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.

Also, your explanation for using a cutoff makes no sense.

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 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.

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?

Another fun exercise might be the all-average team. Guys with a decent number of AB or IP but very little WPA.