How in the world do I suppress RP demands?

[injury log]

Saves are very definitely not factored into WAR calculations. What is factored in, at least on FanGraphs, is leverage. A reliever pitching in a very close game is pitching more important innings than a guy pitching in a blowout. So a great performance in a 2-1 game is worth more than a great performance in a 10-1 game. It's because closers pitch more important innings, and do it well (or they wouldn't have their job) that their WARs tend to be higher.

[Matt Arnold]

Saves are not included in reliever WAR. Fangraphs WAR as you have there is a FIP-based WAR, basically a function of IP, BB, K, and HR. The reason reliever WAR is so low is because they simply don't pitch that many innings.

But WAR is a bad stat to measure relievers on, because the top closers will tend to pitch more in high leverage situations, so their innings are more "valuable" than an average inning.

As for their demands, and their demands in-game, reliever demands might be a bit high now, but there's such a fine line between a bit too high, and way too low. The other flaw is that there are so many ways to set up leagues that it's hard to adjust for all of them. We do our best, but it won't always be perfect.

[TuckerDuckson]

Originally Posted by injury log

Saves are very definitely not factored into WAR calculations. What is factored in, at least on FanGraphs, is leverage. A reliever pitching in a very close game is pitching more important innings than a guy pitching in a blowout. So a great performance in a 2-1 game is worth more than a great performance in a 10-1 game. It's because closers pitch more important innings, and do it well (or they wouldn't have their job) that their WARs tend to be higher.

Originally Posted by Matt Arnold

Saves are not included in reliever WAR. Fangraphs WAR as you have there is a FIP-based WAR, basically a function of IP, BB, K, and HR. The reason reliever WAR is so low is because they simply don't pitch that many innings.

But WAR is a bad stat to measure relievers on, because the top closers will tend to pitch more in high leverage situations, so their innings are more "valuable" than an average inning.

As for their demands, and their demands in-game, reliever demands might be a bit high now, but there's such a fine line between a bit too high, and way too low. The other flaw is that there are so many ways to set up leagues that it's hard to adjust for all of them. We do our best, but it won't always be perfect.

Ah so it was Leverage not saves that was tripping me up then, but if you just change saves to leverage the point is still made, thank you for the clarification

[Rain King]

Either way, saves, leverage, etc. No WAR calculation that I know of includes those things. The point Matt was making is that relievers are probably underrated by WAR exactly because it does not factor in leverage. They only pitch (usually) when it is important, but WAR does not factor that in.

[injury log]

As I said above, FanGraphs WAR does use leverage to compute WAR:

WAR for Pitchers | FanGraphs Sabermetrics Library

"reliever WAR includes a leverage component"

[Rain King]

Ah, I see now. That must be something that is pretty new.

[injury log]

They've been doing it that way for at least six years. If you google fangraphs reliever war, you'll find an article describing the methodology from 2010.

[ThePretender]

Originally Posted by TuckerDuckson

Ah so it was Leverage not saves that was tripping me up then, but if you just change saves to leverage the point is still made, thank you for the clarification

No, your point is not made. The reason those guys are getting the high leverage work is because they're all elite level arms, who should be pitching with the game on the line. If they weren't dominant, they wouldn't be used in such high leverage spots.

There are set up calibre relievers who can dominate the WAR chart, but generally only if the 9th inning guy on the same team is there too. Otherwise, the guy getting the holds would very quickly be used as the closer.

[TuckerDuckson]

Originally Posted by ThePretender

No, your point is not made. The reason those guys are getting the high leverage work is because they're all elite level arms, who should be pitching with the game on the line. If they weren't dominant, they wouldn't be used in such high leverage spots.

There are set up calibre relievers who can dominate the WAR chart, but generally only if the 9th inning guy on the same team is there too. Otherwise, the guy getting the holds would very quickly be used as the closer.

Well my point is made, because to get to those spots they don't have to be just "elite level arms" it is because they have to earn the position

Let's take Wade Davis for example, he had one of the most dominate performances by a reliever in 2014, and wasn't just "named the closer" they still went with Greg Holland, and STILL went with Holland in 2015 until his arm literally gave out, even after Davis's extreme performance, who also might I had 33 holds in 2014.

Same with Dellin Betances, he had an absolute breakout in 2014, surpassing Rivera's team K record and putting up +2 WAR, but wasn't used as the closer even though he was an "elite level arm" mainly because of the triviate of Chapman, Miller and Betances, and in that group, Betances was the 7th inning man, so its more of a chain of command until the organization finds that their closer is no longer useful, or if an injury happens, still they have to go from low leverage middle relief, middle relief, then set up, then closer, unless you have a closer by committee team then its unlikely you dont go with a guy who has proved themselves by moving up the ranks.