Comments on: Mariners 2008 WAR – position players

By: ThundaPC

ThundaPC — Sat, 27 Dec 2008 05:34:02 +0000

I’m really looking forward to when FanGraphs adds WAR for pitchers.

Cause now I’m really curious how the 2007 Mariners managed to win 88 games when got 12.8 wins from their non-pitchers…second worst in baseball ahead of….wow, the White Sox’s 4.7 wins (72-90)?

By: The Ancient Mariner

The Ancient Mariner — Sat, 27 Dec 2008 05:09:58 +0000

of the four offensive players (by which I mean non-pitchers) with value

Yeah, since some of our pitchers are pretty offensive too, even if they don’t contribute anything to the offense.

By: Conor

Conor — Sat, 27 Dec 2008 03:53:13 +0000

What I thought was really funny was that if you put the PA minimum down to zero, you get the pitchers in there and Felix was worth $1.3 million just as a batter.

By: snapper

snapper — Sat, 27 Dec 2008 02:55:46 +0000

I’m simply trying to point out from Dave’s analysis that a position player’s value is based roughly on 75% offense and 25% defense.

But, that’s only b/c the range of output on offense is much greater than on defense. The range of defensive performance in MLB is fairly narrow, approx. -15 R/150G to +15 R/150G. Offensive output can range from below replacement to 80 or 90 runs above.

Despite this, a run saved is as good as a run scored, you just can’t save as many vs. replacement level defense.

By: PositivePaul

PositivePaul — Sat, 27 Dec 2008 02:52:13 +0000

Wow – 45 comments thus far and not one of them points out that WFB actually was worth his contract?

A 200K bargain even!!!

By: Jack Howland

Jack Howland — Sat, 27 Dec 2008 01:58:19 +0000

The theme of the thread is the evaluation of an offensive player. I am not trying to misrepresent Dave’s post, I’m simply trying to point out from Dave’s analysis that a position player’s value is based roughly on 75% offense and 25% defense. People don’t generally underrate the value of pitching as they do positional defense, which is part of the reason I dislike lumping the two together. In fact, Dave’s post does a great job in pointing out that run prevention is less about pitching and more about defense than most people think which I think is what you were trying to get across.

By: Paul B

Paul B — Sat, 27 Dec 2008 01:43:24 +0000

I would think the Branyon/RH 1B platoon, instead of the Sexson/Vidro train wreck, would more than make up for Ibanez’s lost offense vs. Chavez. Plus you’re better defensively (by a lot) at both positions.

One player that hasn’t been mentioned here was about as bad as Sexson. Recall that Cairo was starting at first base quite a bit.

By: jetcity62

jetcity62 — Sat, 27 Dec 2008 01:42:56 +0000

OK I have been lurking for the past couple of months and have found the defense vs offense discussions very intriging. On an empirical level based on my personal observations over the last 20 plus years I have seen a number of above average offense teams that have never done anything (pre 95) and a 116 win team with what seemed to be a very good defense with a less potent offense. So based on the observation it would seem at least on face value there might be something to this defense thing.

More interesting to me personally I have not seen a lot of discussion (may have missed it) in regards to the home field i.e. Safeco and its effect on an optimal team, offensive or defensive. In my humble opinion it would make sense to build at least the core strength of a team to fit its home ballpark based only on the idea that half the games of the season are played there. That said I would contend that Safeco in a general sense favors a team with good defensive skills first and speed on the base pads second over those flashy offensive HR/RBI numbers everyone seems to love so much. Seems to me that adding some top notch defense in the outfield even at the expense of some current offense is a smart first move to build on given where the team plays.

I am really interested to see what the regulars of this site feel the variable of Safeco field has in the on going discussion of offense vs defense

By: Jeff Nye

Jeff Nye — Sat, 27 Dec 2008 01:18:57 +0000

Actually offense is more important than defense. It’s just that defense is generally totally overlooked. Dave has a great post about it.

You’re misrepresenting Dave’s post; he breaks what most people would commonly call defense, but what should more properly be called run prevention, down into the contributions of pitching and the actual defensive players.

But he still defines run creation as 50% of winning a game, and run prevention as the other 50%. Which was my intent as well.

So I guess I should’ve said that run prevention and run scoring are equally important, but I figured most people would infer “run prevention” when I talk about defense.

By: RoninX

RoninX — Fri, 26 Dec 2008 23:58:00 +0000

Actually offense is more important than defense. It’s just that defense is generally totally overlooked. Dave has a great post about it.

Thanks for the link Jack. I was just in the process of asking a question about defense as an (approximate) percentage of run prevention, and you posted before I could finish typing my question!

I love this site.