Need a little stat help here

[Frobby]

17 minutes ago, Baltimorecuse said:

I thought the whole I idea of WAR was that average was zero.  

No.  WAR means wins above replacement. Replacement is the level where guys who are borderline AAA/major leaguers reside.  It is theorized that a team full of replacement level players would win about 47 games.  The average team wins 81 games, 34 wins above what a replacement team would win.  So, there’s about +1000 WAR spread around the major league players every year.  

As to Mateo vs. Belanger defensively, you are comparing players across two different eras.   Belanger was far better than his 1970s peers, for a very long time. He was so good defensively that Earl Weaver put up with his pitiful offense, and as 41 rWAR shows, he was worth it.  

Now, if you could teleport 2022 Jorge Mateo back to 1970, might he be as good or better than Belanger?  Maybe.  Athletes are always getting better and plays are made today that wouldn’t even have been attempted in 1970.   So, there’s no way to know.  What is pretty clear, though, is that Mateo is not as far ahead of his 2020s peers as Belanger was compared to his 1970’s peers.   

 

Edited July 14, 2023 by Frobby

[SemperFi]

27 minutes ago, Sanity Check said:

Belanger's fielding % as a shortstop was .977, and Mateo's is only .973.  Belanger is clearly the better shortstop.

Being serious now........when I looked at Belanger's stats, his errors during his high volume (in chances) seasons were higher that I would have remembered/guessed.  Now, I will make one other point that I don't think can be disputed.....the fields now are much better manicured than when Belanger played.

Lighting has also improved dramatically.

[25 Nuggets]

Here's an example of some zero-WAR players from the 2022 season, using Baseball Reference:

Nick Castellanos (558 PA) - 263/305/389 (96 OPS+), 13 HR, 62 RBI, 29/130 BB-K, corner OF and some DH

Whit Merrifield (550 PA) - 250/298/375 (91 OPS+), 11 HR, 58 RBI, 38/85 BB-K. primarily below-average 2B

Luis Garcia (377 PA) - 275/295/408 (102 OPS+), 7 HR, 45 RBI, 11/84 BB-K, bad defense at SS and okay at 2B

These players could have been replaced by an average AAA call up - Terrin Vavra for example, who also provided 0.0 WAR in 2022, in a more limited role.

Hopefully this provides some context into what replacement level means.

[25 Nuggets]

Another point - averaging the value of an average major league starter over 18 years means you had a really good career.  This is because most players have a development, peak, and decline phase.

40.4 of Belanger's 41.0 WAR came over 11 seasons, from age 24 to age 34.  This is typical.  Those years average out to be 3.7 WAR, which is borderline All Star territory.  He did make the All Star game once in 1976, which is of course the only year in his career that he OPSed league average.

Not coincidentally, these were also his heaviest usage years.  All 11 of his highest PA totals came during this 11 year span.

[Hallas]

3 hours ago, Baltimorecuse said:

Mark Belanger is almost deified by O's fans.  So I thought I'd look at the stats for his 18 seasons because I remembered he couldn't hit.  

In 18 seasons

HRs......20

OBP... .300

SLG.... .280

OPS ..... .580

OPS+.....  68

RBIs  ....  389/18= 22 per season rounded up

So could someone explain a WAR of 41?  I'm not trolling.  I don't get it.

 

You have to take WAR of players measured retroactively with a grain of salt because of the lack of quality defensive data available, but most available sources of data confirms the fact that he was in fact a superior fielder, at the most premium fielding position in the game (tied with catcher.)  In the modern era, they give 7.5 runs for ~full season of playing shortstop.  However, it looks like this value is context-adjusted for players of past eras, and he was given ~9 runs per season of credit for positional adjustment.  (this makes sense, because between Honus Wagner and Cal Ripken, SS was basically a place where bats went to die.)  On top of that, due to the run scoring context, it was only like 9 or 9.5 runs per win, compared to today when it's closer to 10.  So that makes the positional adjustment much more valuable in Belanger's time than it is today.  By BB-Ref he got 111 runs from positional adjustment, which works out to about 10.6 wins.  His bat was, in fact, awful, but his defense more than made up the difference; his runs saved via defense is the 3rd highest in the history of the sport, at any position.

 

But again, you have to take this with a grain of salt because 1: fielding data from any era sucks to varying degrees, and 2: the data used to derive the fielding values here are both inconsistent and lacks the level of detail available in modern game logs.  If you're buying the defensive numbers then it looks about right.  And by all accounts there's no reason to doubt them in this particular case, because everyone who's seen Belanger play says he was a breathtaking fielder.

Edited July 14, 2023 by Hallas

[Just Regular]

Jorge Mateo was the best 2022 example, but for flavor most seasons have some bad bat SS who is at the top of the defense charts and rates ~2.0 WAR.

Poking back some recent years (<90 wRC+): '21 Isaiah Kiner-Falefa, '19 Freddy Galvis, '18 Nick Ahmed really spiked the D by Fangraphs figuring for 3+ wins.

I've kind of felt Omar Vizquel's career had some modern Belanger vibe.     Belanger and Vizquel had that year steadily about 20 years.

[Ohfan67]

8 hours ago, Baltimorecuse said:

No, I'm not.  I really don't understand a 41 WAR.  Because you can't answer, you call it trolling.  

Nice try.

You’re either trolling or being an idiot. Take your choice. 

[Baltimorecuse]

2 minutes ago, Ohfan67 said:

You’re either trolling or being an idiot. Take your choice. 

From your ilk that's a complement.  Frazier has 10% of Belanger's career homers in one night.  

[Baltimorecuse]

5 hours ago, Hallas said:

You have to take WAR of players measured retroactively with a grain of salt because of the lack of quality defensive data available, but most available sources of data confirms the fact that he was in fact a superior fielder, at the most premium fielding position in the game (tied with catcher.)  In the modern era, they give 7.5 runs for ~full season of playing shortstop.  However, it looks like this value is context-adjusted for players of past eras, and he was given ~9 runs per season of credit for positional adjustment.  (this makes sense, because between Honus Wagner and Cal Ripken, SS was basically a place where bats went to die.)  On top of that, due to the run scoring context, it was only like 9 or 9.5 runs per win, compared to today when it's closer to 10.  So that makes the positional adjustment much more valuable in Belanger's time than it is today.  By BB-Ref he got 111 runs from positional adjustment, which works out to about 10.6 wins.  His bat was, in fact, awful, but his defense more than made up the difference; his runs saved via defense is the 3rd highest in the history of the sport, at any position.

 

But again, you have to take this with a grain of salt because 1: fielding data from any era sucks to varying degrees, and 2: the data used to derive the fielding values here are both inconsistent and lacks the level of detail available in modern game logs.  If you're buying the defensive numbers then it looks about right.  And by all accounts there's no reason to doubt them in this particular case, because everyone who's seen Belanger play says he was a breathtaking fielder.

Hansen could hit, and even Aparicio was better than Belanger.  Pease don't tell me Aparicio couldn't field.  Kubek could and was in 6 World Series.  Dick Groat had a lifetime 696 ops and no one said he couldn't field.  My only point is the value of fielding is subjective.  

[Oriole1940]

Another reason Orioles fans of Belangers era  did not penalize Belanger as one might have expected  because of poor offense was because they had power hitters to carry the team and did not count on Belanger  for anything much offensively.  Powell and Ripken to mention only 2 on the infield.  

[Malike]

9 hours ago, Baltimorecuse said:

Yeah, I did.  Mateo is easily as good.  

I believed you when you said you weren't trolling in your first post, but then you said this and lost all credibility.

[Ohfan67]

31 minutes ago, Baltimorecuse said:

From your ilk that's a complement.  Frazier has 10% of Belanger's career homers in one night.  

You asked for help understanding WAR. WAR was explained to you. Frobby even gave you the historical context of Belanger’s WAR. The rest of your posts in this thread are just dumb trolling. Attention-seeking drivel. 

[25 Nuggets]

2 minutes ago, Baltimorecuse said:

Hansen could hit, and even Aparicio was better than Belanger.  Pease don't tell me Aparicio couldn't field.  Kubek could and was in 6 World Series.  Dick Groat had a lifetime 696 ops and no one said he couldn't field.  My only point is the value of fielding is subjective.  

Aparicio was a fantastic fielder and a better offensive player than Belanger, and is in the Hall of Fame.  Sabermetrics jive with this.

Hansen during his prime was a fantastic fielder and of course a better hitter, but he had problems with his back that wore him down.  His best year in 1964 he logged 7.7 WAR, which was third in the entire AL behind Brooks Robinson (8.1) and Jim Fregosi (7.9).  A lot of that was his defensive component.

Kubek and Groat were fine fielders but weren't in Belanger/Aparicio (Hansen for a while) territory.

I do agree however that there is at least some subjectivity to defensive value.  Even today with statcast tracking - although it's gotten us a lot closer to objectivity.

[Baltimorecuse]

8 minutes ago, Malike said:

I believed you when you said you weren't trolling in your first post, but then you said this and lost all credibility.

 I've seen them both play.  Opinions are optional.  Credibility is subjective without facts.  

[Frobby]

32 minutes ago, Baltimorecuse said:

Hansen could hit, and even Aparicio was better than Belanger.  Pease don't tell me Aparicio couldn't field.  Kubek could and was in 6 World Series.  Dick Groat had a lifetime 696 ops and no one said he couldn't field.  My only point is the value of fielding is subjective.  

I do not think the value of fielding is subjective at all.  The measurement of fielding is somewhat subjective, though less so all the time.