Photo

Balt Sun: Q&A: Bill Ripken on his old school vs. new school book, his war on WAR, and the state of the Orioles


  • Please log in to reply
60 replies to this topic

#1 BSLChrisStoner

BSLChrisStoner

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 118,800 posts

Posted 11 February 2020 - 09:01 AM

Balt SunQ&A: Bill Ripken on his old school vs. new school book, his war on WAR, and the state of the Orioles



#2 BSLSteveBirrer

BSLSteveBirrer

    Soccer Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,231 posts
  • LocationMS and ID

Posted 11 February 2020 - 09:27 AM

His example on the WAR and Mookie Betts/Red Sox was pretty interesting. Does seem odd that you add up all the players WAR and get 50 for a team that won 108 games. So I guess that 58 extra wins comes from the chemistry? Yeah ok.



#3 DJ MC

DJ MC

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,680 posts
  • LocationBeautiful Bel Air, MD

Posted 11 February 2020 - 09:50 AM

His example on the WAR and Mookie Betts/Red Sox was pretty interesting. Does seem odd that you add up all the players WAR and get 50 for a team that won 108 games. So I guess that 58 extra wins comes from the chemistry? Yeah ok.

 

WAR isn't a scale where 0 = the worst. 0 WAR is literally "replacement"-level. So a random player you can pick up for free. Those players do still have some level of talent and a team of them will still win a number of games over a 162-game season. I've seen a 0-WAR team argued as being one that would be somewhere in the 40-45-win range. So that is the base to which you add the additional WAR.

 

45+58=103, which just so happens to be the Red Sox pythagorian win total for 2018.

 

In other words, if you listen to Billy, you come out looking like one of his bat knobs.


  • BSLChrisStoner, JeremyStrain, Dr. FLK and 3 others like this
@DJ_McCann

#4 bmore_ken

bmore_ken

    All Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,473 posts

Posted 11 February 2020 - 07:19 PM


His example on the WAR and Mookie Betts/Red Sox was pretty interesting. Does seem odd that you add up all the players WAR and get 50 for a team that won 108 games. So I guess that 58 extra wins comes from the chemistry? Yeah ok.


I think I'm the only baseball fan that thinks that stat is flawed.
  • BSLSteveBirrer likes this

#5 dude

dude

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,109 posts
  • LocationColumbus, GA

Posted 11 February 2020 - 08:58 PM

I agree with some of his points but it's a bad look to say something negative about something IN A BOOK and not even know what the hell you are talking about.

Billy, you're an analyst on MLB Network, come on.

#6 dude

dude

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,109 posts
  • LocationColumbus, GA

Posted 11 February 2020 - 09:00 PM

I think I'm the only baseball fan that thinks that stat is flawed.

 

The stat isn't flawed, it is exactly what it is.

 

The application of the stat is flawed.


  • glenn__davis likes this

#7 BSLRobShields

BSLRobShields

    BSL Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 88,970 posts
  • LocationBaltimore

Posted 11 February 2020 - 09:01 PM

The stat isn't flawed, it is exactly what it is.

 

The application of the stat is flawed.

That's true on both sides of the argument.


@BSLRobShields

#8 BSLMikeRandall

BSLMikeRandall

    Sr. Ravens Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,571 posts

Posted 12 February 2020 - 03:19 AM

I like the idea. I think both the old school and the new school have right ways of operating and they can coexist. For example the two teams in the WS (sign stealing aside) had rotations comprised of mainly starting pitchers capable of going deep into a ball game. Astros had a bullpen game in there, IIRC. I hate openers, but get why teams do it, but if I'm building a team, I'm trying to draft, develop, trade for, sign some aces capable of going 7+ IP every time out. It was nice to see the winning team have a dominant rotation and not 8 long relievers. 

 

Also, gimmie all the analytics I can get to aid in decision making.

 

But that take on WAR was pretty bad. 


  • sandiegosean likes this
@BSLMikeRandall

#9 Mike B

Mike B

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,878 posts
  • LocationTowson Md.

Posted 12 February 2020 - 06:17 AM

I think I'm the only baseball fan that thinks that stat is flawed.

No your not.


  • BSLSteveBirrer likes this
@mikeghg

#10 bmore_ken

bmore_ken

    All Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,473 posts

Posted 12 February 2020 - 09:05 AM

The stat isn't flawed, it is exactly what it is.

The application of the stat is flawed.

We'll have to agree to disagree on that.

#11 BSLMikeRandall

BSLMikeRandall

    Sr. Ravens Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,571 posts

Posted 12 February 2020 - 10:48 AM

We'll have to agree to disagree on that.


How is the stat itself flawed?
@BSLMikeRandall

#12 Nigel Tufnel

Nigel Tufnel

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,705 posts

Posted 12 February 2020 - 11:02 AM

How is the stat itself flawed?

 

I think the defensive part of it isn't nearly as accurate as the offensive part.  And there's fWAR and bWAR, which I guess means the f people think b's version of the stat is flawed, and vice versa.


  • bmore_ken likes this

#13 BSLChrisStoner

BSLChrisStoner

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 118,800 posts

Posted 12 February 2020 - 11:10 AM

Been posted previously, but worth another read given the discussion....

 

https://www.beyondth...-fwar-bwar-warp



#14 BSLChrisStoner

BSLChrisStoner

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 118,800 posts

Posted 12 February 2020 - 11:12 AM

Also this previous thread.... 

 

https://www.baltimor...ve replacement



#15 mweb08

mweb08

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,092 posts
  • LocationRidgely's Delight

Posted 12 February 2020 - 11:40 AM

I think the defensive part of it isn't nearly as accurate as the offensive part. And there's fWAR and bWAR, which I guess means the f people think b's version of the stat is flawed, and vice versa.


The defensive part is certainly flawed, but at least for a time, was arguably using roughly the best publicly available defensive stats.

#16 Mackus

Mackus

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 43,128 posts

Posted 12 February 2020 - 11:48 AM

All stats are flawed if the standard being held to them is that they speak an inherent truth about a player's abilities.  There is no one anything that can accurately describe a player.  

 

WAR is a good stat.  It valiantly attempts to succinctly answer a lot of questions.  It doesn't perfectly answer those questions, not even close.  The underlying assumptions and the limitations are able to be easily understood by anyone who's not intentionally trying to remain ignorant.


  • DJ MC likes this

#17 BSLMikeRandall

BSLMikeRandall

    Sr. Ravens Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,571 posts

Posted 12 February 2020 - 02:14 PM

I think the defensive part of it isn't nearly as accurate as the offensive part.  And there's fWAR and bWAR, which I guess means the f people think b's version of the stat is flawed, and vice versa.

Sure. So what stat should we us for a quick look at how good or bad a player is?


@BSLMikeRandall

#18 Mackus

Mackus

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 43,128 posts

Posted 12 February 2020 - 02:16 PM

Sure. So what stat should we us for a quick look at how good or bad a player is?

 

Salary!



#19 Nigel Tufnel

Nigel Tufnel

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,705 posts

Posted 12 February 2020 - 02:51 PM

Sure. So what stat should we us for a quick look at how good or bad a player is?

 

WAR is probably the best thing that's available, it just isn't perfect.  But don't let perfect be the enemy of good.



#20 Nigel Tufnel

Nigel Tufnel

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,705 posts

Posted 12 February 2020 - 02:56 PM

Salary!

 

I always liked Jim Bouton's line that GM's make decisions all the time based on salary instead of on talent, because salary is easier to judge.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Partners