Bill James uses Jose Altuve and Aaron Judge to demonstrate a flaw in WAR for rating the win value of players in a given season:
We reach, then, the key question in this debate: is it appropriate, in assigning the individual player credit for wins, to do so based on the usual and normal relationship of runs to wins, or based on the actual and specific relationship for this player and this team?
I have been silent on this issue for more than 20 years, and let me explain why. In the 1990s I developed Win Shares, while younger analysts developed WAR. At that time it was my policy not to argue with younger analysts. I was much more well-known, at that time, than they were, and it’s a one-way street. When you are at the top of a profession, you don’t speak ill of those who coming along behind you. It’s petty, and it’s just not done. Some of those people did take pot shots at me and some didn’t, but. . .well, it’s a one-way street. I’ve got mine; I’m not pulling up the ladder behind me.
But that was a long time ago. We’re not there anymore. WAR is not an upstart statistic; it is the dominant statistic. We can debate its merits on an equal footing.
This is an important article. The quick summary is that WAR is good for predicting future performance, but not judging the value of a player in a given season.
from baseballmusings.com http://ift.tt/2irTpOL
No comments:
Post a Comment