FanGraphs Baseball


RSS feed for comments on this post.

  1. I hope I don’t get killed for asking this question but this article seems like the perfect forum to post it…

    Isn’t the Replacement component Fangraphs uses for WAR giving credit to the player for staying on the field and keeping a replacement level player off it? If that is the case then why do players who post numbers that are negative in all other components of WAR still credited with Replacement points even if they themselves are playing at a level less than replacement level? Should WAR discount their Replacement value in these cases? Hope someone is able to help because I’ve often wondered about that. Thanks in advance.

    Comment by Steve — May 25, 2010 @ 1:45 pm

  2. You should also reference this guy

    as supporting what you’re saying or something…

    Comment by Resolution — May 25, 2010 @ 1:46 pm

  3. I know everyone hate’s the “he’s in the best shape of his life” line, but Delmon was noticeably skinnier this year. He allegedly lost 30 lbs, but I believe it. Just looking at him it jumps out at you.

    Not sure what effect that would have on his hitting, but his fielding is apparently better based on UZR (extremely small sample alert!). I haven’t watched a ton of baseball this year, but he’s still making the head-scratching bad plays, but maybe he’s getting to more balls with the lost weight.

    Comment by tpain — May 25, 2010 @ 2:34 pm

  4. The batting and fielding components of WAR are calculated against average players, not replacement-level players (batting is calculated against league average, fielding against positional average; then the positional adjustment corrects for relative value of different defensive positions). The “replacement” column essentially corrects this, setting the baseline for comparison to replacement level instead of average.

    So a player can have negative values everywhere if he’s below league-average as a hitter, a below-average fielder at his position, and plays a below-average difficulty position. He still gets positive credit for his playing time to adjust the baseline from average to replacement-level, and can still wind up with a positive WAR overall if he’s played enough and his other components are not too negative.

    Comment by aldimond — May 25, 2010 @ 2:39 pm

  5. Good lookin’ out man. I always wondered about that and never found the appropriate place to really post the question and have it be relevant to the article. That makes sense though I just always thought it was strange that Yunieski Betancourt got credit for being on the field when he’s freakin’ awful. Thanks again for the info.

    Comment by Steve — May 25, 2010 @ 3:03 pm

  6. By the time he’s any good at all (at ths pace) he’ll be outrageously expensive, and not on the Twins. He’s not Span, and with Hicks, Benson, Revere (over-rated), Morales, and even Tosoni in the minors, why would you pay to keep a guy that in 2 years will be league average, but making waaaaaaaaay too much money thanks to arbitration? Horrible, horrible, horrible trade. Brutal. Oh, and they compounded the stupidity by signing Harris to a two year deal…..

    Comment by Mike in MN — May 25, 2010 @ 3:29 pm

  7. Why would more or less strikeouts affect a player’s BABIP? I don’t get that part. As you said, strikeouts aren’t counted in BABIP. If a player gets fewer K’s, they’re still not counted in his BABIP. It affects the number of balls in play, but I can’t see how it would affect his BABIP.

    Comment by Nathaniel Dawson — May 25, 2010 @ 4:34 pm

  8. BABIP:


    Clearly, the number of strikeouts is going to affect a stat that includes Ks in the denominator.

    Comment by Joe Pawlikowski — May 25, 2010 @ 4:37 pm

  9. Perhaps that was poor phrasing on my part. Ks are not balls in play.

    Comment by Joe Pawlikowski — May 25, 2010 @ 4:39 pm

  10. Hicks is still a long ways away. He’s striking out a ton in Low-A, as is Morales. Benson was just demoted to Single-A. Revere has his defense to work and is similar to Denard Span. No need to have both in the same lineup. Tosoni is probably the one that could possible take Delmon’s spot the earliest, but I wouldn’t count on it. Also, hopefully Revere is trade bait if anything. The lack of XBH is troublesome. Unless Delmon earns it, he won’t be outrageously expensive.

    I think it’s time to get over that trade. It is what it is.

    Comment by ahope — May 25, 2010 @ 5:00 pm

  11. Only if those PAs that previously would have ended in Ks exclusively end in other types of outs, which seems like a strange contention. Otherwise hits would increase and BABIP could go up, or down, or stay the same.

    Comment by don — May 25, 2010 @ 5:09 pm

  12. So fewer K’s means the denominator will be a greater number. And fewer K’s means more balls are put into the field of play, resulting in more hits. So you have a higher number of hits divided by a higher number of balls in play.

    Still don’t see why a difference in K’s menas a difference in BABIP, unless you’re assuming that the extra contact a player is making is weak contact, which may (or may not) result in fewer hits.

    Comment by Nathaniel Dawson — May 25, 2010 @ 5:17 pm

  13. Young is likely an average player already, as this article (sort of indirectly) attests.

    Comment by Bill@TDS — May 25, 2010 @ 5:30 pm

  14. You’re saying that more balls in play will lower his BABIP. That’s like saying someone’s AVG will be lower with more ABs.

    Comment by Jake — May 25, 2010 @ 6:48 pm

  15. As for Delmon’s “improved” discipline, he is swinging at the same pitches he always has, he’s just making a lot more contact than he did last season. Is that really sustainable?

    Comment by R M — May 26, 2010 @ 1:03 am

  16. He’s not swinging at as many of the same bad pitches he did in the past. Most of his improvement has been in his range in the OF, but he’s also chasing fewer BAD pitches than he did in prior years. He’s had fewer of his classic Delmon AB’s (foul off first two pitches, chase pitch in the dirt for strike three). His May level of performance (.306/.348/.500) seems pretty sustainable, since his BABIP is at a fairly normal level for him – 23 points lower than his career level.

    Comment by Mark — May 26, 2010 @ 10:30 am

  17. When I read that he had lost the weight at the beginning of the year I just rolled my eyes. Then I went to a game and saw him on the field and noticed he was much thinner. For once the article told the truth, he has actually lost the weight.

    Comment by adohaj — May 26, 2010 @ 6:33 pm

  18. This is what I’m having trouble with. I’ve already conceded the BABIP will be lower because Delmon’s almost certainly not crushing the pitches he missed last year.

    I’m not sure when Batted Ball statistics are updated, but it actually seems as though Delmon’s seeing fewer pitches per AB this year which just seems counter-intuitive.

    You just hope that Delmon’s improved contact rate will allow him to see more *mistakes*

    Comment by kris — May 28, 2010 @ 1:24 pm

  19. Delmon has hit .375/.395/.611 since this article was posted. The average, power and extreme ball in play tendencies (88%) make for a bizarre combination as he has ten times as many extra base hits (31) as unintentional walks (3) and his hit to UBB ratio is an unfathomable 27 to 1. Good golly Miss Molly.

    Comment by Ray — July 31, 2010 @ 12:37 am

  20. Only want to say your article is impressive. The clarity in your post is simply striking and i can take for granted you are an expert on this subject. Well with your permission allow me to grab your rss feed to keep up to date with succeeding post. Thanks a million and please keep up the a uthentic work.

    Comment by Affiliate — October 6, 2010 @ 5:19 pm

Leave a comment

Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Current ye@r *

Close this window.

0.078 Powered by WordPress