Owners Want to Use WAR to Determine Salary Replacing Arbitration

[SteveJRogers]

I still think this is the best way to evaluate ballplayers.

I’d add Proven Crap for journey men, usually gotten for bargains, spare parts that get thrust into bigger roles, but keep falling to their mediocre norms. Sometimes bringing the team down with them!

[mdb]

Whether war is consistent or not is moot. I do think this will be used to suppress player salaries. That does seem to be the "analytical" approach or the "moneyball" approach. Win without spending money.

[Calabasas]

The thing about WAR is that the more you look closely at it, the more you realize how much of it is subjective. Replacement value, positional value, base running, and every aspect of fielding are all highly subjective, and can change a player's 'value' tremendously if manipulated enough. Pretty much every aspect of value besides hitting that these stats try to place numerical value on should be taken with a huge grain of salt; that is why I am very skeptical of guys who aren't great hitters, but who end up looking like greats according to WAR.

Heck, even WARs hitting values are highly suspicious. I remember pointing out that Derek Jeter has 353 Rbat and Robin Yount has just 233 Rbat despite the fact that hitting-wise they were virtually identical (both quality and quantity). The best explanation I could get was 'well that's what WAR felt like giving them'. Again, a totally subjective thing that makes a HUGE difference in their WAR totals.

Isn't it because his wOBA is more singles driven? He hit for a better average, had more hits? There are little things like ROE (which he was a beast at,) HBP, about a 100 walks and big things like positional advantage (never played anywhere but short) but I always just assumed it was his .310 avg. FWIW, Yount has more WAR & WAA per 162. Jeter has 1.0 oWAR more a season. Always thought it was those 26 hits (and, probs mainly, position)

IOW their OPS+ is an identical 115 but Jeter's is more valuable due to more singles & a higher average. Or that's the gist of it.

Yount was a position player in less games than Jeter and still has more WAR & WAA. He must've PH/PR in 147 games. Jeter started approx 97% of his games at SS. Yount ofc was in CF the last half of his career but also played 69 games in left and DH'd in 137 (to Jeter's 60 some) And WAR is strictly a value stat.

IDK, just a noob wondering aloud. Stats are bbRef. And ofc Jeter was a historically bad defensive player, but we're talking about rBat

Side note: If Jeter didn't juice (who knows) it should be even higher

[scottmitchell74]

I'm skeptical of any metric that says Bobby Grich is one good season from having the same worth as Reggie, Yount, Bench or Pete Rose...and more than Murray.

Would love to witness the meeting when Bobby Grich explains he's the best player in the AL...because WAR...and should be paid accordingly.

[Calabasas]

I'm skeptical of any metric that says Bobby Grich is one good season from having the same worth as Reggie, Yount, Bench or Pete Rose...and more than Murray.

Would love to witness the meeting when Bobby Grich explains he's the best player in the AL...because WAR...and should be paid accordingly.

Yount was better than Jeter. I mean, he could play CF too. But SS has more value. Being versatile has more worth? But SS has more value? There's gotta be a difference there I'm unable to articulate

Same thing w/ Grich. He simply had tremendous value as an elite fielding 2B who avoided outs and could lead the league in homers. Was he as great as Pete Rose? Nah.

Reggie and Rose were awful their last seasons. Reggie after 35 was below average for all but one season, below replacement for more than a few. Take away those 750 some games and he's not played but a little more than Grich.

Johnny Bench... I mean we've gone from RC to Adjusted Batting Runs to OWP to Win Shares to WAR. I'm sure the next gigastat will be able to shed some light on Catchers, versatility..maybe even small ball, who knows. Or maybe that's it and WAR is just one stat

[bluesky5]

Two cents I doubt the people who make these stats are going to be implementing ways to evaluate small ball. They’ve spent the last quarter century ceaselessly degrading it.

Small ball is also more difficult to evaluate. They chose K/BB/HR for a reason- it’s easy to assign a value to. Claiming small ball can be effective while also admitting it can’t be wholly evaluated wasn’t going to get the old ball players out of the front office so the Ivy League analytical intelligentsia could take their jobs.