Jump to content

Orioles WAR ratings

NelsonCruuuuuz

By NelsonCruuuuuz
in Orioles Talk

 Share

Recommended Posts

AlbNYfan Major Leaguer Cup of Coffee

AlbNYfan

Posted
Posted

Someone, please explain to me how McKenna can have the same WAR as Lopez? That alone makes this list suspect (11th on the list??). Does being a cheerleader add value? Many complain about Nevin and his roster spot, but IMO Mckenna is right there too. McKenna vs Stowers??

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 31
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

DrungoHazewood
DrungoHazewood

Both Fangraphs and bb-ref lay out all the components.  For bb-ref it's in that second box labeled Player Value--Batting. Santander is five runs above average in batting compared to all the batter

Ohfan67
Ohfan67

Ahhh. Nice to read a classic Drungo post. The baseball professor is in the house. 

seak05
seak05

McKenna is good at his role, Nevin is not ergo McKenna adds value to the roster, and Nevin does not, and WAR reflects this. 

survivedc Major Leaguer Rising Star

survivedc

Posted
Posted
17 minutes ago, AlbNYfan said:

Someone, please explain to me how McKenna can have the same WAR as Lopez? That alone makes this list suspect (11th on the list??). Does being a cheerleader add value? Many complain about Nevin and his roster spot, but IMO Mckenna is right there too. McKenna vs Stowers??

Mckennas value over Nevin is obvious, he’s very fast and a good defender.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ArtVanDelay Hangout Grand Counsel

ArtVanDelay

Posted
Posted
32 minutes ago, AlbNYfan said:

Someone, please explain to me how McKenna can have the same WAR as Lopez? That alone makes this list suspect (11th on the list??). Does being a cheerleader add value? Many complain about Nevin and his roster spot, but IMO Mckenna is right there too. McKenna vs Stowers??

McKenna has played 232 innings and Lopez has pitched 42.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
seak05 All-Star

seak05

Posted
Posted
34 minutes ago, AlbNYfan said:

Someone, please explain to me how McKenna can have the same WAR as Lopez? That alone makes this list suspect (11th on the list??). Does being a cheerleader add value? Many complain about Nevin and his roster spot, but IMO Mckenna is right there too. McKenna vs Stowers??

McKenna is good at his role, Nevin is not ergo McKenna adds value to the roster, and Nevin does not, and WAR reflects this. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DrungoHazewood Hangout Grand Counsel

DrungoHazewood

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, oldfan said:

I hate to think what the HOF will look like 20 years from now. Their already putting very good players in, it's not for the very good, it's for the no doubters. When you have to start digging down deep into these new metrics, that's a red flag. If your not a first ballot guy, your not a true Hall of Famer.

The first class that included players on the Brady Anderson, Nick Markakis level was in 1946. And that's never really let up.  The Hall was a thing for over 30 years before the first Baseball Encyclopedia came out in '69, so many players were inducted based on embellished stories about players who'd retired half a century before. That continues to some extent even today.  

Tommy McCarthy went in in 1946.  He was basically an average hitter, a pretty good fielder, and once led the league in steals. Only played 13 years, his playing career was like, I don't know... the 1890s version of Jermaine Dye or Jay Bruce.  But someone told a story about him helping invent the hit-and-run, so he's in.

The Frankie Frisch-led Veteran's Committee of the 60s and 70s inducted dozens of players from the 20s and 30s who played with or against Frisch. Players like Sunny Jim Bottomley, who wasn't in the same zip code as Fred McGriff or John OIerud.  There are years from the late 20s where something like 20-25% of NL plate appearances were players who'd eventually go into the Hall.

If you're upset about the Hall inducting pretty good players you need to blame poor information and badly designed voting systems from almost a century ago, not advanced metrics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DrungoHazewood Hangout Grand Counsel

DrungoHazewood

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, AlbNYfan said:

Someone, please explain to me how McKenna can have the same WAR as Lopez? That alone makes this list suspect (11th on the list??). Does being a cheerleader add value? Many complain about Nevin and his roster spot, but IMO Mckenna is right there too. McKenna vs Stowers??

I can't get to Fangraphs right now, but I'll take a guess:

- Fangraphs uses FIP to measure pitchers.  Lopez has a very low batting average on balls in play, which drives his FIP up to over 3.00, which is good but not great. 

- Statcast sees McKenna as a very good fielder and runner, while his .662 OPS is not that far below league average.

bb-ref uses RA instead of FIP and sees Lopez ahead of McKenna 1.6 to 0.7.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DrungoHazewood Hangout Grand Counsel

DrungoHazewood

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

I also think WAR fails to capture the proper value of relievers.

Or is that just a function of their limited number of innings?  Jorge Lopez has faced 171 batters, and he's only two games behind leading the majors in appearances.  Even multiplying by his leverage index of 1.93 that's the equivalent of 330 plate appearances.  Austin Hayes has 342 PAs, plus another 165 chances in the field, and he's created a few runs on the bases.

Relievers don't have as much space to create value.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Frobby Hangout Grand Counsel

Frobby

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Or is that just a function of their limited number of innings?  Jorge Lopez has faced 171 batters, and he's only two games behind leading the majors in appearances.  Even multiplying by his leverage index of 1.93 that's the equivalent of 330 plate appearances.  Austin Hayes has 342 PAs, plus another 165 chances in the field, and he's created a few runs on the bases.

Relievers don't have as much space to create value.

It’s true.   But I think the main thing is, both flavors of WAR are leverage-neutral.   You can argue about whether that’s good or bad.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sports Guy Hangout Grand Counsel

Sports Guy

Posted
Posted
27 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Or is that just a function of their limited number of innings?  Jorge Lopez has faced 171 batters, and he's only two games behind leading the majors in appearances.  Even multiplying by his leverage index of 1.93 that's the equivalent of 330 plate appearances.  Austin Hayes has 342 PAs, plus another 165 chances in the field, and he's created a few runs on the bases.

Relievers don't have as much space to create value.

Yea it’s without question the lack of innings but a better method should be doing, perhaps incorporating WPA or something.  A dominant reliever who excels in high leverage situations should carry higher WARs

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DrungoHazewood Hangout Grand Counsel

DrungoHazewood

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Sports Guy said:

Yea it’s without question the lack of innings but a better method should be doing, perhaps incorporating WPA or something.  A dominant reliever who excels in high leverage situations should carry higher WARs

As I mentioned to Frobby both main flavors of WAR include leverage in their WAR calculations for relievers.  You could just use WPA instead of a leverage-adjusted runs saved number in WAR.  But I don't know if that's objectively better or worse than the way they do it now.  Jorge Lopez has a 0.9 fWAR, 1.6 rWAR, and 0.5 WPA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


  • Posts

    • Can_of_corn
      Hurricane Milton is looking scarier by the minute

      By Can_of_corn · Posted

      Just did a bit of a walk. Some decently large braches down, one segment of privacy fence missing and standing water on the property in a low spot.  
    • Can_of_corn
      Hurricane Milton is looking scarier by the minute

      By Can_of_corn · Posted

      Just woke up and I don't hear any wind or rain.
    • EddeeEddee
      Do the Orioles need someone like Machado?

      By EddeeEddee · Posted

      Not that I am in any way full agreement, but this is a classic post.  Doesn't Machado play chess?  Maybe we could get some chess boards in the clubhouse and junk all the legos.  Not all great baseball men are John McGraw bad asses.  Some can be Christy Mathewsons as well, I suppose.  Not that I imagine today's young players much resembling McGraw or Mathewson, but they are the first two contrasting old school types that come to mind.  I will say just based on his postseason alone I'd much rather have Tatis over Machado.
    • NashLumber
      Hurricane Milton has apparently ripped the roof of the Tropicana Dome to shreds

      By NashLumber · Posted

      Wow, that was so strange to see.  Eerie. 
    • OriolesMagic83
      What's Your Top Priority

      By OriolesMagic83 · Posted

      Well I refuse to believe that only the O's have no players that want extensions.
    • NashLumber
      Any updates on the renovations to OPACY?

      By NashLumber · Posted

      Great points. Definitely agree. 
    • EddeeEddee
      Will MASN be among these soon ? MLB taking over TV broadcasts of 3 teams

      By EddeeEddee · Posted

      Customer advocate groups have tried for decades to force the cable companies to allow channel by channel (a la carte) subscriptions, but the cable companies fought this because it would result in far less revenue (than forcing us to pay for a hundred channels we don't watch).  The government refused to intervene, so we've been stuck with the existing business model for all this time.  Streaming is forcing the change because streaming -- for now -- is an a la carte model.   MLB's fear must be this: if the regional sports network cable channel model goes away, will most users pay anywhere close to what these channels made as part of a cable bundle for just one streaming channel where all you watch are Orioles games (or maybe Orioles and Nats games -- whatever the case may be)?  So if you pay $100/month for cable with MASN, you are probably watching at least a few other channels too.  But will you pay $15/month (or whatever the price may be) just to watch the Orioles -- even during the months when there is no baseball?  The existing basic cable model has been quite stable because people tend to watch at least 5 or 6 channels.  They're reluctant to cancel their whole cable package just because baseball season is over -- or they've been too busy to watch many games this season.  But with a single streaming channel of just baseball there is bound to be a far more unstable revenue base.  All the streaming channels are already dealing with this problem.  I think MLB is maybe reluctant to go all in on streaming for this reason.  Perhaps they're looking for new different model that could allow them to bundle individual team channels with Netflix, or Prime, or maybe with your cell phone plan or something else.  This could give them some stability, but it could also be a turn off for the more hardcore fans who just want the Orioles and little else.  It will be interesting to see how this all shakes out and if MLB, and the Orioles, will prosper or suffer as a result.

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...