Now use it to recalculate WAR

[Enjoy Terror]

1 hour ago, atomic said:

I think all these summary stats are ruining the game. I prefer to watch the player and make my own opinions.    

You could log off the site and never come back, watch the game, and you would never know stats like these exist.

This is mutually advantageous.

[Chuck A]

So with Iglesias replacing Martin, based on this year's projected line-up (Hays in, Smith Jr out and the SS swap) the value is 0 vs -28 OAA.  Wow.

[Frobby]

Overall, not a huge difference between the various defensive metrics for the O’s infielders.    Here’s Rtot, Rdrs, UZR and OAA at each position.    Keep in mind that the first three are measured in runs, while OAA is measure in outs (= 0.6 runs per out, I believe).

1B Davis (769 innings): -1, 0, 0.4, 0

1B Mancini (449 innings): 1, -1, 1.9, 0

2B Villar (733 innings): -2, -11, -4.6, -7

2B Alberto (612 innings): 5, 5, 4.0, 4

3B Ruiz (843 innings): 1, 2, 1.8, -5

3B Alberto (474 innings) 6, -2, -0.6, 3

SS Martin (785 innings): -7, -8, -4.2, -5

SS Villar (658 innings): 4, 0, -1.4, -4

SS Iglesias (1169 innings): 8, 8, 5.9, 12

Rdrs (the second stat shown) is used to calculate rWAR, UZR (third stat shown) is used to calculate fWAR.

[SteveA]

So maybe it's not just a catchy rhyme.   Maybe Hanser really is the Answer.

[DrungoHazewood]

4 hours ago, atomic said:

It makes discussing any of this boring.  You just stat WAR or this stat and we have nothing left to discuss as anyone can look up the information.  Really baseball talk has become incredibly boring.  No one mentions batting average anymore or strike outs by batters.  It is just WAR WAR WAR.  

 

You're listening to the wrong people.  Or grossly exaggerating. 

[Frobby]

5 hours ago, atomic said:

It makes discussing any of this boring.  You just stat WAR or this stat and we have nothing left to discuss as anyone can look up the information.  Really baseball talk has become incredibly boring.  No one mentions batting average anymore or strike outs by batters.  It is just WAR WAR WAR.  

I don’t agree, or understand why you are discussing WAR here.    These new stats aren’t used in calculating WAR (at least, not yet) and to some extent, they call into question whether the current defensive stats used in WAR calculations are valid inputs, and ergo how reliable WAR is.   Hence, the thread title.  

To me, the newer stats don’t eliminate argument or discussion, rather they illuminate it and/or add another element to the debate.    It’s useful to know whether it’s better to be a .260 hitter with 45 homers, 80 walks and 175 strikeouts or a .310 hitter with 24 homers, 50 walks and 110 strikeouts.    Before we could simply argue about it without anything much to back it up, now there’s data to back up the arguments and help us answer the question.    I prefer that.   
 

[atomic]

2 hours ago, Frobby said:

I don’t agree, or understand why you are discussing WAR here.    These new stats aren’t used in calculating WAR (at least, not yet) and to some extent, they call into question whether the current defensive stats used in WAR calculations are valid inputs, and ergo how reliable WAR is.   Hence, the thread title.  

To me, the newer stats don’t eliminate argument or discussion, rather they illuminate it and/or add another element to the debate.    It’s useful to know whether it’s better to be a .260 hitter with 45 homers, 80 walks and 175 strikeouts or a .310 hitter with 24 homers, 50 walks and 110 strikeouts.    Before we could simply argue about it without anything much to back it up, now there’s data to back up the arguments and help us answer the question.    I prefer that.   
 

Yeah instead of arguing it we say hitter A has 3.5 WAR and hitter B has 3.1 WAR.  Incredibly boring. And you were the same one group that was saying DWAR meant everything when I said that Markakis was a good outfielder no matter what DWar said.  

[atomic]

3 hours ago, DrungoHazewood said:

You're listening to the wrong people.  Or grossly exaggerating. 

Yeah I guess the people on the board are not the people I should be listening to. But people in the real world only want to talk about the Ravens. 

[Aristotelian]

5 hours ago, Chuck A said:

So with Iglesias replacing Martin, based on this year's projected line-up (Hays in, Smith Jr out and the SS swap) the value is 0 vs -28 OAA.  Wow.

Villar is gone too. Iglesias and Alberto could actually be a plus infield.

[Frobby]

1 hour ago, atomic said:

Yeah instead of arguing it we say hitter A has 3.5 WAR and hitter B has 3.1 WAR.  Incredibly boring. And you were the same one group that was saying DWAR meant everything when I said that Markakis was a good outfielder no matter what DWar said.  

I think you’d find that I was very skeptical of the defensive stats on Markakis back in the day.    Defense is harder to measure than offense.    But I find the attempts to capture it, and development of different methods, very interesting.    

 

[scOtt]

10 hours ago, interloper said:

Maybe this sheds some light on the Villar decision. If Sig knew about these metrics (I'm sure he did), then perhaps the O's didn't buy his WAR total and thus his cost. And likely most other teams have these metrics as well, hence the lack of trade value. 

Now instead you have two top 30 defenders in your MI based on this metric for a fraction of the cost. 

For 3 and a half million.

[scOtt]

3 hours ago, atomic said:

Yeah I guess the people on the board are not the people I should be listening to. But people in the real world only want to talk about the Ravens. 

Well they ARE in the Playoffs.

[sportsfan8703]

8 hours ago, Aristotelian said:

Villar is gone too. Iglesias and Alberto could actually be a plus infield.

I still think we need a RH platoon partner for Ruiz at 3B. Wilkerson can’t hit lefties. Pat Valaika has a career .752 OPS vs LHP. He could be the solution. Plus he can play SS. 

I’d like to see us sign a 3B to a milb deal or nab a player off waivers. 

Is there room on a 26 man roster for Valaika and Wilkerson?  

[Chuck A]

I am curious to know how this fielding OAA would figure Cal's year of 3 errors at SS.  He obviously didn't have great range at that point but his positioning was second to none.  If i'm not mistaken that was a gold glove performance.  I still have to value the eye test above these fancy stats.

This past season I seen the Shorebirds play 4-5 times on the road here in NC.  Grenier is "supposed" to be the superior defensive player compared to Adam Hall, but in every game I seen Hall make some very nice plays - moving laterally and making strong throws whereas I seen Grenier react slow and miss a couple plays that looked (to me) very gettable (i may have just made up another new word).  I realize it is a small sample size but I prefer to value my eye test over fancy stats.

[DrungoHazewood]

11 hours ago, atomic said:

Yeah instead of arguing it we say hitter A has 3.5 WAR and hitter B has 3.1 WAR.  Incredibly boring. And you were the same one group that was saying DWAR meant everything when I said that Markakis was a good outfielder no matter what DWar said.  

Yea, it was much better when you had no baseline to put different types of contributions on, or common context, so all value arguments were largely subjective.  If you wanted to say that Omar Vizquel was more valuable than Mike Schmidt you could do it with a straight face. You just say that shortstop defense is 10 times more valuable than slugging and third base defense and... well... there you go.  If you thought Rollie Fingers should win the Cy Young award, go for it, it's all guessing anyway.  All things are possible when you're eyeballing it.

If you think more definitive, contextualized, rigorous data is boring I don't know what to tell you.  Maybe you should move to a primitve area off the grid.  Most of the rest of the world is moving ahead.