STLtoday.com

Posted: **16 Jul 2025 20:12 pm**

ClassicO wrote: ↑15 Jul 2025 21:19 pm In 12,232 words, Melville did not answer my question (no surprise).
I look at all stats, and even estimates, and actually cite them for support in my posts (unlike someone).
WAR is used for comparison purposes and does a good job.
People are hung up only on offensive stats, and WAR helps bring out the many other facets of the game.
It's not perfect, but as I've asked The Narcissist - how do you gauge a player's total value? (No answer.)

He can wax poetic all he wants about Gibby et al., but it's an avoidance mechanism.
Was Gibson greater than Brock? H*ll yes. Lou was horrible defensively. He didn't have power. I loved him, but he's nowhere close to Gibby's level.
Note: Gibby 89.2 WAR (47th all-time - vs Carlton - 45th); Brock 45.4 WAR (410th all-time vs Omar Vizquel - 45.6)
Vizquel and Brock are likely equally valued all-around to their teams, as were Gibby and Carlton.

So see, WAR punishes the weaknesses so people hopefully don't ask such dumb questions as did Melville (Gibby v Lou - ha).

Here's the bWARs all-time for the top 67 players. It seems to capture the top players in a good order (always arguments).

Screenshot 2025-07-15 at 9.01.25 PM.png

Screenshot 2025-07-15 at 9.06.37 PM.png

So you needed war to tell you those guys are stars lol I knew those guys were stars before war came out using other stats

Posted: **16 Jul 2025 20:13 pm**

Ozziesfan41 wrote: ↑16 Jul 2025 20:12 pm
ClassicO wrote: ↑15 Jul 2025 21:19 pm In 12,232 words, Melville did not answer my question (no surprise).
I look at all stats, and even estimates, and actually cite them for support in my posts (unlike someone).
WAR is used for comparison purposes and does a good job.
People are hung up only on offensive stats, and WAR helps bring out the many other facets of the game.
It's not perfect, but as I've asked The Narcissist - how do you gauge a player's total value? (No answer.)

He can wax poetic all he wants about Gibby et al., but it's an avoidance mechanism.
Was Gibson greater than Brock? H*ll yes. Lou was horrible defensively. He didn't have power. I loved him, but he's nowhere close to Gibby's level.
Note: Gibby 89.2 WAR (47th all-time - vs Carlton - 45th); Brock 45.4 WAR (410th all-time vs Omar Vizquel - 45.6)
Vizquel and Brock are likely equally valued all-around to their teams, as were Gibby and Carlton.

So see, WAR punishes the weaknesses so people hopefully don't ask such dumb questions as did Melville (Gibby v Lou - ha).

Here's the bWARs all-time for the top 67 players. It seems to capture the top players in a good order (always arguments).

Screenshot 2025-07-15 at 9.01.25 PM.png

Screenshot 2025-07-15 at 9.06.37 PM.png
So you needed war to tell you those guys are stars lol I knew those guys were stars before war came out using other stats

Indeed.

Posted: **16 Jul 2025 20:14 pm**

Melville wrote: ↑16 Jul 2025 20:06 pm
Futuregm2 wrote: ↑16 Jul 2025 14:31 pm
Melville wrote: ↑16 Jul 2025 14:26 pm
Goldfan wrote: ↑16 Jul 2025 13:22 pm
Basil Shabazz wrote: ↑16 Jul 2025 11:46 am
Goldfan wrote: ↑16 Jul 2025 08:21 am
Basil Shabazz wrote: ↑16 Jul 2025 08:12 am "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.

A) Oakland had to spend money to avoid issues with MLB.

B) Who knows, it’s possible. Severino has 2 seasons with 5+ WAR though in his career and his 2 WAR last year wasn’t bad and was his first 30 start season since his last 5 WAR season, so he’s got a more interesting track record than Fedde. What the A’s probably didn’t see was Severino’s ability to miss bats dropping dramatically in 2025 (Swinging strike% went from 9.4% to 6.7%). And that is similar to Fedde who went from 8.7% last year to 6.6% this year. Although his track record of missing bats is not nearly that of Severino.

Posted: **16 Jul 2025 20:50 pm**

Ozziesfan41 wrote: ↑16 Jul 2025 20:12 pm
ClassicO wrote: ↑15 Jul 2025 21:19 pm In 12,232 words, Melville did not answer my question (no surprise).
I look at all stats, and even estimates, and actually cite them for support in my posts (unlike someone).
WAR is used for comparison purposes and does a good job.
People are hung up only on offensive stats, and WAR helps bring out the many other facets of the game.
It's not perfect, but as I've asked The Narcissist - how do you gauge a player's total value? (No answer.)

He can wax poetic all he wants about Gibby et al., but it's an avoidance mechanism.
Was Gibson greater than Brock? H*ll yes. Lou was horrible defensively. He didn't have power. I loved him, but he's nowhere close to Gibby's level.
Note: Gibby 89.2 WAR (47th all-time - vs Carlton - 45th); Brock 45.4 WAR (410th all-time vs Omar Vizquel - 45.6)
Vizquel and Brock are likely equally valued all-around to their teams, as were Gibby and Carlton.

So see, WAR punishes the weaknesses so people hopefully don't ask such dumb questions as did Melville (Gibby v Lou - ha).

Here's the bWARs all-time for the top 67 players. It seems to capture the top players in a good order (always arguments).

Screenshot 2025-07-15 at 9.01.25 PM.png

Screenshot 2025-07-15 at 9.06.37 PM.png
So you needed war to tell you those guys are stars lol I knew those guys were stars before war came out using other stats

Geez. Read closer. Melville says it’s a fiction and I say it’s pretty forking real the way it compares the best of the best - when no other metric does that near as well. It’s the proverbial proof in the pudding.

Posted: **16 Jul 2025 21:00 pm**

Melville wrote: ↑16 Jul 2025 20:11 pm
renostl wrote: ↑16 Jul 2025 20:07 pm
Melville wrote: ↑16 Jul 2025 14:36 pm
Futuregm2 wrote: ↑16 Jul 2025 14:31 pm
Melville wrote: ↑16 Jul 2025 14:26 pm
Goldfan wrote: ↑16 Jul 2025 13:22 pm
Basil Shabazz wrote: ↑16 Jul 2025 11:46 am
Goldfan wrote: ↑16 Jul 2025 08:21 am
Basil Shabazz wrote: ↑16 Jul 2025 08:12 am "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

It is on topic.
I doubt anyone uses a single stat or calculation to determine salary
That context does matter.

You did once reply correctly in this very thread when stating
that you do not use just on item to determine a players value. That's fine.
There's simply o reason to when all are at our disposal. The same as BA has value
but less value when used alone.

Posted: **16 Jul 2025 21:02 pm**

I'm an old geezer. I still like fielding per centage on defense and BA, OBP, HR, RBI on offense. For starting pitchers ERA, W/L. Relievers mostly ERA. You guys can do all the exit angle, exit velocity, spin rate ya'll want.

Posted: **16 Jul 2025 21:05 pm**

Melville wrote: ↑16 Jul 2025 20:06 pm
Futuregm2 wrote: ↑16 Jul 2025 14:31 pm
Melville wrote: ↑16 Jul 2025 14:26 pm
Goldfan wrote: ↑16 Jul 2025 13:22 pm
Basil Shabazz wrote: ↑16 Jul 2025 11:46 am
Goldfan wrote: ↑16 Jul 2025 08:21 am
Basil Shabazz wrote: ↑16 Jul 2025 08:12 am "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.

Posted: **16 Jul 2025 21:26 pm**

AZ_Cardsfan wrote: ↑16 Jul 2025 09:23 am
Melville wrote: ↑15 Jul 2025 21:24 pm
ClassicO wrote: ↑15 Jul 2025 21:19 pm In 12,232 words, Melville did not answer my question (no surprise).
Oh, but I did.
You did not see it.
I will not judge as to whether that is a surprise.
By the way, your word count stat is incorrect.
No one sees an answer. What specific number or stat do you do to compare value in trades or drafts? That is what WAR attempts to provide. You may say it isn't a stat (true) but it uses stats to create a singular number for comparison and is as far as I can see the best thing out there.

WAR does not attempt to provide either of those things. Trade value is deeply dependent on the value of a players contract. Though I suppose it could be done, WAR is not applied to college, high school or international players (potential draftees). WAR only measures on field value, and though it is a factor in establishing some trade value estimates like BTV - that isn’t why it was designed.

Posted: **16 Jul 2025 21:39 pm**

Melville wrote: ↑16 Jul 2025 08:14 am Two, WAR is an estimate based on extremely subjective and assigned values.

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

Posted: **16 Jul 2025 21:40 pm**

Melville wrote: ↑16 Jul 2025 19:30 pm
ClassicO wrote: ↑16 Jul 2025 16:55 pm 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.

Wrong again. You were knocked out long before page 6.

Posted: **16 Jul 2025 21:52 pm**

Quincy Varnish wrote: ↑16 Jul 2025 21:39 pm
Melville wrote: ↑16 Jul 2025 08:14 am 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?

Posted: **16 Jul 2025 22:10 pm**

Futuregm2 wrote: ↑16 Jul 2025 20:14 pm
Melville wrote: ↑16 Jul 2025 20:06 pm
Futuregm2 wrote: ↑16 Jul 2025 14:31 pm
Melville wrote: ↑16 Jul 2025 14:26 pm
Goldfan wrote: ↑16 Jul 2025 13:22 pm
Basil Shabazz wrote: ↑16 Jul 2025 11:46 am
Goldfan wrote: ↑16 Jul 2025 08:21 am
Basil Shabazz wrote: ↑16 Jul 2025 08:12 am "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.
A) Oakland had to spend money to avoid issues with MLB.

B) Who knows, it’s possible. Severino has 2 seasons with 5+ WAR though in his career and his 2 WAR last year wasn’t bad and was his first 30 start season since his last 5 WAR season, so he’s got a more interesting track record than Fedde. What the A’s probably didn’t see was Severino’s ability to miss bats dropping dramatically in 2025 (Swinging strike% went from 9.4% to 6.7%). And that is similar to Fedde who went from 8.7% last year to 6.6% this year. Although his track record of missing bats is not nearly that of Severino.

Very fair.

Posted: **16 Jul 2025 22:13 pm**

HOUCARD wrote: ↑16 Jul 2025 21:02 pm I'm an old geezer. I still like fielding per centage on defense and BA, OBP, HR, RBI on offense. For starting pitchers ERA, W/L. Relievers mostly ERA. You guys can do all the exit angle, exit velocity, spin rate ya'll want.

Wisdom with age.
A good thing.

Posted: **16 Jul 2025 22:23 pm**

Goldfan wrote: ↑16 Jul 2025 21:52 pm
Quincy Varnish wrote: ↑16 Jul 2025 21:39 pm
Melville wrote: ↑16 Jul 2025 08:14 am 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?

Posted: **16 Jul 2025 22:31 pm**

Melville wrote: ↑16 Jul 2025 22:23 pm
Goldfan wrote: ↑16 Jul 2025 21:52 pm
Quincy Varnish wrote: ↑16 Jul 2025 21:39 pm
Melville wrote: ↑16 Jul 2025 08:14 am 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?

Posted: **16 Jul 2025 22:32 pm**

Goldfan wrote: ↑16 Jul 2025 21:52 pm
Quincy Varnish wrote: ↑16 Jul 2025 21:39 pm
Melville wrote: ↑16 Jul 2025 08:14 am 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

STLtoday.com

Going to WAR...for Classic0

Re: Going to WAR...for Classic0

Re: Going to WAR...for Classic0

Re: Going to WAR...for Classic0

Re: Going to WAR...for Classic0

Re: Going to WAR...for Classic0

Re: Going to WAR...for Classic0

Re: Going to WAR...for Classic0

Re: Going to WAR...for Classic0

Re: Going to WAR...for Classic0

Re: Going to WAR...for Classic0

Re: Going to WAR...for Classic0

Re: Going to WAR...for Classic0

Re: Going to WAR...for Classic0

Re: Going to WAR...for Classic0

Re: Going to WAR...for Classic0

Re: Going to WAR...for Classic0