Halfway Awards: Least Offensive Productivity
Back at the end of April, Dave posted his First Month Heroes, a position by position look at the highest WPA/LIs through one month of play. In the comments section I had joked that it would be even more interesting to see the inverse, or the worst context-neutral performers in the same span. My wish became Dave’s command and the following players surfaced: Josh Bard, Adam LaRoche, Robinson Cano, Ryan Zimmerman, Troy Tulowitzki, Garret Anderson, Andruw Jones, Jose Guillen.
Two full months later I thought it again to be prudent to check on these low-level offensive performers. So, as of July 8, the worst WPA/LIs by position are:
C: Kurt Suzuki, OAK, -0.84
1B: Daric Barton, OAK, -1.33
2B: Freddy Sanchez, PIT, -2.56
3B: Melvin Mora, BAL, -1.15
SS: Jason Bartlett, TB, -1.71
LF: Emil Brown, OAK -1.20
CF: Michael Bourn, HOU, -1.67
RF: Jeff Francoeur, ATL, -1.31
SP: Bronson Arroyo, CIN, -1.94
RP: Brad Hennessey, SF, -1.26
Yes, Frenchy was demoted to the minors, and yes, it took me three attempts at spelling his name correctly, but he has been the least productive rightfielder on offense. After him it gets a little hazy since certain guys who may be classified as rightfielders played different positions (SEE: Gary Matthews, Jr, and Mark Teahen).
One interesting part of this group is that their WPAs, which could benefit from some game state bias, are not all the lowest at their position. In fact, the only players listed above with both the lowest WPA/LI and WPA are Suzuki, Barton, and Frenchy. Sanchez, Bartlett, and Brown have the 4th worst WPA at their respective positions; Bourn has the second worst; and Mora actually ranks at the halfway point in WPA terms.
The other aspect of this group that piqued my interest is that three Oakland Athletics position players are, as of this moment, the worst win-contributors at their respective positions. In terms of WPA, not WPA/LI, the most productive offensive total is the 0.80 of Eric Chavez. Overall, though, their offense has cost them six wins; thankfully their starting rotation and bullpen have combined to the tune of ten added wins. Perhaps this is why some As fans were calling for offense in return for Harden. Regardless, I’ll be very curious to revisit this closer to the end of the season not only to see how these players improve or digress, but whether or not any of them remain.
Print This Post
Nice. Also glad I don’t have any of them.
Another fun exercise might be the all-average team. Guys with a decent number of AB or IP but very little WPA.
Guys like Orlando Hudson and Blake Dewitt would seem to be locks for the All-Average team…
RSN, I did something at Statistically Speaking not too long ago called “The Oddibe Awards” wherein I found the average slash line in a given season and then found the guy who most closely matched up. Orlando Hudson was the 2006 winner I believe. The name came from something RJ Anderson, a friend of mine and senior editor at Beyond the Box Score found, that the average slash line over the last 45-50 years most closely matched the career slash of Oddibe McDowell.
I have to be straight here…I’m a little new to WPA. But I’ve been going through it…getting more familiar with it…and I noticed the following:
Jeremy Hermidia 1.94 WPA 0.98 pLI
David Wright 1.68 1.01 pLI
Yet Wright is clearly the better offensive player. He leads Hermidia in each and every statistical category…slash line, 1B, 2B, HR, R, RBI, BB, SO….everything.
So what does WPA/pLI tell me about anything here? Why should we rely on it instead of OPS?
Tim,
WPA/LI is not the WPA of a player divided by the pLI. It is the WPA divided by the LI for each and every plate appearance over the course of the season then added together.
WPA suffers from game state bias. For instance, Wright’s PAs may have a higher LI but perhaps Hermida has performed better in situations that would increase his WPA much more.
We have a stat here called WPA/LI if you go to the players individual page or the Win Probability section of the Leaders page. WPA/LI looks at a player’s win contributions on a neutral scale, so it doesn’t suffer from any bias.
In terms of WPA/LI, Hermida is 0.64, Wright is 2.59. If you want to see which player has contributed the most on offense, regardless of any bias crucial situations have, WPA is great because it literally tracks win contribution. WPA/LI is more indicative of the talent level, though.
OPS is a fine stat, I have nothing truly against it, but the Win Probability metrics measure contributions to wins, which would be better in most cases than a stat or slash line. I like to use everything together.
Since this is a counting stat, wouldn’t it be better to use all players instead of just players with a qualifying number of at bats? I was wondering when Omar Vizquel would catch Bartlett, and it turns out he’s already at -1.75. Tony Pena is even worse at -2.00, but only one of them is still getting regular playing time. Thanks, Brian Sabean.
The reason I wouldn’t do it for all players is that, even though it’s a counting stat, it counts both ways. For instance, something like Home Runs is a counting stat that you can’t lose. Someone with 25 HR is at no risk to be at 24 or 23 the next day.
Something like WPA or WPA/LI can decrease or increase on a game by game basis. Vizquel may be at a certain low number right now but that could increase or decrease in each plate appearance.
You could use all players but I just didn’t here.
WPA/LI is not completely context-neutral. Stop touting it as such.
Also, your explanation for using a cutoff makes no sense.
Luke, WPA/LI is context-neutral wins. It is not blind to the general differences that come with linear weights such as the difference between certain events, but these events do not benefit from the magnitude of the situation at hand.
So, I’ll continue to tout it as context-neutral wins considering that is its given nickname. I apologize if the reasoning for the cutoff didn’t meet your approval. Ultimately, you don’t need to use one, but I chose to here.
DH?