46DidIt Posted January 15 Share Posted January 15 4 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said: hahaha, ok man. I guess you really need this. Here you go. I think you are WAY over simplifying this. A 1B's bat isn't "undervalued". It is placed in an appropriate context of a group of players from the same position. Then adjustment is made recognizing that both offensive and defensive skills occur at different average amounts in different positions. By this same argument a 1B's glove would also be "overvalued" because it is much easier to stand out defensively in a position that doesn't provide much defensive value. The comparison to other positions isn't equal either, because if you took a SS and started playing them at 1B, then they would also see the same positional adjustments and their WAR would adjust accordingly. You can't just take any minor leaguer and replace them. That's not what this does. It's a "replacement" player, not any player out on the street, and that replacement player has it's own definition. Right and that definition is the expected production you would get from a minor league player that replaces him. Which would have theoretical result of .294 winning percentage team. Not the average production of actual major league bat at that position. If every team had Freddie Freeman at first, that doesn’t mean you could expect Freddie Freeman production by replacement. They would already be at majors at another position Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
46DidIt Posted January 15 Share Posted January 15 I mean do you think one WAR first baseman like Bell get paid while 1.9 WAR second baseman like Yolmer get cut because GMs don’t understand WAR? Or could it possibly be they agree with me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestEddy Posted January 15 Share Posted January 15 42 minutes ago, 46DidIt said: i never even argued that positional adjustments weren’t valid, only that firstbaseman are undervalued in that system.which was essentially argument hoopster was making. Hoopster made a bunch of arguments, one of which was that defensive ratings are subjective, which just isn't true. Read up on the MLB explanation of DRS, and you'll see it's a lot more comprehensive than somebody deciding a player could have caught a ball, or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestEddy Posted January 15 Share Posted January 15 38 minutes ago, 46DidIt said: I would post a lot more often if I didn’t expect to be trolled by certain mods. I’d imagine that may have something to do with why 90% of posts are made by like 20 posters these days. But whatever, you enjoy yourself While SS2k5 does get needlessly pithy, I've done some soul-searching, myself, while reading strings these last few months. WAR and defensive rankings are universally accepted methods of rating baseball players. Any "problem" you feel you have with their methods have already been argued by people who are way smarter than any of us, here. The people who have established them for Baseball-Prospectus and Fangraphs have already argued them out on their platforms. The undervaluing of 1B gets accounted for, oftentimes, in real time. Baseball-Reference has updated their model multiple times, which results in a reseeding of stats. Yes, 30 HRs at 1B may get lost at 1B, while 30 HR at SS is praised, but the ding in value often comes in defensive contributions. Pick two guys. Freddie Freeman, 1B, and Jackson Merrill, CF. They have wOBA's .011 points from each other, and their offensive score is 2.2 from each other. Merrill rates a 6.5 on defense, whereas Freeman is a -9.0. Merrill gets a 5.4 fWAR, Freeman gets a 4.2. While similar on offense, Merrill plays a harder position better, and Freeman plays an easy position below average. I'm not the best person to argue this, as I'm not a mathematician who knows this stuff inside out. So it's great that you decide to have a problem with WAR. It's okay to state that, have a few volleys, then move on. Otherwise, it turns into pages of "yes it is", "no it isn't", "yes it is"..... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted January 15 Share Posted January 15 27 minutes ago, 46DidIt said: I mean do you think one WAR first baseman like Bell get paid while 1.9 WAR second baseman like Yolmer get cut because GMs don’t understand WAR? Or could it possibly be they agree with me Yolmer Sanchez didn't get cut as a 2.0 WAR player. He got cut when he was replacement level player after both his offense and defense fell off, probably mainly due to health. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted January 15 Share Posted January 15 41 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said: Yolmer Sanchez didn't get cut as a 2.0 WAR player. He got cut when he was replacement level player after both his offense and defense fell off, probably mainly due to health. That was peak Yolmer…like comparing Eaton 1 and 2 with the Sox, two totally different players. Well, minus the Gatorade baths. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldsox Posted January 15 Share Posted January 15 55 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said: Yolmer Sanchez didn't get cut as a 2.0 WAR player. He got cut when he was replacement level player after both his offense and defense fell off, probably mainly due to health. and his arb payout got a little pricey. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 16 Share Posted January 16 10 hours ago, Bob Sacamano said: I've let this post marinate in the wrong thread for too long: Would be awesome if he flipped the switch his age 27 age season like Max Muncy (another guy who played some 1B who is the same height). I’m not going to hold my breath though. FWIW, No I actually don't think this would be "awesome." Cute, beneficial sure. Nothing worth gawking at. Yes, it would be more wins for the White Sox. That's ok. But if we consider Vaughn's situation, if he has a good Max Muncy like first half, upper .800s OPS and 20 ish home runs, he is absolutely tradable at the deadline and that's nice, but 1.5 years of control on a 1b who is performing well but who has been super unsuccessful in his career isn't worth a ton at the deadline. You can get something for him sure, but not a ton. There's not a great recent comp, but in 2023 Carlos Santana moved at the deadline for a guy in Rookie Ball. The Orioles traded Trey Mancini and got back Jose Siri and a pitcher who might make a part of their rotation this year in 2022. In 2021, the Cubs sent Rizzo to the Yankees for their #9 and #13 prospects. Most of those guys were on 1 year deals. So you could get something for him, not a top 100 prospect very likely though. Next offseason, same problem. You need a team that can spend $10 million on a 1b, needs a 1b, but who can't buy one in free agency. That's the Josh Naylor situation, maybe Vaughn is a little better but ?? That brought back a competitive balance pick and a guy who probably will go into Cleveland's bullpen and become a legend who we hate. If the White Sox hold him to play a little better, he walks for a $75-100 million contract in 2 years, with the White Sox getting a draft pick. All of this is good, but none of it is returning even what the Cease deal did for the White Sox. It's an improvement, but nothing mind blowing or franchise reshaping. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted January 16 Author Share Posted January 16 15 minutes ago, Balta1701 said: FWIW, No I actually don't think this would be "awesome." Cute, beneficial sure. Nothing worth gawking at. Yes, it would be more wins for the White Sox. That's ok. But if we consider Vaughn's situation, if he has a good Max Muncy like first half, upper .800s OPS and 20 ish home runs, he is absolutely tradable at the deadline and that's nice, but 1.5 years of control on a 1b who is performing well but who has been super unsuccessful in his career isn't worth a ton at the deadline. You can get something for him sure, but not a ton. There's not a great recent comp, but in 2023 Carlos Santana moved at the deadline for a guy in Rookie Ball. The Orioles traded Trey Mancini and got back Jose Siri and a pitcher who might make a part of their rotation this year in 2022. In 2021, the Cubs sent Rizzo to the Yankees for their #9 and #13 prospects. Most of those guys were on 1 year deals. So you could get something for him, not a top 100 prospect very likely though. Next offseason, same problem. You need a team that can spend $10 million on a 1b, needs a 1b, but who can't buy one in free agency. That's the Josh Naylor situation, maybe Vaughn is a little better but ?? That brought back a competitive balance pick and a guy who probably will go into Cleveland's bullpen and become a legend who we hate. If the White Sox hold him to play a little better, he walks for a $75-100 million contract in 2 years, with the White Sox getting a draft pick. All of this is good, but none of it is returning even what the Cease deal did for the White Sox. It's an improvement, but nothing mind blowing or franchise reshaping. At least they could trade him. That’s too much of a response for not being that serious or even that optimistic about happening. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 16 Share Posted January 16 6 minutes ago, Bob Sacamano said: At least they could trade him. That’s too much of a response for not being that serious or even that optimistic about happening. Yes it would make him a flip candidate. I'd just temper the expectations on a return. If he has a good first half - who believes he can keep that up. If he has a good year, maybe people believe he's broken out, but he has 1 year of control left before he leaves. For a 1b, that's just not that valuable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dominikk85 Posted January 20 Share Posted January 20 Eno sarris said in a podcast that he showed vaughn a graph that his production was closely correlated to his pull rate, ie. He was doing better in phases where he pulled the ball more. He said vaughn wasn't interested in that and didn't seem to be very into analytics at all. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteSox2023 Posted January 20 Share Posted January 20 19 minutes ago, Dominikk85 said: Eno sarris said in a podcast that he showed vaughn a graph that his production was closely correlated to his pull rate, ie. He was doing better in phases where he pulled the ball more. He said vaughn wasn't interested in that and didn't seem to be very into analytics at all. 🤣 Sounds about right. Vaughn is the very definition of a true White Sox player and their associated failures. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted January 21 Share Posted January 21 1 hour ago, Dominikk85 said: Eno sarris said in a podcast that he showed vaughn a graph that his production was closely correlated to his pull rate, ie. He was doing better in phases where he pulled the ball more. He said vaughn wasn't interested in that and didn't seem to be very into analytics at all. Wait until he tries to talk to Robert... Will probably remember him as Montoyo/a. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.