Going to WAR...for Classic0

[Goldfan]

Posted this in a different thread, but perfect for here…..

“Heyward was by far the Cards best player in 2015”

Carp
R 101
2b 44
HR 28
RBI 84
.272
.365
.505
.871
135 OPS+

Heyward
R79
2b 33
HR14
RBi 60
.293
.359
.439
.797
117 OPS+

Defense

Carp
CH 370
PO 102
A 254

Heyward
CH303
PO 290
A 10

Carp 4.8WAR
Heyward 7WAR

Now we all know that Carp wasn’t Arenado at 3b, but it is a much more difficult position than RF, with many more chances producing many more outs.
Carps offense was appreciably better and yet theres a HUGE disparity in the WAR #. If you weren’t aware of the giant holes in WAR you’d think Heyward outhit Carp by an incredible margin and Heyward must’ve saved at least as many games with his glove that Carp lost…….

Of course it depends on which WAR model/stat you use. The differences between them, for position players at least, is mostly on the defensive side of things.

The numbers you listed above are baseball-reference's WAR stats, or bWAR. bWAR uses DRS as it's defensive component while fWAR, fangraph's WAR model/stat, uses UZR. DRS typically has a wider spread of defensive metrics than UZR so you will see larger outliers, and Heyward is definitely an outlier defender (at least in 2015 he was).

WAR at its core is batting runs (above or below average) + base running runs + defensive runs + positional adjustment. There's adjustments for league and playing time but those can mostly be ignored when comparing teammates from the same year.

Batting runs 2015:
Carpenter +30.6 (+28 BBR)
Heyward +15 (+14 BBR)

I included the baseball reference number in parenthesis, the two models are in agreement at least in terms of direction and magnitude. Heyward was above average at the plate (117 OPS+, 121 wRC+) while Carpenter was about 20 points above that in both metrics (135 OPS+, 140 wRC+). That's about double the gap to average (100 is average for both) so his batting runs above average is about twice Heyward's. That should make sense.

Base running runs 2015:
Carpenter +1.3 (-1 BBR)
Heyward +7.2 (+6 BBR)

Base running doesn't generate anywhere close to the value of hitting or defense, but Heyward was much better on the bases both by standard metrics (23 SB vs. 4 for Carpenter, 3 CS for each) and advanced (shown above). Advanced metrics show a 6-7 run advantage for Heyward, given he stole 19 more bases and was caught the same amount of times I'd say 6-7 runs seems about right. That reduces the "offense runs" advantage Carpenter had at the place from 14-15 runs down to 8-9 runs overall.

Note: Baseball reference also has a Rdp metric, runs saved by avoiding double plays (Heyward was +5, Carpenter was 0). Fangraphs includes this in their base running runs shown above, so I guess the models actually start to differ a bit here, by 5 runs or so. So BBR it was +11 for Heyward and -1 for Carpenter, a 12 run difference, not a six run difference (that's 0.6 WAR difference right there).

Offense runs 2015:
Carpenter +31.9
Heyward +22.2

This is simply batting runs + base running runs, and the gap, at fangraphs, has been reduced to 9.7 runs. At baseball reference the gap would be 14 - 7- 5 = 2 runs.

Now we get to the point that always drives differences and makes people question things, because it is really hard to quantify defense just watching as a fan.

Fielding runs 2015:
Carpenter -4.8 (-3 BBR)
Heyward +17.4 (+28 BBR)

These metrics are relative to your position. Both UZR and DRS thinks Carpenter was a little below average (5 runs, and 3 runs, respectively), and they both think Heyward was great defensively but DRS thinks he was really great (a whole 10 runs saved better than UZR does, 28 vs. 17 runs saved, respectively). 10 runs is a win, in terms of WAR, so this is a huge part of the gap between the two metrics.

Heyward saved 22 extra runs compared to Carpenter, using UZR, and 31 runs using DRS.

Positional adjustment 2015:
Carpenter +2 (+3 BBR)
Heyward -6 (-5 BBR)

In both models there is a positional adjustment that adds 8 runs (almost a whole win) to Carpenter, relative to Heyward. That cuts those defensive gaps from 22 and 31 to 14 and 23 runs. That's 1.4 to 2.3 wins in WAR.

As we saw above on offense Heyward had a 9.7 run deficit on fangraphs, and a 2 run deficit on baseball reference.

Offense + defense (including position adj) runs 2015:
Carpenter +31.9 - 2.8 = 29.1 RAA (runs above average)
Heyward +22.2 + 11.4 = 33.6 RAA

Using baseball reference you get:
Carpenter +27 + 0 (+3 - 3) = 27 RAA
Heyward +25 + 23 = 48 RAA

This is runs above average. They had similar playing time so to drop the baseline from average to replacement level 18-20 runs (Carpenter got one extra run due to more playing time, he hit leadoff). Then you divide by 10 to convert runs to wins.

So fangraphs thinks Heyward was 3.5 runs or so better than Carpenter, or 0.3 fWAR (5.6 fWAR for Heyward, 5.3 fWAR for Carpenter).

Baseball reference thinks the gap is bigger because of how it views defense (11 extra runs saved, 2 extra for Carpenter) and base running (5 extra runs for avoiding GIDP by Heyward), leading to a gap about 1.5 WAR larger than fangraphs (it had an extra run in the batting gap, and another in regular base running as well) so the gap is about 1.7 WAR larger, plus the 0.3, which is really 3.5 runs difference, on fangraphs and you get an expected gap of about 2 WAR between Heyward and Carpenter in 2015, which is what baseball reference shows . . . 7.0 vs. 4.8 bWAR.

This is really well done and explained. Kudos.

Couple of notes on baserunning to add...
Carpenter took an extra base 44% of the time and made 11 outs on the bases
Heyward took an extra base 57% of the time and made 8 outs on the bases

All of these little things add up when quantifying the difference in value.

For context on defense, just 13 outfielders of 72 that played at least 750 innings saved 10 runs. By Fielding Bible, Heyward was 3rd overall at 26. Kiermaier blew everyone away with 38, and Ender Inciarte was 2nd with 27.

Of the 25 3B that played at least 700 innings at the position, Carpenter was 16th at -2. There were 4 3B that saved at least 10 runs, with Arenado and Machado leading the way with 22 and 18, respectively.

* took 750 and 700 innings to get roughly an equal positional player sample size *

Again, appreciate your post, very thorough.

Again great dissection RBI
But even you narrate by saying “Fangraph thinks” “Baseball Ref thinks”…..these are opinions and most of their outcomes don’t align. So how can anyone look to this manipulated opinion analyses as reliable?

I re-read my post 3 times. I didn’t use the word “think” even once. For you to suggest that I did so in my narration is bizarre.

Are you RBI??
The first 2 sentences are EXACTLY what I was referring to. Read real slow or have someone help you

“So fangraphs thinks Heyward was 3.5 runs or so better than Carpenter, or 0.3 fWAR (5.6 fWAR for Heyward, 5.3 fWAR for Carpenter).

Baseball reference thinks the gap is bigger because of how it views defense (11 extra runs saved, 2 extra for Carpenter) and base running (5 extra runs for avoiding GIDP by Heyward), leading to a gap about 1.5 WAR larger than fangraphs (it had an extra run in the batting gap, and another in regular base running as well) so the gap is about 1.7 WAR larger, plus the 0.3, which is really 3.5 runs difference, on fangraphs and you get an expected gap of about 2 WAR between Heyward and Carpenter in 2015, which is what baseball reference shows . . . 7.0 vs. 4.8 bWAR.
[/quote]
This is really well done and explained. Kudos.”

[Goldfan]

Incorrect at face value.
How much dollar value would WAR have assigned to Fedde on the FA market last year?
Obviously, the fictional and ridiculous 5.8 number subjectively assigned to him would have done the EXACT OPPOSITE of "telling you which option adds the most value".

When your main counterpoint is repeatedly something that didn't happen, you know you have no argument.

Are you describing WAR??

[rbirules]

Posted this in a different thread, but perfect for here…..

“Heyward was by far the Cards best player in 2015”

Carp
R 101
2b 44
HR 28
RBI 84
.272
.365
.505
.871
135 OPS+

Heyward
R79
2b 33
HR14
RBi 60
.293
.359
.439
.797
117 OPS+

Defense

Carp
CH 370
PO 102
A 254

Heyward
CH303
PO 290
A 10

Carp 4.8WAR
Heyward 7WAR

Now we all know that Carp wasn’t Arenado at 3b, but it is a much more difficult position than RF, with many more chances producing many more outs.
Carps offense was appreciably better and yet theres a HUGE disparity in the WAR #. If you weren’t aware of the giant holes in WAR you’d think Heyward outhit Carp by an incredible margin and Heyward must’ve saved at least as many games with his glove that Carp lost…….

Of course it depends on which WAR model/stat you use. The differences between them, for position players at least, is mostly on the defensive side of things.

The numbers you listed above are baseball-reference's WAR stats, or bWAR. bWAR uses DRS as it's defensive component while fWAR, fangraph's WAR model/stat, uses UZR. DRS typically has a wider spread of defensive metrics than UZR so you will see larger outliers, and Heyward is definitely an outlier defender (at least in 2015 he was).

WAR at its core is batting runs (above or below average) + base running runs + defensive runs + positional adjustment. There's adjustments for league and playing time but those can mostly be ignored when comparing teammates from the same year.

Batting runs 2015:
Carpenter +30.6 (+28 BBR)
Heyward +15 (+14 BBR)

I included the baseball reference number in parenthesis, the two models are in agreement at least in terms of direction and magnitude. Heyward was above average at the plate (117 OPS+, 121 wRC+) while Carpenter was about 20 points above that in both metrics (135 OPS+, 140 wRC+). That's about double the gap to average (100 is average for both) so his batting runs above average is about twice Heyward's. That should make sense.

Base running runs 2015:
Carpenter +1.3 (-1 BBR)
Heyward +7.2 (+6 BBR)

Base running doesn't generate anywhere close to the value of hitting or defense, but Heyward was much better on the bases both by standard metrics (23 SB vs. 4 for Carpenter, 3 CS for each) and advanced (shown above). Advanced metrics show a 6-7 run advantage for Heyward, given he stole 19 more bases and was caught the same amount of times I'd say 6-7 runs seems about right. That reduces the "offense runs" advantage Carpenter had at the place from 14-15 runs down to 8-9 runs overall.

Note: Baseball reference also has a Rdp metric, runs saved by avoiding double plays (Heyward was +5, Carpenter was 0). Fangraphs includes this in their base running runs shown above, so I guess the models actually start to differ a bit here, by 5 runs or so. So BBR it was +11 for Heyward and -1 for Carpenter, a 12 run difference, not a six run difference (that's 0.6 WAR difference right there).

Offense runs 2015:
Carpenter +31.9
Heyward +22.2

This is simply batting runs + base running runs, and the gap, at fangraphs, has been reduced to 9.7 runs. At baseball reference the gap would be 14 - 7- 5 = 2 runs.

Now we get to the point that always drives differences and makes people question things, because it is really hard to quantify defense just watching as a fan.

Fielding runs 2015:
Carpenter -4.8 (-3 BBR)
Heyward +17.4 (+28 BBR)

These metrics are relative to your position. Both UZR and DRS thinks Carpenter was a little below average (5 runs, and 3 runs, respectively), and they both think Heyward was great defensively but DRS thinks he was really great (a whole 10 runs saved better than UZR does, 28 vs. 17 runs saved, respectively). 10 runs is a win, in terms of WAR, so this is a huge part of the gap between the two metrics.

Heyward saved 22 extra runs compared to Carpenter, using UZR, and 31 runs using DRS.

Positional adjustment 2015:
Carpenter +2 (+3 BBR)
Heyward -6 (-5 BBR)

In both models there is a positional adjustment that adds 8 runs (almost a whole win) to Carpenter, relative to Heyward. That cuts those defensive gaps from 22 and 31 to 14 and 23 runs. That's 1.4 to 2.3 wins in WAR.

As we saw above on offense Heyward had a 9.7 run deficit on fangraphs, and a 2 run deficit on baseball reference.

Offense + defense (including position adj) runs 2015:
Carpenter +31.9 - 2.8 = 29.1 RAA (runs above average)
Heyward +22.2 + 11.4 = 33.6 RAA

Using baseball reference you get:
Carpenter +27 + 0 (+3 - 3) = 27 RAA
Heyward +25 + 23 = 48 RAA

This is runs above average. They had similar playing time so to drop the baseline from average to replacement level 18-20 runs (Carpenter got one extra run due to more playing time, he hit leadoff). Then you divide by 10 to convert runs to wins.

So fangraphs thinks Heyward was 3.5 runs or so better than Carpenter, or 0.3 fWAR (5.6 fWAR for Heyward, 5.3 fWAR for Carpenter).

Baseball reference thinks the gap is bigger because of how it views defense (11 extra runs saved, 2 extra for Carpenter) and base running (5 extra runs for avoiding GIDP by Heyward), leading to a gap about 1.5 WAR larger than fangraphs (it had an extra run in the batting gap, and another in regular base running as well) so the gap is about 1.7 WAR larger, plus the 0.3, which is really 3.5 runs difference, on fangraphs and you get an expected gap of about 2 WAR between Heyward and Carpenter in 2015, which is what baseball reference shows . . . 7.0 vs. 4.8 bWAR.

This is really well done and explained. Kudos.

Couple of notes on baserunning to add...
Carpenter took an extra base 44% of the time and made 11 outs on the bases
Heyward took an extra base 57% of the time and made 8 outs on the bases

All of these little things add up when quantifying the difference in value.

For context on defense, just 13 outfielders of 72 that played at least 750 innings saved 10 runs. By Fielding Bible, Heyward was 3rd overall at 26. Kiermaier blew everyone away with 38, and Ender Inciarte was 2nd with 27.

Of the 25 3B that played at least 700 innings at the position, Carpenter was 16th at -2. There were 4 3B that saved at least 10 runs, with Arenado and Machado leading the way with 22 and 18, respectively.

* took 750 and 700 innings to get roughly an equal positional player sample size *

Again, appreciate your post, very thorough.

Again great dissection RBI
But even you narrate by saying “Fangraph thinks” “Baseball Ref thinks”…..these are opinions and most of their outcomes don’t align. So how can anyone look to this manipulated opinion analyses as reliable?

I re-read my post 3 times. I didn’t use the word “think” even once. For you to suggest that I did so in my narration is bizarre.

Are you RBI??
The first 2 sentences are EXACTLY what I was referring to. Read real slow or have someone help you

“So fangraphs thinks Heyward was 3.5 runs or so better than Carpenter, or 0.3 fWAR (5.6 fWAR for Heyward, 5.3 fWAR for Carpenter).

Baseball reference thinks the gap is bigger because of how it views defense (11 extra runs saved, 2 extra for Carpenter) and base running (5 extra runs for avoiding GIDP by Heyward), leading to a gap about 1.5 WAR larger than fangraphs (it had an extra run in the batting gap, and another in regular base running as well) so the gap is about 1.7 WAR larger, plus the 0.3, which is really 3.5 runs difference, on fangraphs and you get an expected gap of about 2 WAR between Heyward and Carpenter in 2015, which is what baseball reference shows . . . 7.0 vs. 4.8 bWAR.

This is really well done and explained. Kudos.”
[/quote]

My mistake. Please replace "BBR/fangraphs thinks" with "BBR/fangraphs' model calculates". Sorry for any confusion this may have caused. Nobody at either site is arbitrarily manipulating the output of these calculations. They have created a model, by choosing their inputs (biggest difference is defense; pitching philosophy where fangraphs is FIP based and BBR is RA based; and slight differences in base running metrics), and what that model calculates is what they share on their websites.

[JDW]

Why do some posers not like WAR?
Hmmm, well, for one it often contradicts with their own prejudices about a particular player. Maybe they don't like a player b/c his hair is too long, he speaks out about other things or think he pans for the camera, etc., etc., etc. By contrast, WAR is objective and w/o such prejudice. It only focuses on results between the baselines.
They like to take it out of context, like picking out one year, even if they have to go back 10 years, and apparently not understanding it's just one of many metrics that are useful over time.
Anyway, until something better comes along that correlates to W-L's better than WAR, it's an excellent stat to use in evaluating MLB players, but yes, not perfect and not the end all.

[An Old Friend]

Posted this in a different thread, but perfect for here…..

“Heyward was by far the Cards best player in 2015”

Carp
R 101
2b 44
HR 28
RBI 84
.272
.365
.505
.871
135 OPS+

Heyward
R79
2b 33
HR14
RBi 60
.293
.359
.439
.797
117 OPS+

Defense

Carp
CH 370
PO 102
A 254

Heyward
CH303
PO 290
A 10

Carp 4.8WAR
Heyward 7WAR

Now we all know that Carp wasn’t Arenado at 3b, but it is a much more difficult position than RF, with many more chances producing many more outs.
Carps offense was appreciably better and yet theres a HUGE disparity in the WAR #. If you weren’t aware of the giant holes in WAR you’d think Heyward outhit Carp by an incredible margin and Heyward must’ve saved at least as many games with his glove that Carp lost…….

Of course it depends on which WAR model/stat you use. The differences between them, for position players at least, is mostly on the defensive side of things.

The numbers you listed above are baseball-reference's WAR stats, or bWAR. bWAR uses DRS as it's defensive component while fWAR, fangraph's WAR model/stat, uses UZR. DRS typically has a wider spread of defensive metrics than UZR so you will see larger outliers, and Heyward is definitely an outlier defender (at least in 2015 he was).

WAR at its core is batting runs (above or below average) + base running runs + defensive runs + positional adjustment. There's adjustments for league and playing time but those can mostly be ignored when comparing teammates from the same year.

Batting runs 2015:
Carpenter +30.6 (+28 BBR)
Heyward +15 (+14 BBR)

I included the baseball reference number in parenthesis, the two models are in agreement at least in terms of direction and magnitude. Heyward was above average at the plate (117 OPS+, 121 wRC+) while Carpenter was about 20 points above that in both metrics (135 OPS+, 140 wRC+). That's about double the gap to average (100 is average for both) so his batting runs above average is about twice Heyward's. That should make sense.

Base running runs 2015:
Carpenter +1.3 (-1 BBR)
Heyward +7.2 (+6 BBR)

Base running doesn't generate anywhere close to the value of hitting or defense, but Heyward was much better on the bases both by standard metrics (23 SB vs. 4 for Carpenter, 3 CS for each) and advanced (shown above). Advanced metrics show a 6-7 run advantage for Heyward, given he stole 19 more bases and was caught the same amount of times I'd say 6-7 runs seems about right. That reduces the "offense runs" advantage Carpenter had at the place from 14-15 runs down to 8-9 runs overall.

Note: Baseball reference also has a Rdp metric, runs saved by avoiding double plays (Heyward was +5, Carpenter was 0). Fangraphs includes this in their base running runs shown above, so I guess the models actually start to differ a bit here, by 5 runs or so. So BBR it was +11 for Heyward and -1 for Carpenter, a 12 run difference, not a six run difference (that's 0.6 WAR difference right there).

Offense runs 2015:
Carpenter +31.9
Heyward +22.2

This is simply batting runs + base running runs, and the gap, at fangraphs, has been reduced to 9.7 runs. At baseball reference the gap would be 14 - 7- 5 = 2 runs.

Now we get to the point that always drives differences and makes people question things, because it is really hard to quantify defense just watching as a fan.

Fielding runs 2015:
Carpenter -4.8 (-3 BBR)
Heyward +17.4 (+28 BBR)

These metrics are relative to your position. Both UZR and DRS thinks Carpenter was a little below average (5 runs, and 3 runs, respectively), and they both think Heyward was great defensively but DRS thinks he was really great (a whole 10 runs saved better than UZR does, 28 vs. 17 runs saved, respectively). 10 runs is a win, in terms of WAR, so this is a huge part of the gap between the two metrics.

Heyward saved 22 extra runs compared to Carpenter, using UZR, and 31 runs using DRS.

Positional adjustment 2015:
Carpenter +2 (+3 BBR)
Heyward -6 (-5 BBR)

In both models there is a positional adjustment that adds 8 runs (almost a whole win) to Carpenter, relative to Heyward. That cuts those defensive gaps from 22 and 31 to 14 and 23 runs. That's 1.4 to 2.3 wins in WAR.

As we saw above on offense Heyward had a 9.7 run deficit on fangraphs, and a 2 run deficit on baseball reference.

Offense + defense (including position adj) runs 2015:
Carpenter +31.9 - 2.8 = 29.1 RAA (runs above average)
Heyward +22.2 + 11.4 = 33.6 RAA

Using baseball reference you get:
Carpenter +27 + 0 (+3 - 3) = 27 RAA
Heyward +25 + 23 = 48 RAA

This is runs above average. They had similar playing time so to drop the baseline from average to replacement level 18-20 runs (Carpenter got one extra run due to more playing time, he hit leadoff). Then you divide by 10 to convert runs to wins.

So fangraphs thinks Heyward was 3.5 runs or so better than Carpenter, or 0.3 fWAR (5.6 fWAR for Heyward, 5.3 fWAR for Carpenter).

Baseball reference thinks the gap is bigger because of how it views defense (11 extra runs saved, 2 extra for Carpenter) and base running (5 extra runs for avoiding GIDP by Heyward), leading to a gap about 1.5 WAR larger than fangraphs (it had an extra run in the batting gap, and another in regular base running as well) so the gap is about 1.7 WAR larger, plus the 0.3, which is really 3.5 runs difference, on fangraphs and you get an expected gap of about 2 WAR between Heyward and Carpenter in 2015, which is what baseball reference shows . . . 7.0 vs. 4.8 bWAR.

This is really well done and explained. Kudos.

Couple of notes on baserunning to add...
Carpenter took an extra base 44% of the time and made 11 outs on the bases
Heyward took an extra base 57% of the time and made 8 outs on the bases

All of these little things add up when quantifying the difference in value.

For context on defense, just 13 outfielders of 72 that played at least 750 innings saved 10 runs. By Fielding Bible, Heyward was 3rd overall at 26. Kiermaier blew everyone away with 38, and Ender Inciarte was 2nd with 27.

Of the 25 3B that played at least 700 innings at the position, Carpenter was 16th at -2. There were 4 3B that saved at least 10 runs, with Arenado and Machado leading the way with 22 and 18, respectively.

* took 750 and 700 innings to get roughly an equal positional player sample size *

Again, appreciate your post, very thorough.

Again great dissection RBI
But even you narrate by saying “Fangraph thinks” “Baseball Ref thinks”…..these are opinions and most of their outcomes don’t align. So how can anyone look to this manipulated opinion analyses as reliable?

I re-read my post 3 times. I didn’t use the word “think” even once. For you to suggest that I did so in my narration is bizarre.

Are you RBI??
The first 2 sentences are EXACTLY what I was referring to. Read real slow or have someone help you

You responded to me directly and said "even you narrate by saying 'Fangraphs thinks' 'Baseball Ref thinks"

And I said nothing like that. Surely you can see how I would interpret your response to me, and addressing me as "you", would lead me to that response.

[ClassicO]

Why are we responding to two lunkheads when they cannot listen, or do their own research, or, for gawd's sake, find a metric better than WAR?
RBI Rules knows more about baseball stats than all people on this thread combined (me included), yet they ignore his explanations. Geez.

Melville essentially says it's a worthless fiction, but consistently shows that he's clueless about it. All we know is that he is self-absorbed and has no clue what performance measurement for a baseball player involves, which almost makes you feel fictitiously sorry for his fictitious clients for his fictitious job as a "performance coach."
Goldfan is just clueless.

I'm done with this useless thread.

[dugoutrex]

Why are we responding to two lunkheads when they cannot listen, or do their own research, or, for gawd's sake, find a metric better than WAR?
RBI Rules knows more about baseball stats than all people on this thread combined (me included), yet they ignore his explanations. Geez.

Melville essentially says it's a worthless fiction, but consistently shows that he's clueless about it. All we know is that he is self-absorbed and has no clue what performance measurement for a baseball player involves, which almost makes you feel fictitiously sorry for his fictitious clients for his fictitious job as a "performance coach."
Goldfan is just clueless.

I'm done with this useless thread.

his name is ME ville

[Goldfan]

Why are we responding to two lunkheads when they cannot listen, or do their own research, or, for gawd's sake, find a metric better than WAR?
RBI Rules knows more about baseball stats than all people on this thread combined (me included), yet they ignore his explanations. Geez.

Melville essentially says it's a worthless fiction, but consistently shows that he's clueless about it. All we know is that he is self-absorbed and has no clue what performance measurement for a baseball player involves, which almost makes you feel fictitiously sorry for his fictitious clients for his fictitious job as a "performance coach."
Goldfan is just clueless.

I'm done with this useless thread.

So I assume you agree with the 2015 Heyward 7WAR/Carp 4.8WAR?
And even tho Carp performed much better offensively, had considerably more D chances AND OUTS for the year
You think the magic performed in RF by Heyward propelled him so far past Carps all around superior documented feet on plate(runs) that Heyward grades out as a 7 to Carps 4.8??? Because Heyward through 154 games might have gotten to a few more balls than perhaps Noot and those few balls changed the outcomes of countless games?? Because thats the WAR story

[Goldfan]

Posted this in a different thread, but perfect for here…..

“Heyward was by far the Cards best player in 2015”

Carp
R 101
2b 44
HR 28
RBI 84
.272
.365
.505
.871
135 OPS+

Heyward
R79
2b 33
HR14
RBi 60
.293
.359
.439
.797
117 OPS+

Defense

Carp
CH 370
PO 102
A 254

Heyward
CH303
PO 290
A 10

Carp 4.8WAR
Heyward 7WAR

Now we all know that Carp wasn’t Arenado at 3b, but it is a much more difficult position than RF, with many more chances producing many more outs.
Carps offense was appreciably better and yet theres a HUGE disparity in the WAR #. If you weren’t aware of the giant holes in WAR you’d think Heyward outhit Carp by an incredible margin and Heyward must’ve saved at least as many games with his glove that Carp lost…….

Of course it depends on which WAR model/stat you use. The differences between them, for position players at least, is mostly on the defensive side of things.

The numbers you listed above are baseball-reference's WAR stats, or bWAR. bWAR uses DRS as it's defensive component while fWAR, fangraph's WAR model/stat, uses UZR. DRS typically has a wider spread of defensive metrics than UZR so you will see larger outliers, and Heyward is definitely an outlier defender (at least in 2015 he was).

WAR at its core is batting runs (above or below average) + base running runs + defensive runs + positional adjustment. There's adjustments for league and playing time but those can mostly be ignored when comparing teammates from the same year.

Batting runs 2015:
Carpenter +30.6 (+28 BBR)
Heyward +15 (+14 BBR)

I included the baseball reference number in parenthesis, the two models are in agreement at least in terms of direction and magnitude. Heyward was above average at the plate (117 OPS+, 121 wRC+) while Carpenter was about 20 points above that in both metrics (135 OPS+, 140 wRC+). That's about double the gap to average (100 is average for both) so his batting runs above average is about twice Heyward's. That should make sense.

Base running runs 2015:
Carpenter +1.3 (-1 BBR)
Heyward +7.2 (+6 BBR)

Base running doesn't generate anywhere close to the value of hitting or defense, but Heyward was much better on the bases both by standard metrics (23 SB vs. 4 for Carpenter, 3 CS for each) and advanced (shown above). Advanced metrics show a 6-7 run advantage for Heyward, given he stole 19 more bases and was caught the same amount of times I'd say 6-7 runs seems about right. That reduces the "offense runs" advantage Carpenter had at the place from 14-15 runs down to 8-9 runs overall.

Note: Baseball reference also has a Rdp metric, runs saved by avoiding double plays (Heyward was +5, Carpenter was 0). Fangraphs includes this in their base running runs shown above, so I guess the models actually start to differ a bit here, by 5 runs or so. So BBR it was +11 for Heyward and -1 for Carpenter, a 12 run difference, not a six run difference (that's 0.6 WAR difference right there).

Offense runs 2015:
Carpenter +31.9
Heyward +22.2

This is simply batting runs + base running runs, and the gap, at fangraphs, has been reduced to 9.7 runs. At baseball reference the gap would be 14 - 7- 5 = 2 runs.

Now we get to the point that always drives differences and makes people question things, because it is really hard to quantify defense just watching as a fan.

Fielding runs 2015:
Carpenter -4.8 (-3 BBR)
Heyward +17.4 (+28 BBR)

These metrics are relative to your position. Both UZR and DRS thinks Carpenter was a little below average (5 runs, and 3 runs, respectively), and they both think Heyward was great defensively but DRS thinks he was really great (a whole 10 runs saved better than UZR does, 28 vs. 17 runs saved, respectively). 10 runs is a win, in terms of WAR, so this is a huge part of the gap between the two metrics.

Heyward saved 22 extra runs compared to Carpenter, using UZR, and 31 runs using DRS.

Positional adjustment 2015:
Carpenter +2 (+3 BBR)
Heyward -6 (-5 BBR)

In both models there is a positional adjustment that adds 8 runs (almost a whole win) to Carpenter, relative to Heyward. That cuts those defensive gaps from 22 and 31 to 14 and 23 runs. That's 1.4 to 2.3 wins in WAR.

As we saw above on offense Heyward had a 9.7 run deficit on fangraphs, and a 2 run deficit on baseball reference.

Offense + defense (including position adj) runs 2015:
Carpenter +31.9 - 2.8 = 29.1 RAA (runs above average)
Heyward +22.2 + 11.4 = 33.6 RAA

Using baseball reference you get:
Carpenter +27 + 0 (+3 - 3) = 27 RAA
Heyward +25 + 23 = 48 RAA

This is runs above average. They had similar playing time so to drop the baseline from average to replacement level 18-20 runs (Carpenter got one extra run due to more playing time, he hit leadoff). Then you divide by 10 to convert runs to wins.

So fangraphs thinks Heyward was 3.5 runs or so better than Carpenter, or 0.3 fWAR (5.6 fWAR for Heyward, 5.3 fWAR for Carpenter).

Baseball reference thinks the gap is bigger because of how it views defense (11 extra runs saved, 2 extra for Carpenter) and base running (5 extra runs for avoiding GIDP by Heyward), leading to a gap about 1.5 WAR larger than fangraphs (it had an extra run in the batting gap, and another in regular base running as well) so the gap is about 1.7 WAR larger, plus the 0.3, which is really 3.5 runs difference, on fangraphs and you get an expected gap of about 2 WAR between Heyward and Carpenter in 2015, which is what baseball reference shows . . . 7.0 vs. 4.8 bWAR.

Anyone who has watched the game of baseball, if you look at these numbers closely, should be able to see the value attributed to each category is out of whack. Heyward receives only +15 for the act of hitting the baseball, but somehow is allocated +7.2 for baserunning….presumably for stealing 19 more bases than Carp…..he receives 50% of the value he was allotted for hitting??? Think about that. He would need to be Ricky Henderson stealing 130 bases to someone obtain half the value running bases as did batting.
As far as D, Carp is not a GG but he did record 67 more outs for the year than Heyward, so a 25 point difference for fielding between the two is laughable when for the entire season Carp’s very Good offensive year only garnered him +30.6. Again the real world baseball field action value attribution is way out of whack….
Batting runs 2015:
Carpenter +30.6 (+28 BBR)
Heyward +15 (+14 BBR)


Base running runs 2015:
Carpenter +1.3 (-1 BBR)
Heyward +7.2 (+6 BBR)


Offense runs 2015:
Carpenter +31.9
Heyward +22.2


Fielding runs 2015:
Carpenter -4.8 (-3 BBR)
Heyward +17.4 (+28 BBR)

[Melville]

You are dodging and I understand why.
Would the top bidder have made the right choice, or would they have overpaid?
We both know the answer to that.
Curious that someone trying to prop up WAR would use the phrase "no way to answer" - which is of course the fundamental mistaken premise of WAR to begin with.

The free agency market itself leads to inefficiency and overpays that has nothing to do with Fedde or one player's one season WAR.

What an odd - and highly contradictory - statement.
Multiple times in this thread it has been stated that WAR is well suited for determining the value of FA's.
And now you say it has nothing to do with it.
It would appear that those who want to embrace WAR are equally willing to flee from it when facts are inconvenient.
But then again, since imprecision and inconsistency define WAR, it is somewhat logical that the same would define its proponents.
So let's try the actual question again.
Fedde's fictional, subjective assigned WAR was 5.8 last season.
If WAR is a fair estimate which then projects value, would it have been accurate in defining market value last year and would the signing team had made a good decision?
This isn't hard.
Not a trick question.
Many claim WAR is a favor and effective tool to measure value.
So, would WAR have been fair and effective in setting his value a year ago - or would it have been wildly incorrect?
Simply looking for some intellectual honesty here.
It is very telling that folks are running from the question.

[Melville]

Incorrect at face value.
How much dollar value would WAR have assigned to Fedde on the FA market last year?
Obviously, the fictional and ridiculous 5.8 number subjectively assigned to him would have done the EXACT OPPOSITE of "telling you which option adds the most value".

When your main counterpoint is repeatedly something that didn't happen, you know you have no argument.

Are you describing WAR??

Yes, in fact he is.
Outstanding point.

[Melville]

Why are we responding to two lunkheads when they cannot listen, or do their own research, or, for gawd's sake, find a metric better than WAR?
RBI Rules knows more about baseball stats than all people on this thread combined (me included), yet they ignore his explanations. Geez.

Melville essentially says it's a worthless fiction, but consistently shows that he's clueless about it. All we know is that he is self-absorbed and has no clue what performance measurement for a baseball player involves, which almost makes you feel fictitiously sorry for his fictitious clients for his fictitious job as a "performance coach."
Goldfan is just clueless.

I'm done with this useless thread.

It appears we have a 6th page knockout - to use another perfect analogy.

[sdaltons]

Why do some posers not like WAR?
Hmmm, well, for one it often contradicts with their own prejudices about a particular player. Maybe they don't like a player b/c his hair is too long, he speaks out about other things or think he pans for the camera, etc., etc., etc. By contrast, WAR is objective and w/o such prejudice. It only focuses on results between the baselines.
They like to take it out of context, like picking out one year, even if they have to go back 10 years, and apparently not understanding it's just one of many metrics that are useful over time.
Anyway, until something better comes along that correlates to W-L's better than WAR, it's an excellent stat to use in evaluating MLB players, but yes, not perfect and not the end all.

Agree. It shouldn't be used by itself but it's a useful stat when viewed along with others.

[Melville]

"What do you guys....think is the best statistic (or more) you guys argue that gives the best estimate of a total player worth, since that is what we are looking for when comparing players?"

Doesn't seem this was answered?

I’ve answered this ClassicO question in another thread……
Use real offensive stats and whatever D metric you wish and perhaps watch the guy PLAY
I’d argue if this ONE stat(WAR) is the only thing that a FO looks at to assess a player then they should be immediately fired and when they ultimately need to review all the other stats anyway to get a complete picture then whats the point?
Lazy, entitled, and ignorant to think ONE number with a decimal point between 0-10, 11, 12 whatever can value a player.
Sorry, I guess it prints negative numbers as well

The bold quote from you is an exaggeration and a dramatic statement. There is not one player personnel employee in MLB who uses solely WAR as a decision maker on a said player. No need to be dramatic to try and make a point.

Several have written here that it’s the main metric used by FO’s to value players/contracts. And if those FO types have to take a deep dive into the actual statistics after looking at the WAR number to figure out what the player IS GOOD AT….what’s the point of WAR?

Correct.
Case in point.
Fedde had a fictional, subjective, assigned WAR of 5.6 last year.
What if he had entered the market last October as a fully healthy 31 year old FA starting pitcher?
Would WAR have answered the question, to your excellent point, of how large of a contract a team would have signed him to?
Or would relying on the fictional, subjective, assigned WAR of 5.6 last year resulted in a contract the signing team would be regretting today?
The answer is obvious.
Relying on WAR would have produces a terrible decision, because it ignores all the realities of the game.
Curious that no matter how many time the deep and self-evident flaws of WAR are exposed, folks double down on it being reliable as a means to prove comparative value.
It does no such thing.

They would have taken into context that beyond the 5.6 WAR that Fedde had last year he had a career WAR of 0.3 the rest of his career. Thus a team wouldn’t have given him what a consistent 5 WAR pitcher would get.

Would the market have given him what Severino got?
His fictional WAR was .33 in 2021, 1.69 in 2022, -1.50 in 2023, and 1.61 in 2024 - his last 4 MLB seasons.
At age 31 he received a 3yr / 67M deal.
Fedde had a fictional WAR of 1.52, -1.06, -0.63, and 5.62 in his last 4 MLB seasons.
Aggregate WAR was higher and his most recent WAR at the time was higher.
Folks have consistently claimed in this thread that WAR is effective are reasonably accurate in determining relative value.
In fact, they claim that is the primary purpose.
WAR says Fedde was more valuable in 2024 and more valuable over a 4 year period the Severino.
Therefore, according to WAR proponents, that fictional tool would have assigned MORE value to Fedde (same age as Severino) had he been on the FA market last fall.
So again, I ask the question, would WAR have been effective and relatively accurate in determining that Fedde last fall would have been worth MORE than 3 yrs / 67M - or would it have wildly wrong?
We all know the answer to that.
Which is precisely why some are running away from the question.

[renostl]

"What do you guys....think is the best statistic (or more) you guys argue that gives the best estimate of a total player worth, since that is what we are looking for when comparing players?"

Doesn't seem this was answered?

I’ve answered this ClassicO question in another thread……
Use real offensive stats and whatever D metric you wish and perhaps watch the guy PLAY
I’d argue if this ONE stat(WAR) is the only thing that a FO looks at to assess a player then they should be immediately fired and when they ultimately need to review all the other stats anyway to get a complete picture then whats the point?
Lazy, entitled, and ignorant to think ONE number with a decimal point between 0-10, 11, 12 whatever can value a player.
Sorry, I guess it prints negative numbers as well

The bold quote from you is an exaggeration and a dramatic statement. There is not one player personnel employee in MLB who uses solely WAR as a decision maker on a said player. No need to be dramatic to try and make a point.

Several have written here that it’s the main metric used by FO’s to value players/contracts. And if those FO types have to take a deep dive into the actual statistics after looking at the WAR number to figure out what the player IS GOOD AT….what’s the point of WAR?

Correct.
Case in point.
Fedde had a fictional, subjective, assigned WAR of 5.6 last year.
What if he had entered the market last October as a fully healthy 31 year old FA starting pitcher?
Would WAR have answered the question, to your excellent point, of how large of a contract a team would have signed him to?
Or would relying on the fictional, subjective, assigned WAR of 5.6 last year resulted in a contract the signing team would be regretting today?
The answer is obvious.
Relying on WAR would have produces a terrible decision, because it ignores all the realities of the game.
Curious that no matter how many time the deep and self-evident flaws of WAR are exposed, folks double down on it being reliable as a means to prove comparative value.
It does no such thing.

They would have taken into context that beyond the 5.6 WAR that Fedde had last year he had a career WAR of 0.3 the rest of his career. Thus a team wouldn’t have given him what a consistent 5 WAR pitcher would get.

You are dodging and I understand why.
Would the top bidder have made the right choice, or would they have overpaid?
We both know the answer to that.

If I were the GM I would have only looked at his 3.30 ERA.
I would have looked no further since it is an absolute non refutable actual STAT
No need for context or any other information since that would take far too long to see
and paid Mr. Fedde whatever a 3.30 should receive on my chart.

[Melville]

"What do you guys....think is the best statistic (or more) you guys argue that gives the best estimate of a total player worth, since that is what we are looking for when comparing players?"

Doesn't seem this was answered?

I’ve answered this ClassicO question in another thread……
Use real offensive stats and whatever D metric you wish and perhaps watch the guy PLAY
I’d argue if this ONE stat(WAR) is the only thing that a FO looks at to assess a player then they should be immediately fired and when they ultimately need to review all the other stats anyway to get a complete picture then whats the point?
Lazy, entitled, and ignorant to think ONE number with a decimal point between 0-10, 11, 12 whatever can value a player.
Sorry, I guess it prints negative numbers as well

The bold quote from you is an exaggeration and a dramatic statement. There is not one player personnel employee in MLB who uses solely WAR as a decision maker on a said player. No need to be dramatic to try and make a point.

Several have written here that it’s the main metric used by FO’s to value players/contracts. And if those FO types have to take a deep dive into the actual statistics after looking at the WAR number to figure out what the player IS GOOD AT….what’s the point of WAR?

Correct.
Case in point.
Fedde had a fictional, subjective, assigned WAR of 5.6 last year.
What if he had entered the market last October as a fully healthy 31 year old FA starting pitcher?
Would WAR have answered the question, to your excellent point, of how large of a contract a team would have signed him to?
Or would relying on the fictional, subjective, assigned WAR of 5.6 last year resulted in a contract the signing team would be regretting today?
The answer is obvious.
Relying on WAR would have produces a terrible decision, because it ignores all the realities of the game.
Curious that no matter how many time the deep and self-evident flaws of WAR are exposed, folks double down on it being reliable as a means to prove comparative value.
It does no such thing.

They would have taken into context that beyond the 5.6 WAR that Fedde had last year he had a career WAR of 0.3 the rest of his career. Thus a team wouldn’t have given him what a consistent 5 WAR pitcher would get.

You are dodging and I understand why.
Would the top bidder have made the right choice, or would they have overpaid?
We both know the answer to that.

If I were the GM I would have only looked at his 3.30 ERA.
I would have looked no further since it is an absolute non refutable actual STAT
No need for context or any other information since that would take far too long to see
and paid Mr. Fedde whatever a 3.30 should receive on my chart.

ERA is not the topic - and zero people have suggested that would have determined Fedde's value.
You normally do not dodge like that.
The topic is WAR.
So let's stay on-topic.
How would WAR have treated Fedde's value?
We all know the answer.
Which is why so many are running from the question.
Which is why