Does WAR mean anything??

[Peter_Spaeth]

I see on ESPN that Bryce Harper, who is leading the league in just about everything even walks, is TWELFTH in WAR this morning, with a WAR barely over half of the leader, Corey Dickerson. How can this be? Some anomaly due to small number of games played so far? (On the other hand, not surprisingly, Mike Trout leads the AL.)

[the 'stache]

Harper is going nuts with the stick, but he's only a left fielder. Even somewhat comparable output from a center fielder, catcher or shortstop is going to mean more WAR for the premium position player.

Honestly, while I understand the concept of value at positions that are considered defensive premiums, I think the whole thing is sightly overdone when it comes to WAR.

Last I checked, Harper is by far the best player in the bigs right now.

[Peter_Spaeth]

He is 16th in the NL this morning. Leads the league in HR RBI OBP and OPS. What a joke.

WAR
Good god y'all
What is it good for
Absolutely nothing

[packs]

WAR comes in handy only for stat jocks who can't support their point any other way. Even more useless is dWAR.

[Hxcmilkshake]

Batting average, hrs, rbis,sbs

If it works for roto it works for me!

Dont even get me started on "exit velocity"

(Admittedly Old school)

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

[rats60]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

He is 16th in the NL this morning. Leads the league in HR RBI OBP and OPS. What a joke.

WAR
Good god y'all
What is it good for
Absolutely nothing

And he leads the league in Offensive WAR, all of those stats go into that metric. His Defensive WAR is -.6, that is why he doesn't lead in WAR. On the other hand Corey Dickerson has already accumulated 1.0 Defensive WAR with his exceptional defense.

I agree with the 'stache that we can question how defense is calculated. I have an issue with giving players a premium for the position they play or penalize them for playing another position. However, I don't think it gives enough value for those that are outstanding defensively. When evaluating Harper, is he an above average fielder or does his defense hurt the team? That is the question you should be asking. We know he is the best hitter in the league right now and WAR backs that up.

[Peter_Spaeth]

So after 15 games he has supposedly cost his team close to a full game compared to the average outfielder? That sounds insane.

[AGuinness]

This reminds me of the thread where some types of card collecting get ripped... as in, there are different ways to collect and there are different ways to enjoy the game of baseball. Why rip the ways you don't like?

If you like batting average, good for you! If you enjoy wOBA, have fun! Only into sacrifice flies and balks? Enjoy it!

I think people enjoying different facets of collecting and the game make it more interesting and are better for the long term viability of each. Bashing what other people enjoy is only counter-productive.

In the words of the band War, "Why can't we be friends?"

[Hxcmilkshake]

Eh, idk, someone asks an opinion and we give it. No harm no foul, to each his own, and maybe some other cliches i cant think of cuz its late. Stats, even traditional ones, can be twisted to "say" anything. Thats the cool thing about it, in a way.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

[rats60]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

So after 15 games he has supposedly cost his team close to a full game compared to the average outfielder? That sounds insane.

According the baseball reference, he is the worst defensive player in the National League and 3rd worst in MLB. Also, WAR is unrelated to team wins, it is just a number.

[packs]

Originally Posted by rats60

According the baseball reference, he is the worst defensive player in the National League and 3rd worst in MLB. Also, WAR is unrelated to team wins, it is just a number.

No one should use BR as a reference for defense. They have Mattingly with a negative dWAR for his career despite him winning 9 Gold Gloves and being seen universally as an elite defender.

[tschock]

Based on Peter's question and subsequent comments, I believe I've found the answer.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01-2pNCZiNk

[frankbmd]

Originally Posted by tschock

Based on Peter's question and subsequent comments, I believe I've found the answer.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01-2pNCZiNk

“Dick, it has a great beat and is easy to dance to. Edwin is really cute as well. Thumbs up for WAR.”

[Rookiemonster]

I once brought up this point and got attacked by every angle. I think you can make a better judgement with the basic stats and a good old fashioned eye test.

[nat]

Defensive measures tend to swing around wildly. The problem is probably that Harper had a few bad games defensively and hasn't yet had enough good games to make up for them. By the end of the season he almost certainly will though.

Same deal with Dickerson, just the other way around. Dickerson isn't a good fielder. He's probably made a few spectacular plays early this season, and his usual lackluster plays haven't made up for them yet. But they will.

Think about it this way: Jed Lowrie isn't going to lead the majors in RBIs this season. But he is leading the majors in RBIs right now. He's had unusual success batting with men on base early this season, but by the end of the year his batting in clutch situations will drop off and Springer or somebody like that will lead the league in RBIs. Same deal with Harper/Dickerson on defense.

[Exhibitman]

Reversion to the mean. Look it up. Cruddy players and teams may be great for a short time and vice versa but over time they go back to their natural places in the pecking order. Brian Doyle hit .438 in the 1978 Series; his lifetime BA is .161. He had a hell of a hot hand in 6 games but went back to being a scrub after that. See also Brosius, Scott.

[Peter_Spaeth]

That said, there have been some players who for some reason played way above their "mean" for an entire season. Norm Cash 1961 comes immediately to mind. Steve Stone I forget which year. Brady Anderson but that probably had an explanation.

[EvilKing00]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I see on ESPN that Bryce Harper, who is leading the league in just about everything even walks, is TWELFTH in WAR this morning, with a WAR barely over half of the leader, Corey Dickerson. How can this be? Some anomaly due to small number of games played so far? (On the other hand, not surprisingly, Mike Trout leads the AL.)

Imo war is a bad stat

[parker1b2]

Originally Posted by evilking00

imo war is a bad stat

+1000

[nat]

If you're going to criticize it you should say what's wrong with it and help us fix it. Where in the equations is the inaccuracy?

[packs]

Originally Posted by nat

If you're going to criticize it you should say what's wrong with it and help us fix it. Where in the equations is the inaccuracy?

It has already been pointed out. Corey Dickerson is not playing better than Bryce Harper despite what WAR says. Andrelton Simmons was third in all of baseball last year despite putting up pretty average numbers. Defense is not weighed equally for everyone. It boosts some player's WAR while shrinking others. I already made my point re: Mattingly and his negative WAR for defense, which is absurd.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Harper trails Tucker Barnhart, he of 2 HR and 4 RBI.

[D. Bergin]

Originally Posted by packs

It has already been pointed out. Corey Dickerson is not playing better than Bryce Harper despite what WAR says. Andrelton Simmons was third in all of baseball last year despite putting up pretty average numbers. Defense is not weighed equally for everyone. It boosts some player's WAR while shrinking others. I already made my point re: Mattingly and his negative WAR for defense, which is absurd.

Yeah, I've been pointing out the Mattingly thing for years. All other defensive optics he's superior at his position, but WAR chooses to really penalize 1st Basemen no matter how good they are for some reason.

I think it's a hugely under-rated position. Just because teams can stick largely immobile guys there, thinking they are hiding them, and I think it's a super misguided strategy.

I've watched enough Yankees 1st Basemen over the years, to see how a competent to superior 1st Basemen can elevate the confidence of an entire infield. Just watch Greg Bird in last years playoffs, compared to the round robin of 1st Basemen they had playing during most of the regular season.

Meanwhile Jason Heyward has racked up tons of WAR points in Right Field in his career, while averaging about 2.5 chances per game. A lot of them, simply by stealing chances from his centerfielder on routine plays............who in turn, usually have THEIR defensive WAR impacted negatively, whenever Heyward inhabits that corner of the field.

[drcy]

The answer is never go by just one metric, and it's the fool who uses just one. Just as in science (or authentication) where you never go by one type of test. A metric or scientific test often gives useful, and even essential, information, but you should never come to a final conclusion by just the one.

And when doing or looking at precise mathematical or statistical calculations, keep in mind what Economics Nobel Prize winner Wassily Leontief said: "Page after page of academic journals are filled with mathematical formulas leading the reader from sets of more or less plausible but entirely arbitrary assumptions to precisely stated but irrelevant theoretical conclusions."

Someone just yesterday asked what was my definition of genius, and I said "Someone who sees the forest not just the trees, where others see just the trees." Some would call that enlightenment.

[nat]

"A lot of them, simply by stealing chances from his centerfielder on routine plays"

This is a known issue. There's some philosophical differences over whether it's a problem or not - it really depends on what's you're trying to measure. If you have Greg Luzinski in the outfield, having him play next to someone who can "steal" chances from him is a really valuable thing to have. If you have other really good outfielders it doesn't matter so much.

As for Mattingly: he was a really good defensive first baseman. I'm not objecting to his gold gloves. dWAR (the defensive component of WAR) itself has two components: a measure of how many runs a player saved based on the plays that he made, and a positional adjustment. Mattingly saved a lot of runs, but, like all first basemen, he's hit with a big negative positional adjustment. But you really do need a positional adjustment, otherwise a short stop who could hit like Mattingly, and a first baseman who could hit like Mattingly, would end up with equal WAR. Whereas obviously the SS is more valuable, since it's so much harder to find someone who can both hit like Mattingly and play short stop. We can argue over how large the positional adjustment should be (how large it should be for DH's is a matter of rather extreme controversy), but it's clear that there's got to be some, and it's clear that it's got to be large and negative for first basemen. But again, that's not a knock on Mattingly's defense, he was a very good defensive player for a first baseman. It's just a reminder that it's easier to find good hitters who can play first than it is to find good hitters who can play short.

[packs]

Mattingly wasn't just good though, he was the Andrelton Simmons of first basemen; an elite of the elite. If WAR was calculated properly for him he'd have the HOF metrics people knock him for. Not saying he deserves them either, but that's the point re: WAR not being reliable.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by nat

"A lot of them, simply by stealing chances from his centerfielder on routine plays"

This is a known issue. There's some philosophical differences over whether it's a problem or not - it really depends on what's you're trying to measure. If you have Greg Luzinski in the outfield, having him play next to someone who can "steal" chances from him is a really valuable thing to have. If you have other really good outfielders it doesn't matter so much.

As for Mattingly: he was a really good defensive first baseman. I'm not objecting to his gold gloves. dWAR (the defensive component of WAR) itself has two components: a measure of how many runs a player saved based on the plays that he made, and a positional adjustment. Mattingly saved a lot of runs, but, like all first basemen, he's hit with a big negative positional adjustment. But you really do need a positional adjustment, otherwise a short stop who could hit like Mattingly, and a first baseman who could hit like Mattingly, would end up with equal WAR. Whereas obviously the SS is more valuable, since it's so much harder to find someone who can both hit like Mattingly and play short stop. We can argue over how large the positional adjustment should be (how large it should be for DH's is a matter of rather extreme controversy), but it's clear that there's got to be some, and it's clear that it's got to be large and negative for first basemen. But again, that's not a knock on Mattingly's defense, he was a very good defensive player for a first baseman. It's just a reminder that it's easier to find good hitters who can play first than it is to find good hitters who can play short.

I strongly disagree with this. A player's defensive value comes from the runs he saves. He shouldn't need a positional adjustment. A shortstop's
adjustment comes from getting more chances. A statue at shortstop is not more valuable than a first base man saving his infielders throwing errors.

Just examples from a Cubs game I was at last week. Their first base men saved Kris Bryant 2 errors by digging out bad throws cleanly. Jason Hayward missed a catchable ball and then let it get away from him for a triple instead of catching it for an out. However dWAR says the wrong guy has positive value.

I like WAR to compare players at the same position, but otherwise it isn't very useful. Positinal adjustment is a joke in my opinion.

[bravos4evr]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

So after 15 games he has supposedly cost his team close to a full game compared to the average outfielder? That sounds insane.

that's not what that means.....

WAR stands for WINS ABOVE REPLACEMENT

replacement player is a set group of numbers meant to represent a crap player called up fro AAA to replace a legit starter.

an average MLB WAR is around 2.0


it is wayyyy too early to put any stock in any stats


metrics are the future, they are what the teams use to build and operate their franchises, you can ignore them, hand wave them or wtvr but it comes off as flat eartherish

[bravos4evr]

Originally Posted by packs

Mattingly wasn't just good though, he was the Andrelton Simmons of first basemen; an elite of the elite. If WAR was calculated properly for him he'd have the HOF metrics people knock him for. Not saying he deserves them either, but that's the point re: WAR not being reliable.

hahaha being so wrong so often must get frustrating, huh old man

the game has left you behind, deal with it, or die off and leave it to those who understand it

[nat]

Originally Posted by bravos4evr

hahaha being so wrong so often must get frustrating, huh old man

the game has left you behind, deal with it, or die off and leave it to those who understand it

This isn't productive. Explain how the stats are calculated and explain why they're calculated that way. It does, in the end, make sense. So if you want to help people understand baseball better, just show them that it makes sense.