Surprisingly low WAR

Carter08 · #1 07-07-2024, 07:10 PM

I like ops a lot. WAR seems overused and often incorrect. Seems like a starter that plays every day but is decent is going to have an outsized war against a player that for whatever reason is killing it but doesn�t get to play every day.

frankbmd · #2 07-07-2024, 08:18 PM

Alfredo Griffin's last year in Toronto was 1984. He had over 440 PAs and accumulated a grand total of 4 walks, none of which were intentional. His WAR of 3.1 may be on the high side. WAR is a tool, but not the sharpest tool in the shed.

Kutcher55 · #3 07-07-2024, 08:32 PM

WAR punishes outfielders, 1B, and DHs. It seems to put a huge premium on OBP as well. In other words, sluggers who didn�t hit for average or walk much and played one of those positions tend to have lower WAR than expected. Just as 2B, 3B and SS who didn�t put up great #s can have surprisingly high WAR.

Tabe · #4 07-08-2024, 12:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kutcher55

WAR punishes outfielders, 1B, and DHs. It seems to put a huge premium on OBP as well. In other words, sluggers who didn�t hit for average or walk much and played one of those positions tend to have lower WAR than expected. Just as 2B, 3B and SS who didn�t put up great #s can have surprisingly high WAR.

Yeah, WAR loves to reward players who happen to be the one good player at their position. Joe Morgan is a perfect example of this. In 1975, he won an MVP after a great season where he hit .327 with a .974 OPS. He had an 11.0 WAR meaning WAR thinks he had one of the greatest seasons ever (19th for WAR among position players ever - ahead of every season in the careers of Ted Williams, Hank Aaron, and Mike Trout). And it's all because he played 2B, a position where two NL starters had an OPS under .600. Morgan had 50 extra base hits in 1975, a fine total that netted him 12th place in total bases. His 50 was a full third fewer than Mike Schmidt's 75 but Schmidt somehow had just 7.7 WAR that year. Morgan had an incredible WAR because his 2B contemporaries all sucked.

Morgan was actually much better in 1976, increasing his extra base hits by 24% while increasing his OPS despite playing 5 fewer games.

His WAR actually went DOWN because of his defense.

I like WAR in general but it has to be viewed with skepticism and put in proper context.

Aquarian Sports Cards · #5 07-08-2024, 05:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tabe

Yeah, WAR loves to reward players who happen to be the one good player at their position. Joe Morgan is a perfect example of this. In 1975, he won an MVP after a great season where he hit .327 with a .974 OPS. He had an 11.0 WAR meaning WAR thinks he had one of the greatest seasons ever (19th for WAR among position players ever - ahead of every season in the careers of Ted Williams, Hank Aaron, and Mike Trout). And it's all because he played 2B, a position where two NL starters had an OPS under .600. Morgan had 50 extra base hits in 1975, a fine total that netted him 12th place in total bases. His 50 was a full third fewer than Mike Schmidt's 75 but Schmidt somehow had just 7.7 WAR that year. Morgan had an incredible WAR because his 2B contemporaries all sucked.

Morgan was actually much better in 1976, increasing his extra base hits by 24% while increasing his OPS despite playing 5 fewer games.

His WAR actually went DOWN because of his defense.

I like WAR in general but it has to be viewed with skepticism and put in proper context.

I will say a 2b leading the league in OPS (both of his MVP seasons) cannot be overlooked. That simply didn't happen back then and I feel the WAR accurately represented his value. I honestly feel those seasons are legitimate candidates for all time greatest seasons. He did have 40 less plate appearances in the second season in addition to his fielding being less stellar than the year before. That certainly accounts for a small chunk of possible WAR helping to explain the difference.

Morgan was a much better base runner than Schmidt also. Not just steals, but advancing extra bases and not making outs and not hitting into double plays. That's a very underrated aspect of what adds to WAR, and legitimately adds to someone's value as a player. Schmidt hit into 50% more double plays than Morgan in 1300 less plate appearances.

Tabe · #6 07-09-2024, 02:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

I will say a 2b leading the league in OPS (both of his MVP seasons) cannot be overlooked. That simply didn't happen back then and I feel the WAR accurately represented his value. I honestly feel those seasons are legitimate candidates for all time greatest seasons. He did have 40 less plate appearances in the second season in addition to his fielding being less stellar than the year before. That certainly accounts for a small chunk of possible WAR helping to explain the difference.

In a roundabout way, you're agreeing with me. His season adds up to being really impressive because his contemporaries sucked. If you moved him 70 feet to the right defensively, it would be just another in a long list of MVP-caliber seasons. Again, *50* extra base hits. That's just not impressive number. It was a borderline all-time great season - for a 2B. It's not even remotely in the conversation for greatest overall. Better than EVERY season from Ted Williams? Hard disagree.

Aquarian Sports Cards · #7 07-09-2024, 05:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tabe

In a roundabout way, you're agreeing with me. His season adds up to being really impressive because his contemporaries sucked. If you moved him 70 feet to the right defensively, it would be just another in a long list of MVP-caliber seasons. Again, *50* extra base hits. That's just not impressive number. It was a borderline all-time great season - for a 2B. It's not even remotely in the conversation for greatest overall. Better than EVERY season from Ted Williams? Hard disagree.

That's because you're still hung up over only the traditional numbers. Morgan hit into a total of (without double checking) 5 double plays in those 2 seasons. He stole about 130 bases at an 85% clip and I imagine he stretched a lot of extra bases as a runner, tagging up going to third on a single etc.

Combine that with gold glove caliber defense (In 1975) at a premium position with excellent range vs Ted whose range was what was hit right at him and what Dom could get to in left field and I imagine that Joe was worth more wins to his team in 1975 than Ted in his best season.

Look at it this way. Ted's OWAR was often higher than his WAR. Joe's only was in the second half of his career (amazingly beginning in 1976 which would explain the drop in his total WAR for what appears to be an offensively superior season)

Morgan's best OWAR seasons, while impressive, don't compare with Ted's best. It's just that there's more than offense to the game.

If you want to discuss the best OFFENSIVE players of all-time might I point you in this direction:

https://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=350700

Peter_Spaeth · #8 07-07-2024, 08:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carter08

I like ops a lot. WAR seems overused and often incorrect. Seems like a starter that plays every day but is decent is going to have an outsized war against a player that for whatever reason is killing it but doesn’t get to play every day.

Well, just taking Buckner, in 1985 he played 162 games and hit .299, but his WAR was only 1.5. 46 doubles, 16 HR, 110 RBI.

jayshum · #9 07-08-2024, 09:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carter08

I like ops a lot. WAR seems overused and often incorrect. Seems like a starter that plays every day but is decent is going to have an outsized war against a player that for whatever reason is killing it but doesn�t get to play every day.

The early question about Dante Bichette's low WAR in 1995 shows that just playing every day doesn't necessarily lead to a high WAR.

jayshum · #10 07-08-2024, 09:21 AM

For anyone interested, here's a link to the baseball-reference.com page that shows how WAR is calculated:

https://www.baseball-reference.com/a...position.shtml

akleinb611 · #11 07-08-2024, 11:48 AM

Getting back to the original focus of this discussion - Lou Piniella - his low career WAR is probably explained by a fairly short career (he didn't catch on in the majors until he was 29; deducting two meaningless tryout years and two seasons at the end when he was barely a part time player, you get 14 years); a lack of walks; almost no stolen bases; and genuinely poor fielding. He had no range in the outfield. He was, in fact, the stereotypical big, hard-hitting white guy who would be planted at first base so he would cause the least harm, and would clog up the bases if he didn't hit a home run. He was a good player, no doubt about it, but he wasn't as good as many people thought at the time.

It's human nature. We do overrate the players we like.

bbcard1 · #12 07-08-2024, 12:07 PM

There is a huge knot of third basemen that should be considered in the Hall of Fame. Their WAR is between around 55 and 70. These include: Nettles, Buddy Bell, Boyer, Bando, Darrell Evans, Ventura, and Hack.

I like WAR in that it gives some context to the era.

Beercan collector · #13 07-10-2024, 09:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bbcard1

There is a huge knot of third basemen that should be considered in the Hall of Fame. Their WAR is between around 55 and 70. These include: Nettles, Buddy Bell, Boyer, Bando, Darrell Evans, Ventura, and Hack.

I like WAR in that it gives some context to the era.

Once Ron Santo Got in I thought for sure Boyer would be next ,
Very similar careers

Peter_Spaeth · #14 07-11-2024, 11:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beercan collector

Once Ron Santo Got in I thought for sure Boyer would be next ,
Very similar careers

Oddly, If you look up Boyer, Santo is not even on the list of 10 most comparable batters.

Peter_Spaeth · #15 07-12-2024, 09:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jayshum

For anyone interested, here's a link to the baseball-reference.com page that shows how WAR is calculated:

https://www.baseball-reference.com/a...position.shtml

Can they really reconstruct every game way back in time to get to these levels of detail on particular at bats? I mean you couldn't do most of this stuff from a box score.

jayshum · #16 07-12-2024, 09:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Can they really reconstruct every game way back in time to get to these levels of detail on particular at bats? I mean you couldn't do most of this stuff from a box score.

I've always wondered the same thing about the fielding and base running components of WAR for players more than 20 years ago let alone 100 years ago. I think they do the best they can, but it's why WAR is just one way to try to compare players but not the absolute answer that some people try to claim it to be.

gregndodgers · #17 07-12-2024, 10:22 AM

Nettles does not get my HOF vote (not that anyone cares). I saw him play for years, and I hated that he made so many great plays against my Dodgers, but consider this:
1. He never batted .300 or better in any full season, his best being .276 in 78'
2. Career .248 hitter.
3. .225 batting average in 53 post season games.
4. 25 HRs in any season should not be a high bar for a third baseman, yet Nettles accomplished that only five times.
5. Career OBP of just .329.

His great defense and longevity (22 seasons) are what helps is WAR, but his very mediocre offense keeps him out of the HOF.

packs · #18 07-12-2024, 10:39 AM

I agree on Nettles. He joins a long list of Yankees who were great for the Yankees but not quite HOFers and I think that's just fine. It's also important to note that unlike many of his fellow Yankees greats not in the HOF, the Yankees did not retire his number like they did with some of his peers like Bernie, Posada, O'Neil or Pettitte. Though he was a captain.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Surprisingly long history of Traded cards	jason.1969	Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980)	32	01-09-2019 08:09 PM
Surprisingly long history of Traded cards	jason.1969	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	12	01-04-2019 10:34 AM
What Card Has Been Surprisingly Tough For You?	pgellis	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	34	11-06-2011 06:04 PM