Adley gets a nice fWAR bump

[Frobby]

Fangraphs announced today that it has revised all of its fWAR calculations for the last eight years, basically replacing many of its own defensive metrics that fed into the calculation with Statcast metrics.  They also provided a list of all players whose fWAR over that 7-year period had changed my more than 1 WAR, plus or minus.  Yadier Molina was the biggest gainer (+3.0 fWAR), while Mookie Betts was the biggest loser (-3.0 fWAR).   There were no current Orioles on either list, but Aaron Hicks (-1.3 fWAR) and Rougned Odor (-1.2 fWAR) both took a hit.

Adley Rutschman, having played for only two seasons, wasn't on the list, but he received a nice fWAR bump in both seasons.   For 2022, he was upgraded from 5.3 fWAR to 5.6, and for last year, from 5.1 to 5.6.   So, that's cumulative gain of 0.8 fWAR, a pretty big adjustment over a two year period.

Austin Hays also received a nice bump last year, from 2.2 fWAR to 2.5 (+0.3).  Of the rest of the team, only Mateo improved by 0.2 (from 0.5 to 0.7) and only McCann declined by 0.2 (from 0.5 to 0.3).   Everyone else either improved by 0.1 (Henderson, Mullins, Mountacstle, O'Hearn, Frazier), stayed the same (Santander), or declined by 0.1 (Westburg, Urias, McKenna).  

It's a good reminder that these metrics we treat as gospel aren't set in stone.

 

[dystopia]

Not all of us treat them as gospel. 

[Can_of_corn]

13 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Fangraphs announced today that it has revised all of its fWAR calculations for the last eight years, basically replacing many of its own defensive metrics that fed into the calculation with Statcast metrics.  They also provided a list of all players whose fWAR over that 7-year period had changed my more than 1 WAR, plus or minus.  Yadier Molina was the biggest gainer (+3.0 fWAR), while Mookie Betts was the biggest loser (-3.0 fWAR).   There were no current Orioles on either list, but Aaron Hicks (-1.3 fWAR) and Rougned Odor (-1.2 fWAR) both took a hit.

Adley Rutschman, having played for only two seasons, wasn't on the list, but he received a nice fWAR bump in both seasons.   For 2022, he was upgraded from 5.3 fWAR to 5.6, and for last year, from 5.1 to 5.6.   So, that's cumulative gain of 0.8 fWAR, a pretty big adjustment over a two year period.

Austin Hays also received a nice bump last year, from 2.2 fWAR to 2.5 (+0.3).  Of the rest of the team, only Mateo improved by 0.2 (from 0.5 to 0.7) and only McCann declined by 0.2 (from 0.5 to 0.3).   Everyone else either improved by 0.1 (Henderson, Mullins, Mountacstle, O'Hearn, Frazier), stayed the same (Santander), or declined by 0.1 (Westburg, Urias, McKenna).  

It's a good reminder that these metrics we treat as gospel aren't set in stone.

 

Some of us put more faith in advanced statistics then we do the gospels.

At least they show their work.

[Pickles]

5 minutes ago, dystopia said:

Not all of us treat them as gospel. 

No, but too many do.

[forphase1]

9 minutes ago, dystopia said:

Not all of us treat them as gospel. 

Not as the gospel, especially defensive metrics, which are more prone to vary greatly from year to year, IMO.  But they give a valuable data set, and are, again in my opinion, more reliable than the fan 'eyeball' test while watching the games.  

Interesting the changes though, and glad to see Adley got a nice bump.  Also interesting that 2 guys we played a bunch the past two years got dinged so hard in Hicks and Odor, not that either was a surprise really.

[BRobinsonfan]

6 minutes ago, Pickles said:

No, but too many do.

While imperfect, they are much better than the "eye test" alone.    

[Aristotelian]

5 minutes ago, Pickles said:

No, but too many do.

I think most of us refer to WAR as a useful baseline with an understanding that it is impossible to accurately reduce a player's value into a single number, and that there is disagreement over how to do use. I wouldn't assume that anyone views WAR as "gospel".

[Spy Fox]

Some may use WAR as gospel to too far an extent.

Others see people using WAR as a summary, and assume those people are using it as gospel.

Edited April 5 by Spy Fox

[Orioles0615]

1 minute ago, Aristotelian said:

I think most of us refer to WAR as a useful baseline with an understanding that it is impossible to accurately reduce a player's value into a single number, and that there is disagreement over how to do use. I wouldn't assume that anyone views WAR as "gospel".

Felix Bautista fWAR was 2.8, feels like he was worth may more than that last year. He was worth that in that Tampa series alone 

[BRobinsonfan]

WAR is the equivalent of the gnostic gospels, from the Greek, gnostikos, or "having knowledge."  (I knew that seminary training would finally pay off!)

Edited April 5 by BRobinsonfan

[Frobby]

Fangraphs also announced they’re going to stop publishing UZR after 2025.   So, I guess I’ll stop referencing it when I list out players’ defensive metrics.  I’m wondering why they’ll even keep it until 2025 if they no longer consider it as reliable as OAA.

[Say O!]

37 minutes ago, Orioles0615 said:

Felix Bautista fWAR was 2.8, feels like he was worth may more than that last year. He was worth that in that Tampa series alone 

I believe WAR is context (game situation) neutral so for relievers impact it may also be useful (better?) to look at WPA which had The Mountain at 4.5 last year. 

[Tony-OH]

1 hour ago, Frobby said:

Fangraphs also announced they’re going to stop publishing UZR after 2025.   So, I guess I’ll stop referencing it when I list out players’ defensive metrics.  I’m wondering why they’ll even keep it until 2025 if they no longer consider it as reliable as OAA.

I would like you to repeat that for people in the back!

As the guy who has been a huge proponent of using statcast metrics over all others, glad to see them come around. While statcast data still can be refined, it was subjective in that it is literally based on the position of the player, how hard the ball is hit, and how far they have to throw among other factors. 

 

[emmett16]

1 hour ago, Spy Fox said:

Some may use WAR as gospel to too far an extent.

Others see people using WAR as a summary, and assume those people are using it as gospel.

I think people only use it as gospel when it backs up their argument.  When it doesn’t, they poke holes in it.  

[emmett16]

6 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

I would like you to repeat that for people in the back!

As the guy who has been a huge proponent of using statcast metrics over all others, glad to see them come around. While statcast data still can be refined, it was subjective in that it is literally based on the position of the player, how hard the ball is hit, and how far they have to throw among other factors. 

 

So true.  With the ability to track all the movement in space that takes place on the field (ball, bat, player) traditional tallying stats just aren’t as accurate in the way of predicting future perforce or describing a players ability.  Eventually it starts to paint a picture but it takes a long time and is super noisy with so many independent variable involved in the outcomes.