Somebody explain WAR already...

[Goody]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

And Gordy,

The best way to describe WAR to you is that it tells you that Milton Bradley is a valuable player to have on your team when hes playing.

If you look at his common stats(Avg, HR, R, RBI) from year to year they look pretty average. However if you look at the big picture his OBP is very high along with his OPS+ making him a nice player when hes not getting himself in trouble.

WAR does a nice job of seperating the underrated(Milton Bradley types) from the over rated(Juan Pierre types)

Excellent points.

[Goody]

Originally Posted by Curtis

Interesting; I thought you were going to reference "Field of Dreams". "Field of Dreams" and "The Natural" (my father's favorite sports movie) appeal to one type of fan, while "Eight Men Out" and "A League of Their Own" appeal to a different one. I know how to characterize fans of films like "Mr. 3000," "Mister Baseball" and even "Damn Yankees", but I really don't know how to categorize fans of "Bull Durham", "61*" and "The Bingo Long Traveling All Stars and Motor Kings".

Obviously I've gone off topic, so I'll cede the field.

Bull Durham and 61* fans like the things that aren't measurable with stats, while still giving stats their due attention. Its the whole "mystic"..."mystical" thing....while still being somewhat grounded. If that made any sense. And those are my two favorite baseball movies with Major League and A League of Their Own close behind. Sandlot is good on a different level.

[attackemu]

Originally Posted by Goody

Bull Durham and 61* fans like the things that aren't measurable with stats, while still giving stats their due attention. Its the whole "mystic"..."mystical" thing....while still being somewhat grounded. If that made any sense. And those are my two favorite baseball movies with Major League and A League of Their Own close behind. Sandlot is good on a different level.

We all like the things that aren't measurable with stats! Any serious sabr-head who says he's not - well. Just ask him about Oscar Charleston. We still love the myths, and the larger-than-life moments. We love the game. That's why we want to know as much about it as we can. A better comparison is the sort of music fan who knows all the members and albums and tracks of all his favorite bands vs. the kind who is just happy to listen to the radio.

This should really be in Talk Sports. But to make it fit here, the idea that a stat shouldn't be in the game just because some people don't like it is absurd. I don't ever look at stolen bases or holds or RC/27, but I'm glad they're all in the game. Shrug.

[Goody]

Originally Posted by attackemu

We all like the things that aren't measurable with stats! Any serious sabr-head who says he's not - well. Just ask him about Oscar Charleston. We still love the myths, and the larger-than-life moments. We love the game. That's why we want to know as much about it as we can. A better comparison is the sort of music fan who knows all the members and albums and tracks of all his favorite bands vs. the kind who is just happy to listen to the radio.

This should really be in Talk Sports. But to make it fit here, the idea that a stat shouldn't be in the game just because some people don't like it is absurd. I don't ever look at stolen bases or holds or RC/27, but I'm glad they're all in the game. Shrug.

I didn't say I hated the stat. I just didn't think it translated to OOTP well. There's so much more that can be worked on than trying to port a stat that works good in real life to a computer baseball game....at this time in the development.

Simple things that make the game work and simulate real life by adding the variables and randomness of real life baseball, rather than trying to define the calculations even more precisely.

I appreciate the stat, but I don't think its necessary for OOTP and would be a lot of fine tuning to make it work in OOTP, since its based on real life subjective input from a humans opinion.

Sure, a guy can be an expert on the MLB now. But would a stat head now be an expert on stats in 1900 without spending some time to translate it logically?

WAR might be perfect for out of the box replays and for fantasy leagues. To make it perfect for the whole scope of OOTP fans would take an expert from every ERA and even fictional situations....unless you base it off league settings...which would reveal too much IMO.

[JackRules1]

I am definitiely not a stat head, though I do enjoy reading articles from The Hardball Times and Fangraphs. Most of what I read I don't fully understand but that stuff does augment my enjoyment of the game. As for OOTP, the new stats are fun as a record of past performance, but I don't pay much attention to them when predicting future value. The old basic stats are more than sufficient.

[Kelric]

Originally Posted by Curtis

Interesting; I thought you were going to reference "Field of Dreams". "Field of Dreams" and "The Natural" (my father's favorite sports movie) appeal to one type of fan, while "Eight Men Out" and "A League of Their Own" appeal to a different one. I know how to characterize fans of films like "Mr. 3000," "Mister Baseball" and even "Damn Yankees", but I really don't know how to categorize fans of "Bull Durham", "61*" and "The Bingo Long Traveling All Stars and Motor Kings".

Obviously I've gone off topic, so I'll cede the field.

What if you like Field of Dreams, The Natural, Eight Men Out, A League Of Their Own, Bull Durham, Major League, The Sandlot AND The Bingo Long Traveling All Stars & Motor Kings. Because I do.

[CBL-Commish]

Originally Posted by Goody

I don't hate them. They play a part and give us a lot to think about an analyze. I just think they're no where as close to understanding the game as an intelligent player who is actually on the field at a given time.

Somebody like Jamie Moyer can probably tell you that all the statistics in the world are a useful tool, but they don't determine the next play...game...or season.

He out thinks his opponents. But hasn't as much raw talent as some. And there's varying degrees of this on every single pitch...every single play...every single match up.

Here's what I don't get: VORP is already in OOTP. Doesn't seem to detract from anyone's enjoyment. Take VORP, add in defense, convert it to wins instead of runs, and, basically, there's WAR.

Why would that be in any way controversial, or detract from anyone's enjoyment of OOTP? And what in the world does that have to do with Jamie Moyer's talent?

[Malleus Dei]

Originally Posted by attackemu

A better comparison is the sort of music fan who knows all the members and albums and tracks of all his favorite bands vs. the kind who is just happy to listen to the radio.

A better comparison is someone who actually understands music vs. someone who just listens to the radio and has no interest in the details of how music is actually composed, played and recorded.

Myths are for children and primitives, as they offer glib and mystic explanations without offering any actual understanding of reality. The problem with that is that the actual understanding of reality is critical.

Wes Westrum, when he was managing the Giants, said that "Baseball is like church. Many attend but few understand." Many play OOTP and, fortunately, the majority do understand...which is a backhanded way of saying that in general, although not in this thread, the overall level of baseball knowledge on this board is pretty impressive.

[Goody]

"More than any other American sport, baseball creates the magnetic, addictive illusion that it can almost be understood." ~Thomas Boswell, in Inside Sports

"1) Numbers are tools, not rules.
2) Numbers are symbols for things; the number and the thing are not the same.
3) Skill in manipulating numbers is a talent, not evidence of divine guidance.
4) Like other occult techniques of divination, the statistical method has a private jargon deliberately contrived to obscure its methods from nonpractitioners.
5) The product of an arithmetical computation is the answer to an equation; it is not the solution to a problem.
6) Arithmetical proofs of theorems that do not have arithmetical bases prove nothing." - Ashley-Perry

"Definition of Statistics: The science of producing unreliable facts from reliable figures. " - Evan Esar


Understanding the latest sabermetric trends does not equal understanding baseball. Anyways, I enjoyed this discussion (mostly) and have a new found appreciation for those stats.

[Malleus Dei]

What a steaming dump of bullcrap. Everything is mathematical, even you. Here's some things for you to learn about to remedy your lack of an education: empiricism, observationalism, induction, and critical rationalism.

Instead of having a voodoo-based view of the world, complete with witch doctors, learn enough to have one based on reality. You'll be far better off for it.

[robc]

Many disciplines use numbers to analyze things. Take business, for example. Earnings per share, return on investment, liquidity, etc.., they are numbers used to try and put value on a company. Can a company have good numbers, but fail to perform in the future? Sure. Can a baseball player put up great numbers and bomb? Yep.

The numbers are tools to help understand a players value. To make decisions based on hunches and feelings is usually not a great method. Use the tools to formulate your strategies and make decisions. Decide what numbers express what you are looking for. I great SS may not be worth a lot to you if you already have a very good one for much less money.

[fhomess]

Missed a good part of this thread, so this is a bit long as I'm now caught up:

Originally Posted by Goody

Who is Tango Tiger and why does his opinion get to have an effect on a statistic?

Statistics should be just that, compiled outcomes of what happened. It seems WAR is constantly changing based on human input and evaluation.

Tango is a professional statistician who analyzes baseball for a living. He meticulously researches the game to try to understand it better. Statistics like WAR and VORP, which attempt to show the value of a player in a league neutral context (by comparing the player with replacement level in his league) inherently require adjustments as the talent pool of the league changes. The reason is because the type of player that is replacement level changes. These changes are made after performing the research to determine what that level really should be. To me, this is far more logical than deciding that scoring a runner from third base on a sac fly should be an RBI, but scoring a runner from third while hitting into a double play is not an RBI. Another example might be the decision taken in the 1920's (I think it was then) to declare a ball that bounces over the fence to be an automatic double rather than a home run. Of course, there's a slight difference with this last example, in that it actually does dictate the outcome of the play. Both WAR and the RBI rule do not dictate the outcome of the play, they are a measure of what happened in the course of the game.

Originally Posted by Goody

I don't hate them. They play a part and give us a lot to think about an analyze. I just think they're no where as close to understanding the game as an intelligent player who is actually on the field at a given time.

Somebody like Jamie Moyer can probably tell you that all the statistics in the world are a useful tool, but they don't determine the next play...game...or season.

He out thinks his opponents. But hasn't as much raw talent as some. And there's varying degrees of this on every single pitch...every single play...every single match up.

What about the unintelligent player who is actually on the field? Does his opinion count too? Think of the dolts! Seriously, though, Moyer's intelligence does actually show up in his statistics. His success is measurable just like the success of other players who get there based on physical skills without the same level of smarts. It's important to note that you shouldn't confuse the usefulness of statistics to a GM with the usefulness of statistics to a player. Statistics might be able to tell a player what areas of weakness they have that they can improve upon, but if they're thinking about it while in the game, they're probably not in the right mindset to play at their highest skill level. In terms of a GM who's watching Moyer and trying to decide whether or not to use him or another pitcher, the proof is in the pudding. If his intelligence translates into success, that will show up in statistics. You could have the most brilliant baseball mind ever on the mound, but if he can't throw a strike, what does it matter that he knows what to throw or where to throw it? He still has to execute his plan physically. If he's successful, he'll get batters out, he'll allow fewer runs, and we'll have a statistical record of that.

Originally Posted by Goody

Didn't you ever see the movie Bull Durham?!

Bull Durham's not a movie about baseball so much as it's a movie about life that just happens to focus on baseball players. To many, this is the appeal.

Originally Posted by Goody

Stats are fun. They are what draws most baseball (and certainly text sim baseball) fans in. But they aren't the heart and soul of the game that should dictate every decision.

I always think of these sabermetric guys when I see that scene in the movie 61* when Maris fails to hit the bomb off of Hoyt Wilhelm the one reporter asks the snarky reporter who is dogging out Roger Maris..."Have you ever actually played baseball?"

Wow, this post is wrong on so many levels. I seriously doubt that most people think stats are fun. Most everyone I know who took stats in college hated it (I was actually somewhere in the middle on this). I also don't believe stats are what draws most baseball fans in. Most baseball fans are drawn in as children, when they play catch with their dad in the yard, or when they go to a ballgame for the first time and smell the grass and turf and watch the form and symmetry of the plays unfold. Baseball is a beautiful sport that captures our attention for that reason, and causes people to want to understand how it works on a deeper level. This is what drives people to create stats like WAR. Sure, some are attracted to baseball because of the stats, but for most, baseball attracts them in first, and then they start caring about the stats.

Putting WAR into OOTP doesn't mean any user of the game has to dicatate their every decision on it. I also don't see anywhere in this thread where anyone has said that WAR should dictate every decision of a major league baseball club. To state this implies your preconceived perception of the "stat-guy" position. That reporter in 61* wasn't a stats guy at all. I don't see how that's relevant. It'd be like me lambasting my wife when she's not up for a 30 mile bike ride when she's 6 months pregnant. Simple ignorance and stupidity. To be blunt, this is how you come across when you suggest that the "stat guys" want stats to dictate every decision.

Originally Posted by Goody

I didn't say I hated the stat. I just didn't think it translated to OOTP well. There's so much more that can be worked on than trying to port a stat that works good in real life to a computer baseball game....at this time in the development.

Simple things that make the game work and simulate real life by adding the variables and randomness of real life baseball, rather than trying to define the calculations even more precisely.

I appreciate the stat, but I don't think its necessary for OOTP and would be a lot of fine tuning to make it work in OOTP, since its based on real life subjective input from a humans opinion.

I would posit a couple of challenges to you here. First, please define the "simple things that make the game work" that are not in OOTP now that should be. The rest of that sentence seems to imply that you still think WAR impacts the outcome of plays, which is incorrect. It's very much like AVG, it doesn't affect the outcome of the play, it is a reflection of what happened. If you don't understand this, then you need to start with this piece.

On the last sentence, I'll have to say that I agree with the first part. WAR isn't necessary for OOTP. To get it accurate in OOTP would require manipulation that would need to be done in every league context in which it is used. I don't think people are asking for this level of detail, much like they haven't asked that VORP be adjusted for every league context.
The last part about being influenced by a humans opinion is again, lacking in accuracy. It's influenced by research, which is admittedly influenced somewhat by opinion, although I think it would be more accurate to say that it's influenced by interpretation and analysis. Much like the laws of physics have been translated into mathematical equations.

Originally Posted by Goody

Sure, a guy can be an expert on the MLB now. But would a stat head now be an expert on stats in 1900 without spending some time to translate it logically?

WAR might be perfect for out of the box replays and for fantasy leagues. To make it perfect for the whole scope of OOTP fans would take an expert from every ERA and even fictional situations....unless you base it off league settings...which would reveal too much IMO.

No, a stat head would not be an expert on another era without spending time to translate it. However, it doesn't take all that long to apply the same level of analysis that leads to stats developed for the modern context into useful stats that can reflect a different era. I think you would find the same level of confusion on how the game is played if you transported a 1900's era ballplayer to today's game or vice versa. Again, I don't think anyone is asking for it to be adjusted to other eras in OOTP, and no one can force anyone to consider WAR in their OOTP decision making anymore than they can force someone to consider RBI in their OOTP decision making. At the end of the day, we all make our own decisions.

Originally Posted by Goody

Understanding the latest sabermetric trends does not equal understanding baseball.

Rejecting the latest sabermetric trends does not equal understanding baseball, either. Even if the stats later prove to be inaccurate, we gain a greater understanding through statistics than we do by ignoring statistics. This is how scientific progress works, and there's no reason to think a scientific approach can't be applied to any discipline out there, including sports.

All that said, I actually agree with you on the idea that there are other things I would rather see implemented in OOTP than WAR. I'd much rather see Markus work on historical financials. I'd much rather see a more dynamic league/player environment, where you can have summer college leagues like the Northwoods League and players would be able to be loaned out to the Arizona Fall League.

[RchW]

Originally Posted by Goody

5) The product of an arithmetical computation is the answer to an equation; it is not the solution to a problem.

You wouldn't be able to turn a light on, drive a car or play OOTP if problems were not solved by doing the math.

The first atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima was not tested beforehand. The method (via math and engineering) was considered certain but not without risk.

[ryanivr]

Originally Posted by Goody

Didn't you ever see the movie Bull Durham?!

Stats are fun. They are what draws most baseball (and certainly text sim baseball) fans in. But they aren't the heart and soul of the game that should dictate every decision.

I always think of these sabermetric guys when I see that scene in the movie 61* when Maris fails to hit the bomb off of Hoyt Wilhelm the one reporter asks the snarky reporter who is dogging out Roger Maris..."Have you ever actually played baseball?"

This is the attitude that drives me crazy. The assumption that people who love stats never play or watch the game.

Baseball is the only sport I ever played, and while I do watch football and soccer, I watched all 162 games of my team last year.

I love statistics because they help me understand what I'm watching.

[Malleus Dei]

Originally Posted by ryanivr

This is the attitude that drives me crazy. The assumption that people who love stats never play or watch the game.

I'm a great big brutal bastage who played baseball though college and on to semi-pro. Yet on the Internet, just because I understand the value of actual knowledge about baseball, some people call me a geek or a stathead. It's insane.

[StyxNCa]

This is simple. War is when Army A picks up it's weapons and Army B picks up it's weapons and they go at it.

Hope that was helpful.

[fhomess]

Originally Posted by StyxNCa

This is simple. War is when Army A picks up it's weapons and Army B picks up it's weapons and they go at it.

Hope that was helpful.

Ok, smartypants. Explain why if a soldier surrenders, he lays down his arms while putting his hands up in the air?

[StyxNCa]

Originally Posted by fhomess

Ok, smartypants. Explain why if a soldier surrenders, he lays down his arms while putting his hands up in the air?

Dr. Frankenstein sewed his hands to his feet?

[fhomess]

Originally Posted by StyxNCa

Dr. Frankenstein sewed his hands to his feet?

I'll never understand WAR.

[ryanivr]

Free online course courtesy of the Sabermetric Libarary.

Course