I know what you're all thinking,  Ozzie Bonds' range still kind of sucks, but every player has a weakness.

Except Trout.

Posted by tecwrg on 10/3/2012 3:55:00 PM (view original):
"Now are you so sure Trout is the MVP?"

I'm questioning the value of dWAR, and want to understand a little more about how it's calculated.

But if you go strictly on oWAR, Trout's at 8.6 and Cabrera's at 7.5.  So that's still advantage to Trout.  But the "gap" between the two certainly has narrowed.

And I've already dismissed the playoff argument as retarded in this case, for reasons previously given.

Yet, if dWAR is questionable don't you think oWAR might be too?

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/3/2012 4:38:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 10/3/2012 3:49:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/3/2012 3:45:00 PM (view original):
I guess what I'm saying(or asking) is this:  Is the WAR calculation the same every season?   As I understand it, it is not.

I'm not sure. Either way, Trout and Cabrera were both calculated against the same replacement level this year and with the exact same position bonus.

Yet replacement level(which you're not even sure about how it's calculated) is different for CF/3B and could greatly vary from season to season and position to position.   

If your MONSTER stat is the one you're gonna swear by, I suggest understanding how it works first.

It's not different for 3B and CF. The positional bonus is exactly the same.

Fangraphs calculates replacement the same every year:

FanGraphs calculates replacement level as being 20 runs below average per 600 PAs. So if a player gets exactly 600 plate appearances, their positional adjustment would be +20. If they have more than 600 PAs, their adjustment would be higher; if they have fewer than 600 PAs, the adjustment would be lower. The exact formula is (20/600)*PA.

EDIT: Average is league wide average, not positional average.

Posted by bad_luck on 10/3/2012 4:39:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/3/2012 4:38:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 10/3/2012 3:49:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/3/2012 3:45:00 PM (view original):
I guess what I'm saying(or asking) is this:  Is the WAR calculation the same every season?   As I understand it, it is not.

I'm not sure. Either way, Trout and Cabrera were both calculated against the same replacement level this year and with the exact same position bonus.

Yet replacement level(which you're not even sure about how it's calculated) is different for CF/3B and could greatly vary from season to season and position to position.   

If your MONSTER stat is the one you're gonna swear by, I suggest understanding how it works first.

It's not different for 3B and CF. The positional bonus is exactly the same.

So 30 minutes ago you're not sure and now you're an expert?

Please link the source you found during that time.

Posted by bad_luck on 10/3/2012 4:42:00 PM (view original):
Fangraphs calculates replacement the same every year:

FanGraphs calculates replacement level as being 20 runs below average per 600 PAs. So if a player gets exactly 600 plate appearances, their positional adjustment would be +20. If they have more than 600 PAs, their adjustment would be higher; if they have fewer than 600 PAs, the adjustment would be lower. The exact formula is (20/600)*PA.

EDIT: Average is league wide average, not positional average.

So average never changes?    Average in 2003 was the same as average in 2012?

Same with dWAR(which is questionable and surely rates by position)?

I wasn't sure if it changed from year to year, not whether or not Cabrera and Trout were calculated against the same replacement level. They are.

Posted by bad_luck on 10/3/2012 4:36:00 PM (view original):

Posted by burnsy483 on 10/3/2012 4:17:00 PM (view original):
So i guess you see it as "most valuable to any team."  And I do too, mostly.  The problem is, there are a lot of people who see a player's value as "most valuable to the team he's on."  David Wright is great, but how valuable is he to the Mets this year when without him they would have went 68-94 rather than 74-88? What's the difference?  But Cabrera is easily the best player on the Tigers, and without him, they aren't a playoff team, and possibly a WS team.

My thoughts are this:

There are 25 guys on the roster. A star position player gets 4 or 5 at bats a game and doesn't pitch at all. There's only so much he can do. Barry Bonds could mate with Ozzie Smith and birth a gigantic roided up SS with range 17 times better than Derek Jeter and the ability to hit 100 home runs with a .330 BA . But if he's on the Astros this year, they aren't making the playoffs, even with his 24 WAR. Even if he's replacing a replacement level SS, they still won't get to 80 wins.

Ozzie Bonds would clearly be the mot valuable player in the league. That the other 24 guys on his team are complete piles of **** doesn't change that fact.

I'd vote for that guy.  But what value does he bring to this team? The difference between 80 wins and 56 wins.  One could argue that Miguel Carbera, and him helping the Tigers get to 88 wins, and a playoff berth by a couple wins, is more valuable to the Tigers than Ozzie Bonds is to the Astros.

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/3/2012 4:44:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 10/3/2012 4:42:00 PM (view original):
Fangraphs calculates replacement the same every year:

FanGraphs calculates replacement level as being 20 runs below average per 600 PAs. So if a player gets exactly 600 plate appearances, their positional adjustment would be +20. If they have more than 600 PAs, their adjustment would be higher; if they have fewer than 600 PAs, the adjustment would be lower. The exact formula is (20/600)*PA.

EDIT: Average is league wide average, not positional average.

So average never changes?    Average in 2003 was the same as average in 2012?

Same with dWAR(which is questionable and surely rates by position)?

Who gives a ****? Cabrera and Trout both played this year in 2012. The replacement level benchmark was the same for both of them.

Posted by burnsy483 on 10/3/2012 4:45:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 10/3/2012 4:36:00 PM (view original):

Posted by burnsy483 on 10/3/2012 4:17:00 PM (view original):
So i guess you see it as "most valuable to any team."  And I do too, mostly.  The problem is, there are a lot of people who see a player's value as "most valuable to the team he's on."  David Wright is great, but how valuable is he to the Mets this year when without him they would have went 68-94 rather than 74-88? What's the difference?  But Cabrera is easily the best player on the Tigers, and without him, they aren't a playoff team, and possibly a WS team.

My thoughts are this:

There are 25 guys on the roster. A star position player gets 4 or 5 at bats a game and doesn't pitch at all. There's only so much he can do. Barry Bonds could mate with Ozzie Smith and birth a gigantic roided up SS with range 17 times better than Derek Jeter and the ability to hit 100 home runs with a .330 BA . But if he's on the Astros this year, they aren't making the playoffs, even with his 24 WAR. Even if he's replacing a replacement level SS, they still won't get to 80 wins.

Ozzie Bonds would clearly be the mot valuable player in the league. That the other 24 guys on his team are complete piles of **** doesn't change that fact.

I'd vote for that guy.  But what value does he bring to this team? The difference between 80 wins and 56 wins.  One could argue that Miguel Carbera, and him helping the Tigers get to 88 wins, and a playoff berth by a couple wins, is more valuable to the Tigers than Ozzie Bonds is to the Astros.

Would the Tigers be better off with Ozzie Bonds or Cabrera? If the answer is Ozzie Bonds, then Cabrera was not the most valuable player in the league.

But he's not on the Tigers. 

Posted by bad_luck on 10/3/2012 4:46:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/3/2012 4:44:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 10/3/2012 4:42:00 PM (view original):
Fangraphs calculates replacement the same every year:

FanGraphs calculates replacement level as being 20 runs below average per 600 PAs. So if a player gets exactly 600 plate appearances, their positional adjustment would be +20. If they have more than 600 PAs, their adjustment would be higher; if they have fewer than 600 PAs, the adjustment would be lower. The exact formula is (20/600)*PA.

EDIT: Average is league wide average, not positional average.

So average never changes?    Average in 2003 was the same as average in 2012?

Same with dWAR(which is questionable and surely rates by position)?

Who gives a ****? Cabrera and Trout both played this year in 2012. The replacement level benchmark was the same for both of them.

I give a ****.  As should you since this is YOUR stat not mine.

Don't get mad because you have no idea how it works.   That's like a kid tipping over a puzzle because he can't put it together.   It's not the puzzle's fault.

What does 2003 have to do with this year?

Also: I was that kid.

I'm the first to admit that I don't know the technical ins and outs of WAR. But whether or not the replacement level changes from year to year doesn't matter. Replacement level for 2012 was X. Mike Trout was 10ish games better than X. Miguel Cabrera was 6ish games better than X. No matter what happens to X, the gap between the two remains.

FUN WITH WAR!!

Per B-R (for position players only):
Cabrera's WAR (O+D) is 6.9.  His team total WAR is 14.5.  Meaning Cabrera's WAR is 47.6% of his team's total level.
Trout's WAR (O+D) is 10.7.  His team total WAR is 38.2.  Trout's WAR is 28% of his team's total.

Who is more valuable to their team?