witesoxfan

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 16, 2014 -> 11:05 AM) I guess I'm confused about this part of it. You know that a CF should have a higher WAR than a 1b, which makes total sense to me. But I'm getting tripped up I guess because it seems to me it's not really weighting shortstops against each other correctly if it's pretty easy for any SS to get to 2.0 WAR. And maybe it isn't and that's just my presumption I haven't looked at where all shortstops fell last year. I think what you are actually seeing is a trend towards what we saw in the 80s where good defensive shortstops were abundant but good offensive shortstops were on very short supply. Cal Ripken kind of broke that mold back then, but we're back. This is why, if Leury Garcia is as good defensively as advertised, I've had no problem dealing Alexei. Alcides Escobar hit .234/.259/.300 (yes, that's a .559 OPS) with a wRC+ of 49 and, because of his defense and the positional adjustment, he was still worth 1.1 WAR entirely because of how good he was defensively. If he hits .250/.300/.325, he's probably a 2 WAR player. I also think, to some extent, you are also assuming just a bit too much how easy it is. Last year, there were 15 full time shortstops who had WARs of 2 or more. Considering there can only be 30 full time shortstops, and the WAR of an average player is 2, that distribution actually works out pretty perfectly. http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=...=&players=0

QUOTE (raBBit @ Jan 16, 2014 -> 10:52 AM) That's actually a very interesting debate. If Simmons had a wRC+ of 105 but was the best defensive player in the majors where does he rank for MVP voters? He's probably barely top 10, if that, but I'd have him in my top 3-5, depending on the field. Jean Segura put up 7.1 offensive runs this year with a wRC+ of 107. (wRC+ is a weighted statistic meant to help determine overall offensive value, all things considered, and then adjust it to the league average. More reading here). Segura's defensive runs were 5.4. If you assume the same wRC+ with Simmons' defensive value, you are talking about a 6+ WAR player. That is incredible.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Jan 16, 2014 -> 10:49 AM) So a catcher essentially has a 2.5 WAR head start over a 1st baseman? (Assuming 162 games, which obviously catchers dont play) Yes, which is an indication that it is much easier to find a guy to play and hit as a 1B than it is a C. To expound on this, in 521 PAs, Justin Smoak hit .238/.334/.412/.746 and was worth 0.2 WAR (he was poor defensively, but not moreso than other 1B around the league). In 475 PAs, Miguel Montero hit .230/.318/.344/.662 and was worth 0.9 WAR (he was solid defensively). Smoak was obviously the far superior hitter, but because he played a position where it is easier to find good offense, his value is actually lower because he was not as good as his contemporaries.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Jan 16, 2014 -> 10:40 AM) I just find it very interesting how much of an opportunity they're going to give Nieto. I know it's Nieto's agent doing the talking, but supposedly he's a shoe in on the roster. I remember seeing that quote too, which is why I really think that they'll get rid of Flowers if they can't acquire Nieto outright. Maybe Nieto is ready for the majors. I doubt it, but a couple things that were crazier happened.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Jan 16, 2014 -> 10:44 AM) Look at the impact Andrelton Simmons had despite providing little to no offense. 49 games in 2012, 2.2 WAR. http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playe...amp;position=SS If he ever hits .300, he's going to be an MVP candidate.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 16, 2014 -> 10:36 AM) Makes sense. So even though it's position adjusted, the variance between great and good is much larger at shortstop because they have a chance at more plays. I don't necessarily think that's true. I think you are going to see the differences in variances no matter what position it is, but what you will see is that it's easier to accrue very high values up the middle than it is on the corners. This is why people have been screaming for Trout to win the MVP the last two years over Cabrera, and why statheads hate the idea of the Angels using Trout in LF. The best two examples I can think of regarding maximizing value in players are Neil Walker and Jed Gyorko. Walker was a catcher coming up but was bad defensively, so they moved him to 3B. His bat simply wasn't good enough to stick there. So they moved him to 2B where he has actually been solid defensively and great - comparatively speaking - offensively, and he has turned into one of Pittsburgh's most valuable players. Gyorko was and still really is a 3B, but the Padres have Headley there - so they moved Gyorko to 2B, and even though he is not good defensively, he creates positive value there because he is creating surplus value there compared to other players in general around the league.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Jan 16, 2014 -> 10:33 AM) So are we giving up on acquiring a catcher or... They did acquire a catcher. But no, I don't think they are going to be looking for a big upgrade at catcher.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 16, 2014 -> 10:22 AM) In a futuresox thread someone said it is easier for a SS to get to something like 4.0 WAR so it isn't as impressive. Is WAR measured against your replacement infielder or replacement position? Is SS just so much easier to create dramatic improvement because of the balls in play you have a chance to make an impact on? Yes. There is a replacement level jump that is automatically figured into each position within the equation: Catcher: +12.5 runs (all are per 162 defensive games) First Base: -12.5 runs Second Base: +2.5 runs Third Base: +2.5 runs Shortstop: +7.5 runs Left Field: -7.5 runs Center Field: +2.5 runs Right Field: -7.5 runs Designated Hitter: -17.5 runs (For the record, a run in this instance (as I recall) is the difference between the number of runs you personally create and the number of runs you allow.) Roughly 10 runs equals 1 WAR. However, the reason it's "easier" for a shortstop to earn a higher WAR compared to catcher is because shortstops simply affect more plays. They are making strides towards better defining catcher's defensive value (specifically in pitch framing), but, simply put, a shortstop getting/not getting to a ball affects the game far more than a catcher allowing a runner to get to 2B because he couldn't throw him out or allowed a passed ball. Alexei Ramirez, even considering how "bad" he was defensively last year, still saved 12 more runs than he allowed defensively and he was worth 3.1 WAR. Alexei Ramirez was and is still a very solid shortstop, and it really, honestly, is one of the best free agent signings in White Sox history. EDIT: Sorry, that chart is found here. That is part 3 in a (seriously) 15 part series FanGraphs has posted on WAR. http://www.fangraphs.com/library/misc/war/

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 16, 2014 -> 09:52 AM) The fact that White Sox have not been even mentioned in a single tweet recently makes me think the ball game is over. Enjoy the $150 million dollar man. The fact that the White Sox haven't been mentioned means absolutely nothing to me.

QUOTE (Jake @ Jan 16, 2014 -> 09:34 AM) I'll add this resource to kick things off: The FanGraphs Glossary -- the real gems here are the full explanations of how each component of WAR is calculated for hitters and pitchers, which is also where you'll learn the most about things like wOBA and wRC+ I wanted to do this but didn't want to just C&P from there. It really is a great resource. Speaking of this, I actually get really frustrated when people say "bWAR is meaningless." To start, WAR is Wins Above Replacement, which is a general stat used to help determine how many more wins a guy contributes compared to John Doe in AAA. In theory, a true replacement level player will put up a WAR of 0, but you often see these players unqualified for even that, and they end up with WARs in the negatives, meaning they are actually costing their team wins. bWAR is baseballreference's version of WAR, while fWAR is FanGraphs version of WAR. bWAR is typically calculated using traditional counting statistics, while fWAR is calculated using more inferred rate statistics. The idea and difference behind these is that bWAR shows the value of what a player did on the field, including value added by the defense, while fWAR shows the value of what a player basically SHOULD do given neutral circumstances. The numbers may not agree 100% with offensive players, but they are pretty close and the differences are typically negligible. Here is the detailed description - http://www.baseball-reference.com/about/war_explained.shtml The difference primarily lies in pitchers. bWAR uses ERA as it's primary determinant while fWAR uses FIP (which is Fielding Independent Pitching, using just numbers the pitcher puts up to determine basically how well he has pitched and removing the defense from the equation. Compared to ERA, this statistic is much steadier over time because it essentially takes "luck" out of the equation). NEITHER OF THEM IS WRONG. It's really all in what you are looking to determine. To me, these two answer two different but similar questions bWAR - "how good was he?" fWAR - "how good should he have been?" The classic example is Javier Vazquez. In his time with the White Sox - '06-'08 - Vazquez put up bWARs of 2.7, 6.2, and 3.1 for a total of 12 bWAR. During those same years, his fWAR was 4.9, 5.0, and 4.9. fWAR says he pitched "very well" in all 3 years, while bWAR says he was only average to above average during 2 years (in either statistic, 2 WAR is average). However, try and tell any avid White Sox fan that Javy Vazquez was very good in all 3 years, and you will get an ear full. The bottom line is this: WAR - both bWAR and fWAR - are not the end all, be all of statistics. The difference between 2.6 WAR and 2.3 WAR in either is negligible. The idea and concept of WAR is to allow a person the opportunity to compare the actual value of a defensive minded shortstop to a home run hitting first basemen to a run of the mill starting pitcher to a lights out closer. It's a statistic that's always evolving and will continue to evolve. However, it does a terrific job in quantifying the value of players, compared to the league average and compared to players all time, which is why it's so prevalent today. Use either one, but know why you are using them and for what you are using them. Just be wary that if you say "Jim Slim has a bWAR of 3 and it's only July, he's incredible," people will dispute your point stating that he's been pretty lucky with leaving runners on base and a BABIP (batting average on balls in play, which we'll get to eventually) of .250 and that he is due for regression (moving back towards his career norms) and has been pitching over his head. They are also probably right.

QUOTE (lasttriptotulsa @ Jan 16, 2014 -> 09:21 AM) An official NBA basketball is definitely brown, not orange. RACIST

To try and stimulate some constructive conversation both now and moving forward, we've decided to open this up for all the advanced stat "nerds" to both answer questions people have regarding advanced statistics and to pose beliefs and write actual blogs (as in web logs) and opinions they have about advanced stats. We just ask that, if you are going to be writing about something that has not been covered yet in the thread, you define the statistic you are writing about or answering a question about in your own words. One final note: ANY NON-CONSTRUCTIVE POSTS WILL BE DELETED WITHOUT FURTHER WARNING. We will allow a lot of leeway here, but be forewarned, we want this to be a thread about creative thinking and understanding regarding statistics in baseball, and we want it to be just that. Any stats that are defined will be added to this post and it will be updated at any time by a moderator.

Did you guys know that basketballs are orange?

Having eaten both Chipotle and Panchero's, Panchero's is way, way better. Looks like the only locations in the Chicago area are in Schaumburg and Rockford.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Jan 15, 2014 -> 08:50 PM) Jeopardy contestants are generally pretty sharp and rarely cause me to facepalm, but tonight, this clue elicited a response of, "Who is Ellen Degeneres?" Who is Dr Phil

QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Jan 16, 2014 -> 08:37 AM) Starks is reporting that the Cubs are going hard after Tanaka. Angels involved too I pay as much attention to this as I do "the Sox are falling out" tweet as I do "beware of the Sox." Frankly, I could care less either way. There's going to be so much bulls*** thrown around in the next week and a half that it's impossible to know what's true and what's not. QUOTE (chisoxfan310 @ Jan 16, 2014 -> 08:51 AM) Rangers are looking for left-handed starting pitchers. The only way I see us getting back into the Tanaka sweepstakes is if we can work out a deal with the Rangers and free up some cash. I disagree 100% with this. They have the money.

QUOTE (lasttriptotulsa @ Jan 16, 2014 -> 08:33 AM) First of all, we are talking at their peak. I'll never believe that Bieber is more famous/popular now than Jordan was up until his retirement. If you took a poll of people in this country and just asked them if they knew who Justin Bieber was, I'd bet money that more people could tell you who Jordan is or who Oprah is. And to say Bieber is more famous than Obama would be ludicrous. The vast majority of the world's population could tell you who Obama is. I genuinely disagree with all of this.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Jan 16, 2014 -> 08:24 AM) Like it or not, Miley is the most famous person on the planet. Bieber was the number 4 most googled person in 2013. Oh yeah, I forgot all her s***. When I think of pop culture, I always just think of Bieber. I have used all my willpower to ignore everything Miley.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 16, 2014 -> 08:09 AM) I for one think that scouting of minor leaguers has swung too far towards physical tools. I think we're missing out on good baseball players in some cases by doing that. And before anyone launches into the obvious here, I'm aware of how all this works. Stats in the lower levels of the minors, for example, don't mean a lot. And obviously, some of the time at least, success in the minors may be an illusion. That all said, when you have players who put up big numbers in the upper levels of the minors, I think scouting types are sometimes too quick to write them off based on things like a lack of a single, flashy plus tool, or the fact that a guy is say 24 vs 22/23. Not that those factors aren't relevant, because they very much are - but for some, those perceived tools have been allowed to crowd out performance nearly entirely. My personal view is, that trend will start to reverse itself in the next few years, a bit. Allen Craig and Matt Carpenter were never top 100 prospects.

You guys seriously don't think Bieber is more famous than Jordan? Bieber is the most famous person on the planet right now. And then I see J4L said the exact same thing.

QUOTE (The Ultimate Champion @ Jan 16, 2014 -> 12:05 AM) MLBTR suggests the Pirates would like a lefty 1B to platoon with Gaby Sanchez. I wonder what they would be willing to give us if we send them Dunn and $14M. Not happening, so forget about it. Seriously, the White Sox aren't going to eat $15 million to send Dunn away. Stop suggesting it.

QUOTE (Nokona @ Jan 15, 2014 -> 05:52 PM) B & B mentioned it. Did not have a source though, just said that they were. Whoa

"They've moved closer to competing with us."

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 15, 2014 -> 04:27 PM) That was nothing compared to when we thought Miguel Cabrera was coming to us only to have an hour go by and he was a Tiger. And man the proposed package we were sending to Florida was such garbage. The package they got ended up being jacks*** too.

QUOTE (The Ultimate Champion @ Jan 15, 2014 -> 04:14 PM) What about the 3-way where we got Damon, the Red Sox got Maggs, and I think someone else got Nomar can't remember who. Nomar went to the Cubs IIRC shortly after that. ARod to Boston for Manny Ramirez. Magglio Ordonez, Brandon McCarthy, and one other prospect (those two were both in A ball at the time) for Nomar and Scott Williamson.