The WAR thing

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from maxbialystock. Show maxbialystock's posts

    The WAR thing

    That's "wins above replacement," a single stat the presumably evaluates the total player in comparison to a "scrap heap" replacement.  Armed with a player's WAR, one can compare him to all other players. 

    It's supposedly the ultimate stat because it considers offense and defense--hitting, baserunning, hitting for power, runs and runs scored, fielding percentage, UZR, errors, assists, you name it.   

    As of right now the Sox have four players whose WAR's lead MLB for their positions:  AGon at 1B, Pedroia at 2B, Ortiz at DH, and Ellsbury at CF.  Given the 30 MLB teams (for DH, just 14 teams in the AL), that's not too shabby.  Plus Youk is ranked 3d among 30 thirdbasemen. 

    AGon and Ortiz are of course no surprise.  Pedroia is only because of Cano, but his WAR is in fact significantly better than Cano's.  Ellsbury is a surprise too because he and Granderson both play CF, but Ellsbury's is slightly better.  Amazing.  

    Almost as amazing:  for all players on all 30 MLB teams, Pedroia has the second highest WAR, and Ellsbury has the 4th highest.  Imagine that.  

    The question, of course, is whether WAR is a useful measuring tool.  
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from The--Babe----. Show The--Babe----'s posts

    Re: The WAR thing

    lackey has a +.8 WAR this year and Burnett had a +1.3 WAR last year. That should tell you all you need to know about WAR.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from JB-3. Show JB-3's posts

    Re: The WAR thing

    In Response to Re: The WAR thing:
    [QUOTE]lackey has a +.8 WAR this year and Burnett had a +1.3 WAR last year. That should tell you all you need to know about WAR.
    Posted by The--Babe----[/QUOTE]

    No, that tells you all you need to know about ERA being a flawed stat.  WAR is based on xFIP, which is a far better predictor for future performance, using peripheral stats.  I will say that pitching WAR tends to overvalue IP's though.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: The WAR thing

    In Response to Re: The WAR thing:
    [QUOTE]lackey has a +.8 WAR this year and Burnett had a +1.3 WAR last year. That should tell you all you need to know about WAR.
    Posted by The--Babe----[/QUOTE]

    Those are very low scores though.  If you look at the top 2011 WAR scores for AL pitchers it makes more sense:

    Verlander 5.7
    Weaver 5.6
    Beckett 4.9
    Sabathia 4.6
    Shields 3.8

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from rkarp. Show rkarp's posts

    Re: The WAR thing

    also not a fan of WAR for pitching evaluation.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from maxbialystock. Show maxbialystock's posts

    Re: The WAR thing

    So, then, everyone does agree that WAR is a pretty good measuring tool for non pitchers? 
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from promise4you. Show promise4you's posts

    Re: The WAR thing

    Im really not a fan of war, too many get killed, by a silly stat. Pun intended.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from tbrod. Show tbrod's posts

    Re: The WAR thing

    Oh sure. WAR shows that Dustin Pedroia is twice the player Robinson Cano is.
    Yeah, WAR is accurate.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from tomnev. Show tomnev's posts

    Re: The WAR thing

    I think WAR and many of the other sabermetrics measurements have to be taken with a grain of salt....it seems to be it is tough to turn statistics into Wins. Take Wake yesterday, after the 6th inning when he had a quality start, his stats for the day I imagine would have improved his WAR score....but hen after giving up the grand slam, his stats probably hurt his WAR.  But how do you judge whether he would have given up the grand slam if the sox were only up by 2 or if he even would have pitched in the 7th...it seems to me pitchers often pitch to the score....as do hitters. A good hitter, getting up with 2 outs in the 8th inning with his team up by 6 is going to have a different approach, then if his team is down by 1. Since players on a better team like the Sox are more likely to be up by 6 then a lesser team, a player on the lesser team will have less instances where  he may take a relaxed approach. I know all these guys want to say they go 100% all the time but it is human nature to ease up when your team is in control, so I don't know if relying totally on Stats works.....watching the games everyday can tell you alot more.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from jimdavis. Show jimdavis's posts

    Re: The WAR thing

    In Response to Re: The WAR thing:
    [QUOTE]lackey has a +.8 WAR this year and Burnett had a +1.3 WAR last year. That should tell you all you need to know about WAR.
    Posted by The--Babe----[/QUOTE]

    This is what happens when you eliminate context, which you often do.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from jimdavis. Show jimdavis's posts

    Re: The WAR thing

    In Response to Re: The WAR thing:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: The WAR thing : Those are very low scores though.  If you look at the top 2011 WAR scores for AL pitchers it makes more sense: Verlander 5.7 Weaver 5.6 Beckett 4.9 Sabathia 4.6 Shields 3.8
    Posted by Hfxsoxnut[/QUOTE]

    And here is the context that Babe omitted...As usual.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from ADG. Show ADG's posts

    Re: The WAR thing

    Hxfsoxnut - Exactly. I think The Babe's comment further confirms this statistic. It says that Lackey will give you .8 more wins than a replacement player.  A number like .8 really isn't good. It measures against a replacement player.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from The--Babe----. Show The--Babe----'s posts

    Re: The WAR thing

    In Response to Re: The WAR thing:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: The WAR thing : And here is the context that Babe omitted...As usual.

    Posted by jimdavis[/QUOTE]

    It's not about context. How a pitcher goes 10-15 with a 5.26 ERA and 1.51 WHIP and gets a positive rating let alone a +1.3 WAR shows you how flawed it is.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from maxbialystock. Show maxbialystock's posts

    Re: The WAR thing

    In Response to Re: The WAR thing:
    [QUOTE]Oh sure. WAR shows that Dustin Pedroia is twice the player Robinson Cano is. Yeah, WAR is accurate.
    Posted by tbrod[/QUOTE]

    And just how many AL MVP's has Cano won?  Last year was definitely Cano's, but this year I gotta go with Pedroia.  Better hitter and fielder. 
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from CTJake14. Show CTJake14's posts

    Re: The WAR thing

    what is it good for?
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: The WAR thing

    In Response to Re: The WAR thing:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: The WAR thing : It's not about context. How a pitcher goes 10-15 with a 5.26 ERA and 1.51 WHIP and gets a positive rating let alone a +1.3 WAR shows you how flawed it is.
    Posted by The--Babe----[/QUOTE]Or it reflects the total player pool on average.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: The WAR thing

    In Response to Re: The WAR thing:
    [QUOTE]what is it good for?
    Posted by CTJake14[/QUOTE]

    Absolutely Nothing.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from CTJake14. Show CTJake14's posts

    Re: The WAR thing

    In Response to Re: The WAR thing:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: The WAR thing : Absolutely Nothing.
    Posted by royf19[/QUOTE]


     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: The WAR thing

    In Response to Re: The WAR thing:
    [QUOTE]I think WAR and many of the other sabermetrics measurements have to be taken with a grain of salt....it seems to be it is tough to turn statistics into Wins. Take Wake yesterday, after the 6th inning when he had a quality start, his stats for the day I imagine would have improved his WAR score....but hen after giving up the grand slam, his stats probably hurt his WAR.  But how do you judge whether he would have given up the grand slam if the sox were only up by 2 or if he even would have pitched in the 7th...it seems to me pitchers often pitch to the score....as do hitters. A good hitter, getting up with 2 outs in the 8th inning with his team up by 6 is going to have a different approach, then if his team is down by 1. Since players on a better team like the Sox are more likely to be up by 6 then a lesser team, a player on the lesser team will have less instances where  he may take a relaxed approach. I know all these guys want to say they go 100% all the time but it is human nature to ease up when your team is in control, so I don't know if relying totally on Stats works.....watching the games everyday can tell you alot more.
    Posted by tomnev[/QUOTE]

    Completely agree; reminds me of a story about Berra & W Ford & their approach based on the score & game importance; Jack Morris was another.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: The WAR thing

    In Response to Re: The WAR thing:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: The WAR thing : Completely agree; reminds me of a story about Berra & W Ford & their approach based on the score & game importance; Jack Morris was another.
    Posted by nhsteven[/QUOTE]Everything in life is a matter of balance. And WAR gets particularly weird for me because it takes some elements that require subjective charting to become "metrics" and encapsulates them in the formula to arrive at WAR. UZR is one of those factors.

    But I think the emergence of SABR and the impact that stats have had in both evaluation and strategy can not be denied. Those that have done so, have done it at their peril.

    While Beane got a lot of attention for his use of under valued metrics like OBP, OPS, BABIP and WHIP and less focus on BA and RBI, the NYY in the 90's leveraged that very well without any of the celebration that Moneyball brought Beane.

    While I am not a big fan of declaring any one of two similar players clearly better based on the WAR calculation, if the result says the player is above average he is and if it says he is average or below, he is, at least for the period of time the calculation was executed for IMO. 
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from maxbialystock. Show maxbialystock's posts

    Re: The WAR thing

    OK, fine.   Let's try the eye test.  AGon about as good a firstbasemen as there is this year?  Given his leading MLB in rbi's and near that in average, I would think so--plus he's a pretty good fielder.  Pedroia at 2B?  Not a bad pick.  He's hitting up a storm and fielding great despite the knee issue.  Ortiz as the DH is a no-brainer.

    Jake at CF is not that clearcut and I certainly agree Granderson would also be a good choice--and probably Kemp with LA.  There might be others.  So maybe the best you can say about Ellsbury is that he is among the best centerfielders in MLB when you include hitting and fielding.  And Granderson and Kemp might even be better. 

    But, if you downgrade Ellsbury slightly, then you have to agree that Youk is also among the best thirdbasemen this year.  72 rbi's.  OPS around .900.  Fielding OK, if not above average. 

    I think you also have to consider this.  The Sox have the second best W-L record in MLB and the best (by 3 games) in the AL despite having so-so pitching.  What they do have is great hitting, easily the best in MLB, and that great hitting by and large rests on the strong shoulders of those same five guys:  Ellsbury, Pedroia, AGon, Youk, and Ortiz.  When you look at the Sox player statistics, those five guys have the highest OPS (not including Reddick, who has played too few games), runs, hits, total bases, home runs, and runs batted in. 

    In addition, the Sox have been pretty good at not committing errors, which translates to the second best fielding percentage in the AL.  Ellsbury, for example, has 0 errors and 5 assists, plus this year he seems to be getting to a lot of balls. 

    While I will agree that WAR couldn't possibly be an accurate measure of a player's true worth, I also think it is in the right ballpark.  Despite all that softy keeps saying about Ellsbury, I think all five are in the hunt. 
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from ZILLAGOD. Show ZILLAGOD's posts

    Re: The WAR thing




    Say it again!!!

    (if we try real hard, we can get the whole song on this thread!)



     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Alibiike. Show Alibiike's posts

    Re: The WAR thing

    In Response to Re: The WAR thing:
    [QUOTE]what is it good for?
    Posted by CTJake14[/QUOTE]

    Absolutely nothin'!
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from thewags. Show thewags's posts

    Re: The WAR thing

    In Response to Re: The WAR thing:
    [QUOTE]I think WAR and many of the other sabermetrics measurements have to be taken with a grain of salt....it seems to be it is tough to turn statistics into Wins. Take Wake yesterday, after the 6th inning when he had a quality start, his stats for the day I imagine would have improved his WAR score....but hen after giving up the grand slam, his stats probably hurt his WAR.  But how do you judge whether he would have given up the grand slam if the sox were only up by 2 or if he even would have pitched in the 7th...it seems to me pitchers often pitch to the score....as do hitters. A good hitter, getting up with 2 outs in the 8th inning with his team up by 6 is going to have a different approach, then if his team is down by 1. Since players on a better team like the Sox are more likely to be up by 6 then a lesser team, a player on the lesser team will have less instances where  he may take a relaxed approach. I know all these guys want to say they go 100% all the time but it is human nature to ease up when your team is in control, so I don't know if relying totally on Stats works.....watching the games everyday can tell you alot more.
    Posted by tomnev[/QUOTE]


    I agree to a large extent. Watching can tell you a ton more than getting caught up in stats all day. I also think that WAR is not quite as telling for pitchers, for whom I think WPA is perhaps a more telling stat (and vice versa). But, I do think that these stats can contribute greatly to the evaluation of a player. Pedroia has a high WAR for a reason, as do Els, Gonzo, and Ortiz. Alex Rios, Raul Ibanez, and Adam Dunn have horrid WAR's because, well, they are just bad this year.

    I dont think career WAR is necessarily a productive way to evaluate players on an absolute basis, since things like injuries and other factors can take away more from career WAR than from WAR in an individual season; however, on the whole, I am a supporter of the WAR stat.

    Similarly, is there anyone who feels strongly about WPA, for pitchers, hitters, or both? As I said, I think its a good measure for pitchers, but not quite as much for hitters.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from thewags. Show thewags's posts

    Re: The WAR thing

    Also, team WAR is garbage. Just throwing that out there.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share