FanGraphs Baseball


RSS feed for comments on this post.

  1. Dagnabbed gubmint meddlin’ in our baseball!

    Comment by Nate — March 28, 2013 @ 9:09 am

  2. who cares?

    Comment by sprot — March 28, 2013 @ 9:16 am

  3. You try to rob me of what little WAR I have. Everybody’s always trying to bring me down…

    Comment by Yuniesky Betancourt — March 28, 2013 @ 9:24 am

  4. This is cool.

    Could bbFIP, the one with IFFBs, be published too?

    Comment by philosofool — March 28, 2013 @ 9:46 am

  5. most of the people reading.

    Comment by Sleight of Hand Pro — March 28, 2013 @ 9:49 am

  6. Will you show IFFIP on the dashboard now? Since it is a WAR component, it would help with quick diagnoses of players.

    Comment by Thomas — March 28, 2013 @ 9:58 am

  7. Sprot your comment adds absolutely nothing to the discussion. Why even bother commenting?

    Comment by Jimmy D — March 28, 2013 @ 9:58 am

  8. This is great news. I think it’s a non-trivial step for the quantitative approach to normalize among its advocates. Terrific work!

    Comment by John — March 28, 2013 @ 10:05 am

  9. Bravo to Dave, Dave, Sean, Sean, and any other FG and BR staffers who were involved in this awesome step forward, but through a parenting oversight aren’t named Dave or Sean.

    Seriously, though, bravo.

    Comment by Well-Beered Englishman — March 28, 2013 @ 10:06 am

  10. Funny you would call that a parenting oversight coming right after your cool names series.

    Comment by suicide squeeze — March 28, 2013 @ 10:09 am

  11. I’m missing something fundamental here in regards to “Replacement level is now set at an even 1,000 WAR.” Isn’t replacement level definitionally worth 0 WAR?

    Comment by pitnick — March 28, 2013 @ 10:22 am

  12. Will Infield Flies be adjusted based on whether Sam Holbrook is calling them?

    Comment by John — March 28, 2013 @ 10:28 am

  13. something so nerd-tastic about this.

    Comment by MrKnowNothing — March 28, 2013 @ 10:32 am

  14. A replacement level team would, but the league as a whole is Average. Thus, the 1000 WAR is the amount of wins an 81 win team has over a replacement team x 30 teams.

    Comment by Darren — March 28, 2013 @ 10:40 am

  15. Exactly. I’m really excited about this, but it would take a ridiculous amount of nerdy background to explain to anyone here at work.

    Comment by suicide squeeze — March 28, 2013 @ 10:46 am

  16. How does this adjust the meaning of “average” player? Is 2 WAR still a good estimate of “average”, with 5 and 8 WAR as benchmarks for All-star and MVP? Or should these be adjusted downward as well?

    Comment by Tom H. — March 28, 2013 @ 11:13 am

  17. Not me Yuni!!!1 I think you’re a heckuva ballplayer.

    Comment by Doug Melvin — March 28, 2013 @ 11:14 am

  18. So by standardizing WAR they are going to use the same WAR calculations now? MEaning BBREF is going to calculate their WAR using FIP now, like FG?

    Comment by Wil — March 28, 2013 @ 11:32 am

  19. It’s like how all the major tech/science guys in the 90s were named Steve. Steve Jobs, Steve Wozniak, Steve Hawking, Steve Pinker, Steve Weinberg, Steve Gould

    Comment by Well-Beered Englishman — March 28, 2013 @ 11:48 am

  20. Can someone explain to me like I’m five years old why FIP with IFFB is being incorporated into WAR, but why ‘generic FIP’ will remain unchanged? If this is an improvement to FIP, why only include it in WAR? I’d rather see ‘generic FIP’ include IFFB, or at least have ifFIP available separately.

    Comment by P. Hapley — March 28, 2013 @ 11:52 am

  21. Nope. Only replacement level is standardized. The inputs and calculations are still different

    Comment by Bort — March 28, 2013 @ 12:10 pm

  22. I have never heard anyone refer to “Steve” Hawking.

    Comment by AJS — March 28, 2013 @ 12:16 pm

  23. Steve and I used to go for fish and chips and Fullers ESB at the Four Candles every Saturday.

    That’s actually not true.

    Comment by Well-Beered Englishman — March 28, 2013 @ 12:30 pm

  24. Plus the original host of Blue’s Clues was named Steve. How quickly we forget!

    Comment by Detroit Michael — March 28, 2013 @ 12:30 pm

  25. Thank you, you explained this much better than the post did (assuming you’re right).

    Comment by byron — March 28, 2013 @ 12:30 pm

  26. Because FIP is FIP, but Fangraphs can calculate WAR however they damn well please.

    Comment by byron — March 28, 2013 @ 12:31 pm

  27. Odd that the consensus would be to net to zero the performance above average by league given that, with interleague play, the number of actual wins by league doesn’t net to zero.

    Comment by Detroit Michael — March 28, 2013 @ 12:31 pm

  28. So an all-replacement level team would now win 48 games?

    Comment by Baltar — March 28, 2013 @ 12:40 pm

  29. Which is I why I suggested they could also offer iffbFIP separately. The question is why not also offer the latest and greatest instead of just only rolling it into WAR?

    Comment by P. Hapley — March 28, 2013 @ 12:52 pm

  30. I would not re-adjust your scale of what “average”, “all-star”, or “MVP” is. On a seasonal basis, there was very little change in WAR. The big differences will show up in career WAR.

    Comment by David Appelman — March 28, 2013 @ 1:07 pm

  31. “Four candles – you know, handles for forks.”

    Comment by Choo — March 28, 2013 @ 1:48 pm

  32. This change greatly hurts pitchers who dont necessarily induce ‘infield flies’ but a lot of high flyballs to the shallow outfield, because all those near-guarantee outs aren’t being considered like they should be. It would have been better to withhold this update until you can use fieldFX calculations to determine if a flyball is an automatic out–not an arbitrary definition that changes depending on the weather, game scorer, and whether or not the infield lines are painted on the field. A blooper that stays in the infield has to be dived after to be caught is anything but a sure out, yet it gets counted nonetheless.

    Comment by derp — March 28, 2013 @ 1:54 pm

  33. The babip for what have been scored as infield flies over the past several years is tiny. A strikeout isn’t even a guaranteed out unless there is a runner on first with fewer than 2 outs.

    Comment by TKDC — March 28, 2013 @ 2:28 pm

  34. Meh.

    Comment by Jeff Francoeur — March 28, 2013 @ 2:56 pm

  35. Somewhat related… I just found myself trying to explain to a Royals fan how Shields is better than he looked in 2012 and not quite as good as he seemed in 2011… but probably somewhere in between. I had a screenshot of his player profile and said “f it” and deleted the whole e-mail.

    Comment by tomdog — March 28, 2013 @ 3:21 pm

  36. his fangraphs profile that is

    Comment by tomdog — March 28, 2013 @ 3:21 pm

  37. Will the park factors be updated with 2012 information in the Guts! section? Thanks

    Comment by Mitch Kramer — March 28, 2013 @ 3:22 pm

  38. Gotcha. Thanks.

    Comment by pitnick — March 28, 2013 @ 3:26 pm

  39. Yes, please.

    It would be helpful to see the formula for FIP with IFFBs included and also “PU%” i.e. IFFB/PA, not IFFB/FB. I don’t care what it’s called, but it’d be nice to have these stats.

    Comment by cass — March 28, 2013 @ 4:05 pm

  40. But even then, it’s more fielding independent than Ks. I don’t think we need to wait.

    Comment by Daniel — March 28, 2013 @ 5:15 pm

  41. Well your first question was why they aren’t changing generic FIP, then you asked that again with different phrasing, then you requested it again, and then you threw in “the question” at the end there as a less desirable alternative. But as to that minor point of your original comment, sure, they could offer it separately.

    Comment by byron — March 28, 2013 @ 5:50 pm

  42. Don’t forget to remove in field flies from UZR (if they were ever there), otherwise there is double credit going around in the WAR statistics. I assume this hasn’t been done because I don’t see it mentioned in the UZR changes. Please correct me if I’m mistaken.

    Comment by Andre the Angels Fan — March 28, 2013 @ 7:19 pm

  43. This, or I’m misunderstanding what happened.

    Comment by Andre the Angels Fan — March 28, 2013 @ 7:24 pm

  44. “Batters are given 57% of all total WAR with pitchers receiving the remaining 43%. ”

    Whats the reasoning for this particular split?

    Comment by Synovia — March 29, 2013 @ 9:59 am

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Close this window.

0.270 Powered by WordPress