We would need to bring TP back if Colon became explosive
GDT 4/5 - Colon @ deGrom
- Thread starter Freshmaker
- Start date
We would need to bring TP back if Colon became explosive
bravesfanMatt
Steve Harvey'd
This is not how to bore you!!
Actually, you have just proved beyond all doubt you have no idea what WAR is, and you did it in 2 sentences. Well done!
We bet over bWAR, which doesn't even have any 2017 value numbers up yet, so no idea where the 0.3 came from.
I'm sure you think Kemp is on pace for a 24 WAR season, so keep derping along.
Southcack77
Well-known member
If I play Andruw Jones in left instead of center, he's going to have a lower dWAR, then? Simply because he's playing left rather than center? Even if he's a really good LF? -- somewhat answered, above. He's probably going to have a lower dWAR offset, but maybe not be too much since he will rank as one of the best LFs. I'm curious what the difference would be though.
Southcack77
Well-known member
I think the criticism isn't really of the stat, it is in the context in which it is applied perhaps.
if you have a high slugging LF who is average defensively in LF, he's probably more valuable to his team than his defensive WAR would suggest.
Granted, that is probably not going to be Kemp, who has been a well below average LF defender.
The question then is how much being one of the worst defenders in LF actually hurts a team as opposed to the offense helps? That's ultimately going to be subjective somewhere -- but i tend to think that a strong hitter in LF probably creates more value than he loses defensively. I think these big slugging LFs sitting on scrap heaps and making reasonable bucks are probably pretty good bargains. On the other hand, Kemp is not one of those either. He's paid a ton.
if you have a high slugging LF who is average defensively in LF, he's probably more valuable to his team than his defensive WAR would suggest.
Granted, that is probably not going to be Kemp, who has been a well below average LF defender.
The question then is how much being one of the worst defenders in LF actually hurts a team as opposed to the offense helps? That's ultimately going to be subjective somewhere -- but i tend to think that a strong hitter in LF probably creates more value than he loses defensively. I think these big slugging LFs sitting on scrap heaps and making reasonable bucks are probably pretty good bargains. On the other hand, Kemp is not one of those either. He's paid a ton.
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
I don't think anyone has argued that Kemp' s defensive WAR summarizes his value...it is one part of it
No, it would be roughly the same. Because instead of being +20-30 runs in center he would be +30-40 runs in left. So overall his dWAR would equal out.
The problem with Kemp isn't really his defense. It's that some people think he's going to be the offensive force he was in LA. If that happens then he will be a valuable player and pretty much be like Adam Dunn in his prime. The problem is he hasn't been that guy in quite a few years. Another problem is the big deal made about homers without looking at anything else. People see the 35 homers and 100+ rbi. That's good. But they often fail to see the 304 OBP he had last year. That's really bad. Even with the 35 homers he was not a good hitter last year. Overall he did improve when he came to Atlanta so there is some hope.
The problem with completely discounting traditional stats is that you espoused hypothetical runs derived with a formula. A run either scores or it doesn't and Kemp got the hit to drive in over 100 of those. Again, I'm not an anti stat guy. If my coworkers heard that about me they'd laugh. But at some point we have to distinguish between hypothetical and real runs.
I'm pretty sure you said the same thing about Jeff Francoeur. Glad some things never change. A 109 WRC+ or 112 OPS+ aren't the marks of a good hitter. Certainly not enough to offset being one of the worst defenders in the league and be considered a good player.
Continue to discount real runs scored or produced. Someone consistently getting on base is more likely to produce more runs in the future no question but in terms of what has been produced then you are missing out on what the stats say.
Same thing for ERA vs FIP.
So much fail here. OPS is not a predictive stat. It's directly tied to runs scored for an offense. And it's good to know that RBI is back to being a core offensive stat. Is that you Bill?
Who said anything about OPS? Getting on base impacts your WRC+ doesn't it?
Who is saying its a core stat? RBI's do tell you something.
Getting on base does impact WRC+. It's also half of the component of OPS. Kemp's 112 OPS+ in 2016 is not what I would consider good.
RBI's do tell you something. That you got hits with men on base. What it doesn't tell you is how good the hitter is. Some players get way more opportunities than others with men on base. some players happen to hit better with RISP in a given year. Again, nothing about the quality of the hitter just certain circumstances they were in.
Kemp was a valuable hitter last year as a result of him being able to drive runners in when the situations were presented to him. That doesn't have nearly the predictive power of a stat such as WRC+ on 2017 but in terms of his value in a year that past RBI's can sometimes tell you more than WRC+. its the same argument of ERA vs. FIP/xFIP.
bravesfanMatt
Steve Harvey'd
sure, but would someone who hit .300 in the same situations as Kemp not have relatively the same amount of runs batted in? even if that person didn't have that much power...
More than one way to skin a cat for sure but I would think the person that hits for more power will typically drive in more runs. The situations he came up in would have to be analyzed for sure.
Good thing we signed Ryan Howard then. He's the king of homers, rbi, and low OBP.
Kemp drove in 100 runs, but a better hitter would have driven in more given the same opportunities. A better hitter in Kemp's slot would have allowed the Braves to score more runs overall, and win more games, and be a better team.
That's why literally nobody with any idea how to value baseball players use RBIs as a measure of productivity. The moment you bring up RBI is the same moment you discredit yourself in any discussion dealing with baseball analysis.
If you want to sit around the campfire talking baseball with Don Sutton and other nitwits, stick to talking about RBI. If you want to talk baseball with intelligent people, educate yourself.
Give me the Ryan Howard of 3 years ago and I'm OK with that based on our team mix. Now he's just a bad player.