, but clearly the Sox should (and did Friday and Saturday) transcend that. Given the competition on the mound, yesterday was vexing.

See above post - with Napoli, there was clear approach and craft. He was looking for something to mash and he walked a ton ...

I agree in principle. On the other hand there is the "can he actually hit the baseball major leaguers are throwing him" ... as I noted, that's what the scouting is for - was his enormous strikeout rate in Portland a choice in approach, or his bat being afraid of breaking stuff? I think that is why he was down longer than Benintendi with better superficial numbers. You can get a lot done with athletic advantage at lower levels. That AA pitchers got him to whiff a third of the time could (could!!) be a harbinger that there is an absence of craft at this point (which would not be surprising!). I am excited about his arrival - I know the .571 BABIP ain't gonna last.

I get on Farrell - because he's a manager, and that's what watching baseball is. But you look at the box scores - and the team has piled up a lot of annoying losses - and honestly, it is hard not to say Farrell played the right (or at least a thoroughly reasonable) pitcher in the right spot. On some level that is all you can do. Now he has not been hyper vigilant in hitting the eject button - but that is not the best way to manage the regular season. I know in 2013 he was much more cutthroat with that stuff - and generally did not let a chance go to make sure his best relievers had a say in the highest leverage spots.

Giant bonuses are the best dollar value in player personnel ... Moncada's bonus is probably the sort of bonus a good draft year #1 overall pick gets if there in fact no draft.

He started as a SS I think ... 2B was just a good way to ease him in given just how little baseball he had played, and all those things he had to deal with as a 19 year old which normal prospects don't.

Maybe, maybe not. Shaw should not get too down - if Moncada is going to strike out 40% of the time going forward, it's not going to be that much of an improvement on Shaw.

He was very much up there in the "most valuable player conversation" in 2008-2011. There was no fluke - there was no David Eckstein level pity. He was legitimately outstanding. He is happy in Boston. Good. Agents work for players, not the other way around - and the salaries are not at all inflated.

When he's been healthy - he has been quite good. OF course that's the trick.

Should robots be allowed to wear elbow pads? Or do you spend extra to reinforce the bodies? For authenticity maybe they can power them via fuel coming from burning Dip or Chaw

The stats and the eyes complement each other. Now on TV, the eyes lie a lot - you don't see the route an outfielder takes, even if the catch and end is pretty good. It is good when the numbers fit what your eyes see - Ozzie Smith's stardom was entirely justified analytically. I think what WAR (which is a normalized sum of everything a player does that is measurable on the field) has advanced the conversation in some important ways. When I was a kid, you only thought in terms of pitchers and batters as far as getting down to runs. Yeah there were errors and wild pitches and such, but team defense as a meaningful contribution to run prevention was rarely talked about. We have a much better understanding (and it is still fuzzy granted) of the split between pitcher and fielder with regards to run prevention.

they trade them often ... and since we like major league baseball we often don't miss them ... and then in their draft positions pitchers are rarely the best guys available

it is restating the point I think we've covered ... because moncada could replace anybody on the 60 day DL - his playoff eligibility is basically assured.

doesn't matter when he was added - it matters for him to be able to play ... but with the DL positions, he is playoff eligible

If they are really hurt and have been out 15 days, yes