….I feel that WAR is a great stat. But it doesn’t mean that it’s perfect.

I was most intrigued by the points raised about rewards guys seem to get by playing multiple positions. Zobrist playing 20+ games at 4 or 5 spots certainly allows him to benefit from smaller sample sizes in the UZR numbers.

Also, I’d love for someone to dig deeper into the FB% vs UZR data that was discusssed. I have seen a few people (including AJM) ask why fans are ok with batters having their stats fluctuate wildly from one season to another, yet they struggle to understand fielders numbers doing the same. I admit to being one of those who has trouble accepting that. I know we should be past the eyeball test days, but when Pat Burrell suddenly has a year with a 6.1 UZR and a 13.4 UZR/150 (like he did in 2010), the bullshit flag has to be thrown, right? And since UZR is a component used to determine WAR, this is a problem to me.

There’s only one problem. It doesn’t work.

(click "view full post" to read more)


At least, not yet. Not in the fantastically straight-forward way we try to use it.

But yeah, UZR in particular is iffy, though it’s probably not any worse than anything else that’s widespread (high praise, I know).

The complaint about it undervaluing “sluggers,” though, I disagree with. Value is very closely tied to scarcity, and so a slugger at first base isn’t going to be as valuable as a slugger at second. I think this is a good thing WAR does.

The lineup construction/protection/etc issues are probably valid, but not exactly relevant to an “is it the new RBI” discussion. It may be intractable to tease out those interdependencies, whereas with RBI even the plain old BA/OBP/SLG trio fixed the context issues.

why?

he goes on and on about how Curtis Granderson is getting penalized for not fielding in front of a fly ball staff while ignoring Brett Gardners’s league leading 21.9 UZR in left field and Nick Swisher’s oddly high 11.6 UZR in right field.

So, either Curtis is letting Brett Gardner and Nick Swisher catch balls he should be catching (possible, as I haven’t seen much Yankee baseball), or Granderson just doesn’t have much range.

Not that his point doesn’t have merit. the outliers are what makes you pause. You do have to ask yourself, “is Ian Kinsler really 10 runs better than replacement as a second baseman?” I think so, but I’m biased because I see Kinsler’s range and its fantastic. and his ability to turn the double play is pretty majestic too. Elvis’ range has been every bit as good but he’s had a bad year with the errors. (probably due to a revolving door at first. with none of the 3 current first baseman on the roster actually being first baseman by trade).

this article has a lot of issues. Some of them are legit issues with WAR, stated too boldly. Others are issues understanding WAR, also stated too boldly.

There is some truth to the “WAR is the new RBI” line: people misuse WAR because they don’t understand it well. I’m not sure, though, how a critique that also appears to misunderstand key pieces of WAR will rectify that situation.

I see Neyer tore the piece to shreds. And that’s cool. I like Neyer.

I most agree what Darth Snark mentioned above. Perhaps the biggest problem with WAR is the way some people use it. If person A says “I think Granderson is the AL MVP” person B will chime in with “He’s only 4th in the AL in fWAR!” as if that closes the door on any further argument. Kind of like how I might say “Ian Kinsler is the Rangers MVP this year” and person B says “LOL Michael Young has all those RBIs and that sparkly batting average. Get that Kinsler shit out of here!”