Why do people value WAR/Arbitrary formulas.

[Pickles]

Well, I did take this from the OP:

and this later

Well, I do think he goes too far to say it's "worthless."

But his point about BA is valid. It's a stat w an extremely limited amount of subjectivity. It pretty accurately describes what it is attempting to describe; far more than WAR does.

[Pickles]

I'm not familiar with the constituent components, but could he have a viable point here? Do we know that preferential bias does not play a part in component valuation? I honestly do not know.

Of course it does. That's the whole point.

[24fps]

C'mon guys...keep the momentum going.

What do you all think of the Higgs Boson? An elegant solution to the so-called "particle zoo" problem, no? But is it too elegant?

For the typical Yankees fan, yes.

[sangar]

Of course it does. That's the whole point.

So rather than attempting to project an objective measurement, the formula designers are pushing a personal agenda?

[Pickles]

So rather than attempting to project an objective measurement, the designers are pushing a personal agenda?

They are attempting to project an objective measurement, but it's, as LJ has noted, framed subjectively.

[sangar]

They are attempting to project an objective measurement, but it's, as LJ has noted, framed subjectively.

Gotcha, thanks.

[CA-ORIOLE]

I'm not familiar with the constituent components, but could he have a viable point here? Do we know that preferential bias does not play a part in component valuation? I honestly do not know.

Ehh, not really. I think it's just matter of the best we have isn't conclsuive in the areas of defense and pitching. He's not identifying deficiencies but rather saying that the statistic is "useless". He clearly has an agenda imo.

The offensive component is pretty widely accepted as being about the best there is. There isn't to much difference betwen rWAR and fWAR for offense. We can debate defensive efficiency (UZR) and FIP (for pithcers) in fWAR and that's fine. They are pretty regularly picked apart in WAR discussions when they don't make sense and and that's as it should be. The component and methodology are there to be argued and debated. You don't have to (and should not) take WAR at face value without analyzing it.

What are we going to do go back to batting average and ERA? Not adjust for OBP? Not adjust for park factors and competition? If he thinks there's a bias then say what he thinks it is and inform us. How would he value players?

I don't have any problem with people pointing out flaws and debating. That's not what he's doing. Some others have made good points about FIP, one years growth of UZR etc. He hasn't really provided anything.

[sangar]

Ehh, not really. I think it's just matter of the best we have isn't conclsuive in the areas of defense and pitching. He's not identifying deficiencies but rather saying that the statistic is "useless". He clearly has an agenda imo.

The offensive component is pretty widely accepted as being about the best there is. There isn't to much difference betwen rWAR and fWAR for offense. We can debate defensive efficiency (UZR) and FIP (for pithcers) in fWAR and that's fine. They are pretty regularly picked apart in WAR discussions when they don't make sense and and that's as it should be. The component and methodology are there to be argued and debated. You don't have to (and should not) take WAR at face value without analyzing it.

What are we going to do go back to batting average and ERA? Not adjust for OBP? Not adjust for park factors and competition? If he thinks there's a bias then say what he thinks it is and inform us. How would he value players?

I don't ahve any problem ith people pointing out falws and debating. That's not what he's doing. Some others have made good points about FIP, one years growth of UZR etc. He hasn't really provided anything.

I didn't mean to sound like I was siding with the OP, and yes, his agenda was evident. I just wanted to explore that one point a little further for my own information. Thanks for the instructive response.

[CA-ORIOLE]

Well, I do think he goes too far to say it's "worthless."

But his point about BA is valid. It's a stat w an extremely limited amount of subjectivity. It pretty accurately describes what it is attempting to describe; far more than WAR does.

WAR is looking to describe player "value". Batting average can't do that. In fact, it is often used to innaccurately describe value.

Offensive WAR with numerous calculations and adjustments provide a better assessment of offensive value than batting average will. If you have some issue with the adjustments/methodology that oWAR uses to assess value then by all means, please provide what you find objectionable.

[Pickles]

WAR is looking to describe player "value". Batting average can't do that. In fact, it is often used to innaccurately describe value.

Offensive WAR with numerous calculations and adjustments provide a better assessment of offensive value than batting average will. If you have some issue with the adjustments/methodology that oWAR uses to assess value then by all means, please provide what you find objectionable.

I'm not saying BA is a more valuable tool; I'm saying it is far more accurate in what it attempts to measure.

Regarding WAR, do I really need to have more issues than those which you raise to have a legitimate objection to it's value?

[Nigel Tufnel]

I'm not saying BA is a more valuable tool; I'm saying it is far more accurate in what it attempts to measure.

Yeah, but who cares? It's like saying a tape measue is more accurate at measuring distance than an MRI is at finding an injury. It's true, but what does it have to do with anything?

[CA-ORIOLE]

I'm not saying BA is a more valuable tool; I'm saying it is far more accurate in what it attempts to measure.

Regarding WAR, do I really need to have more issues than those which you raise to have a legitimate objection to it's value?

So what? I would prefer to look at something that is valuable over somethiing that is accurate. What good is something that is accurate if doesn't mean anything. No offense but, I really don't get the point here.

[Pickles]

So what? I would prefer to look at something that is valuable over somethiing that is accurate. What good is something that is accurate if doesn't mean anything. No offense but, I really don't get the point here.

It was really periphreal to the conversation we were having, and was merely about the "subjectivity" of certain stats.

[SrMeowMeow]

WAR is excellent. Stupid people routinely misuse excellent things. The end.

[Pickles]

WAR is excellent. Stupid people routinely misuse excellent things. The end.

Well thanks for clearing that up.