9/28 GDTY: Braves lineup posted before 3 p.m.!

Enscheff said:
Over that one single season? Perhaps. It is plausible he had enough chances to impact the game defensively to be worth that much, and that production can't be taken away from him. It happened, it helped his team win, period. However, it does not mean he is a 5+ WAR talent going forward since a lot of that value is based purely on the luck of his defensive chances.

That "chance based" portion of defensive metrics, along with the fact that defensive contributions can't add indefinitely, are my 2 biggest gripes with defensive metrics. I'm hoping the availability of more statcast data will enable us to boil down defensive skill to a more basic level: Who gets the best jumps? Who takes the most efficient routes? Who covers the most ground? Who makes the most accurate throws? Who gets the ball to its destination the quickest?

And you know just as well as I do that me predicting 0-1 wins for Kemp, and him posting a 2 month WAR value that extrapolates out to 1.2 wins over a full season means absolutely nothing and doesn't make me wrong. The only reason you are nitpicking to that level is because you want to have a point, no matter how small, to post against me.
Click to expand...

You caught me.
 
I still think WAR is flawed as is most stats used to determine a players 'worth'.

take this example. lets say Kemp made two errors last night and didn't get to a ball that average fielder would. his defensive stats would take a hit. But in last nights game, it really doesn't matter. Same as his 2 run bomb, really didn't play too much in the out come.. now say 20% of WAR calculations are derived from meaningless games.. that really puts a 1- 2 point variance on that stat IMO.. plus the fact that there is subjective calculations based on a human determining if a ball could be caught or not.. plus the emotions and human psych can not be quantified. I understand that it is a tool to determine how a player is expected to perform over a longer course of play, but we tend to use it as a valuation of a player at X point in time.

There really is one simple fact that can't be disputed. since Kemp dawned a Braves Uni.. the team has played to a 28-24 record. And regardless of what anyone says.. the most important stat in sport is the W/L record.
 
bravesfanMatt said:
I still think WAR is flawed as is most stats used to determine a players 'worth'.

take this example. lets say Kemp made two errors last night and didn't get to a ball that average fielder would. his defensive stats would take a hit. But in last nights game, it really doesn't matter. Same as his 2 run bomb, really didn't play too much in the out come.. now say 20% of WAR calculations are derived from meaningless games.. that really puts a 1- 2 point variance on that stat IMO.. plus the fact that there is subjective calculations based on a human determining if a ball could be caught or not.. plus the emotions and human psych can not be quantified. I understand that it is a tool to determine how a player is expected to perform over a longer course of play, but we tend to use it as a valuation of a player at X point in time.

There really is one simple fact that can't be disputed. since Kemp dawned a Braves Uni.. the team has played to a 28-24 record. And regardless of what anyone says.. the most important stat in sport is the W/L record.
Click to expand...

The whole point of WAR is to eliminate context so we can evaluate the player's skills. It is unquestionable that a base hit with the bases loaded in a tie game helps your team more than a base hit with the bases empty when your team is down by 5 runs. However, the underlying skill demonstrated by the player to get that single in unchanged regardless of the context in which he just so happened to be batting (the vast majority of which is beyond his control).

It's not like WAR is the first stat that tried to remove parts of the equation that were beyond the player's control. ERA attempted to eliminate the effects a bad defense had on a pitcher. Hell, BA tried to eliminate the benefits of hitting against a poor defense by not counting errors as a time on base.

Recently, the majority of folks have realized W/L records are a terrible way of judging pitchers, yet you still boil your argument about Kemp down to the Braves W/L record?

The only reason people are against advanced stats is because they are new, and most people are naturally resistant to anything new. Rather than taking the time to understand what these stats are telling us, they come up with arguments that don't really carry any weight, like yours about them being context nuetral...which is EXACTLY what those stats were designed to be.
 
Enscheff said:
The whole point of WAR is to eliminate context so we can evaluate the player's skills. It is unquestionable that a base hit with the bases loaded in a tie game helps your team more than a base hit with the bases empty when your team is down by 5 runs. However, the underlying skill demonstrated by the player to get that single in unchanged regardless of the context in which he just so happened to be batting (the vast majority of which is beyond his control).

It's not like WAR is the first stat that tried to remove parts of the equation that were beyond the player's control. ERA attempted to eliminate the effects a bad defense had on a pitcher. Hell, BA tried to eliminate the benefits of hitting against a poor defense by not counting errors as a time on base.

Recently, the majority of folks have realized W/L records are a terrible way of judging pitchers, yet you still boil your argument about Kemp down to the Braves W/L record?

The only reason people are against advanced stats is because they are new, and most people are naturally resistant to anything new. Rather than taking the time to understand what these stats are telling us, they come up with arguments that don't really carry any weight, like yours about them being context nuetral...which is EXACTLY what those stats were designed to be.
Click to expand...

Are you really suggesting comparability between a teams W/L Record and a Pitchers W/L Record? Ummm. One is the whole point of the game while the other is a very poor estimate of a pitchers effectiveness.
 
mfree80 said:
Are you really suggesting comparability between a teams W/L Record and a Pitchers W/L Record? Ummm. One is the whole point of the game while the other is a very poor estimate of a pitchers effectiveness.
Click to expand...

Is Kemp responsible for the Braves record since he got here?
 
I actually never said Kemp was the reason for the W/L. it can be implied based on my statement, but I did not say he is the reason. you can determine what you want for those 52 games and the record.. but ultimately the Braves are 28-24 since Kemp joined the team on the field.
 
bravesfanMatt said:
one player is not solely responsible for that record.. but if you take Kemp out and replace him with anyone else on the team or minors, what is the record for those 52 games?
Click to expand...

Depends on the quality of the player. But likely not as good since Kemp is currently the best player for the position in the organization.
 
mfree80 said:
Certainly a major contributor... Would the Braves record have been as good without him? I don't know, but there is some evidence.
Click to expand...

Kemp is a positive contributor. Especially compared to what we were running out there. That still says nothing to the actual quality of the player that he is.
 
bravesfanMatt said:
I actually never said Kemp was the reason for the W/L. it can be implied based on my statement, but I did not say he is the reason. you can determine what you want for those 52 games and the record.. but ultimately the Braves are 28-24 since Kemp joined the team on the field.
Click to expand...

Kemp absolutely, positively, 100% certainly improved this team. He didn't do it by protecting Freeman, who was already hitting insanely well weeks before Kemp got here. He didn't do it because he is a "power hitter". And he certainly wasn't some magical elixir that made the team "click" and start winning.

He improved the team because he is a better player than the absolute garbage they were running out there in LF before Kemp was acquired. If they had acquired a player better than Kemp (like Braun), the team would have played even better than they have with Kemp.

The Braves have been playing better because Freeman is having an MVP caliber season. Inciarte is having extreme BABIP luck in the second half and is hitting very well to go along with his elite defense. Markakis finally found his power and is still putting up a .340-.350 OBP. Swanson was called up and has been a positive contributer, while Aybar also played much better in the 2nd half. Adonis has improved from a negative WAR guy to a 0-1 WAR guy in the second half.

All of those things add up to the team being better. Kemp was just a small part of it. Just because he is the newest part of it doesn't make his contributions any more responsible than any other parts. It is impossible for most to grasp the concept, but correlation does not prove causation.
 
Enscheff said:
Where did I say he was worthless? My formula? These are stats derived by guys who have since been hired by MLB front offices, so I'm fairly confident that folks who actually know what they are talking about know they aren't "silly-ass".

I said he would be worth 0-1 WAR overall, and I am right so far. An impact offensive player added to a completely inept lineup will improve it, even if it costs the team some run prevention. However, that doesn't change the fact that Kemp is worth 0-1 wins overall.

Your lack of reading comprehension and inability to grasp points of others makes you the ****ing idiot, and you demonstrate that idiocy over and over.
Click to expand...

Ouch. Enscheff, that's hurtful. You should be careful, you could lower your reputation with the members of the Board.
 
Enscheff said:
Where did I say he was worthless? My formula? These are stats derived by guys who have since been hired by MLB front offices, so I'm fairly confident that folks who actually know what they are talking about know they aren't "silly-ass".

I said he would be worth 0-1 WAR overall, and I am right so far. An impact offensive player added to a completely inept lineup will improve it, even if it costs the team some run prevention. However, that doesn't change the fact that Kemp is worth 0-1 wins overall.

Your lack of reading comprehension and inability to grasp points of others makes you the ****ing idiot, and you demonstrate that idiocy over and over.
Click to expand...

When you say he's playing to a 0 WAR, just as you anticipated, you are saying he is worthless, just as you anticipated.

I'd say my comprehension is just fine, Enscheff, Internet Poster (EIP).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top