2008 Orioles MVP using WPA

[Maverick2143]

I was referring to this season in his "crapping out" at the three spot in the order, not last year. What you are showing though looks like he has regressed in that spot from last year to this year, which is not a good thing I must point out.

He's 24 years old of course he is going to have some rough spots. Pitchers made adjustments to Nick at the begining of the season and he made corresponding adjustments. I was all set to make this big long post detailing the Pitch F/X and the difference from 2007 and Pre-All Star break 2008. But it's not worth my time because you won't listen.

[Eight]

In a stirring turn of events Markakis has another clutch evening while Johnson, Huff and Mora all falter. Current Orioles WPA leaders:

Johnson: 2.08

Guthrie: 2.03

Huff: 1.89

Roberts: 1.82

Markakis: 1.61

Mora: 1.51

And Markakis surpasses Mora! Amazing!

[BRobinsonfan]

In a stirring turn of events Markakis has another clutch evening while Johnson, Huff and Mora all falter. Current Orioles WPA leaders:

Johnson: 2.08

Guthrie: 2.03

Huff: 1.89

Roberts: 1.82

Markakis: 1.61

Mora: 1.51

And Markakis surpasses Mora! Amazing!

According to SAOFRmetrics (Society for Advanced Old Fan Research) even if Markakis ends up at the top of the WPA leader board (as he did last year) it will only prove the inadequacy of WPA as a statistical tool - not that Markakis is actually the best hitter on the Orioles with the highest future potential. As the OldFan theorem clearly states "the only accurate stat is the one that agrees with his opinion, all others are useless."

The only exception to the theorem is when the stat he is currently quoting to try and prove a point can be used to contradict an earlier conclusion made by him. In this case we fall back on the "OldFan Situational postulate." This basically invalidates all data not actually witnessed by OldFan. For example, if Nick Markakis actually hits well in "close and late" situations they are "not the right close and late situations" because when OldFan sees him hit in those situations he chokes.

This exception helps explain and inform the OldFan "productive out" and "unmanly walk" rules.

Hope this helps.

[Baltimoron]

Of course, this stat also would need to be weighed somehow.

An average player has a zero WPA. One can debate how WPA chooses to define "average" (largely because it looks at outcomes over multiple years) but that is what it represents.

Should you really reward someone who's "raw" numbers are lower but simply was presented with a far greater number of impactful sitations?

WPA does not necessarily reward someone who has been presented with "a far greater number of impactful situations." In such situations, referred to as "high leverage" in WPA nomenclature, failing (i.e. making an out for an offensive player) yields a negative WPA.

For example, go to Fangraphs leaderboard and click on the "pLI" to sort by pLI in ascending or descending order. pLI is the average leverage of a given player's game events, which in the case of a batter are plate appearances and situations where there was a base running "play" (advancement or out).

Keven Kouzmanoff lead the majors with a 1.13 pLI. But his WPA is a negative -2.38.

In one way of looking at it, being presented with more high leverage situations gives a player a chance to amass a higher WPA *if* they succeed in such chances. But they are also presented with more chances to fail and accrue a negative WPA.

To what extent players are "clutch" and can do better in high or low leverage situations is a debatable separate matter.

----

A lot of this is reiterating a lot of the good stuff already posted in this thread.

Tom Tango said it best - WPA is a good barometer for how you feel as you watch a game as a fan:

What WPA represents is the quantification of your feelings as the game unfolds. Imagine if Youk hit into a triple play his first 2 AB, with the score tied 0-0 the whole time, then the Sox lead 15-0 (and he gets two outs), then he hits two HR. How is it that you felt with Youk, if you tracked it in real time?

Well, his first two AB, you are cursing his name like there’s no tomorrow, then when the team batted around (twice), your blood pressure starts to go down, and then, with the score at 15-0, you’re probably not even watching the game any more.

That is what WPA captures.... the quantification of your feelings as the game unfolds, assigned to the players involved.

WPA is not a way to evaluate the talent of a player.

link.

To repeat, WPA is not a way to assess talent.

WPA counts certain situations (high leverage situations) more (sometime much, much more) than low leverage situations. Its apparent that in a predictive sense, it has sample size size issues, because a few key at bats can swing it either way. Tom Tango:

- WPA count some PA as 10, some as 5, some as 1, some as 0.5, some as 0.01, depending on the game state; so a bases loaded down by 1 in the bottom of the 9th counts far far more than the same situation but up by 25

link.

But in a MVP debate context, it provides a fairly logically sound and decently clean way of assessing who made the most meaningful impact (for offensive players). Its not perfect (see below), and "who made the most meaningful impact" is not the sole definition of "MVP", but its worth looking at when retrospectively trying to assess impact.

--

WPA does not consider fielding, so that everything that happens "defensively" is attributed to the pitcher (a strikeout, an fielding error, or an outstanding defensive play) and everything that happens "offensively" is attributed to the hitter (credited for reaching on an error) or the lead baserunner (credited for advancing on a wild pitch). link.

Thus WPA isn't very helpful for pitchers. Not to say it is faultless for offensive players, but its pretty good for assessing what happens "offensively."

If you are interested in an explanation of the calculation of the underlying win probability percentages, you could start here.

A simple explanation and example of WPA is here. There are also some links there that can offer some further explanations of how WPA works.

[Enjoy Terror]

When I initially posted this thread, Jim Johnson led the club in WPA. Since Jim Johnson managed to avoid the september collapse by being injured, he is still on top as MVO. Brian Roberts and Markakis both eclipsed Huff as well.

[Guest rochester]

I hate that I keep involving myself in these things. It just boggles my mind to the point of disbelief that somebody could be so ignorant and still somehow function in society.

I gotta tell you... why does Old#5fan get under everyone's skin so bad - to the point of this kind of attack. Until the complete vitriol started I thought he wrote that Markakis is a very good ballplayer (which he is) but is overrated on the board (which I believe he is at times).

He may have been a bit(?) antagonistic about it but gee Mackus relax.

[BRobinsonfan]

I gotta tell you... why does Old#5fan get under everyone's skin so bad - to the point of this kind of attack. Until the complete vitriol started I thought he wrote that Markakis is a very good ballplayer (which he is) but is overrated on the board (which I believe he is at times).

He may have been a bit(?) antagonistic about it but gee Mackus relax.

I guess because he keeps insisting that 2 + 2 = 7