2012 MLB Regular Season Running Thread

That's really good to hear, because I'd really like to get in the front couple of rows behind the plate.

I'm debating now whether I want to go the light-rail route or just drive into the parking lots.

 

I'm wondering how it is that Brett Lawrie has 3.3 dWAR (baseball-reference). As a result, he's the major league leader in WAR (ahead of Joey Votto, the Fangraphs WAR leader).

 

Cole's running mate at UCLA, Trevor Bauer, is expected to be called up to the Diamondbacks and start Thursday against the Braves. That's just over one year since his last college pitch.

 

Because WAR is, at best, very flawed.

 

Instead of saying that WAR is "wrong" or "useless" because a result does not match up with preconceived notions (never an acceptable reason why data is wrong), I would love to see a skeptic explain why +/- is overrating his defense (which it may very well be doing), and give a solid estimate of how many runs he really has saved, in their opinions.

 

Toronto's extreme shifts have broken some defensive metrics. He's getting huge amounts of credit for fielding balls outside of his "3b zone" when someone hits into the shift.

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=17183

 

I never said it was wrong. That said, his 3.3 dWAR less than halfway through the season puts him on pace to shatter the record of 5.4 dWAR by Terry Turner in 1906. So, baseball-reference's dWAR suggests Brett Lawrie is having the greatest defensive season in baseball history.

 

That makes a lot of sense. Thanks.

 

Sorry, that wasn't directed at you. Just for people who call it wrong or a useless stat.

 

And it shows exactly how flawed WAR is in this case. It's not some hidden value that WAR is revealing. The metrics are failing in this case, creating an illusion of value that isn't there.

Lawrie is a nice player, but he is not better than Joey Votto. Gehrig, it's not up to me to explain why WAR failed to properly evaluate those players. It is up to you because you are the one trying to argue that it has value.

 

Calling "WAR" flawed because of a broken defensive metric is like calling the grading system of A+ through F- flawed because of a bad teacher. Or the 20-80 scouting scale flawed because some dork on a message board says Jeter has 70 range. Or saying the 1-5 star system of movie ratings is flawed because someone gave Spiderman 2 4.5 stars.

WAR is a scale, not a calculation. Individual implementations of WAR can be quite flawed, but there is no universal "WAR."

 

Hey, Spider-Man 2 has a 93% fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes.