Would trading Mancini be the best option now?

[Number5]

7 minutes ago, ArtVanDelay said:

Nor was Trumbo’s seasonal WAR figure unduly deflated by randomly poor defensive numbers. Trumbo split the season between the outfield and designated hitter, and his UZR in the outfield was right in line with his career numbers, where he has been roughly 10 runs below average over a full season for a corner outfielder. That figure plus the positional adjustment for corner outfield (-7.5 runs) is equivalent to the adjustment for designated hitter (-17.5), which means that making Trumbo a designated hitter isn’t going to save him any more runs as a player overall.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/mark-trumbo-is-still-a-free-agent-for-obvious-reasons/

I'm not sure if you understand the positional adjustment.  DHs are heavily penalized by WAR for not playing defense.  Trumbo isn't gaining anything by DHing.  The positional adjustment for DH basically falls in line with what he has done as an outfielder. 

LOL.  Well, you can pretend that is the case if you want.  Me?  The proof's in the pudding.  One look at Ortiz and Alvarez shows the minimal affect of the DH adjustment on their WAR.  One look at Trumbo shows the huge affect his RF play had on his WAR. 

[weams]

Just now, mdbdotcom said:

It must be very difficult to hit that many home runs in one season and earn so little WAR.

Maybe WAR should be re-evaluated. Things change very quickly theses days. Perhaps the skills evaluated are not as influential as they were just a few years ago? Adaptation rather than dogma rules the day. Even New Age Dogma.

[ArtVanDelay]

3 minutes ago, Number5 said:

LOL.  Well, you can pretend that is the case if you want.  Me?  The proof's in the pudding.  One look at Ortiz and Alvarez shows the minimal affect of the DH adjustment on their WAR.  One look at Trumbo shows the huge affect his RF play had on his WAR. 

They didn't even play the same amount of games.  You're grasping at straws here. 

[DrungoHazewood]

1 hour ago, Number5 said:

Exactly.  And the difference between oWAR and WAR for those two players is much less than for Trumbo, with the obvious difference being how his poor defense in RF affected his WAR.  The discussion you entered was regarding the other ArtVanDelay's claim than the DH adjustment would have just as much impact on Trumbo's WAR as his bad play in right field.  I was pointing out that that is quite obviously not the case. 

Yea, I don't know if you understand the positional adjustment.

[DrungoHazewood]

16 minutes ago, mdbdotcom said:

It must be very difficult to hit that many home runs in one season and earn so little WAR.

Eh, not so much.  Yes, Trumbo set a record for lowest rWAR with 47 or more homers. But he basically had the same year that Ryan Howard had in 2008, and Jose Canseco in 1998:

                                                                                                                          
	Rk               Player WAR/pos HR Year Age  Tm Lg   G  PA  AB   R   H 2B 3B RBI  BB IBB  SO   BA  OBP  SLG   OPS      Pos
	1             Adam Dunn     0.4 40 2006  26 CIN NL 160 683 561  99 131 24  0  92 112  12 194 .234 .365 .490  .855   *7/3HD
	2             Adam Dunn     0.7 40 2008  28 TOT NL 158 651 517  79 122 23  0 100 122  13 164 .236 .386 .513  .898  *793/HD
	3        Jeff Burroughs     0.7 41 1977  26 ATL NL 154 671 579  91 157 19  1 114  86   2 126 .271 .362 .520  .882     *9/H
	4          Chris Carter     0.9 41 2016  29 MIL NL 160 644 549  84 122 27  1  94  76   1 206 .222 .321 .499  .821    *3/HD
	5        Dante Bichette     1.1 40 1995  31 COL NL 139 612 579 102 197 38  2 128  22   5  96 .340 .364 .620  .984    *79/H
	6             Adam Dunn     1.4 41 2012  32 CHW AL 151 649 539  87 110 19  0  96 105   3 222 .204 .333 .468  .800   *D3/7H
	7             Adam Dunn     1.4 40 2007  27 CIN NL 152 632 522 101 138 27  2 106 101   8 165 .264 .386 .554  .940    *7/HD
	8          Jose Canseco     1.5 46 1998  33 TOR AL 151 658 583  98 138 26  0 107  65   5 159 .237 .318 .518  .836     *D79
	9           Mark Trumbo     1.6 47 2016  30 BAL AL 159 667 613  94 157 27  1 108  51   1 170 .256 .316 .533  .850   *9D/37
	10          Ryan Howard     1.8 48 2008  28 PHI NL 162 700 610 105 153 26  4 146  81  17 199 .251 .339 .543  .881    *3/HD
	11          Dick Stuart     1.9 42 1963  30 BOS AL 157 659 612  81 160 25  4 118  44   2 144 .261 .312 .521  .833     *3/H
	12         Paul Konerko     2.3 41 2004  28 CHW AL 155 643 563  84 156 22  0 117  69   5 107 .277 .359 .535  .894    *3D/H
	13          Gus Zernial     2.3 42 1953  30 PHA AL 147 617 556  85 158 21  3 108      57  79 .284 .355 .559  .914     *7/H
	14         Tony Batista     2.4 41 2000  26 TOR AL 154 664 620  96 163 32  2 114  35   1 121 .263 .307 .519  .827       *5
	15           Jay Buhner     2.4 40 1995  30 SEA AL 126 539 470  86 123 23  0 121  60   7 120 .262 .343 .566  .909    *9/DH




	

[Number5]

2 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Yea, I don't know if you understand the positional adjustment.

If you guys want to look at the blatantly obvious difference between oWAR and WAR for Trumbo versus the much smaller difference for the players that played DH nearly the entire season and not reason that the undeniable difference that you are staring at is not the result of Trumbo's defensive play, be my guest.  Better yet, tell me that I don't understand.  The difference is there and is both large and unmistakable.  Pretend it isn't there, if you want, but I'll go ahead and recognize the obvious, thank you.

[DrungoHazewood]

1 minute ago, Number5 said:

If you guys want to look at the blatantly obvious difference between oWAR and WAR for Trumbo versus the much smaller difference for the players that played DH nearly the entire season and not reason that the undeniable difference that you are staring at is not the result of Trumbo's defensive play, be my guest.  Better yet, tell me that I don't understand.  The difference is there and is both large and unmistakable.  Pretend it isn't there, if you want, but I'll go ahead and recognize the obvious, thank you.

Look, this is simple. Go to Trumbo's page on Fangraphs, go to the bottom.  See where, on the 2016 line, it says -7.6 fielding and -10.8 positional?  Zero out the fielding, and make the positional adjustment -17.5.  Then total up the whole 2016 row... and you get pretty much the same value either way.

BB-ref has him as a -11 fielder and -10 position, so there you get a slight advantage for him DHing the whole time.

[Number5]

1 minute ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Look, this is simple. Go to Trumbo's page on Fangraphs, go to the bottom.  See where, on the 2016 line, it says -7.6 fielding and -10.8 positional?  Zero out the fielding, and make the positional adjustment -17.5.  Then total up the whole 2016 row... and you get pretty much the same value either way.

BB-ref has him as a -11 fielder and -10 position, so there you get a slight advantage for him DHing the whole time.

Looking directly at the WAR is even simpler.  Especially since that is what we are talking about.  There simply is no question whatsoever that Trumbo's WAR is affected much more by defense than the DH players' WAR is affected by the DH adjustment.  It jumps off the page at you.  Pretending that it isn't there or doing other calculations is meaningless.  The actual WAR is unquestionably actually affected as shown.  Maybe, just maybe, I'm not the only one that doesn't understand.

[Roll Tide]

13 minutes ago, Number5 said:

Looking directly at the WAR is even simpler.  Especially since that is what we are talking about.  There simply is no question whatsoever that Trumbo's WAR is affected much more by defense than the DH players' WAR is affected by the DH adjustment.  It jumps off the page at you.  Pretending that it isn't there or doing other calculations is meaningless.  The actual WAR is unquestionably actually affected as shown.  Maybe, just maybe, I'm not the only one that doesn't understand.

WAR is  flawed stat

 

http://www.cheatsheet.com/sports/mlb-5-weaknesses-of-the-war-statistic-explained.html/?a=viewall

[ArtVanDelay]

5 minutes ago, Roll Tide said:

WAR is  flawed stat

 

http://www.cheatsheet.com/sports/mlb-5-weaknesses-of-the-war-statistic-explained.html/?a=viewall

Of course it's flawed. 

So are batting average, RBI, errors, ERA, wins, saves, etc. 

[weams]

1 minute ago, ArtVanDelay said:

Of course it's flawed. 

So are batting average, RBI, errors, ERA, wins, saves, etc. 

Not home runs. They all count. 

[ArtVanDelay]

1 minute ago, weams said:

Not home runs. They all count. 

But some are 475 feet and some are 325 feet. 

[Number5]

10 minutes ago, Roll Tide said:

WAR is  flawed stat

 

http://www.cheatsheet.com/sports/mlb-5-weaknesses-of-the-war-statistic-explained.html/?a=viewall

No question.  Especially the defensive component.  That is how people get fooled into thinking Jason Heyward is worth $184 million while fretting about paying Mark Trumbo $37 million.

[Roll Tide]

7 minutes ago, ArtVanDelay said:

Of course it's flawed. 

So are batting average, RBI, errors, ERA, wins, saves, etc. 

average is a mathematical equation so it can't be flawed

RBIs or how they are credited is clearly defined

errors are flawed as they have a human element and a home team scorer. 

Wins have a criteria to qualify, but yes it's flawed as run support is not controlled

ERA is flawed as the actual pitcher that allows a run to score doesn't often get charged with it

Save are certainly not all created equal

 

[Can_of_corn]

10 minutes ago, Roll Tide said:

average is a mathematical equation so it can't be flawed

RBIs or how they are credited is clearly defined

errors are flawed as they have a human element and a home team scorer. 

Wins have a criteria to qualify, but yes it's flawed as run support is not controlled

ERA is flawed as the actual pitcher that allows a run to score doesn't often get charged with it

Save are certainly not all created equal

 

2+2=5.

Does not compute.