WAR Changes and Updates!

A few weeks ago, you may have seen this tweet:

Today, we’ve rolled out those changes, and some other ones!

Here are the details:

– Replacement level is now set at an even 1,000 WAR per 2,430 game season. Batters are given 57% of all total WAR with pitchers receiving the remaining 43%. This will cause players to drop in WAR by about 0.3 WAR per recent season.

– The leagues for batters are now zeroed out in terms of runs above average. Most of this adjustment is done in Batting, while the final league adjustment is done behind the scenes. We will soon have a “League Adjustment” stat which shows exactly what the league adjustment is for each player. On a seasonal level, AL position players will see about a 0.2 decrease, with NL position players receiving about a 0.4 decrease in WAR.

– Infield fly balls are now part of our pitcher WAR calculation. They are counted the same as a strikeout in the FIP calculation (though generic FIP on the site has not changed). You can see Dave Cameron’s original post to find out more about this change.

– UZR has been given a minor update. There was a small issue with calculating the foul line and this has now been corrected. Also, the 2012 park factors were updated. Players may have had their UZR values changed by a run or two at most.

Dave Cameron will have another post up in about 15 minutes going into more detail on the replacement level changes.



Print This Post



David Appelman is the creator of FanGraphs.


Sort by:   newest | oldest | most voted
Nate
Guest
Nate
3 years 5 months ago

Dagnabbed gubmint meddlin’ in our baseball!

sprot
Guest
sprot
3 years 5 months ago

who cares?

Sleight of Hand Pro
Guest
Sleight of Hand Pro
3 years 5 months ago

most of the people reading.

Jimmy D
Guest
Jimmy D
3 years 5 months ago

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

Yuniesky Betancourt
Guest
Yuniesky Betancourt
3 years 5 months ago

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

Doug Melvin
Guest
Doug Melvin
3 years 5 months ago

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

Jeff Francoeur
Guest
Jeff Francoeur
3 years 5 months ago

Meh.

philosofool
Guest
philosofool
3 years 5 months ago

This is cool.

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

cass
Guest
cass
3 years 5 months ago

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.

Thomas
Guest
Thomas
3 years 5 months ago

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

John
Member
John
3 years 5 months ago

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

Well-Beered Englishman
Guest
Well-Beered Englishman
3 years 5 months ago

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.

suicide squeeze
Member
Member
suicide squeeze
3 years 5 months ago

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

Well-Beered Englishman
Guest
Well-Beered Englishman
3 years 5 months ago

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

AJS
Guest
AJS
3 years 5 months ago

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

Well-Beered Englishman
Guest
Well-Beered Englishman
3 years 5 months ago

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

That’s actually not true.

Detroit Michael
Guest
Detroit Michael
3 years 5 months ago

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

Choo
Member
3 years 5 months ago

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

pitnick
Guest
pitnick
3 years 5 months ago

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?

Darren
Guest
Darren
3 years 5 months ago

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.

byron
Member
byron
3 years 5 months ago

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

Baltar
Guest
Baltar
3 years 5 months ago

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

pitnick
Guest
pitnick
3 years 5 months ago

Gotcha. Thanks.

John
Guest
John
3 years 5 months ago

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

MrKnowNothing
Guest
MrKnowNothing
3 years 5 months ago

something so nerd-tastic about this.

suicide squeeze
Member
Member
suicide squeeze
3 years 5 months ago

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

Hamba
Member
Hamba
3 years 5 months ago

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.

Hamba
Member
Hamba
3 years 5 months ago

his fangraphs profile that is

Tom H.
Guest
Tom H.
3 years 5 months ago

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?

Wil
Guest
Wil
3 years 5 months ago

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?

Bort
Guest
Bort
3 years 5 months ago

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

P. Hapley
Guest
P. Hapley
3 years 5 months ago

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.

byron
Member
byron
3 years 5 months ago

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

P. Hapley
Guest
P. Hapley
3 years 5 months ago

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?

byron
Member
byron
3 years 5 months ago

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.

Detroit Michael
Guest
Detroit Michael
3 years 5 months ago

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.

Andre the Angels Fan
Guest
Andre the Angels Fan
3 years 5 months ago

This, or I’m misunderstanding what happened.

derp
Guest
derp
3 years 5 months ago

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.

TKDC
Guest
TKDC
3 years 5 months ago

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.

Daniel
Guest
Daniel
3 years 5 months ago

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

Mitch Kramer
Guest
Mitch Kramer
3 years 5 months ago

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

Andre the Angels Fan
Guest
Andre the Angels Fan
3 years 5 months ago

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.

Synovia
Guest
Synovia
3 years 5 months ago

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

Whats the reasoning for this particular split?

wpDiscuz