If you were building a team...

[BrodyChill5]

Giancarlo Stanton/Stephen Strasburg

[DieHardYankee26]

Re: If you were building a team...

I'm not a fan of... I can't think of the word right now... but most combination stats (things like QBR, QB Rating, WAR and the like.)

I think sabermetrics for baseball is amazing and should be used for projecting, comparing and everything else it is used for - but not in the way people think. Like the whole argument last year for Trout being MVP because "he has a higher WAR." IMO that argument diminished everything he accomplished (and I was in the camp that he should have been MVP.)

Just not a stat I enjoy, it tries to do way too much. Combining offense, pitching, defense and speed into one number makes no sense at all. I think that's how I want to explain it. I love advanced/saber stats though, for the most part. Don't get me wrong. Each facet of the game should be treated individually though.

But we don't compare players through individual facets all the time. We can say Miguel Cabrera is a better hitter, but we know Mike Trout is a better fielder, baserunner, and had an amazing hitting season. So how do we really compare the two if not one stat? Trout's SB's don't mean much against Miggy's because he doesn't steal bases. There has to be someway to bring it all together, WAR is just the best way to do that right now.

[ubernoob]

But we don't compare players through individual facets all the time. We can say Miguel Cabrera is a better hitter, but we know Mike Trout is a better fielder, baserunner, and had an amazing hitting season. So how do we really compare the two if not one stat? Trout's SB's don't mean much against Miggy's because he doesn't steal bases. There has to be someway to bring it all together, WAR is just the best way to do that right now.

Comparing players by one single number is never how it should be done. It uses UZR which is inherently flawed (not taking positioning into account and such) and pitchers that tend to have more batted balls can effect it as well.

WAR is like the overall rating in sports games - it gives a good general lay of the land, but there are much more important numbers to focus on. It's a good starting point, but not reliable to definitively say this person is better than this person because one single computation said so. That's not how sports works.

I don't hate WAR, I just think too much stock gets pot into it when there are better ways of doing it even though it takes more work. Of course this is all personal opinion.

[DieHardYankee26]

Re: If you were building a team...

I agree, and the overall rating is a good analogy. If you want a speedy leadoff hitter, you'd take Trout. If you want a middle of the order bruiser, you'd want Miggy. Just like in Madden. If you play better with a faster running back who is elusive a la Chris Johnson, you'd take him first. If you play better with a more all around running back like AD, then you'd pick him. But at the end of the day, if you're comparing them, it's easy to say who is faster. Or who hits more home runs. But who is better? If not WAR, how do you determine that? Serious question, btw. I like that WAR puts it in a single number, and seems to be pretty accurate, showing the best players of all time at the top. It's not as if there are a lot of total head scratchers. Although, the Ben Zobrist being the most valuable player in the league still confuses me as to how they came up with that.

[55]

Re: If you were building a team...

Although, the Ben Zobrist being the most valuable player in the league still confuses me as to how they came up with that.

How often have you seen him play?

He isn't elite at anything other than plate discipline, but he also does all of the five tools at an above average to good level and is a top tier defender. It also helps that he is so versatile and can play pretty much anywhere on the diamond.

Is he the best baseball player in the world? Absolutely not. But he is certainly one of the best all-around players when it comes to overall VALUE. The guy is pretty much the definition of "baseball player" and doesn't get nearly the recognition he deserves.

/homerpost

[ubernoob]

You don't determine who is better. You find the player that most fits your needs. Sports culture has the weird obsession with "is this player better than this player" even though they play completely different positions, or in different eras and so forth.

If were talking about determining who is better in terms of MVP voting and such, just look at who is the most valuable to his team. Its one of those intangible things - using one flawed number won't get you there, you HAVE to take everything into account. Voters have to take into account what they think is the most important for a position player (is it Trouts speed and defense, alongside of his hitting? Or is it Cabrera who proved yet again why he is the best hitter in the game?) and make their decisions based on how they feel. My vote would have been for Trout but obviously that's not the way the chips fell.

(In the next example I'm going to use random numbers and players, so they will be off.) If I'm looking at statistics in the near future and I'm seeing that Ted Williams and Ken Griffey Junior have WARs of 6.7 and 6.0. Natural logic says oh take the 6.7 every day v because it's higher. I'm sure you will still find people that will take the 6.0 because it's accomplished in a different way. The only time players should be compared is if they got traded for each other or if they played the same position.

Anyways that's a long rant... Like I said, I'm a huge advanced metrics guy but the questionability of WAR and the amount of people that talk about it like it's the be all end all of stats really detracts from the community and hurts all the good truly measurable things they do put out.

[TheSwamp]

Re: If you were building a team...

Stanton-Hernandez.

[ParisB]

Re: If you were building a team...

Comparing players by one single number is never how it should be done. It uses UZR which is inherently flawed (not taking positioning into account and such) and pitchers that tend to have more batted balls can effect it as well.

WAR is like the overall rating in sports games - it gives a good general lay of the land, but there are much more important numbers to focus on. It's a good starting point, but not reliable to definitively say this person is better than this person because one single computation said so. That's not how sports works.

I don't hate WAR, I just think too much stock gets pot into it when there are better ways of doing it even though it takes more work. Of course this is all personal opinion.

I think you are misunderstanding the whole WAR thing. Nobody is saying that Trout is the best because he has the highest WAR. People are saying he's the best, well, because he passes the eye test and smell test, and has the numbers to back it up. Nobody in the game today has a combination of elite contributions to every facet of the game. Average, OBP, power, baserunning, stealing, defense, coverage, leadership. He does it all at a high level.

WAR sort of just backs it up, so do the more traditional statistics. Nobody is saying it's the perfect stat either, but scroll on through the WAR rankings and it also passes the smell test. Only a few "surprises".

[ParisB]

Re: If you were building a team...

Kershaw and Stanton.

I'd be a bit surprised if Trout hits anywhere near 310 this year... If he can constantly keep up his beating of expectations, then we can talk again.

I'd also think about Posey, because a 300/20 guy at catcher is a great asset to have.

Bk - on sabermetrics.... I think they are amazing, when used as an evaluation tool. To be used as an end-all be-all in a discussion is a joke to me, but when you combine a lot of the stats (not WAR and such, I'm talking about ct%, h%, xba and more skill based tools than a random number like WAR) they make for a very compelling case.

I know you're a Dodgers or Giants fan and all, but c'mon....lol. A .310 average is closer to his low end. All his minor league statistics translate very well, and his first season in the big leagues leaves no reason to think that all of a sudden he will not come anywhere near a mark he's never hit below).

This isn't Dee Gordon we are talking about.

[ubernoob]

I know you're a Dodgers or Giants fan and all, but c'mon....lol. A .310 average is closer to his low end. All his minor league statistics translate very well, and his first season in the big leagues leaves no reason to think that all of a sudden he will not come anywhere near a mark he's never hit below).

This isn't Dee Gordon we are talking about.

Actually I'm a brewers, nats and halos fan because I've lived in those 3 places the longest. Don't like the Dodgers or the Giants.

He way outperformed his xBA and had a very high h%. There's a chance he does it again, but I doubt his h% is 40 again. I'm probably saying 280-305 is what he hits this year.

[BDKiiing]

Re: If you were building a team...

Kershaw and Harper.

[ParisB]

Re: If you were building a team...

Actually I'm a brewers, nats and halos fan because I've lived in those 3 places the longest. Don't like the Dodgers or the Giants.

He way outperformed his xBA and had a very high h%. There's a chance he does it again, but I doubt his h% is 40 again. I'm probably saying 280-305 is what he hits this year.

Fair enough.

The thing is, players aren't created equal. When you have the ability to square up the ball and hit it HARD (like Trout does), it's going to find holes and gaps at a higher rate than most other players. Especially if you include how fast he is, he also gets gimme hits where most other players would have grounded out. He also has a good eye and takes a lot of pitches. It's a tough sell to claim that he's lucking out and exceeding expectations when he's the one that puts himself in position to do exactly that due to his skill/ability.

Baseball is a statistical sport, and there are averages and you can create bell curves that can give you a reasonable expectation for most players/teams. With that said, with every bell curve there will always be data points on the high or low sides.

Miguel Cabrera far exceeds his xBA and h% every year. So do other star players. There's a reason for that.

[ubernoob]

Re: If you were building a team...

Exceeding, yes. Being a statistical outlier in a group of statistical outliers? Not so much. Even if Trout does 90% of what he did last year he would hit like... .293 with almost 30 bombs and 44 SB or some crazy numbers like that. Normally, xBA and BA are +/- 30 points of each other (anything over 30 is a good candidate for regression/breakout seasons.) Trout's xBA last year was 276. He hit .328 across all levels throughout the year. 52 points higher. It's because his h% was 40, where as the year before in the minors his MLE was 34. If you look at the elite hitters, even 40 is insanely high for a h% so that will normalize, almost guaranteed. I'll go back 3 years and list some of the better hitters h%s (with '10/'11'/12 stats).

Miggy (34/37/34)
Braun (33/35/35)
Melky Cabrera (29/34/38 [he hit .346])
Cano (33/32/33)
Votto (36/35/41, which was dipping in the second half before he got hurt)

When looking at Minor League stats, you have to use the proper MLEs. Even Trout's 2011 stats (when transferred using proper MLEs) look like this - .282 (253 xBA) / 93 Runs / 15 HR / 50 RBI / 33 SB ( 349 / 460 / 808 for OBP/SLG/OPS).

Right now, I can give you 7 different projections of Trout. One has him at .307, one has him at .306, one has him at .300 and the rest are all between .280-300.

A lot of people like the Baseball Prospectus projections, from what I can tell, and that has Trout at .288 this year, with 21 HR, 106 R, 77 RBI, and 45 SB. Still a great season.

Is it possible that he repeats his year last year? Yes. Is it likely? Smart money says no.

Just since you brought up Cabrera outperforing xBA and h%, here are his 08-12 seasons with BA/xBA/h% since I have it up in front of me.

2008 292 / 291 / 32
2009 324/ 297 / 35
2010 328 / 327 / 34
2011 344 / 317 / 37
2012 330 / 315 / 34

[55]

Re: If you were building a team...

Back to this again, I guess...

NSFW

<object width="560" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/z3zuwF15Ios?version=3&amp;hl=en_US&amp;rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/z3zuwF15Ios?version=3&amp;hl=en_US&amp;rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="560" height="315" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>

[ParisB]

Re: If you were building a team...

Exceeding, yes. Being a statistical outlier in a group of statistical outliers? Not so much. Even if Trout does 90% of what he did last year he would hit like... .293 with almost 30 bombs and 44 SB or some crazy numbers like that. Normally, xBA and BA are +/- 30 points of each other (anything over 30 is a good candidate for regression/breakout seasons.) Trout's xBA last year was 276. He hit .328 across all levels throughout the year. 52 points higher. It's because his h% was 40, where as the year before in the minors his MLE was 34. If you look at the elite hitters, even 40 is insanely high for a h% so that will normalize, almost guaranteed. I'll go back 3 years and list some of the better hitters h%s (with '10/'11'/12 stats).

Miggy (34/37/34)
Braun (33/35/35)
Melky Cabrera (29/34/38 [he hit .346])
Cano (33/32/33)
Votto (36/35/41, which was dipping in the second half before he got hurt)

When looking at Minor League stats, you have to use the proper MLEs. Even Trout's 2011 stats (when transferred using proper MLEs) look like this - .282 (253 xBA) / 93 Runs / 15 HR / 50 RBI / 33 SB ( 349 / 460 / 808 for OBP/SLG/OPS).

Right now, I can give you 7 different projections of Trout. One has him at .307, one has him at .306, one has him at .300 and the rest are all between .280-300.

A lot of people like the Baseball Prospectus projections, from what I can tell, and that has Trout at .288 this year, with 21 HR, 106 R, 77 RBI, and 45 SB. Still a great season.

Is it possible that he repeats his year last year? Yes. Is it likely? Smart money says no.

Just since you brought up Cabrera outperforing xBA and h%, here are his 08-12 seasons with BA/xBA/h% since I have it up in front of me.

2008 292 / 291 / 32
2009 324/ 297 / 35
2010 328 / 327 / 34
2011 344 / 317 / 37
2012 330 / 315 / 34

That's nice and all, but like I said, he's a different breed. Check out his hits this Spring while you're at it. There's a reason he's exceeding projections.