PDA

View Full Version : How can this be?



Captain Hook
08-02-2012, 08:34 PM
WAR seems to be a stat that many here really believe in and I do too but mostly because I'm taking your word for it.So with that said how in the world does Darwin Barney show up on the top ten list at number ten, right behind our very own Joey Votto?This list includes pitchers as well.Please help?

http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/MLB/2012-batting-leaders.shtml

He's barley average IMO.

.269/.310/.390/.700

edabbs44
08-02-2012, 09:03 PM
Because fielding metrics are broken.

dougdirt
08-02-2012, 09:17 PM
He is a middle infielder, so he gets a big adjustment for that. With that said, this is exactly why I don't like BR WAR. They have his defensive value at 3.3 wins. Fangraphs, which uses a different defensive metric (UZR), has his ENTIRE value at 2 wins, less than HALF of what Votto is worth.

Superdude
08-02-2012, 10:16 PM
Because fielding metrics are broken.

I'm always leery of stacking offense and defense in one number. I think we've finally reached a point where defense is respected again, but I take year to year statistics with a grain of salt. Either defense is an incredibly volatile skill or we just don't measure it all that well yet.

Homer Bailey
08-02-2012, 10:28 PM
Friends don't let friends use baseball reference WAR.

jojo
08-02-2012, 10:29 PM
Because fielding metrics are broken.

Please demonstrate.

Brutus
08-02-2012, 10:31 PM
Friends don't let friends use baseball reference WAR.

They're the ones that use Dewan's fielding bible, correct?

TOBTTReds
08-02-2012, 10:31 PM
we just don't measure it all that well yet.

This.

I saw Field FX before it was finalized, and it was pretty amazing. Not sure where it's being used today. This would be the best way to judge fielding BY FAR.

http://www.sportvision.com/base-fieldfx.html

Superdude
08-02-2012, 10:58 PM
This.

I saw Field FX before it was finalized, and it was pretty amazing. Not sure where it's being used today. This would be the best way to judge fielding BY FAR.

http://www.sportvision.com/base-fieldfx.html

That's pretty awesome. Is that something they're still working on, or is it just not available?

RedsManRick
08-03-2012, 01:18 AM
Because fielding stats are:

A. Measures of performance, not talent.
B. Inherently small sample sizes due to the number of opportunities involved

In a given season, bad defenders can have above average years and vice versa. Sure, the metric could be improved. But we're so used to thinking of defensive performance as static and consistent ("defense never slumps") that it's hard to accept the possibility that a year's worth of defense is like 200 PA. If Darwin Barney had an .900 OPS after 120 PA, nobody would care.

RedsManRick
08-03-2012, 01:19 AM
That's pretty awesome. Is that something they're still working on, or is it just not available?

They decided to make the data private rather than public.

dougdirt
08-03-2012, 07:12 AM
They're the ones that use Dewan's fielding bible, correct?

No, they aren't.

BR uses Total Zone (http://www.baseball-reference.com/about/total_zone.shtml), which simply uses play by play data from box scores. The Fielding Bible uses the +/- system that uses video breakdown and classification of each ball in play. They are two very, very different things.

dougdirt
08-03-2012, 07:16 AM
They decided to make the data private rather than public.

And for good reason too. The amount of bandwidth it would use up would be incredible. The one thing that does stink about it though is that when Pitch F/X came out, some of the early steps forward with how to use the data were done by fans. While I am sure that some of those same guys do have access to the Field and Hit F/X data (in particular the guys at Complete Game Consulting), I think it would be interesting if at the end of the season perhaps, the data were presented for download in an 'all at once' package for a week or so for anyone who wanted to take a look at it.

edabbs44
08-03-2012, 07:23 AM
Please demonstrate.

It is fairly obvious that WAR can become extremely distorted due to the randomness of such a measurement.

jojo
08-03-2012, 08:43 AM
It is fairly obvious that WAR can become extremely distorted due to the randomness of such a measurement.

You said fielding metrics are broken. Please demonstrate.

wolfboy
08-03-2012, 09:32 AM
WAR seems to be a stat that many here really believe in and I do too but mostly because I'm taking your word for it.So with that said how in the world does Darwin Barney show up on the top ten list at number ten, right behind our very own Joey Votto?This list includes pitchers as well.Please help?

http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/MLB/2012-batting-leaders.shtml

He's barley average IMO.

.269/.310/.390/.700

Others have said it, but not many people around here use rWAR (baseball-reference). You can read about the difference between rWAR and fWAR here: http://www.fangraphs.com/library/index.php/war/differences-fwar-rwar/

wolfboy
08-03-2012, 09:38 AM
Another helpful thread that points out some of the differences: http://www.fangraphs.com/forums/topic.php?id=6560

edabbs44
08-03-2012, 10:57 AM
You said fielding metrics are broken. Please demonstrate.

Alfonso Soriano vs Carlos Beltran
Chase Headley vs Miguel Cabrera
Darwin Barney vs Curtis Granderson

With the benefit of hindsight, whom would you take for your team so far in 2012. Or would it matter to you?

jojo
08-03-2012, 02:09 PM
Alfonso Soriano vs Carlos Beltran
Chase Headley vs Miguel Cabrera
Darwin Barney vs Curtis Granderson

With the benefit of hindsight, whom would you take for your team so far in 2012. Or would it matter to you?

Beltran, cabrera and granderson. What is your point?

Brutus
08-03-2012, 02:22 PM
No, they aren't.

BR uses Total Zone (http://www.baseball-reference.com/about/total_zone.shtml), which simply uses play by play data from box scores. The Fielding Bible uses the +/- system that uses video breakdown and classification of each ball in play. They are two very, very different things.

Well I knew the difference between the two, I just couldn't remember which one they used. Thanks, Doug.

edabbs44
08-03-2012, 02:30 PM
Beltran, cabrera and granderson. What is your point?

All 3 are showing up with basically the same WAR due to large differences in their defensive measurements.

jojo
08-03-2012, 02:34 PM
All 3 are showing up with basically the same WAR due to large differences in their defensive measurements.

How does that support an argument that defensive metrics are broken?

edabbs44
08-03-2012, 03:29 PM
How does that support an argument that defensive metrics are broken?

Do you believe that those players I listed truly have had the same values so far this season?

wolfboy
08-03-2012, 04:09 PM
All 3 are showing up with basically the same WAR due to large differences in their defensive measurements.

You're pointing to a problem with the way WAR values defense, not a problem with defensive metrics.

edabbs44
08-03-2012, 04:21 PM
You're pointing to a problem with the way WAR values defense, not a problem with defensive metrics.

Yes and no. WAR gets distorted because the metric is distorted. Look at Bruce's UZRs in his career. Everyone was wetting their pants 2 years ago when he posted a 19.8. Now he is looking at 2 negative seasons in a row. What is this telling us?

edabbs44
08-03-2012, 04:23 PM
You're pointing to a problem with the way WAR values defense, not a problem with defensive metrics.

But I agree, I probably wasn't exactly clear. For purposes of this thread I should have said that defensive metrics are broken in the context of WAR.

REDREAD
08-03-2012, 04:58 PM
Friends don't let friends use baseball reference WAR.

Not disputing, but what site has the better WAR in your opinion (Can't recall)

Redsfan320
08-03-2012, 05:02 PM
Not disputing, but what site has the better WAR in your opinion (Can't recall)


He's almost definitely referring to Fangraphs' War (fWAR). As far as I know, those are the only two common variants of the stat.

320

wolfboy
08-03-2012, 05:11 PM
But I agree, I probably wasn't exactly clear. For purposes of this thread I should have said that defensive metrics are broken in the context of WAR.

I don't care for rWAR and I think it's for the same reasons you're getting at.

jojo
08-03-2012, 05:35 PM
Yes and no. WAR gets distorted because the metric is distorted. Look at Bruce's UZRs in his career. Everyone was wetting their pants 2 years ago when he posted a 19.8. Now he is looking at 2 negative seasons in a row. What is this telling us?

Bruce is probably not a true talent +20 run defender?

His OBP have been .303, .353, .344, .333 during the last three+ seasons. What is that telling us?

Superdude
08-03-2012, 05:38 PM
Yes and no. WAR gets distorted because the metric is distorted. Look at Bruce's UZRs in his career. Everyone was wetting their pants 2 years ago when he posted a 19.8. Now he is looking at 2 negative seasons in a row. What is this telling us?

That's my biggest problem with WAR, at least in a predictive context. Let's say theoretically value is 50:50 offense and defense. I still can't see stacking them equally just because of things like the example you mentioned with Bruce. Whether or not UZR is retrospectively accurate, it doesn't seem to have much predictive value. Bruce may have put up 5.4WAR in 2010, but to assume he was a true 5+ WAR player going forward would have been false.

jojo
08-03-2012, 05:43 PM
That's my biggest problem with WAR, at least in a predictive context. Let's say theoretically value is 50:50 offense and defense. I still can't see stacking them equally just because of things like the example you mentioned with Bruce. Whether or not UZR is retrospectively accurate, it doesn't seem to have much predictive value. Bruce may have put up 5.4WAR in 2010, but to assume he was a true 5+ WAR player going forward would have been false.

WAR isn't intended to be a projection system. It's supposed to quantify a player's total value. In other words it looks at the now and the past.

REDREAD
08-03-2012, 05:53 PM
Ok, so fangraphs WAR is the good one.
Here's one I found amusing:

Cairo had a 1.9 WAR in 2011
Hiesey had a 1.6 WAR in 2011

Compare the following players:
Leake: 1.4 WAR
Homer : 1.3 WAR
Every reliever other than Cordero (0.1), Bray (0.7), Masset (0.6), Lecure (0.5), and Chapman (0.6) had a negative WAR.

So that kind of implies that Cairo was more valuable than the entire bullpen (when you add in the negative WAR people).
If you take out the negative WAR people, he's as valuable than Bray, Masset, and Chapman combined. That just does not pass the sniff test.
Cairo had a nice year, but not that good.

It doesn't even make sense that Heisey/Cairo were more valuable than Leake and Homer (Cairo is graded as almost 50% more valuable than Homer)

Superdude
08-03-2012, 06:00 PM
WAR isn't intended to be a projection system. It's supposed to quantify a player's total value. In other words it looks at the now and the past.

I can agree with that; I just wish that part of the stat was stressed a little more. I can't even count the number of times I see, "so and so is a 4 WAR player" after one season of data inflated by defensive stats way outside the norm for that player's career.

westofyou
08-03-2012, 06:04 PM
Ok, so fangraphs WAR is the good one.
Here's one I found amusing:

Cairo had a 1.9 WAR in 2011
Hiesey had a 1.6 WAR in 2011

Compare the following players:
Leake: 1.4 WAR
Homer : 1.3 WAR
Every reliever other than Cordero (0.1), Bray (0.7), Masset (0.6), Lecure (0.5), and Chapman (0.6) had a negative WAR.

So that kind of implies that Cairo was more valuable than the entire bullpen (when you add in the negative WAR people).
If you take out the negative WAR people, he's as valuable than Bray, Masset, and Chapman combined. That just does not pass the sniff test.
Cairo had a nice year, but not that good.

It doesn't even make sense that Heisey/Cairo were more valuable than Leake and Homer (Cairo is graded as almost 50% more valuable than Homer)

I have both those guys on my strat team, and well Cairos Strat card is better than Heisey's

wlf WV
08-03-2012, 06:15 PM
Ok, so fangraphs WAR is the good one.
Here's one I found amusing:

Cairo had a 1.9 WAR in 2011
Hiesey had a 1.6 WAR in 2011

Compare the following players:
Leake: 1.4 WAR
Homer : 1.3 WAR
Every reliever other than Cordero (0.1), Bray (0.7), Masset (0.6), Lecure (0.5), and Chapman (0.6) had a negative WAR.

So that kind of implies that Cairo was more valuable than the entire bullpen (when you add in the negative WAR people).
If you take out the negative WAR people, he's as valuable than Bray, Masset, and Chapman combined. That just does not pass the sniff test.
Cairo had a nice year, but not that good.

It doesn't even make sense that Heisey/Cairo were more valuable than Leake and Homer (Cairo is graded as almost 50% more valuable than Homer)
You sold me...

jojo
08-03-2012, 06:22 PM
Ok, so fangraphs WAR is the good one.
Here's one I found amusing:

Cairo had a 1.9 WAR in 2011
Hiesey had a 1.6 WAR in 2011

Compare the following players:
Leake: 1.4 WAR
Homer : 1.3 WAR
Every reliever other than Cordero (0.1), Bray (0.7), Masset (0.6), Lecure (0.5), and Chapman (0.6) had a negative WAR.

So that kind of implies that Cairo was more valuable than the entire bullpen (when you add in the negative WAR people).
If you take out the negative WAR people, he's as valuable than Bray, Masset, and Chapman combined. That just does not pass the sniff test.
Cairo had a nice year, but not that good.

It doesn't even make sense that Heisey/Cairo were more valuable than Leake and Homer (Cairo is graded as almost 50% more valuable than Homer)

You have to be aware of baselines.

League average FIP was pretty low in 2011 so while in isolation Leake or Homer might look like something that we're used to associating with above average, viewing them relative to actual average tells a somewhat different story. For instance the Reds pen was ranked 23rd in the majors based upon FIP that year. Their starters were ranked 29th. It's one reason you've seen Jocketty after the arms that he has.

While Heisey was a more valuable hitter than Cairo, Cairo was close to a league average hitter and he did it from more valuable positions. What's more Cairo was a better fielder than Heisey. Think of it this way, what is more valuable, a league averagish bat who is a plus defender at second and third or a slightly above average bat who is a roughly neutral defensive corner outfielder? Heisey's bat was about 6 runs better than Cairo but he mostly lost that to Cairo's glove and the position adjustment. In the end they ended up with basically the same WAR.

Based upon the players listed, rather than not passing the sniff test, it came out smelling like roses.

jojo
08-03-2012, 06:36 PM
I can agree with that; I just wish that part of the stat was stressed a little more. I can't even count the number of times I see, "so and so is a 4 WAR player" after one season of data inflated by defensive stats way outside the norm for that player's career.

I think that point gets confused alot. Several people recently have talked about WAR in terms of projected performance.

It's possible to produce at a 4 WAR level but not be a true talent 4 WAR player (I.e be able to equal that repeatedly all things being equal). I think alot of people forget that too.