Aramis Ramirez: All star?

[poodski]

what are you talking about?

:dewey: oh that didn't do the rolleyes? I thought they changed it for you. My bad.

Il make it as easy as possible for you.

I do like when things are easy.

The higher the entire stat line, the higher the WAR. Not very hard to understand.

No not at all. So show my a stat on the stat line that gives you what war does.

If you want to continue to use the highly subjective and flawed stat you are welcome to do so.

Until shown why it doesn't show what its intended to I plan to.

You have yet to shown any reason why its flawed. Other than "it's not real" which is well not a reason.

"“If this player got injured and their team had to replace them with a minor leaguer or someone 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"

you dont see a problem with the above?

No, but maybe you can tell me. That's exactly what WAR is supposed to show you. A team full of "replacement level" players would win I believe 44 games? Been a while since I have looked it up would have to in order to risk being told I was copy/pasting so I will just go off of memory. Hope I don't fail the quiz.

So you are trying to be better than replacement. I have no clue what the problem with that is.

if im a strawman, it still doesnt change the fact that you are the official vice pres of the cub homer club.

Sweet nice to meet you.

Not sure how I am a homer as I back everything up with stats.

 

[Rice Cube]

Yeah, the "replacement level player" part can be a bit fuzzy, and I think it's only concrete at the end of the season when all the stats are in and you can make a better analysis of baselines and thresholds and what not. I think for the most part though WAR does a pretty good job at assessing player value even in season.

 

[dabynsky]

Yeah, the "replacement level player" part can be a bit fuzzy, and I think it's only concrete at the end of the season when all the stats are in and you can make a better analysis of baselines and thresholds and what not. I think for the most part though WAR does a pretty good job at assessing player value even in season.

I agree with the people that complain when WAR is used to the exclusion of other stats, but I think it does a decent job of comparing value of players across position. I don't get Dewey's absolute hatred of the stat. Couldn't have stated my position better than what you wrote, though.

 

[poodski]

"How WAR works: Conceptually, it's simple: WAR is a sum of the win value of a player's offense, defense, pitching, adjusted for that player's defensive position, playing time (thus keeping the replacement level players off the field) and year, park, and league context. The heavy lifting occurs in the individual calculations of the values and constants — as usual, I really just recommend you just use FanGraphs.

The fuzziest of all of these is the concept of the "replacement player." Tom Tango defines it as "the talent level for which you would pay the minimum salary on the open market, or for which you can obtain at minimal cost in a trade." On the other hand, we've all seen our teams struggle with players below replacement level, like Emilio Bonifacio(notes) and Yuniesky Betancourt(notes) (who had WAR of -0.4 and -2.1 last year, literally below replacement level). In the majors last year, there were eight players with a negative WAR. So "replacement level" is more of a theoretical conception rather than a concrete reality."

Just because Yuniesky Betancourt is playing in the majors doesn't mean he should be playing in the majors. Big difference there.

You keep quoting all these things yet you SHOW nothing as to why not to use it. Hell I ran come correlation over the last few years and the correlation between team WAR and team wins was around .888. Since you keep wanting REAL stats that is a REAL stat. A real good stat. Can you find me a better one that is used to rate individuals and then added up for the entire team?

 

[poodski]

Yeah, the "replacement level player" part can be a bit fuzzy, and I think it's only concrete at the end of the season when all the stats are in and you can make a better analysis of baselines and thresholds and what not. I think for the most part though WAR does a pretty good job at assessing player value even in season.

There will never be a perfect stat and once hit f/x comes out I think WAR will be even better because we won't be using a stat like UZR or DRS we will actually be able to see where the ball landed the angle speed and everything and have MUCH better gauge as

As it stands though there isn't a single statistic that better sums up a players value over the current season or for past seasons than WAR, and if someone wants to say how terrible it is I would like to at least see something backing that up.

 

[Rice Cube]

I agree with the people that complain when WAR is used to the exclusion of other stats, but I think it does a decent job of comparing value of players across position. I don't get Dewey's absolute hatred of the stat. Couldn't have stated my position better than what you wrote, though.

I think he's got issues with it because of the fuzziness. The replacement level is obviously going to change each season as players turn over, some holdovers are going to improve and some will decline. I don't know how to actually calculate WAR but I feel like they have a running tally of what the average wOBA and FIP and what not is at the end of each day and then adjust the calculations accordingly, so while in-season stats are fluctuating, they still have a rolling baseline as a method of comparison. You'd probably know this better than I, but I don't really have a problem with WAR as long as people use it in context.

 

[DewsSox79]

:dewey: oh that didn't do the rolleyes? I thought they changed it for you. My bad.



I do like when things are easy.



No not at all. So show my a stat on the stat line that gives you what war does.



Until shown why it doesn't show what its intended to I plan to.

You have yet to shown any reason why its flawed. Other than "it's not real" which is well not a reason.



No, but maybe you can tell me. That's exactly what WAR is supposed to show you. A team full of "replacement level" players would win I believe 44 games? Been a while since I have looked it up would have to in order to risk being told I was copy/pasting so I will just go off of memory. Hope I don't fail the quiz.

So you are trying to be better than replacement. I have no clue what the problem with that is.



Sweet nice to meet you.

Not sure how I am a homer as I back everything up with stats.

again, you miss the point. see replacement player and try to figure out what the problem is with that.

 

[DewsSox79]

I think he's got issues with it because of the fuzziness. The replacement level is obviously going to change each season as players turn over, some holdovers are going to improve and some will decline. I don't know how to actually calculate WAR but I feel like they have a running tally of what the average wOBA and FIP and what not is at the end of each day and then adjust the calculations accordingly, so while in-season stats are fluctuating, they still have a rolling baseline as a method of comparison. You'd probably know this better than I, but I don't really have a problem with WAR as long as people use it in context.

Some people live by that as gospel like poodski, who doesnt actually watch baseball, but watches Fangraphs.

 

[poodski]

again, you miss the point. see replacement player and try to figure out what the problem is with that.

I don't see it. Explain it to me.

 

[poodski]

Some people live by that as gospel like poodski, who doesnt actually watch baseball, but watches Fangraphs.

This is true. I just watch fangraphs. Mostly for the pretty pictures and neat looking graphs.

I can't read so I just watch it as I scroll up and down. It's the little things in life that keep me entertained. Not that fancy ball throwing and hitting stuff they show on the skinny rectangle thing sitting in front of me.

That's only used for watching Jurassic Park.

Also gospel. LOL. Have you not seen me say its flawed about a thousand times?

 

[DewsSox79]

This is true. I just watch fangraphs. Mostly for the pretty pictures and neat looking graphs.

I can't read so I just watch it as I scroll up and down. It's the little things in life that keep me entertained. Not that fancy ball throwing and hitting stuff they show on the skinny rectangle thing sitting in front of me.

That's only used for watching Jurassic Park.

Also gospel. LOL. Have you not seen me say its flawed about a thousand times?

than stop talking about it in every single discussion about a player. Im so glad i didnt call you any mean names today, I dont want you to leave.

 

[poodski]

than stop talking about it in every single discussion about a player.

Just because its flawed, doesn't mean its not the best single stat to evaluate a player and therefore I will continue to use it. Still waiting on that proof its not a good stat to use, BTW. Every single way to evaluate a player is flawed. So if I am not allowed to use WAR because its "flawed" you might as well just shut down the Cubs and Sox forums.

Im so glad i didnt call you any mean names today, I dont want you to leave.

Nah now that the mods will start enforcing the rules I will just use the nifty report post button. :dewey: damn it did it again.

 

[DewsSox79]

Just because its flawed, doesn't mean its not the best single stat to evaluate a player and therefore I will continue to use it. Still waiting on that proof its not a good stat to use, BTW. Every single way to evaluate a player is flawed. So if I am not allowed to use WAR because its "flawed" you might as well just shut down the Cubs and Sox forums.



Nah now that the mods will start enforcing the rules I will just use the nifty report post button. :dewey: damn it did it again.

you should be jumping up and down because of the rules. now you wont have to spend any money on tissues.

:rofl: "best single stat to evaluate a player" too funny.

IT
IS
NOT
A
STAT

:facepalm:

 

[poodski]

you should be jumping up and down because of the rules. now you wont have to spend any money on tissues.

:rofl: "best single stat to evaluate a player" too funny.

IT
IS
NOT
A
STAT

:facepalm:

Wins Above Replacement, commonly known as WAR, is a non-standardized sabermetric baseball statistic that is used to show how many more wins a player would give a team as opposed to a "replacement level", or minor league/bench player at that position

Wins Above Replacement (WAR) is an attempt by the sabermetric community to summarize a player’s total contributions to their team in one statistic.

There I copy/pasted just for you.

It's a stat. Then again I suppose you know more than these great statistical minds.

 

[FirstTimer]

than stop talking about it in every single discussion about a player. Im so glad i didnt call you any mean names today, I dont want you to leave.

I vote that you keep calling him mean names.


LOL at WAR being the single best stat to evaluate a player when

1: There isn't even one consistent metric for it. Different places calculate it different ways.

2. It's based on some unprovable hypothetical

3. It used defensive metrics which at best are highly highly questionable and fangraphs version weights very heavily toward them in relative terms to BR's. I don't even use FG's WAR metric for that reason...and only really look at BR's in passing.

I still can't believe we have morons like poods and CO running around trying to evaluate players based on one stat. Let alone one stat that doesn't even have a universally accepted way of being figured. Talk about Special person.

 

[Jntg4]

I vote that you keep calling him mean names.


LOL at WAR being the single best stat to evaluate a player when

1: There isn't even one consistent metric for it. Different places calculate it different ways.

2. It's based on some unprovable hypothetical

3. It used defensive metrics which at best are highly highly questionable and fangraphs version weights very heavily toward them in relative terms to BR's. I don't even use FG's WAR metric for that reason...and only really look at BR's in passing.

I still can't believe we have morons like poods and CO running around trying to evaluate players based on one stat. Let alone one stat that doesn't even have a universally accepted way of being figured. Talk about Special person.

Gator's back?

 

[CODE_BLUE56]

u cant site WAR by itself to validate a claim imo...and yes it flawed(again relies too much on wOBA) however..that doesnt mean it isnt useful...

 

[poodski]

u cant site WAR by itself to validate a claim imo...and yes it flawed(again relies too much on wOBA) however..that doesnt mean it isnt useful...

Wait what's wrong with wOBA.

 

[DewsSox79]

I vote that you keep calling him mean names.


LOL at WAR being the single best stat to evaluate a player when

1: There isn't even one consistent metric for it. Different places calculate it different ways.

2. It's based on some unprovable hypothetical

3. It used defensive metrics which at best are highly highly questionable and fangraphs version weights very heavily toward them in relative terms to BR's. I don't even use FG's WAR metric for that reason...and only really look at BR's in passing.

I still can't believe we have morons like poods and CO running around trying to evaluate players based on one stat. Let alone one stat that doesn't even have a universally accepted way of being figured. Talk about Special person.

:clap::clap::clap::clap:

 

[CODE_BLUE56]

Wait what's wrong with wOBA.

for one thing it values a walk and home run evenly

is it a good stat? yes...and again...WAR is a good stat to use

but if you tell me a player is 2nd or some high rank in WAR and that stat alone support your argument..thats not strong support...What about other offensive stats?