Going to WAR...for Classic0

[Goldfan]

Two, WAR is an estimate based on extremely subjective and assigned values.

Please describe the specific elements of WAR you consider “extremely subjective”.

Who or what determines what a “Replacement Level Player” is…..since this is the foundation of what WAR is based…..a ghost player
Who or what or Why determines the scale of “Positional Adjustment”
Who or what or Why determines the scale of “League Adjustment”…..does this even matter with balanced schedule??
How is it known that the starting baseline of all this assuming and adjusting is accurate?

You have made another great point.
"Replacement player" is yet another assumption.
Let's say Whetherholt is the STL 2B next year - and wins ROY.
Donovan moves to LF and Gorman to 3B.
Who did Whetherholt replace?
And as the "replacement player" would his value be "wins above" or "negative wins above" Donovan and Gorman based on his own actual contribution?
Or is he not the "replacement player" at all?
Is the "replacement player" actually just a fictional estimate - something akin to an invisible friend?

It’s stated AAA player, bench or available FA. So example on the Cards would be Saggesse, Barriro, the fella who was called up and released?
What kind of baseline or constant could possibly be derived from those types?? And this is the equations origination. Fantasy

[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.

Your argument here requires that you’re implying that Severino’s contract was a product of or related to his WAR.

Do you really believe the A’s used WAR to calculate their offer to Severino? What did that equate to? Why would they have done that?

Good try. Terrible example sabotages your own argument.

Which is it?
WAR is used by teams to determine value?
Or it isn't?
The claim has been made many time that teams do that very thing:
"does a good job of showing who adds the most value to their teams""
"its also why people were saying sign Oneil to a long term contract because he is a WAR god"
"a cost of 4.3mil per War"
"you have $30M to spend this off-season....WAR helps answer that. Exact same thing with trades"
"WAR can tell you which of the options adds the most value"
"One of the best tools for determining a baseball player's total value"
I do wish you and others would take a position and then stick with it.

[Melville]

Two, WAR is an estimate based on extremely subjective and assigned values.

Please describe the specific elements of WAR you consider “extremely subjective”.

Who or what determines what a “Replacement Level Player” is…..since this is the foundation of what WAR is based…..a ghost player
Who or what or Why determines the scale of “Positional Adjustment”
Who or what or Why determines the scale of “League Adjustment”…..does this even matter with balanced schedule??
How is it known that the starting baseline of all this assuming and adjusting is accurate?

You have made another great point.
"Replacement player" is yet another assumption.
Let's say Whetherholt is the STL 2B next year - and wins ROY.
Donovan moves to LF and Gorman to 3B.
Who did Whetherholt replace?
And as the "replacement player" would his value be "wins above" or "negative wins above" Donovan and Gorman based on his own actual contribution?
Or is he not the "replacement player" at all?
Is the "replacement player" actually just a fictional estimate - something akin to an invisible friend?

Are you conceding that you have never read the definition of WAR
and yet know that it has no meaning and is fictious?

Nope.
Rhetoric construct.
I have read and studied several definitions of the WAR fiction.
The scenario above is simply a good illustration of just how silly WAR is.
No such thing as a "replacement level player".
WAR is indeed nothing more than an invisible friend who does not actually exist.

[An Old Friend]

"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.

Your argument here requires that you’re implying that Severino’s contract was a product of or related to his WAR.

Do you really believe the A’s used WAR to calculate their offer to Severino? What did that equate to? Why would they have done that?

Good try. Terrible example sabotages your own argument.

Which is it?
WAR is used by teams to determine value?
Or it isn't?
The claim has been made many time that teams do that very thing:
"does a good job of showing who adds the most value to their teams""
"its also why people were saying sign Oneil to a long term contract because he is a WAR god"
"a cost of 4.3mil per War"
"you have $30M to spend this off-season....WAR helps answer that. Exact same thing with trades"
"WAR can tell you which of the options adds the most value"
"One of the best tools for determining a baseball player's total value"
I do wish you and others would take a position and then stick with it.

We fundamentally disagree with each other on this topic at nearly every level. It’s a waste of my time to try to change your mind when it’s already made up.

[renostl]

Two, WAR is an estimate based on extremely subjective and assigned values.

Please describe the specific elements of WAR you consider “extremely subjective”.

Who or what determines what a “Replacement Level Player” is…..since this is the foundation of what WAR is based…..a ghost player
Who or what or Why determines the scale of “Positional Adjustment”
Who or what or Why determines the scale of “League Adjustment”…..does this even matter with balanced schedule??
How is it known that the starting baseline of all this assuming and adjusting is accurate?

You have made another great point.
"Replacement player" is yet another assumption.
Let's say Whetherholt is the STL 2B next year - and wins ROY.
Donovan moves to LF and Gorman to 3B.
Who did Whetherholt replace?
And as the "replacement player" would his value be "wins above" or "negative wins above" Donovan and Gorman based on his own actual contribution?
Or is he not the "replacement player" at all?
Is the "replacement player" actually just a fictional estimate - something akin to an invisible friend?

Are you conceding that you have never read the definition of WAR
and yet know that it has no meaning and is fictious?

Nope.
Rhetoric construct.
I have read and studied several definitions of the WAR fiction.
The scenario above is simply a good illustration of just how silly WAR is.
No such thing as a "replacement level player".
WAR is indeed nothing more than an invisible friend who does not actually exist.

Then there should be room on both sides to see aspects where there can be reasons to
use it as a tool. There can also be acknowledgement that it isn't without debate
or discussion. To do so without belittling some very good baseball people on both sides isn't
of use. Question the POV and its integrity.

You have rated Outfielders as #1,#2, #3 or a number 4. I seriously doubt that you have
done so without analysis of data. Your opinions are not only bias and full of subjective whims but
from some objective data. Otherwise, I would certainly not waste this much time responding to your
opinions.

It is possible that you have done so by using some of the same data. You may have given different
weights to the data and reached a conclusion. Sometimes different than that of myself and sometimes in
agreement. WAR is a tool that can quickly compare players and at its best with same position players.

[Quincy Varnish]

Two, WAR is an estimate based on extremely subjective and assigned values.

Please describe the specific elements of WAR you consider “extremely subjective”.

Who or what determines what a “Replacement Level Player” is…..since this is the foundation of what WAR is based…..a ghost player
Who or what or Why determines the scale of “Positional Adjustment”
Who or what or Why determines the scale of “League Adjustment”…..does this even matter with balanced schedule??
How is it known that the starting baseline of all this assuming and adjusting is accurate?

You have made another great point.
"Replacement player" is yet another assumption.
Let's say Whetherholt is the STL 2B next year - and wins ROY.
Donovan moves to LF and Gorman to 3B.
Who did Whetherholt replace?
And as the "replacement player" would his value be "wins above" or "negative wins above" Donovan and Gorman based on his own actual contribution?
Or is he not the "replacement player" at all?
Is the "replacement player" actually just a fictional estimate - something akin to an invisible friend?

It’s stated AAA player, bench or available FA. So example on the Cards would be Saggesse, Barriro, the fella who was called up and released?
What kind of baseline or constant could possibly be derived from those types?? And this is the equations origination. Fantasy

How have your extensive studies of statistics led you to this conclusion?

Please tell me the number of standard deviations below the mean would establish the baseline of a replacement player.

Apparently you feel the designers of WAR are throwing darts at a board, so I am eager to hear your insights.

[Quincy Varnish]

Nope.
Rhetoric construct.
I have read and studied several definitions of the WAR fiction.
The scenario above is simply a good illustration of just how silly WAR is.
No such thing as a "replacement level player".
WAR is indeed nothing more than an invisible friend who does not actually exist.

I’d bet you know a lot about invisible friends.

[Goldfan]

Two, WAR is an estimate based on extremely subjective and assigned values.

Please describe the specific elements of WAR you consider “extremely subjective”.

Who or what determines what a “Replacement Level Player” is…..since this is the foundation of what WAR is based…..a ghost player
Who or what or Why determines the scale of “Positional Adjustment”
Who or what or Why determines the scale of “League Adjustment”…..does this even matter with balanced schedule??
How is it known that the starting baseline of all this assuming and adjusting is accurate?

You have made another great point.
"Replacement player" is yet another assumption.
Let's say Whetherholt is the STL 2B next year - and wins ROY.
Donovan moves to LF and Gorman to 3B.
Who did Whetherholt replace?
And as the "replacement player" would his value be "wins above" or "negative wins above" Donovan and Gorman based on his own actual contribution?
Or is he not the "replacement player" at all?
Is the "replacement player" actually just a fictional estimate - something akin to an invisible friend?

It’s stated AAA player, bench or available FA. So example on the Cards would be Saggesse, Barriro, the fella who was called up and released?
What kind of baseline or constant could possibly be derived from those types?? And this is the equations origination. Fantasy

How have your extensive studies of statistics led you to this conclusion?

Please tell me the number of standard deviations below the mean would establish the baseline of a replacement player.

Apparently you feel the designers of WAR are throwing darts at a board, so I am eager to hear your insights.

You don’t require extensive studies of stats. Show me the data used to establish this baseline “replacement player” which WAR originates?

[2ninr]

Honestly-I don't have the time or interest I used to devote to baseball. WAR is a pretty good way to know something about a player without actually havIng watched him, and not having to analyze his metrics. If he has a good WAR I might make an effort to watch him or look at his metrics to find out why.

[rbirules]

Who or what determines what a “Replacement Level Player” is…..since this is the foundation of what WAR is based…..a ghost player
Who or what or Why determines the scale of “Positional Adjustment”
Who or what or Why determines the scale of “League Adjustment”…..does this even matter with balanced schedule??
How is it known that the starting baseline of all this assuming and adjusting is accurate?

Here's a link to fangraphs' glossary on WAR, with links to specific sections which go more in depth on each adjustment or component.

WAR is set league wide at 1,000 per season. Replacement level is set at a .297 winning percentage, or a 48-114 record. That is a team of freely available players that put up 0 WAR would be expected to go 48-114 (or thereabouts). The 2003 Detroit Tigers went 43-119 and had 1.7 fWAR as a team, so that's in the ballpark for a team to be that bad.

But replacement level's exact level doesn't really matter. All that matters is that the baseline is the same for all players, which it is. All the inputs are relative to league average (batting runs, defensive runs saved, base running runs, pitching runs, etc.), which is very easy to determine (look at league wide stats). WAR then drops the entire league from RAA/WAA (runs and wins above average) to replacement level. It doesn't change the gaps between players it just shifts the perspective. Carpenter and Heyward would have been 3.X wins above average, but instead they are 5.X wins above replacement (an average player is about 2 WAR over a full season of playing time).

Positional adjustment is too "neat" for me. I don't think the gaps are perfectly in five run increments, but I don't think they are drastically different from what is used. This is definitely an area for improvement (but let's not let precise be the enemy of accurate), but it would change slightly year to year, which I would be fine with. As long as you are aware of this being slightly inaccurate you're fine. Again, WAR isn't meant to be a precise tool down the decimal place.

League adjustment (differences) should be minimal now for players with similar playing time due to the balanced schedule.

[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.

Your argument here requires that you’re implying that Severino’s contract was a product of or related to his WAR.

Do you really believe the A’s used WAR to calculate their offer to Severino? What did that equate to? Why would they have done that?

Good try. Terrible example sabotages your own argument.

Which is it?
WAR is used by teams to determine value?
Or it isn't?
The claim has been made many time that teams do that very thing:
"does a good job of showing who adds the most value to their teams""
"its also why people were saying sign Oneil to a long term contract because he is a WAR god"
"a cost of 4.3mil per War"
"you have $30M to spend this off-season....WAR helps answer that. Exact same thing with trades"
"WAR can tell you which of the options adds the most value"
"One of the best tools for determining a baseball player's total value"
I do wish you and others would take a position and then stick with it.

We fundamentally disagree with each other on this topic at nearly every level. It’s a waste of my time to try to change your mind when it’s already made up.

I am not attempting to change any minds.
I simply created an opportunity for quality conversation, as was requested by another poster.
It is surprising to me that so many hold a view which, when challenged, they are unwilling or incapable to support.
This is not hard.
Would WAR have valued Fedde correctly had he been available last fall?
Obviously, no.
So why not simply admit it, thereby opening the door to a productive dialogue?
It is a waste of your time to answer such an easy question (which would require less than 15 seconds) - given the time you have already invested in this thread?
Quite curious.

[Melville]

Nope.
Rhetoric construct.
I have read and studied several definitions of the WAR fiction.
The scenario above is simply a good illustration of just how silly WAR is.
No such thing as a "replacement level player".
WAR is indeed nothing more than an invisible friend who does not actually exist.

I’d bet you know a lot about invisible friends.

I know fictional people do not exist.
Unlike WAR.

[Melville]

Two, WAR is an estimate based on extremely subjective and assigned values.

Please describe the specific elements of WAR you consider “extremely subjective”.

Who or what determines what a “Replacement Level Player” is…..since this is the foundation of what WAR is based…..a ghost player
Who or what or Why determines the scale of “Positional Adjustment”
Who or what or Why determines the scale of “League Adjustment”…..does this even matter with balanced schedule??
How is it known that the starting baseline of all this assuming and adjusting is accurate?

“WAR (Wins Above Replacement) stats originate from the concept of "replacement level," which represents the performance of a readily available, typically minor league or readily available free agent, player. This theoretical player is used as a baseline to determine how many additional wins a player provides to their team beyond what a replacement-level player would contribute.”

ORIGINATE from the concept……of replacement level…..
So the entire WAR “stat” foundation are ghost stats of “replacement players” who either never really play to generate this baseline for WAR or certainly don’t create a proper sample set to use as a baseline……and from this theoretical player with no or very little real stats(0)…..all the neat whole numbers with decimals points originate.
Again WAR originates from either NO data or statistically insignificant data and then adjusts and assumes going forward

"theoretical player"
Thank you.
WAR's invisible friend.

[rbirules]

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)

Again, the batting runs and base running runs aren't total runs created, they are runs above average. The total number of runs created by hitting is much higher than with base running but Heyward separated himself from the pack (and Carpenter) by 7 runs or so in a much smaller category.

Total bases:
Carpenter - 290
Heyward - 240

Over a full season (with an advantage of an extra 55 PAs, 27 ABs) Carpenter managed a whole 50 more bases from hitting. As you mentioned Heyward stole 19 more bases (that's 40% of that gap). Another poster mentioned Heyward took an extra base 57% of the time vs. 44% for Carpenter and made three fewer outs on the bases. Making an out is a big deal, it removes a runner from base entirely (in addition to making an out). I don't think it's hard to see how Heyward probably created extra value through base running (he already is at 19 just looking at steals, add in at least 3 for the extra outs).

I found the metrics on the outs. Carpenter made 4 at 3B, 4 at 2B, and 1 at 1B. Heyward at 2 at 3B, 3 at 2B, and 1 at 1B. Not sure if they were doubled off on a line drive, or caught advancing, but that's two extra times Carpenter was out at 3B and one extra time at 2B than Heyward. Those hurt. Do you count being out at 3rd as three bases lost or two (could be on 2nd, unless doubled off 3rd)? Same with 2B, is that two bases lost or one? That could be as many as eight bases lost, or minimum of five, we're cutting into that total bases gap even more.

[An Old Friend]

Would WAR have valued Fedde correctly had he been available last fall?
Obviously, no.

Since he wasn’t a free agent, you can’t speak in absolutes.

The answer could be “hypothetically, no”… or “hypothetically, yes”. “Obviously” isn’t an option because it relies on you making up a result to a scenario that did not exist.

So why not simply admit it, thereby opening the door to a productive dialogue?

Nothing productive comes from a baseline of a made up scenario with pretend results cultivated to serve one side of a debate.

Fedde could’ve gotten a QO if he was a free agent. He could’ve been on the market and gotten Wacha / Lynn / Gibson type of contracts because of his track record.

The only “obvious” is that we have no idea how the market would have valued him.

It is a waste of your time to answer such an easy question (which would require less than 15 seconds) - given the time you have already invested in this thread?
Quite curious.

I’ve answered your silly question, now.

[Ozziesfan41]

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)

Again, the batting runs and base running runs aren't total runs created, they are runs above average. The total number of runs created by hitting is much higher than with base running but Heyward separated himself from the pack (and Carpenter) by 7 runs or so in a much smaller category.

Total bases:
Carpenter - 290
Heyward - 240

Over a full season (with an advantage of an extra 55 PAs, 27 ABs) Carpenter managed a whole 50 more bases from hitting. As you mentioned Heyward stole 19 more bases (that's 40% of that gap). Another poster mentioned Heyward took an extra base 57% of the time vs. 44% for Carpenter and made three fewer outs on the bases. Making an out is a big deal, it removes a runner from base entirely (in addition to making an out). I don't think it's hard to see how Heyward probably created extra value through base running (he already is at 19 just looking at steals, add in at least 3 for the extra outs).

I found the metrics on the outs. Carpenter made 4 at 3B, 4 at 2B, and 1 at 1B. Heyward at 2 at 3B, 3 at 2B, and 1 at 1B. Not sure if they were doubled off on a line drive, or caught advancing, but that's two extra times Carpenter was out at 3B and one extra time at 2B than Heyward. Those hurt. Do you count being out at 3rd as three bases lost or two (could be on 2nd, unless doubled off 3rd)? Same with 2B, is that two bases lost or one? That could be as many as eight bases lost, or minimum of five, we're cutting into that total bases gap even more.

I would take carp who scored more runs hit more home runs drove in more runs and got on base more over Heyward I prefer actual runs being scored in games that actually win games.