Quote:
Originally Posted by jhs5120
Well, as of right now it's true, but it's obviously a little skewed since Trout only has 3,427 PAs compared to Babe Ruth's 10,623.
Like I said before, WAR is a counting stat just like Home Runs or RBI. So using WAR to compare which players are "better" can only be used when the length of time is similar. Mike Trout's average plate appearance brought as much value as every TWO plate appearances by Carl Yastrzemski (if you believe in WAR). This isn't even including external adjustments for time period.
Trout is great, but Babe Ruth player at an even more dominant level on average through his entire career. Pretty amazing.
|
absolutely. Though, we must put a little * on WAR before the advent of UZR and DRS, range factor and total zone stats just aren't very good and thus it's pretty well agreed that the defensive value of players before the 90's is harder to determine (and the more you go back, the harder it gets).
But WAR, isn't meant to be perfect, it's there to be a handy number of comparison. Think of it as the difference between looking something up on google maps and buying a geographical survey map. The latter is the peripheral stats that give you the more accurate picture (but requires deeper digging and effort) and the former is the convenience of WAR.
08-29-2016, 05:28 PM
Similar Threads
Threaded Mode