Jump to content
NBC Sports Edge Forums

Recommended Posts

17 minutes ago, Low and Away said:

No shyte. But what has Castro done that makes one of the best players of his generation? If he reaches 3000 hits it will be because he played a long time. When 3000 hits was used most players were retired by their mid thirties at best.

Don't forget -- You ask the question

I can tell you -- Today, Starlin is no Hall-of-Famer..... but I have no idea what is going to happen in the future.

 

So are you allow to see what the future holds for Starlin?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 285
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

29 minutes ago, shakestreet said:

Don't forget -- You ask the question

I can tell you -- Today, Starlin is no Hall-of-Famer..... but I have no idea what is going to happen in the future.

 

So are you allow to see what the future holds for Starlin?

Do you understand the word IF as in if he reaches 3000, which posters have postulated, he should go in the HOF because of that?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If Castro gets to 3000 hits he's in (barring any PED's, gambling, etc).

 

Interesting article that has him on pace...I know a lot can change with productivity as he ages. He also doesn't seem like he has the 'love' for baseball so I'm not sure he'd be compelled to play long enough to get to 3000.

 

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/who-will-join-the-3000-hit-club-after-adrian-beltre/

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/3/2017 at 10:37 AM, Fiveohnine said:

Yeah. I think there are actually one or two other WARs out there as well. I want to say ESPN uses the baseball reference one, or maybe at some point they switched from a different one, I'm not entirely sure.

You also have to keep up with each different "version" of WAR, as its formula constantly being "adjusted", "weighted", and "updated" like software or something.

WAR has been around for years and people are only now realizing that it's not a real stat, and more like a subjective opinion/evaluation, kinda like a rating from 1-100.

This has always been my main problem with WAR. When you delve deeper, you realize that in some cases, much of it also relies on stuff like UZR and other "stats" which are actually just a judgement that a bunch of guys watching the games make.

Basically, WAR isn't an actual statistic based on objective numbers that anyone can gather and calculate, even though it's sort of misrepresented to be that, by popping out a catch-all number. This causes people to give that number WAY more credibility than they otherwise should, or would if they actually delved into the different versions, updates, formulas, etc.

So Mussina might be better in one guy's current version of WAR or w/e. But hey, by the time they come out with their WAR 2.4, who knows? Maybe it'll be Glavine by a mile.

I keep asking how WAR is calculated and I keep getting a "Well It's Better than the current metric of AVG/OBP/SLG etc"

 

"

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, verycoolnin said:

It's not that simple.  Different stat people have different calculations for their WAR.  "Wins Above Replacement."   

We're all aware. And you can find those as well. You insinuated that you'd like to know how it's calculated and that couldn't be answered. It can. So that's NOT your problem. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Backdoor Slider said:

We're all aware. And you can find those as well. You insinuated that you'd like to know how it's calculated and that couldn't be answered. It can. So that's NOT your problem. 

If you can, please calculate a WAR pitcher.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, verycoolnin said:

If you can, please calculate a WAR pitcher.

We already discussed the difference in pitcher's WAR, & also decided we would stop and go back to talking HOF, which the thread is intended. Feel free to go back and read it ??

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/4/2017 at 11:19 AM, Fiveohnine said:

No. But we can throw some numbers around and say we did. 

Calling it "reasonable" is going a bit far though don't you think? Especially considering all the gymnastics we did to get to "runs" in the first place. 

 

You can't determine the average number of runs it takes to win a baseball game?

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, 89Topps said:

 

You can't determine the average number of runs it takes to win a baseball game?

Average and replacement level are 2 different data points. Its part why WAR has soo many variations.. Since league average is survivor biased data base(The good players play more games and hit higher in the lineup than the bad)

 

Figuring out what the actual replacement level is not that easy. It's basically just theory at this point. People smarter/more involved than ourselves have come up with formulas to get a very good idea of a very specific range.. But its still predicting something(the production of the hypothetical replacement player would produce)

 

Its not hard facts like most other offensive measures.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, 89Topps said:

 

You can't determine the average number of runs it takes to win a baseball game?

Yeah. I can calculate hits and errors too. 

But saying any of it would equal exactly x amount of -actual wins- that wouldn't have occurred if a replacement level guy had been playing is the part that isn't really reasonable.

In fact it's pretty stupid, considering all the gymnastics we did getting to "runs" in the first place.

And besides, it only takes one run to win a ballgame, to answer your question without any calculations. 

Edited by Fiveohnine
Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Fiveohnine said:

Yeah. I can calculate hits and errors too. 

But saying any of it would equal exactly x amount of -actual wins- that wouldn't have occurred if a replacement level guy had been playing is the part that isn't really reasonable.

In fact it's pretty stupid, considering all the gymnastics we did getting to "runs" in the first place.

And besides, it only takes one run to win a ballgame, to answer your question without any calculations. 

 

On average, it does not take 1 run to win a baseball game.

 

And I guess I don't take WAR as literal as you do.  To me, it's just a number to rank players based on all facets of their game.  I mean, it doesn't factor in personality, leadership, clubhouse presence, etc, but I don't how you would ever calculate that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 89Topps said:

 

On average, it does not take 1 run to win a baseball game.

 

And I guess I don't take WAR as literal as you do.  To me, it's just a number to rank players based on all facets of their game.  I mean, it doesn't factor in personality, leadership, clubhouse presence, etc, but I don't how you would ever calculate that.

 

You all make great points.  WAR can be a quick and easy way to try and rank players.  But some people just have gotten to crazy about it and treat it as some end all be all stat which anyone who has a fair understanding of WAR and just baseball in general clearly knows that this is just not true.  

 

Like Slaty said the best players do weight the league average more than the "average players".  As well as replacement level player is very arbitrary and not easy to define.

 

Defensive metrics are getting better which naturally increases the "efficiency" (for a lack of a better word) of WAR. 

 

So while it's the best thing we have now for an all encompassing stat.  I still don't think it's anywhere near good enough to just hand out MVPs or Cy Youngs based on who has the highest number in WAR.  That's where people who follow the game have to take the time to break down and analyze the top players in every facet they can.  Yes this takes more time and leaves a lot more room for argument but that's baseball.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, 89Topps said:

On average, it does not take 1 run to win a baseball game.

 

And I guess I don't take WAR as literal as you do.  To me, it's just a number to rank players based on all facets of their game.  I mean, it doesn't factor in personality, leadership, clubhouse presence, etc, but I don't how you would ever calculate that.

Give them a year or two. They'll find a way.

Or at least, that's what they'll tell us. And of course we'll all just believe them like we already do with WAR now.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Fiveohnine said:

Give them a year or two. They'll find a way.

Or at least, that's what they'll tell us. And of course we'll all just believe them like we already do with WAR now.

Nobody believes WAR = gospel. In fact, the very definition on fangraphs includes they themselves saying it's not perfect, it's a gauge, etc. I'm really not sure why you're so bitter about it. You only seem to talk in strawman arguments, making statements that no one has made. Did the stat geeks hurt you in some way? 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think WAR is kinda dumb for the reasons I've given. You don't. That doesn't make either of us "bitter". I've said repeatedly I don't think it's entirely useless when cited as rating rather than an objective statistic.

But when people do cite WAR as if it were a real stat, I thhink it tends to be less helpful to discussions in general and only adds more confusion, since like I said, it's actually not a real stat at all. 

None of that is a straw man since I'm not paraphrasing anyone. But take it however you want to take it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wins Above Replacement (WAR) is an attempt by the sabermetric baseball community to summarize a player’s total contributions to their team in one statistic. You should always use more than one metric at a time when evaluating players, but WAR is all-inclusive and provides a useful reference point for comparing players. WAR offers an estimate to answer the question, “If this player got injured and their team had to replace them with a freely available minor leaguer or a AAAA player from their bench, how much value would the team be losing?” This value is expressed in a wins format, so we could say that Player X is worth +6.3 wins to their team while Player Y is only worth +3.5 wins, which means it is highly likely that Player X has been more valuable than Player Y.

WAR is not meant to be a perfectly precise indicator of a player’s contribution, but rather an estimate of their value to date. Given the imperfections of some of the available data and the assumptions made to calculate other components, WAR works best as an approximation. A 6 WAR player might be worth between 5.0 and 7.0 WAR, but it is pretty safe to say they are at least an All-Star level player and potentially an MVP.

 

^^This is from the fangraphs definition. I would think the use of the word "estimate" twice, along with the words/phrases, "not perfectly precise," "imperfections of data," and "approximation" would be enough to make the uses of WAR clear. 

Maybe we can stop pretending people think WAR is some perfect, all-knowing stat, and get back to talking about HOF potential players? And here's an idea! If someone brings up WAR, and you don't like WAR, maybe...gasp...bring up some alternative stat that you like! Crazy, huh? 

 

Anyway...

Johan Santana. Roy Halladay. Both elite peaks, but with some holes. In or out? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

^it would be nice if everyone who cites WAR would read the definition or even know the first thing about it aside from its completely misleading name. 

But they don't. So why would we pretend otherwise?

and even if they did read fangraphs version of it, they'd still be mostly uninformed since there are 2 or 3 other versions out there. 

Even now, you and I are bogged down discussing the uselessness/usefulness of WAR instead of discussing real stats/merits of actual players who may or may not get into the HOF. 

Now granted, that's not really WAR's fault and more yours and mine. But I'm just saying that WAR seems to subtract more value from such discussions than it adds. That's my opinion. Take it or leave it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

WAR is at its best when comparing apples to oranges type players. Leadoff speed guy vs cleanup power guy. It basically is why Rock Raines got in, as he should've imo. For HOF purposes it's rather useful

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, WahooManiac said:

WAR is at its best when comparing apples to oranges type players. Leadoff speed guy vs cleanup power guy. It basically is why Rock Raines got in, as he should've imo. For HOF purposes it's rather useful

Agree. And also the ever-difficult comparing people of different eras (peak Koufax to Maddux). 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Backdoor Slider said:

Agree. And also the ever-difficult comparing people of different eras (peak Koufax to Maddux). 

 

I think all players when being considered for the hall should be compared against their era.  If we are trying to have a debate who in their prime was a more skillful hitter Joey Votto or Babe Ruth regardless of stats, but going off of pure context and knowledge of the evolution of baseball points towards Joey Votto by a wide margin.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, FouLLine said:

 

I think all players when being considered for the hall should be compared against their era.  If we are trying to have a debate who in their prime was a more skillful hitter Joey Votto or Babe Ruth regardless of stats, but going off of pure context and knowledge of the evolution of baseball points towards Joey Votto by a wide margin.  

Correct. But what it shows is how dominant someone was in their era v. another in theirs. Can't just compare ERA in the 'roids era to ERA in the dead ball era. It helps give context. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...