How does a player get WAR points ?
 

I'm assuming all players start the season at (0). What does the player have to do to get WAR stats added ? I'm trying to understand this stat better.

Mike Trout just has to show up.

Well, the definition of WAR on BBR is A single number that presents the number of wins the player added to the team above what a replacement player (think AAA or AAAA) would add.

I would think that Mookie Betts would play all 9 innings of games until get-away day, then a reserve might play all of part of that game...and Betts' production (encompassing several offensive stats) would be compared to his replacement(s) - on a pro-rated basis of course.

That's the way I understand it anyway...I could be wrong...you and I will wait patiently for any corrections to come:



=

Seek and ye will find.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wins_A...ball_Reference

Here you go.

If Trout is like all the others before him , his SB's will go down a lot in the next few years (look at Canseco, Sosa, Soriano etc). I think he is already in the $ 30+ million/year range. In his 30's, his baserunning will no longer be an asset, in fact he has not had over 30 SB since 2013 (not over 30 for the last 5 years). 7 years and he has hit the 100 RBI mark 2 times (100,111).

I know he is a great player but I thought his stats were much better than this. Watching MLB Network I thought he was the greatest of all-time ( lifetime average is . 307 , you would think it was .350+ ).

Also I watch a lot of baseball games and I think most CF's are very good and fast. Not sure how some get rated higher than others, they all make great plays.

Teams win games by who scores the most runs. I still like RBI's .

Of course my prior post was facetious, sort of, but there is something about Trout and this metric that is an uncanny marriage. I vividly recall an article last year in May or June speculating that if he kept up his pace he was on track for perhaps the greatest season ever. I looked and he was hitting .294 as I recall. WTF.

If you want a real laugh compare Trout and Pujols. According to WAR Trouts #s are way better. Then look at real #s like batting average, home runs, and RBI and Pujols are better.

Pujols 7 years Trout 8 years
1091 games 1065
1344 Hits 1187
282 HR 240
861 RBI 648
332 BA 307
54.9 WAR 64.3

Somehow WAR must favor Outfielders , but they are only in a few plays a game, mostly non-significant. Just think of a firstbaseman who is involved with several plays, mostly snagging a ball out of the dirt to save the SS 3b or 2b an error and save several runs per game. Not sure how WAR handles all the saves the first basseman makes in a game. Do they only count their errors ?

I wrote up a whole explanation of how to calculate WAR and then my computer crashed and ate it. Maybe I'll try again tomorrow.

Anyway, regarding Trout in particular: he does so well by this metric because he's good at everything. He has a good batting average, a good walk rate, he hits for power, he steals bases, he plays an important defensive position, he even does little things like advancing from first to third on a single really well. Being a well-rounded player is a big advantage. (Willie Mays, the classic well-rounded player, is 5th all-time in WAR, behind Ruth, Cy Young, W. Johnson, and Bonds.)

On the Trout/Pujols comparison: there are three big reasons for the difference. One is what I mentioned above, Trout is more well-rounded than Pujols ever was. Pujols may have been the better hitter, but the other stuff makes up for the difference in their bats.

The second is that Trout is a center fielder and Pujols was (mostly) a first baseman. WAR gives players a positional adjustment, weighted to the number of games that they play at each position. First basemen, left fielders (and especially DHs) get a negative adjustment; guys who plays hard defensive positions get a bonus. Trout has been getting about +0.3 WAR bonus each year for playing center, Pujols lost about 0.8 per year for playing first. The rationale for this is that its easier to find a guy who hits well and plays first base than one who hits well and plays a tough defensive position. Clearly a shortstop who could hit like Pujols would be more valuable than a first baseman that could hit like Pujols, and the positional adjustment is what lets us account for that fact.

Finally, Pujols' prime seasons were during a more offense-heavy era. There's about a 20 point difference in league average OPS between 2001 and 2018. Because it was easier to put up impressive offensive numbers in 2001, that performance isn't as valuable as the same performance would be in 2018.

That's all I've got time for right now. Hopefully I manage to recreate the post on calculating WAR tomorrow.

No, it doesn't only count their errors. The problem that first baseman have got is that pretty much any major league baseball player can make almost all of the plays that a first baseman gets called on to make. (With the occasional exception.) Scooping those throws is important, but WAR measures wins _above replacement_ and pretty much any replacement first baseman would be able to make most of those plays. The really good defensive first basemen do well by WAR. Pujols himself (who was really good at first when he was young) was averaging about 2 WAR a year from defense from 2006 to 2009.

Nat it would be interesting to hear you weigh in on why Edgar Martinez's WAR is so high.

That's the part I just can't agree on. Centerfield in most parks isn't much more than a test of running speed. Especially in a typical symmetrical fan shaped park.

But to say that's harder than either left or right field at say Fenway is just silly. Left field especially has made even some excellent fielders look silly.

I agree with you on left field in Fenway, but surely there's more to center field than speed, there is throwing, a huge question of judgment and instincts on whether to charge a sinking liner or play it on the bounce, same for judging the flight path of a deep ball. And so forth.

I bet his career OBP of .418 has a lot to do with it, he was an On Base machine.

Here’s the brief explanation of how to calculate WAR.

First we start with all of the things that a player can do on offense: hit singles, double, triples, home runs, walks, steal bases, strike out, get thrown out stealing, etc, etc. Including some marginal things like reaching base on error. For each one of these events we know (historically) how many runs a team has scored, on average, from the occurrence of an event of that type to the end of the inning. This gives you the run value of each event. (In practice it makes sense to use the run value from recent seasons, what was going on in 1912 doesn’t really matter.) For example – and going from memory here, so numbers may be off – the run value of a home run is about 1.4, a single is about 0.3, a walk is a little bit less than a single. That is, in recent years, from the time that a player hit a home run (including the home run itself) to the end of the inning, on average a team will score 1.4 runs. So the first step in the calculation is to take all of the things that a player does on offense, all the singles that he hit, all the doubles that he hit, and so on, and multiply them by their run values. (Of course the run values for bad things – like striking out – will be negative.) Add that all up.

The next step is to convert the player’s offensive run value into wins. This is pretty straight forward. As a rule of thumb, if the number of runs you score, plus the number of runs you prevent, equals 10, you should expect your team to win an additional game. (There will be some year-to-year variation on this, but 10 is a nice rule of thumb.) So divide the player’s run value by 10 to get his expected offensive win value.

Then we need to look at defense. There are a few ways to do this, but we’ll keep it simple. (Differences in WAR that you find on Fangraphs or Baseball-Reference usually come down to the fact that they calculate defense differently.) Cut the field up into zones – basically think of them as concentric circles radiating out from where fielders usually stand. The further the circle is from the player’s usual position, the more credit that they get for making a play in that zone. (Roughly speaking at least; how one fielder interacts with another’s chances changes this some, and shifts throw things off a bit, but it’ll do for our summary.) If a ball is hit right toward you, since almost anyone could catch that ball, you don’t get much credit for making that play. But you lose points if you boot the ball. On the other hand, if you have to go a really long way to make a play, you’ll get lots of credit for making the play, and lose basically nothing if you don’t manage to make it (since we shouldn’t have expected you to make it anyway).

Each ball that gets hit has an expected run value attached to it – a screaming line drive down the first base line has a high run value, since it’s probably a double or a triple, whereas a soft grounder right to the shortstop has a very low run value because it’s almost always an out, and even when it’s not it’s just a single. So take the run value of each ball that gets hit, note whether the player in question made a play on it or not, and then multiple the run value of the ball by the weight attached to the zone that it was hit to. So if a center fielder makes a diving catch deep in the hole, you take the run value of a double and multiply it by something close to 1, since it almost certainly would have been a double if the play wasn’t made, and since it was a hard play to make, we shouldn’t just expect any old center fielder to make it. Or say that a shortstop fails to make a play on a ball hit up the middle. Take the run value of a single (0.3), since the play wasn’t made, reverse the sign (-0.3), and then multiply that value by the weight of the zone, say 0.5, since we’d only expect a shortstop to make that play half the time. Failing to make that play then costs the shortstop 0.15 runs. Once you’ve done all that, add up the results, and again divide by 10 to get the player’s expected defensive wins.

Now, WAR doesn’t measure wins, it measures wins _above replacement_, so we need to know what replacement level is. Essentially, replacement level is supposed to be the amount of performance – runs scored and prevented – that you could get from freely available talent. The kind of guy that almost every team has stashed in AAA. We’re not talking top prospects here, just career minor leaguers who can get called up in a pinch. Figure out how many runs such a player should be expected to score and how many he should be expected to prevent. Convert that to wins (divide by 10). Then subtract that amount from our target player’s win totals.

Finally, we need a positional adjustment. Good hitting shortstops and catchers are hard to find. Good hitting first basemen are easier to find. We need to adjust for that. So take the number of games a player plays at each position and multiple that by the per-game adjustment for each of those positions. A full-time center fielder gets a bonus of about 0.3 WAR from this, a full-time first baseman gets a penalty of about 0.8 WAR. Catchers (IIRC) get the highest bonus, DHs get the largest penalty. Once you’ve made the positional adjustment you have the player’s WAR.

The run values and the weights are all determined historically, it’s important to see that they are just records of what has happened in the past. Replacement level is also an empirical matter, as there are plenty of replacement level players. Guys who are on the border of being MLB bench players but also spend a lot of time in the minors. Replacement level is just what those guys, on average, can give you. There’s nothing theoretical about these components of WAR, they’re all determined by what happened on the baseball diamond.

It is important, however, to recognize that statistics are tools, and, as with any tool, that are some jobs that WAR is good for and others that it isn’t. Don’t try to turn a screw with a hammer, and don’t try to pound a nail with a screwdriver. What WAR tells you is how many extra games an arbitrary team would be expected to win or to lose if they added the player in question. This is a useful thing to know for some purposes and not for others. It makes sense, for instance, when talking about the hall of fame, or when trying to evaluate a player’s career as a whole. But it’s not so helpful if you are a team’s general manager and are trying to decide whether to sign a player. In that case you don’t care about wins above a generic AAAA player, you care about wins above the actual guy whose job this player would take. But the general strategy can still be useful. If you are considering signing a third baseman, but you’ve already got a good one, then you can keep the win calculations and adjust replacement level up to reflect the good incumbent. Alternatively if you’ve got a black hole at third base and no help on the farm team, you can keep the outlines of the calculation but drop replacement level down.

Other than the throwing, those things are mostly the same for other fields. Maybe marginally more difficult because of covering more ground, but in many parks not by much. And the speed usually balances that out.


What seems weird now you mention it, is that the two best I've seen for throwing both played right field. Evans and Ichiro, I can't count Mays because I only saw his last year when he was way past his prime, but I hear he was amazing.

And of course the Sox had Damon in center who couldn't throw well at all.

RF to 3B obviously longer than from other fields so yeah the strongest arms (Parker, Clemente, etc.) often play there. And centerfielders cover a LOT more ground because CF is much deeper almost everywhere.

WAR what is it good for
 

An example of how it can be misapplied:

Offensive WAR numbers:

Ozzie Smith 1980
Rod Carew 1983

AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI SB BB SO AVE OB% SLG OPS oWAR
609 67 140 18 5 0 35 57 71 49 .230 .313 .276 .589 2.7
472 66 160 24 2 2 44 6 57 48 .339 .409 .420 .820 2.9

The fact that their offensive WAR is similar does not suggest that they are equal offensive players. Ozzie is almost 3 wins better than the dismal offensive AAAA
shortstop as he at least gives you some walks and stolen bases. Carew even at age 37 was almost 3 wins offensively better than the dime a dozen replacement first baseman who will hit .240 with 12 homers. But they are not equal offensive players. If it’s the bottom of the ninth and you are down a run, you clearly want Carew to pinch hit, not Ozzie. (you can use Ozzie to pinch run after Carew gets on base).

I don't know how offensive WAR is calculated but the OPS shows Carew is clearly the better hitter.

Which is my point that CF is almost entirely about running ability. Unless a CF is slow but positions well, it really doesn't take more skill than any other outfield position.

Robert is exactly right, that would be a terrible way to use oWAR (that is, the offensive part of WAR). oWAR doesn't tell you who is the better hitter, it tells you who is the better hitter _relative to AAAA guys at the same position_. And even guys who would be iffy major leaguers at 1B hit better than your ordinary shortstop. WAR is a good tool if you're using it right, not if you aren't.

Chimps figured that out when using a stick to fish ants out of their holes. :rolleyes:


On the subject of Trout vs. Pujols, I'm guessing the WAR numbers mentioned were overall, not oWAR or dWAR - isolated those two stats may bring things more into focus.

I am 35 year member of SABR. My favorite SABRmetrician is Edwin Starr. He even did a song about it.

And he may have been right. What is it good for? Absolutely nothing. Say it again.

Good god, y'all

Oh, come on. First off, he's hitting in the two slot. He hit 39 home runs last year, and drove in 79. That means hitting the ball out of the park almost 40 times, and all the other times he got a hit, he only drove in other Angels 40 times. 25 of his home runs were solo shots. What does that tell you? Nobody is getting on base ahead of him to drive in. Is that Trout's fault? Does his 79 RBI diminish his season? He had a 199 OPS+, for God's sake. He hit .312. AL League AVG was .249. He led the AL with 122 walks and a .460 OBP! League average OBP was .318. Slugged .628. League average SLG was .416. He OPSd 1.088, which was 343 points (.743) above league average. From the #2 slot.

He's freaking Mickey Mantle. You like the RBI? It's about the most useless stat in baseball, after pitcher wins. It's very much a metric of opportunity. By the way, Mickey Mantle drove in 100 + runs in a season four times. He led the AL in home runs three times where he didn't have 100 RBI.

1955 37 HR, 99 RBI
1958 42 HR, 97 RBI
1960 40 HR, 94 RBI

Know another reason why Trout doesn't drive in 100 every year, besides the fact that he bats second in the lineup? When he comes up, and players are on, he draws a lot of walks. Again, 122 walks last year. The last five seasons, he's averaged 113 walks per 162 games played, leading the AL with 110 in 2013, 116 in 2016, and 122 in 2018. His combined 40 intentional walks led the American League the last two years (15 in 2017, a Major League leading 25 in 2018). Yet, even with all those walks, he drives in 99 runs per 162 games played.

And who cares if he didn't steal 30 bases? Only three guys in all the Major Leagues stole over 40 bases. Only eleven stole over 30. Know who the most successful base swiper in the Majors was by success rate? Jackie Bradley of Boston. He stole 17 bases in 18 tries. 94.4% success rate. Know who was second best in the Majors? Mike Trout. He stole 24 bases in 26 tries. He was successful 92.3% of the time he went. And he hit 39 home runs. Trout's stolen 189 bases in 223 tries, an 84.8% career success rate. By percentage, he's a better base stealer than Rickey Henderson.

Trout does everything well. Over the last two seasons, he's walked (216) more times than he's struck out (214), while hitting .309, and OPSing 1.080, or 94% above league average. In seven years as a Major Leaguer, he's led the American League in OPS five times, and each of the last four seasons.

He had a 1.2 dWAR last year, which is Gold Glove caliber.

You thought his stats were much better? Maybe you need to adjust your thinking. It's the year 2019.

In seven years as a Major League full time player, Mike Trout has led the league:

Runs scored 4 times (Majors 3 times)
RBI 1 time
stolen bases 1 time (Majors 1 time)
walks 3 times (Majors 1 time)
OBP 3 times (Majors 2 times)
SLG 2 times
OPS 3 times (Majors 2 times)
OPS + 5 times (Majors 3 times)
total bases 1 time
intentional base on balls 2 times (Majors 1 time)

OPS+ measures a player's offensive performance (OBP and SLG) relative to the rest of the league. 100 is league average. Mike Trout's OPS+ for his career is 175. He's been 75% better than league average for his career. That 175 OPS+ is tied with Rogers Hornsby for fifth best....in the history of Major League Baseball. The only players better than Mike Trout after seven years as a full time player?

Babe Ruth
Ted Williams
Barry Bonds
Lou Gehrig

That's it. Just for shits and giggles, let's compare Trout to those guys at the same age. Mike Trout just finished his age 26 season. How does he rank compared to the all-time greats at the same age?

Babe Ruth 219 OPS+
Ted Williams 190 OPS+ (age 20-23 only. Was on active military service age 24-26)
Mike Trout 175 OPS+
Lou Gehrig 174 OPS+
Rogers Hornsby 173 OPS+
Barry Bonds 138 OPS+

Ruth and Williams, arguably the two greatest hitters in baseball history. Those are the only two better than Trout through his age 26 season. And they didn't play center field, and steal bases. And Williams maintained that OPS + across only four seasons. Trout has done it over seven. When a discussion of hitting is "Babe Ruth, Ted Williams and Mike Trout", it's time you rethink just how phenomenal the kid in Anaheim really is. He's a Hall of Famer. Right now. He could never play another inning, and he's a lock. Two MVP, four second place finishes, and a fourth place finish in seven seasons. And he was the best hitter in the Majors during that fourth place finish with a 187 OPS+. He only played 114 games, hence the lower vote.

Trout is playing at a level equivalent to that of the immortals of the game.

Except that he hasn't played 10 seasons yet... ;)


Other than that I agree, he's on track to be one of the best ever.

His WAR can't be much this year yet ? Angels 1-6. Spending alot of $$$$ for 1 win. But it's still early, right ?

I really enjoy the vitriol a subset of fans have for WAR.

It makes me nostalgic for the vitriol a similar subset of fans had for OBP 20 years ago.

The more things change, the more they stay the same! :D

Granted, both then and now, there were some fans who think/thought WAR/OBP were the ONLY stat of value, although I'd wager that the number of straw-men who "thought" this were far higher than the number of fans who ACTUALLY thought that.

The way I look at it, if I look at the list of the top 100 players in career WAR, it's as good a list of the top 100 players in history as any. A few arguments here or there, but the vast majority pretty much jive with any other reasonable list.

Trouts on Pace for the greatest WAR season again, simply because he's on Pace to play 162 games :)

I think Bellinger is having a better year so far ( 6 hrs, 17rbi and 13 runs scored etc).

Granted Bellinger leads Trout at this point in the all important Dinger Whiff Derby 22 to 17. However Cody has twice as many whiffs (6-3) and only 3 walks compared to Trout’s 11.

If Trout’s OBP of .581 stays above .500, he will win the WAR easily.:D

Trout is also on a pace to have 100 more RBIs than he had last year.;)

Statistical projections after 10 games are notoriously accurate.:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

ESPN just started to compute WAR for 2019 and, naturally, Trout is way ahead. LOL.

After going 2 for 2 last night, he was taken out of the game for an alleged groin strain, but I suspect he just wanted to keep his WAR up.;):D

Your comment reminded me of Jose Reyes a few years ago. Left the game early to preserve his "batting title". Never sat well with me. Especially knowing the story of Teddy Ballgame hitting 0.400 and then playing a double header and going 6 for 8 to hit 0.406. Now THAT was a hitter.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

He may miss a month and still be leading the league in WAR even after playing only 10 or so games. Yeah that was a chicken move by Reyes. Sitting out wouldn't have even crossed Williams' mind, not who he was.

Trout's WAR is now higher, per ESPN, than when he went down with his latest injury. Uh, OK.