Baseball Prospectus has a solid tool and graphics to plot out player injuries and impact by projected WAR (for BP it is WARP).

Here is the White Sox Graph for the season, with injuries color coded. Details regarding the injury are available when you hover over each player on the site, but I can't convert that here. Currently, the Oakland A's are the only team in baseball with less players (4) currently on the IL than the White Sox (6).

 

This second chart is YTD projected WARP lost due to injury. As I tried to convey here earlier this year, the Mets have had a much larger injury impact, and if you look at the rest of MLB, the Sox have been fortunate, primarily due to the fact their rotation and nearly all relievers have remained healthy this season.

YTD Projected WARP lost due to injury

1. 9.6 New York Mets
2. 8.3 Los Angeles Dodgers
3. 7.0 San Diego
4. 6.3 New York Yankees
5. 6.1 Toronto
6. 5.9 Arizona
7. 5.8 Houston
8. 5.6 Los Angeles Angels
9. 5.5 Saint Louis
10. 5.4 Tampa Bay
11. 5.4 Washington
12. 5.2 Atlanta
13. 4.6 Cincinnati
14. 4.6 Seattle
15. 4.3 San Francisco
16. 4.3 Minnesota
17. 4.1 Milwaukee
18. 3.8 Cleveland
19. 3.7 Chicago White Sox

 

Quote

Note regarding WARP Missed: WARP calculation is based on projected preseason WARP. The projected WARP missed is based on the % of the season a player has missed due to injury. 

 

Edited August 2, 20214 yr by South Side Hit Men

So 2/3 of a season of Eloy Jiminez plus 1/2 of a season of Luis Robert equals only 3.7 WAR? That seems on the low side.

4 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

So 2/3 of a season of Eloy Jiminez plus 1/2 of a season of Luis Robert equals only 3.7 WAR? That seems on the low side.

I assumed it's so low bc without them we've been still winning at a much higher rate than the formula would calculate...?

 

WARP must hate Robert Eloy and Nick.  

Did they base it on Robert's first month of 2021 or just last season?

And it's not only those two plus Grandal, but difference with the production actually being received... so maybe 1.5 difference at second? 

Edited August 2, 20214 yr by caulfield12

Thanks to Mercedes?

I don’t see madrigal listed

Well that’s absurd.

Is this only what was lost, or does it also factor in what was replaced?

I think it is pretty obvious that their predictive WAR model is largely underestimating the young players here.

I also think the one number you really can't touch is how many guys have played through injuries because so many other main players have been hurt, and how that has hurt production.

3 minutes ago, Sambuca said:

Is this only what was lost, or does it also factor in what was replaced?

Without looking yet I’d have to assume it would factor in the player that filled in.

I don't see how this can be accurate.  Obviously lots of injuries league wide, but how many teams have lost 4/9 major offensive producers with serious injuries.  Our health on the SP side has certainly helped alleviate some things, but 19th?  GMAFB. 

4 hours ago, Balta1701 said:

So 2/3 of a season of Eloy Jiminez plus 1/2 of a season of Luis Robert equals only 3.7 WAR? That seems on the low side.

Eloy was projected for 2.5 WAR by ZiPS and Robert was projected for 3.3. 

Robert was on pace for nearly 6 WAR when he got hurt. The projection systems are definitely on the conservative side of projections for younger guys. 

This is one example of why I generally consider analytics to be hit or miss. This calculation really misses the mark, IMO. 

1 minute ago, IWokeUpLikeThis said:

This is one example of why I generally consider analytics to be hit or miss. This calculation really misses the mark, IMO. 

Analytics is what you put into it.  GIGO.

1 hour ago, southsider2k5 said:

I think it is pretty obvious that their predictive WAR model is largely underestimating the young players here.

I also think the one number you really can't touch is how many guys have played through injuries because so many other main players have been hurt, and how that has hurt production.

Not only the young guys but Tim is also a headache for projection models. He always has been. The models never quite understand why he keeps doing well.

2 hours ago, southsider2k5 said:

I think it is pretty obvious that their predictive WAR model is largely underestimating the young players here.

I also think the one number you really can't touch is how many guys have played through injuries because so many other main players have been hurt, and how that has hurt production.

Yep.  Reminds me of when many of us were rightly skeptical of the various unimpressive season projections that had the Sox as a .500 team.

And also how are the Guardians only at the spot right above us missing their entire starting rotation (including the CY Young favorite)?

This guy's page is all copyrighted and locked, but he does share some details on Twitter. I've always found it to do a fairly good job of keeping track of how badly teams got hurt.

 

 

 

13 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

This guy's page is all copyrighted and locked, but he does share some details on Twitter. I've always found it to do a fairly good job of keeping track of how badly teams got hurt.

 

 

 

Does this mean that had the Sox not had anyone injured, they would have 10 more wins at this point? That would make one heck of a record.

56 minutes ago, SpringfieldFan said:

Does this mean that had the Sox not had anyone injured, they would have 10 more wins at this point? That would make one heck of a record.

Well first, no team is ever 100% healthy. The 2015-16 White Sox were one of the healthiest teams I ever saw, and we saw injuries used as an excuse for those teams as well. So maybe an average team loses about 5 WAR in that guys numbers by this point in the year?

Second, I don’t honk he explicitly takes into account how good of a player replaces the guy, he is evaluating how badly beaten up your team is, not how strong your bench is.

2 hours ago, southsider2k5 said:

I think it is pretty obvious that their predictive WAR model is largely underestimating the young players here.

I also think the one number you really can't touch is how many guys have played through injuries because so many other main players have been hurt, and how that has hurt production.

This is correct, WARP is typically more conservative with younger players, prudent overall due to the lack of performance track record.  Players with an established record (performance, ability to play through a season healthy consistently), whereas younger players do not have an established record, take a few years to adjust to the grind of the season, and typically increase their ability and performance until they reach their peak age (26-28).

It also doesn't include time not on the IL, such as Eloy who has already missed more games while not on the IL (4) than he has played (3, leaving the 3rd early), or time of such as when they gave Jose the series off vs. a formal IL stay.

The Sox had key players out, but a much lower number of overall players out, which accounts for the Sox' lower position in terms of overall IL / WARP impact. Also, high impact players out for the entire season, such as Mike Clevenger or Justin Verlander, also impact the IL impacted WARP.

fWAR lost by key players (2.0 + projected fWAR) YTD (Limited to current roster & Total IL days 10 +)

New York Mets (10.5) : C. Carrasco 2.8 (2.8 X 120); N. Syndergaard 2.6 (2.6 X 122); J. DeGrom 1.3 (5.1 X 32); B. Nimmo 1.2 (2.5 X 60); M. Conforto 1.0 (3.3 X 37); J. McNeil 0.8 (3.0 X 35); F. Lindor 0.6 (5.1 X 15); P. Alonso 0.2 (2.6 X 12).

Los Angeles Dodgers (9.1): C. Seager 2.8 (4.6 X 75); C. Bellinger 2.7 (5.4 X 61); D. May 1.6 (2.2 X 91); C. Kershaw 0.8 (3.4 X 28); M. Betts 0.5 (6.0 X 10); G. Lux 0.5 (2.4 X 23); M Muncy 0.2 (2.5 X 10).

New York Yankees (7.9): L. Severino 2.7 (2.7 X 122); L. Voit 1.8 (2.6 X 86); A. Hicks 1.5 (2.4 X 77); C. Kluber 1.2 (2.1 X 67); A. Judge 0.4 (4.2 X 11);  G. Stanton 0.3 (2.5 X 14).

San Diego (6.5): M. Clevenger 3.0 (3.0 X 122); D. Lamet 1.4 (2.6 X 67); F. Tatis Jr 0.7 (4.4 X 19); T. Grisham 0.5 (2.4 X 27); B. Snell 0.3 (2.8 X 15); C. Paddack 0.3 (2.6 X 13); Y. Darvish 0.3 (3.1 X 10).

White Sox: (6.1): L. Robert  2.4 (3.3 X 90); E. Jimenez 2.4 (2.5 X 116); Y. Grandal 0.8 (3.9 X 25); L. Lynn 0.3 (2.8 X 14); T. Anderson 0.2 (2.7 X 10).

 

Data Used: Fan Graphs Preseason 2021 ZIPS Projections: https://www.fangraphs.com/projections.aspx?pos=all&stats=bat&type=zips

The denominator used is 187 days (For example: Luis Robert's projected fWAR 3.3 was multiplied by IL days missed (90) divided by MLB days to date of 122) or 3.3 X (90/122) = 2.43 = 2.4.

 

4 hours ago, South Side Hit Men said:

This is correct, WARP is typically more conservative with younger players, prudent overall due to the lack of performance track record.  Players with an established record (performance, ability to play through a season healthy consistently), whereas younger players do not have an established record, take a few years to adjust to the grind of the season, and typically increase their ability and performance until they reach their peak age (26-28).

It also doesn't include time not on the IL, such as Eloy who has already missed more games while not on the IL (4) than he has played (3, leaving the 3rd early), or time of such as when they gave Jose the series off vs. a formal IL stay.

The Sox had key players out, but a much lower number of overall players out, which accounts for the Sox' lower position in terms of overall IL / WARP impact. Also, high impact players out for the entire season, such as Mike Clevenger or Justin Verlander, also impact the IL impacted WARP.

fWAR lost by key players (2.0 + projected fWAR) YTD (Limited to current roster & Total IL days 10 +)

New York Mets (10.5) : C. Carrasco 2.8 (2.8 X 120); N. Syndergaard 2.6 (2.6 X 122); J. DeGrom 1.3 (5.1 X 32); B. Nimmo 1.2 (2.5 X 60); M. Conforto 1.0 (3.3 X 37); J. McNeil 0.8 (3.0 X 35); F. Lindor 0.6 (5.1 X 15); P. Alonso 0.2 (2.6 X 12).

Los Angeles Dodgers (9.1): C. Seager 2.8 (4.6 X 75); C. Bellinger 2.7 (5.4 X 61); D. May 1.6 (2.2 X 91); C. Kershaw 0.8 (3.4 X 28); M. Betts 0.5 (6.0 X 10); G. Lux 0.5 (2.4 X 23); M Muncy 0.2 (2.5 X 10).

New York Yankees (7.9): L. Severino 2.7 (2.7 X 122); L. Voit 1.8 (2.6 X 86); A. Hicks 1.5 (2.4 X 77); C. Kluber 1.2 (2.1 X 67); A. Judge 0.4 (4.2 X 11);  G. Stanton 0.3 (2.5 X 14).

San Diego (6.5): M. Clevenger 3.0 (3.0 X 122); D. Lamet 1.4 (2.6 X 67); F. Tatis Jr 0.7 (4.4 X 19); T. Grisham 0.5 (2.4 X 27); B. Snell 0.3 (2.8 X 15); C. Paddack 0.3 (2.6 X 13); Y. Darvish 0.3 (3.1 X 10).

White Sox: (6.1? L. Robert  2.4 (3.3 X 90); E. Jimenez 2.4 (2.5 X 116); Y. Grandal 0.8 (3.9 X 25); L. Lynn 0.3 (2.8 X 14); T. Anderson 0.2 (2.7 X 10).

 

Data Used: Fan Graphs Preseason 2021 ZIPS Projections: https://www.fangraphs.com/projections.aspx?pos=all&stats=bat&type=zips

The denominator used is 187 days (For example: Luis Robert's projected fWAR 3.3 was multiplied by IL days missed (90) divided by MLB days to date of 122) or 3.3 X (90/122) = 2.43 = 2.4.

 

So Madrigal was a 0?

I’m wondering if the Madrigal trade moved him to Cubs lost value which obviously would be an error. 

6 hours ago, Balta1701 said:

So Madrigal was a 0?

No, 1.7. Players over 2 were listed.

If players between 1-2 were listed, the gap between the White Sox and the teams above would have grown much larger, since each of the four have several 1-1.9 fWAR projected players with IL time.

Liked the graph you posted, showed the Sox had a wide circle with high projected players, but the number of player days lost was on the low end, consistent with the other analysis.

And no Bama Doc, Madrigal's injury time was included in the OG post, was excluded in my latest to isolate "high impact players" with projected fWAR over 2.0.

Edited August 3, 20214 yr by South Side Hit Men