August 2nd Win Shares Report Card

Jason Moyer · 08-04-2003, 08:43 AM

Top 10 players in each league through August 2nd:

NL

29 Bonds
28 Pujols
24 Sheffield
22 Lopez
21 Helton
20 Abreu
20 M Giles
20 Lowell
19 I Rodriguez
19 A Jones

AL

23 Delgado
23 B Boone
22 Ja Giambi
20 M Ramirez
20 Garciaparra
19 Beltran
18 Loaiza
18 A Rodriguez
18 Suzuki
18 Soriano

Have I mentioned that Bobby Abreu is more valuable than Alfonso Soriano lately?

Jason

Crapshoot · 08-04-2003, 09:54 AM

Eh- while I agree with Abreu being more valuable, it is dangerous to use win shares when a season isn't complete- even James said that... The emphasis on defense sure has pitchers ranked low eh ?

Jason Moyer · 08-04-2003, 10:12 AM

Yeah. I dunno, I feel like James gives pitching and defense too much credit tho, and they already get more than 50% of the pie. I suppose the argument is that offense is bounded by 0 on one side, but there is no boundary for being 'bad' defensively. Still...

The big thing to look at for with mid-season WS is the pythagorean record for each team, since each offensive/defensive run created/saved is worth more or less depending on how your expected wins/losses matches up to your actual record.

Jason

Gastric ReFlux · 08-04-2003, 11:05 AM

zing swooooooooooosh ahhhhhhhhhhh

die StatHeads DIE!

But thanks for the numbers, I wish the Phillies could clone Abreu.

dougaiton · 08-04-2003, 11:40 AM

Can you compare WS across leagues? i thought that would always be a problem (as the wins were generated against different opposition)

Crapshoot · 08-04-2003, 11:50 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Jason Moyer
Yeah. I dunno, I feel like James gives pitching and defense too much credit tho, and they already get more than 50% of the pie. I suppose the argument is that offense is bounded by 0 on one side, but there is no boundary for being 'bad' defensively. Still...

The big thing to look at for with mid-season WS is the pythagorean record for each team, since each offensive/defensive run created/saved is worth more or less depending on how your expected wins/losses matches up to your actual record.

Jason

Myself, Ive never found a satisfactory explanation for the 52% figure- and I know Im not the only one who feels that way....

Skipaway · 08-05-2003, 05:27 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Jason Moyer
Have I mentioned that Bobby Abreu is more valuable than Alfonso Soriano lately?

Using win shares is an overkill. You only need the most traditional stats to tell us how Soriano sucked lately: .203BA after the all-star break. Abreu is at .403.

OldGiants · 08-06-2003, 03:22 PM

Abreu's WS total is likely to be overstated due to the extraordinarily crappy seasons of Burrell and Bell. I noticed in the Sunday stats Burrell and Bell are the only two 'regulars' batting under .200 in the NL (the AL could have some, I suppose, but despite having a much longer list of hitters, it ended at .235)

Thus about 25% of the Phillies lineup is comprised of the two worst hitters in major league baseball. How does this effect Abreu's win share total?

Well its a complicated analysis as anyone who's reading this should be aware, but here's my argument. Suppose Burrell and Bell were 'merely bad' instead of the worst. Through Aug 2, the Phillies had played over 100 games. Assume Bell and Burrell each has 10 more singles and 5 more walks over the season. These 20 hits and 10 walks could easily have been squeezed into 100+ games without resulting in another victory for the Phillies. (Which would have increased the win shares to allocate, another story entirely)

But the effect on the allocation of win shares could be dramatic. both Bell and Burell would have battinhg averages 30+ points highger and OBP 35+ points higher. These figures go into the allocation formula and would result in a greater allocation for Bell and Burrell and lesser for all the other Phillies. But because he's the team leader, Abreu would see the largest proportional reduction.

How much would this be? I don't know, but it would have an impact of a share or three off Abreu, I believe.

You can argue Abreu is carrying the Phils offense, and deserves credit, but the crappy performances of Burrell and Bell does impact the allocation, no way to ignore that.

Plus, if Burrell and Bell (who might not see much action at all) get a few more hits and approach mere awfulness by season end, (assuming the phils winning pct doesn't change much) this shift away from Abreu will occur.

Just another oddity to toss into the win share argument.

Jason Moyer · 08-06-2003, 03:40 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by OldGiants
Abreu's WS total is likely to be overstated due to the extraordinarily crappy seasons of Burrell and Bell. I noticed in the Sunday stats Burrell and Bell are the only two 'regulars' batting under .200 in the NL (the AL could have some, I suppose, but despite having a much longer list of hitters, it ended at .235)

I assumed his win shares were largely the result of being a Center Fielder playing Right Field and being among the top hitters in the game while playing in one of the top 5 pitcher's parks in baseball. I mean, last time I checked, his OPS was hovering around .900 and he was in the top 5 in walks and OBP, was on pace for around 25 homeruns, and was stealing his normal 20-30 bases. I can think of maybe 3 right fielders in the game I'd take over Abreu, and maybe 2 who have been better over the span of the last 5 years.

Jason

Gastric ReFlux · 08-06-2003, 03:45 PM

I thought one of the points of Win Shares was to distribute the credit for the wins, and if you argue that Burrell and Bell having bigger seasons, you're going have to take in to account that the Phillies would then have more wins to distribute into shares.

Eckstein 4 Prez · 08-06-2003, 03:50 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Aadik
Myself, Ive never found a satisfactory explanation for the 52% figure- and I know Im not the only one who feels that way....

There is no satisfactory explanation, other than "that's what makes the numbers work."

It's the one truly subjective factor in Win Shares, and it is indeed a problem..... but how would you propose changing it? I think the system works rather well..... yeah, pitchers don't get that much credit, but if they were used more intelligently they'd get more. I wouldn't mind seeing it go to, say, 53% - I think that might be a more indicative number. But I guess it's all pretty much guesswork.

Jason Moyer · 08-06-2003, 08:08 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Gastric ReFlux
I thought one of the points of Win Shares was to distribute the credit for the wins, and if you argue that Burrell and Bell having bigger seasons, you're going have to take in to account that the Phillies would then have more wins to distribute into shares.

Right. If Burrell and Bell were having bigger seasons, Abreu would have exactly the same number of win shares and the Phillies would have more wins.

Edit: Talking about the Phillies, how bout Placido Polanco? I totally had him written off going into this year, and yet he's played 92 games and has 9 more walks than his previous career high during a full season. His OPS is .103 above his career too, and he was playing in much better hitting conditions in St Louis. By the end of the month he'll have career highs in walks, homeruns, stolen bases, RBI, and should either pass or be close to his career high in runs scored. He's having a better year than SORIANO ffs. And what's weird is, it's not a classic fluke - he's actually shown an improvement in power and walks while hitting right around his career average BA wise. And he's among the league leaders in defensive win shares at third base (beating Scott Rolen last time I checked despite fewer games).

Jason

Specs · 08-06-2003, 08:59 PM

Pitching is not given enough credit. Pure and simple.

Skipaway · 08-06-2003, 09:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Specs
Pitching is not given enough credit. Pure and simple.

Why is that? and got any other stats that did better at putting pitching/defense/batting all together?

sixto · 08-06-2003, 10:12 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Jason Moyer
And he's among the league leaders in defensive win shares at third base (beating Scott Rolen last time I checked despite fewer games).

Polanco has not played an inning at 3B this season.

Meanwhile, bad news about an arrest for Darren Daulton...say it ain't so...

darkhorse · 08-06-2003, 10:18 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by sixto
Polanco has not played an inning at 3B this season.

Indeedy! Polanco is second in fielding WinShares at second base behind Cora in the NL.

OldGiants · 08-07-2003, 02:21 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Jason Moyer
Right. If Burrell and Bell were having bigger seasons, Abreu would have exactly the same number of win shares and the Phillies would have more wins.

Jason

Once again, you've completely missed my point.

It is NOT a foregone conclusion that a few more hits has to result in more Phillie victories. But IS likely that Abreu's win shares would be redistributed to Burrell and Bell, because of their 'better' performance

Burrell and Bell could easily have gotten those few hits and walks I posited without the Phillies winning so much as one more game--that's what's so uniquely crappy about their seasons so far. think of it as each of them getting 10 singles in innings where the Phillies did not score. No team improvement what ever, but now they each would have better stats and higher claims on the win shares that exist--that's how win shares are calculated, afterall.

Is that so hard to understand?

Jason Moyer · 08-07-2003, 05:36 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by OldGiants
Is that so hard to understand?

Yes, because it makes no sense.

Offensive win shares depend on a number of things, but a player's individual share is calculated entirely by runs created and outs made. If Burrell and Bell were creating more runs, the Phillies would be scoring more runs. If the Phillies were scoring more runs, they'd be winning more games. If the Phillies were winning more games there would be more win shares to distribute. Since those extra wins would be the result of Bell/Burrell, those win shares would go to them.

This is assuming that the Phillies would be playing the exact same relative to their pythagorean record, of course.

The only way anything Abreu's teammates do could affect his win shares would be if the team's record in relationship to its pythagorean winning percentage were different.

The way the system works, what your teammates does means nothing unless it affects that relationship. A great season on a 50-100 team is worth the same as a season on a 100-50 team, all things being equal.

Jason

Skipaway · 08-07-2003, 11:16 PM

Well, I thought Bill James explained these points well enough in the book. If one must go the ******ed way of complaining "there might be 10 more singles and no scores" or "there might be 10 more runs and no more wins", then there is no point of arguing. Without some fundamental understanding of statistics, you just can't discuss stuff like win shares or even run created.

OldGiants · 08-08-2003, 02:14 PM

Obviously you two have never actually computed winshares for you OOTP league and wondered why some odd results pop up when the situation I've described exists.

Do some sensitivity studies, as I did, and you'll see I'm right.

Winshares is a complicated set of formulas and small changes sometimes make bigger changes in the winshare allocation than you'd think.

But you two wouldn't know that, because you haven't done your homework.

08-04-2003, 08:43 AM	#1
Jason Moyer Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Pittsburgh Posts: 5,108	August 2nd Win Shares Report Card Top 10 players in each league through August 2nd: NL 29 Bonds 28 Pujols 24 Sheffield 22 Lopez 21 Helton 20 Abreu 20 M Giles 20 Lowell 19 I Rodriguez 19 A Jones AL 23 Delgado 23 B Boone 22 Ja Giambi 20 M Ramirez 20 Garciaparra 19 Beltran 18 Loaiza 18 A Rodriguez 18 Suzuki 18 Soriano Have I mentioned that Bobby Abreu is more valuable than Alfonso Soriano lately? Jason __________________ "I pretty much popped everything cold turkey. We were doing steroids they wouldn't give to horses." -- Tom House "I was very fortunate to have a pitching coach by the name of Tom House...Tom, I really miss those days that we spent in the weight room and out on the field working together." -- Nolan Ryan's HoF Induction Speech

08-04-2003, 09:54 AM	#2
Crapshoot Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: watching: DArwin's missing link in action Posts: 3,112	Eh- while I agree with Abreu being more valuable, it is dangerous to use win shares when a season isn't complete- even James said that... The emphasis on defense sure has pitchers ranked low eh ? __________________ Senior Senor Member of the OOTP Boards Pittsburgh Playmates- OTBL

08-04-2003, 10:12 AM	#3
Jason Moyer Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Pittsburgh Posts: 5,108	Yeah. I dunno, I feel like James gives pitching and defense too much credit tho, and they already get more than 50% of the pie. I suppose the argument is that offense is bounded by 0 on one side, but there is no boundary for being 'bad' defensively. Still... The big thing to look at for with mid-season WS is the pythagorean record for each team, since each offensive/defensive run created/saved is worth more or less depending on how your expected wins/losses matches up to your actual record. Jason __________________ "I pretty much popped everything cold turkey. We were doing steroids they wouldn't give to horses." -- Tom House "I was very fortunate to have a pitching coach by the name of Tom House...Tom, I really miss those days that we spent in the weight room and out on the field working together." -- Nolan Ryan's HoF Induction Speech

08-04-2003, 11:40 AM	#5
dougaiton Hall Of Famer Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Location: Posts: 3,414	Can you compare WS across leagues? i thought that would always be a problem (as the wins were generated against different opposition) __________________ tThis shower of clowns My park-adjusted, historically split Born in '69 league file! (also at Joe's wonderful site +BBSC)

08-07-2003, 11:16 PM	#19
Skipaway Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Where you live Posts: 11,017	Well, I thought Bill James explained these points well enough in the book. If one must go the ******ed way of complaining "there might be 10 more singles and no scores" or "there might be 10 more runs and no more wins", then there is no point of arguing. Without some fundamental understanding of statistics, you just can't discuss stuff like win shares or even run created. __________________ Jonathan Haidt: Moral reasoning is really just a servant masquerading as a high priest.

08-04-2003, 11:05 AM	#4
Gastric ReFlux Hall Of Famer Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Member #3409 Posts: 8,350	zing swooooooooooosh ahhhhhhhhhhh die StatHeads DIE! But thanks for the numbers, I wish the Phillies could clone Abreu.

08-06-2003, 03:22 PM	#8
OldGiants Registered User Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 211	Abreu's WS total is likely to be overstated due to the extraordinarily crappy seasons of Burrell and Bell. I noticed in the Sunday stats Burrell and Bell are the only two 'regulars' batting under .200 in the NL (the AL could have some, I suppose, but despite having a much longer list of hitters, it ended at .235) Thus about 25% of the Phillies lineup is comprised of the two worst hitters in major league baseball. How does this effect Abreu's win share total? Well its a complicated analysis as anyone who's reading this should be aware, but here's my argument. Suppose Burrell and Bell were 'merely bad' instead of the worst. Through Aug 2, the Phillies had played over 100 games. Assume Bell and Burrell each has 10 more singles and 5 more walks over the season. These 20 hits and 10 walks could easily have been squeezed into 100+ games without resulting in another victory for the Phillies. (Which would have increased the win shares to allocate, another story entirely) But the effect on the allocation of win shares could be dramatic. both Bell and Burell would have battinhg averages 30+ points highger and OBP 35+ points higher. These figures go into the allocation formula and would result in a greater allocation for Bell and Burrell and lesser for all the other Phillies. But because he's the team leader, Abreu would see the largest proportional reduction. How much would this be? I don't know, but it would have an impact of a share or three off Abreu, I believe. You can argue Abreu is carrying the Phils offense, and deserves credit, but the crappy performances of Burrell and Bell does impact the allocation, no way to ignore that. Plus, if Burrell and Bell (who might not see much action at all) get a few more hits and approach mere awfulness by season end, (assuming the phils winning pct doesn't change much) this shift away from Abreu will occur. Just another oddity to toss into the win share argument.

08-06-2003, 03:45 PM	#10
Gastric ReFlux Hall Of Famer Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Member #3409 Posts: 8,350	I thought one of the points of Win Shares was to distribute the credit for the wins, and if you argue that Burrell and Bell having bigger seasons, you're going have to take in to account that the Phillies would then have more wins to distribute into shares.

08-08-2003, 02:14 PM	#20
OldGiants Registered User Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 211	Obviously you two have never actually computed winshares for you OOTP league and wondered why some odd results pop up when the situation I've described exists. Do some sensitivity studies, as I did, and you'll see I'm right. Winshares is a complicated set of formulas and small changes sometimes make bigger changes in the winshare allocation than you'd think. But you two wouldn't know that, because you haven't done your homework.