Originally Posted by RedsManRick
Replacement level production at the positions is not equal.
I'm aware of that, but that's my point. A player's WAR doesn't gauge best players but rather best players relative to their positions. I am aware of how WAR is calculated and why but I'm not referring to WAR... rather I'm referring to WAR being used as the "best player" for the MVP. In terms of total production, it's counter-intuitive to give a player a head start because he plays a weaker position if you truly are only looking for the "best" player.
Hence, if you truly want best player regardless of position, you need to remove replacement level from the equation and only gauge pure run production.
I'm trying to draw a distinction between "value" derived at a position and truly being the "best" player regardless of position. If you want the best player regardless of position, you should not be including positional adjustments in such a calculation. To reiterate, I'm not saying to change WAR, but rather using WAR in the context of "best" player is not very wise. On the other hand, I think if you're looking for "value," then WAR positional adjustments are a good idea.