OOTP Developments Forums - View Single Post

One Great Matrix · 06-12-2019, 01:19 AM

Man, I don't know if you're talking about War or the stat WAR at this point, lol...

But yes it does change...you are comparing it to players who (at first would give you a .320 winning %), and now would give you a .294 winning %.

Can you figure out how even if it remains relative to a player that would give you a .294 winning % in the MLB a player's WAR will change?

Actually, the statistic is an ever-changing one...

That Babe Ruth his 61 home runs in a season is a constant.
His high WAR just means he was many wins better than the back-up plan (player to replace Ruth) that the Yankees did not have in place in the case Ruth was unavailable.
The only way I can imagine you'd keep that WAR number constant is by constantly adjusting other numbers.

WAR is an approximation of wins added for a player's performance...
There are pretty obvious reasons why it wouldn't, couldn't be an exact number. And it's kind of for the same reason that it isn't an exact number that it's bound not to be a constant one.

06-12-2019, 01:19 AM	#7
One Great Matrix All Star Starter Join Date: Apr 2019 Posts: 1,782	Man, I don't know if you're talking about War or the stat WAR at this point, lol... But yes it does change...you are comparing it to players who (at first would give you a .320 winning %), and now would give you a .294 winning %. Can you figure out how even if it remains relative to a player that would give you a .294 winning % in the MLB a player's WAR will change? Actually, the statistic is an ever-changing one... That Babe Ruth his 61 home runs in a season is a constant. His high WAR just means he was many wins better than the back-up plan (player to replace Ruth) that the Yankees did not have in place in the case Ruth was unavailable. The only way I can imagine you'd keep that WAR number constant is by constantly adjusting other numbers. WAR is an approximation of wins added for a player's performance... There are pretty obvious reasons why it wouldn't, couldn't be an exact number. And it's kind of for the same reason that it isn't an exact number that it's bound not to be a constant one. __________________ Last edited by One Great Matrix; 06-12-2019 at 01:48 AM.