109 replies to this topic

[Adam Wolff]

So..about that MVP talk..

[SportsGuy]

So..about that MVP talk..

Slight edge to Donaldson.

[mweb08]

Obviously, some the defensive parts of WAR are flawed.

 

The reasons I bolded Cerrano's post is that there is no discussion to be had with some people once they look at one stat. His WAR is higher. He is the MVP. End of the story.

 

 

I also have some thoughts on other advanced stats that bother me and I'll use examples. If Chris wants to open up or bump an old thread Ill do it there. Since this one is being sidetracked by the "simple, close minded people"people.

 

So who specifically does this? 

[SportsGuy]

So who specifically does this? 

No one...but Branden doesn't let facts get in the way of his awful arguments.

At least he's consistent about that...I will give him a lot of credit there.

[mweb08]

Again, I wouldn't say Jones is the team MVP so far due to him leading the team in fWAR. Neither would Rob. But I guess we still just take it as gospel and just look at one stat when looking at the MVP.<br /><br />I would say Cruz is the team MVP so far, but I wouldn't say he's a strong contender to date for the league MVP. Here's the reasoning without mentioning WAR: he's been a great hitter, but other hitters have been just as good or better by wRC+ and/or OPS+, meanwhile Cruz provides no defensive value while he's in the field and he DH's a fair amount, yet players that provide a lot of value on defense are close to him with the bat. Lastly, looking at timing of production, which can play a factor in MVP talk, Cruz's WPA is strong, but below the likes of Trout, Donaldson, and Bautista. So I'm not sure what angle can be taken to say he's most valuable. He's not the best hitter even without adjusting for position, he has zero defensive value at best, he isn't anything special on the bases, he doesn't play anything close to a premium position, and the timing of his production has not been exceptional enough to set him apart from other candidates, in fact it hasn't been as helpful as many of the other candidates.<br />

[Mike in STL]

I cant wait for the debates when I unveil my Z-Score project for the last 64 years of the NFL (1950-present). A project that tries to define the best and worst individual offensive seasons. Something ive been working on off and on for over a year and a half.

Of course if it goes well, baseball will be the next project.

Stay tuned.

[DJ MC]

I cant wait for the debates when I unveil my Z-Score project for the last 64 years of the NFL (1950-present). A project that tries to define the best and worst individual offensive seasons. Something ive been working on off and on for over a year and a half.

Of course if it goes well, baseball will be the next project.

Stay tuned.

 

I assume Pedro is paying you for this?

[Mike in STL]

 
I assume Pedro is paying you for this?

Haha. No.

Im in the "no single stat tells the whole story" boat, including this one.

I agree with bits and pieces of what everyone has said in this thread. Yes, advanced stats tell more of the story than others and I dont dismiss them even though I dont understand them all. Maybe a half dozen I get. Yes, for simplicity sake, I like to see old school numbers like a guys ERA, K/9, OPS etc because its a good starting point to say is this guy good or bad. I've never seen a good pitcher with a high ERA, or a poor hitter with a high OPS.

Ive echoed Pedro's sentiments about WAR in the past. From what ive been told here is that different publications interpret it slightly differently (fangraphs is fWAR). But to me that is subjective, which takes away from its definitiveness. On the other hand, no bad players have high WAR numbers so they are doing something right. But because one guy might list player Xs WAR as 9.4, and another guys list him as 10.2, and another 9.8, Its like a power ranking or AP poll to me. But its still a useful tool that encompasses the total body of work which no other stat does, which is what I have tried to do with the Z - Score thing ive been working on.

[SportsGuy]

Haha. No. Im in the "no single stat tells the whole story" boat, including this one. I agree with bits and pieces of what everyone has said in this thread. Yes, advanced stats tell more of the story than others and I dont dismiss them even though I dont understand them all. Maybe a half dozen I get. Yes, for simplicity sake, I like to see old school numbers like a guys ERA, K/9, OPS etc because its a good starting point to say is this guy good or bad. I've never seen a good pitcher with a high ERA, or a poor hitter with a high OPS. Ive echoed Pedro's sentiments about WAR in the past. From what ive been told here is that different publications interpret it slightly differently (fangraphs is fWAR). But to me that is subjective, which takes away from its definitiveness. On the other hand, no bad players have high WAR numbers so they are doing something right. But because one guy might list player Xs WAR as 9.4, and another guys list him as 10.2, and another 9.8, Its like a power ranking or AP poll to me. But its still a useful tool that encompasses the total body of work which no other stat does, which is what I have tried to do with the Z - Score thing ive been working on.

Well, it's just that different sites use different things to determine their WAR.

It's not a universal stat like OPS is, for example.

[mweb08]

I agree that no one stat can tell the whole story. Some things aren't going to be captured at all or well in a stat that tries to be all encompassing. Defense and baserunning are going to the aspects of the game where a stat like that is generally going to have inadequacies, so then you add your own judgments.