Skip

WAR! Huh! Good god, y'all!
January 14, 2011 10:16 AM   Subscribe

Wins-above-replacement, or WAR, is a Sabermetric term of art for baseball player comparison. Fangraphs, one of the go-to sites for baseball nerdlingers, now offers a way to make WAR grids, an amazingly easily comprehended visual display comparing players based on WAR, sortable by team, position and season, with a default topline of player age. posted by klangklangston (54 comments total) 9 users marked this as a favorite

 
Huh, I was not expecting to see John Valentin on the Red Sox all-time grid, but there he is tied with Fred Lynn. Normally, I'd be dismissive, but since the rest of this list seems so reasonable, I'm beginning to wonder if Johnny V was waaaay under-appreciated in his time in Boston.
posted by .kobayashi. at 10:24 AM on January 14, 2011


That hole in Ted Williams' graph is so painful.
posted by Rock Steady at 10:38 AM on January 14, 2011


Also, is it possible to change the topline to Year? I'd love to see scroll along a team's history through the lens of WAR.
posted by Rock Steady at 10:39 AM on January 14, 2011


So, I guess this was posted now so all the fantasy league people have a month and a half to make their grids before spring training begins?
posted by hippybear at 10:39 AM on January 14, 2011


Felix Hernandez won the 2010 AL Cy Young award despite finishing the season with a 13-12 record. Why? Because he led AL pitchers in WAR for the season. Wins are a terrible stat -- good pitchers with bad run support from their teammates can lose more games than they deserve to. His season is pretty much a case study in the inaccuracy of Wins and the value of WAR.
posted by Plutor at 10:42 AM on January 14, 2011 [2 favorites]


Also painful is knowing that if Edgar Martinez hadn't been blocked by incompetent management he'd be the all-time leader among Mariners.
posted by dw at 10:42 AM on January 14, 2011 [1 favorite]


Fascinating that Nomar has the second highest WAR during my time as a Red Sox fan. So disappointing the way his career played out.
posted by Rock Steady at 10:46 AM on January 14, 2011


Clearly, beer and hot dogs should be banned as performance enhancing substances.
posted by mollweide at 10:50 AM on January 14, 2011 [1 favorite]


Wow, I didn't realize baseball careers were so long.
posted by DU at 10:52 AM on January 14, 2011


Huh, I was not expecting to see John Valentin on the Red Sox all-time grid, but there he is tied with Fred Lynn.

The number in the column labeled WAR is the sum of the player's WAR for each season. In this case, Valentin's total is from 10 years with the Red Sox, while Lynn's is from 7. Assuming they both averaged a similar number of games per season, then Lynn was the better player with a 4.6 WAR per season versus Valentin's 3.2.

It'd be nice if they could let us sort by WAR per season (or even per game played).
posted by clorox at 10:55 AM on January 14, 2011


I love baseball, sabermetrics, and MeFi. Thank you for this, klangklangston. Please let me know when Fire Joe Morgan or an equivalent site is available again for all the snarky goodness. :-)
posted by grubi at 10:58 AM on January 14, 2011


Clorox: So this is a table that's skewed for longevity with a team? That makes much more sense than my first-glance interpretation.
posted by .kobayashi. at 10:59 AM on January 14, 2011


Al Kaline?
posted by oddman at 11:03 AM on January 14, 2011


Despite looking like some weird chemistry joke, Al Kaline was a real (and very good) baseball player.
posted by kmz at 11:07 AM on January 14, 2011


Awesome!

It's heartening to me to see Babe Ruth at the top of that list, squeaking past Barry Bonds. And it shows to go you how awesome Mr. Ruth really was when you consider that the WAR graphs don't even consider pitching, and that he was arguably the best pitcher in baseball before he went to the Yankees and started hitting everything that came near him. Yeah. I think you'd need to add something like 40 more WAR for the 1916 - 1919 period.
posted by dirtdirt at 11:07 AM on January 14, 2011


Other funny baseball player names:

Dick Pole (I wonder how the NFL pregame crew a few posts down would have handled his name.)

Coco Crisp

Milton Bradley

Kennesaw Mountain Landis (OK, not a player, but the first baseball commisioner. And a racist asshole.)
posted by kmz at 11:12 AM on January 14, 2011


That hole in Ted Williams' graph is so painful.

Not half as bad as the hole at the end of Lou Gehrig's career.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 11:15 AM on January 14, 2011 [1 favorite]


.k. - It ranks the players by summing up their season WAR. If you filter by a team, it will only take a player's WAR for seasons spent with that team and rank the players by summed seasonal WAR for that team. This does favor longevity with the team. If you don't specify a team, it shows career WAR, which favors players with long careers regardless of the number of teams they played for.
posted by mollweide at 11:16 AM on January 14, 2011


Fascinating. It's fun to note that WAR is entirely context driven; Babe Ruth had such a high WAR because, comparatively, the players he played alongside sucked. This is why stats "back in the day" were at such Hurculean (Ruthian?) heights. The talent pool of available ballplayers in the 20s and 30s was so small, that when a true superstar like Ruth came along they batted against Old Feeble-Finger Johnston and his Coterie of Limp-Armed Melon Tossers and had a field day. But what really made Babe Ruth great from a WAR perspective was that he knew not only how to hit a home run-very good for making runs, of course- but he knew how to draw a walk.
My sabermetrics "ding!" moment was when I realized that the point of baseball is to make an inning last as long as possible on your side of the ball- as long as you don't have three outs, that clock keeps ticking. So as a baseball player, the object is to not make an out when you bat, and create more outs than normal at your position when you play defense. Runs (created and saved) come from creating and saving outs. As long as you don't have three outs, runs are possible. Of course, this is why walks are held in much higher esteem than they were just ten years ago. In Ruth's day, you were walked because you were being pitched around. Ah shit, Ruth walked! They took the bat out of his hands! But really, he was getting on base, not getting out. Which is always A Good Thing. Makes the inning continue.
Concepts like WAR are changing the way the game is taught. That kid who kept his bat on his shoulder in little league and walked all the time? Kudos to you, Johnny. Maybe you'll one day be a high WAR player. You're prolonging the game, giving your team longer time to score. Sure, there's no glamor in it; it's like a good free throw shooter in basketball. But we're coming around on how important good free throw shooters are too.
The art of WAR is creating and saving runs, in context of the rest of baseball players, by creating and saving outs. How do you most effectively increase WAR? Attrition. Make the other pitcher throw a lot of pitches (or, if you're a pitcher, get outs as quickly as possible.) On your side of the ball, prolong the game.
That's probably one of the reasons why some people hate baseball so much.
posted by joechip at 11:18 AM on January 14, 2011 [4 favorites]


So this is a table that's skewed for longevity with a team?

As far as I can tell, yes. Sorting it by WAR/season isn't ideal, either, because then players that played in few games per season lose out, which is why I'd like to see WAR/game.

Also, according to this metric, Greg Maddux is the worst batter in the history of the game (with more than 100 plate appearances).
posted by clorox at 11:18 AM on January 14, 2011


And player names? Nothing beats Topsy Hartsel.
posted by clorox at 11:20 AM on January 14, 2011


Al Kaline is also arguably the best Jewish position player ever (though fellow Tiger Hank Greenberg has a solid claim too).
posted by klangklangston at 11:25 AM on January 14, 2011


Great, yet another painful reminder of how much the Pirates sucked last year.
posted by elder18 at 11:26 AM on January 14, 2011


yeah, walking rocks. i'm not ashamed that I try to get walked in softball. it does, of course, increase the risk that i'll strike out looking. in softball. and that surely does NOT rock.
posted by joecacti at 11:29 AM on January 14, 2011


Joe Gordon had a better total during the 40s than Joe DiMaggio? DiMaggio lost three seasons for WWII, but Gordon missed two. I guess, "Where have you gone Joe Gordon" just doesn't have the same ring to it.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 11:35 AM on January 14, 2011


And now the leather-covered sphere came hurtling through the air,
And Casey stood a-watching it in haughty grandeur there.
Close by the sturdy batsman the ball unheeded sped-
"That ain't my style," said Casey. "Strike one," the umpire said.
posted by jfuller at 11:35 AM on January 14, 2011


Also, according to this metric, Greg Maddux is the worst batter in the history of the game (with more than 100 plate appearances)

Looking at his stats, he doesn't seem especially atrocious as a batting pitcher, though he's certainly not good. I have to believe in the history of baseball there's been someone worse (Chris Carpenter of my beloved Cardinals, for instance, is an absolutely awful hitter. Although he did have a grand slam two years ago, his first homer in a 12-year career.) Of course, Greg Maddux could have wet himself and bunted every time he came to bat and still been a valued member of any team, as he is one of the greatest pitchers of all time.
Reminds me of something Bill James said when asked something about how important it is for a team for the pitcher to be a good batter. He said something along the lines of: having your pitcher be able to hit is as important as wearing a good pair of underwear on a long car trip.
(I think he was saying, well, it will make you feel comfortable and a little better, but in the whole scheme of things, no big whoop. I think.)
posted by joechip at 11:40 AM on January 14, 2011


As a Cards fan, it's good to see Musial up there on the all-time list. It's also interesting to see how El Hombre stacks up in his first ten years, vs The Man in his 20 years.
posted by notsnot at 11:41 AM on January 14, 2011


Is there a historical WAR stat? I see all of the old-timers like Ruth who have 14+ WAR, but how would that compare to Albert Pujols' 9 WAR? Is there an all-time positional WAR to compare each player against?
posted by dflemingecon at 11:55 AM on January 14, 2011


Sam Smith's WAR database is corrected for historical differences, and includes pitching. It's not very user-friendly though.
posted by klangklangston at 11:59 AM on January 14, 2011


I suppose now's the time to say that I enjoyed the title of this post too, although I thought it would have invited a derisive "What is it good for?" harumph by now?
posted by .kobayashi. at 12:34 PM on January 14, 2011


beginning to wonder if Johnny V was waaaay under-appreciated in his time in Boston

He was. As mentioned above, the Fred Lynn comparison isn't apples-to-apples, but Valentin was a good defender at SS (and decent at 3rd) and for most of his time at short, a tremendous hitter for his position. Mo Vaughn's 1995 MVP award really should have gone to Val and probably would have if that bastard Tim Belcher hadn't hit him in the head the day after his 14 (or was it 16) total bases game. Not that I'm still bitter or anything.
posted by yerfatma at 12:41 PM on January 14, 2011


joechip: "My sabermetrics "ding!" moment was when I realized that the point of baseball is to make an inning last as long as possible on your side of the ball- as long as you don't have three outs, that clock keeps ticking. So as a baseball player, the object is to not make an out when you bat, and create more outs than normal at your position when you play defense. Runs (created and saved) come from creating and saving outs. As long as you don't have three outs, runs are possible. Of course, this is why walks are held in much higher esteem than they were just ten years ago."

This was actually the "ding moment" of the entire SABRmetrics movement. From this came OBP and thus was created the greatest revolution in sports history. All hail Bill James.
posted by Plutor at 12:44 PM on January 14, 2011


Kaline vs. Clemente is a great baseball debate.

The difference between Kaline and Clemente is, in a sense, the difference between Wilt Chamberlain and Kareem Abdul-Jabar. Clemente, like Wilt, was visually stunning, and there is a mythic quality to him. Kaline, like Kareem, was less stunning but a better percentage player.

Clemente's WAR is 11 points lower than Kaline's, though Roberto's career was of course cut short.
posted by stargell at 12:59 PM on January 14, 2011


dirtdirt: Awesome!

It's heartening to me to see Babe Ruth at the top of that list, squeaking past Barry Bonds. And it shows to go you how awesome Mr. Ruth really was when you consider that the WAR graphs don't even consider pitching, and that he was arguably the best pitcher in baseball before he went to the Yankees and started hitting everything that came near him. Yeah. I think you'd need to add something like 40 more WAR for the 1916 - 1919 period
Good fucking christ, so much wrongness in one paragraph. Let's look at it sentence by sentence.

1. Okay, this you got right. This graph is awesome. You should probably have stopped there, and you'd have had a successful comment.

2. Not sure why that's heartening to you; to me, not competing against black people, nor international star Japanese hitters, nor facing a Dominican pitcher like Pedro Martinez in his prime, or having the luxury of facing "Old Feeble-Fingered Johnston" (thank you joechip!) running on fumes in the 9th for your last at bat of each game, is a far greater "performance enhancer" than "The Clear". Me, I looked at that graph and came here to sarcastically post "This 'Bonds' chap- he still seemed a pretty dark green in those last years, what happened? Did he get injured? Surely some team would have wanted a productive player, unless they like colluded for some weird reason to blacklist him... nah, he must have had a bad wrist injury or something...". Then I read your comment and reached for the bottle of gin in the cupboards...

3. WAR graphs do consider pitching- maybe not this specific utility, but Plutor already linked the 2010 pitchers WAR to explain why Felix Hernandez (another pitcher who'd not have likely been in uniform against Ruth if he'd been born in 1900) was correctly deserving of the Cy Young this year. I'd say it was very arguable that he was the best pitcher, but agreed he was a good one. Especially when facing Bob "Illiterate Drunken Hick" Smith of the Toledo Shittyhitters.

4. Well, you're so off the fucking rails at this point, let's just pull a fucking number out of our hat here, yes? It's not like we don't have WAR numbers for Ruth's career from 1916-1919 and could actually state that his pitching during that period summed to 16.0 WAR. And if we're going to play the "WAR numbers we can hypothetically add" game, then for example a healthy Bonds was still putting up a solid WAR of 4 the last two seasons he played before apparently that mysterious ebola outbreak that had teams refusing his service even at the league minimum salary:
Although Bonds says he will work for a pro-rated share of the major league minimum salary, with the funds donated to charity to pay for children's tickets, no team has expressed any interest.
This is presumably because of Bonds' notorious hamstring injury that precluded him from even swinging the bat or running the bases. Or his strong ties to Osama bin Laden. Or his Greg Maddux-like penchant for ritualistically killing, mutilating, and even eating hobos and teenage prostitutes as a way of tempering his otherwise insatiable bloodlust and rage. All plausible theories why no team would employ the best hitter of his, and probably any, generation.
posted by hincandenza at 1:01 PM on January 14, 2011 [6 favorites]


Great, yet another painful reminder of how much the Pirates sucked last year.

They are essentially a team of replacement players.
posted by stargell at 1:20 PM on January 14, 2011


I'm still not sure what was the worst lasting legacy of Fire Joe Morgan -- was it the remarkable inability to be correct without being insufferable at the same time, or was it all the casual profanity? Probably the first, I'd guess.
posted by .kobayashi. at 1:23 PM on January 14, 2011


And Willie Stargell's WAR was 71, in case you're wondering.
posted by stargell at 1:25 PM on January 14, 2011 [1 favorite]


Hey, Hal, maybe take it down a notch? Your disproportionate and overtly aggressive and personal venom against me is kind of out of place.
posted by dirtdirt at 1:37 PM on January 14, 2011 [1 favorite]


It's quit possible to adjust WAR for all time, right? Maybe (hopefully) FanGraphs will add options.
posted by that's candlepin at 1:55 PM on January 14, 2011


This graph is amazing, but they've obviously got Joe Carter all wrong. I've completed my own calculations, and I've found that his one hit off of Mitch Williams in the 1993 World Series was worth at least +10 War, possibly for every season of his career.

So yeah, the measure is not perfect, but still interesting.
posted by the thing about it at 1:58 PM on January 14, 2011


"3. WAR graphs do consider pitching- maybe not this specific utility, but Plutor already linked the 2010 pitchers WAR to explain why Felix Hernandez (another pitcher who'd not have likely been in uniform against Ruth if he'd been born in 1900) was correctly deserving of the Cy Young this year. I'd say it was very arguable that he was the best pitcher, but agreed he was a good one. Especially when facing Bob "Illiterate Drunken Hick" Smith of the Toledo Shittyhitters."

The Fangraphs WAR doesn't consider pitching in this graph, otherwise Justin Verlander wouldn't be listed as the worst player on the Tigers.

It only considers pitching in the all-pitcher categories, and doesn't consider pitcher's offense. It also doesn't consider catcher's defense, in part because it's notoriously difficult to quantify.
posted by klangklangston at 3:00 PM on January 14, 2011


dirtdirt: Hey, Hal, maybe take it down a notch? Your disproportionate and overtly aggressive and personal venom against me is kind of out of place
Wait, what personal venom? I said you were incredibly wrong, then detailed how sentence by sentence. I didn't attack you as a person at all.
posted by hincandenza at 5:26 PM on January 14, 2011


to me, not competing against black people, nor international star Japanese hitters, nor facing a Dominican pitcher like Pedro Martinez in his prime

Nate Silver's take over at 538 (remember, before he got into politics, he was one of the masterminds behind Baseball Prospectus) essentially agrees with this statement. In Babe Ruth's era, there were about 75 million 'contestants' (white American men) for 16*25=400 major league slots. Now there are 30 teams, so there are 750 major leaguers, but the player pool now includes all American men, as well as those from Latin America and Japan, where baseball is a popular sport--something like 650 million. So, as Nate Silver says, it's certainly harder to be a major leaguer now than it was eighty years ago--which has interesting implications for Hall of Fame voting, among other things. The piece is fascinating, and I highly recommend it.
posted by notswedish at 8:47 PM on January 14, 2011


Further reading related to Barry Bonds' only halfway explicable blacklisting and unpopularity: America's six most-hated athletes are all black. I'll bet you $100 Barry Bonds would have been at or near the top of that list three years ago.

Also: J.D. Drew and Johnny Damon had the same WAR over the same number of seasons. But, like, just imagine if Drew tried!
posted by dixiecupdrinking at 8:55 AM on January 15, 2011 [1 favorite]


hincandenza: "Well, you're so off the fucking rails at this point, let's just pull a fucking number out of our hat here, yes? It's not like we don't have WAR numbers for Ruth's career from 1916-1919 and could actually state that his pitching during that period summed to 16.0 WAR. "

For his full career, Babe Ruth was 172.0 batting (best ever, although only just) and 18.0 pitching. The next best batter who played at least 5% of his games as pitcher (Ruth was pitcher about 6.5% of the time over his career) was his contemporary Rube Bressler with a career batting WAR of a whopping 17.1 over half as many games.
posted by Plutor at 11:38 AM on January 15, 2011


dixiecupdrinking: "America's six most-hated athletes are all black."

Hated is a weird word to use. It's positive-view minus negative view. I think LeBron acted like an entitled brat and would probably answer "negative". But do I hate him? No. (Kobe, on the other hand, fuck that dude. But that's only because I'm a Bostonian. I also hate Pau Gasol.)

dixiecupdrinking: "I'll bet you $100 Barry Bonds would have been at or near the top of that list three years ago. "

In 2006, GQ said he was #2, just under T.O. But the list also included Kurt Busch, Curt Schilling, and Michael Iaconelli.
posted by Plutor at 11:48 AM on January 15, 2011


dixiecupdrinking: "J.D. Drew and Johnny Damon had the same WAR over the same number of seasons. But, like, just imagine if Drew tried!"

J.D. Drew is the most underrated overrated person in sports. I feel bad for that guy, until I remember he's getting paid $14 million.
posted by Plutor at 11:50 AM on January 15, 2011


klangklangston: Al Kaline is also arguably the best Jewish position player ever (though fellow Tiger Hank Greenberg has a solid claim too).

This is going to come as a surprise to some famous Lutherans
posted by Right On Red at 6:59 PM on January 15, 2011


dixiecupdrinking: Also: J.D. Drew and Johnny Damon had the same WAR over the same number of seasons. But, like, just imagine if Drew tried!

right, because if you picked one of those players to see who most "fans" liked which do you think they would choose? (hint, most would be damon)

equally, if you asked scouts who is a more talented baseball player who do you think they would choose? (hint, most scouts would say drew)

for what its worth, damon's WAR over his career (2276 games, 16 seasons) is 41.8

JD drew's WAR over 1485 games, 13 seasons is 46.9

lets look at another stat - OPS+
per hardball times it is: OPS measured against the league average, and adjusted for ballpark factors. An OPS+ over 100 is better than average, less than 100 is below average.

johnny damon's career OPS+ is 104.
jd drew's career OPS+ is 127.

before you spout off about things you clearly do not know about (for example, EVERYONE hated bonds - including his teammates. now was the media especially easy on the man, no. but how many baseball players have been essentially run out of baseball the last 25 years? ...and dont say it had jack to do with the color of his skin.

for what its worth JD Drew is actually a better player than damon, and its really not even that close. Drew has a higher career OPS+, a higher career OPS+ as a member of Boston (120 vs 108) and has more WAR.

if you want to post about racism with regard to bonds (...which had nothing to do with bonds being run out of baseball or his teammates hating him) or damon/drew at least get your facts straight - otherwise you look like a fool.

also, i guess race is the reason that black ppl happen to top the Q score list, right? ...since none of the six did anything notable recently. in all honesty is there really THAT much of a difference between ben rothlisberger's 30% negative, 20% positive and LeBron's 39% negative, 14% positive? (average for athletes is 24% negative)

got to love the last part of the article:
And don’t get me started with Vick. He never hurt a human being. The only reason he went to jail was because of the color of his skin, and through all the persecution and hate he’s faced, he’s persevered with true courage and dignity.

right, the reason he went to jail was b/c he was black. / sarcasm

the reason he went to jail was because he was 1) highly visible (athlete who has made millions of dollars in salary - the 13th highest sports contract in HISTORY) and more importantly 2) he was left out to hang by the rest of his co-defendants - he was the last one to agree to a plea bargain. he also didnt help himself by failing a drug test when he was out on bail (BEFORE he was sentenced)

tl;dr - drew = more talent than damon. damon = more popular than drew. race = not anything to do with it. bonds = blackballed because of steroids, not his skin color. vick = didnt help himself by being the 4th of 4 to accept a plea bargain + failing a drug test + being a high profile athlete + lied to his owner and the NFL
posted by knockoutking at 11:17 PM on January 15, 2011


before you spout off about things you clearly do not know about... you look like a fool... etc. etc.

Bro, your long-winded J.D. Drew jock-strap ride was exactly my point. I was poking fun at the typical fan criticism of him – "he looks like he isn't even trying," etc., while Damon is a real hard-nosed ballplayer, you know?

As to Barry Bonds – fine, it's not racist, whatever, maybe you're right. But don't pretend that you can prove that empirically. It's true that lots of black players are well-liked; remember that everyone wanted Griffey to break the record way back when? But I think there's at least a kernel of truth to the racism angle, in that black players are given less leeway when they step out of bounds.

in all honesty is there really THAT much of a difference between ben rothlisberger's 30% negative, 20% positive and LeBron's 39% negative, 14% positive? (average for athletes is 24% negative)

Yes, there is. First, that's a big numerical difference. A 10% negative-positive gap versus a 25% negative-positive gap. Second, let's think about why these guys are viewed negatively. Rothlisberger allegedly (but, if I may be so bold, probably) sexually assaulted a college girl. Meanwhile, LeBron did what, exactly? Went to a team he thought would give him a better chance to win. Which is exactly what players do all the time. And yeah, he did it in a pretty abrasive way, but the guy is what, 24? All things considered he handles himself pretty well, and certainly doesn't deserve being villainized.

This doesn't change the fact that a bunch of athletes -- black, white, yellow, polka dot, or whatever color -- are objectively assholes, and Bonds probably falls into that camp. However, I think there is a real element of race that plays into public perceptions of these athletes. You may reasonably disagree; therefore, you look like a jackass. Oh, wait, I'm not going to take this legitimate disagreement as an opportunity to personally insult you. See how that works?

TL;DR - half of your post was a longer version of what I was saying in the first place. The other half is a reasonable disagreement with what I suggested re: black athletes, though I still think race plays a role in these things. And don't be a jerk.
posted by dixiecupdrinking at 9:32 AM on January 16, 2011 [1 favorite]


re: JD Drew

...most scouts would say that he doesnt give his all to the game of baseball. plain and simple. damon tries and maximizes his talents. meanwhile drew does not....

re: Bonds

if you think he was run out of baseball due to the fact he was black, well there is no helping you. if you think his teammates didnt like him because he was black, same answer. there are way too many stories out there about how he treated his teammates like crap and how he had nothing to do with them (he skipped out of the team picture for his last 2 years for christ's sake!)

re: q-score

the lebron hate is because of HOW he left, not that he left. IIRC his q-score was SIGNIFICANTLY higher before the decision (i think mark cuban did a big story regarding how much money he left on the table w/ endorsements b/c of how far his q-score ropped)

look, think what you want to - but bonds WAS an asshole. bonds WAS run out of baseball because of steroids.

...and yes, i admit that "the median or average guy in a baseball clubhouse does drive an SUV, drinks beer, golfs, likes college sports, chews or dips tobacco and is relatively a douchebag."
posted by knockoutking at 6:07 PM on January 16, 2011


most scouts would say that he doesnt give his all to the game of baseball. plain and simple

And what observable phenomenon would they use to prove this case other than the fact he doesn't show much emotion and "disrespected" the game by not willingly giving himself over to a draft which is designed to reduce his compensation?
posted by yerfatma at 12:34 PM on January 17, 2011


knockoutking: " ...most scouts would say that he doesnt give his all to the game of baseball. plain and simple. damon tries and maximizes his talents. meanwhile drew does not...."

J.D. Drew doesn't give his all, Damon does. Yet Drew exceeds Damon in WAR, OPS+, and just about every advanced fielding metric there is (Total Zone says +4 runs above avg vs +87, BIS says -10 vs +32). So wouldn't it still follow that Drew was more desirable? You don't get extra points for effort, and you don't have the option to draft a hypothetical "Drew Who Tries".
posted by Plutor at 7:41 AM on January 20, 2011 [1 favorite]


« Older There is excessive lead in the nuclear sludge   |   Mensch Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments



Post