Why WAR is stupid for Closers, especially for Colome

[vilehoopster]

Okay, I did my research on this. Explain to me where my math or logic is wrong.

First, WAR is wins above replacement. Now, the way I understand that stat, "replacement" is what an average player would acheive in that spot or position or whatever, and WAR measures how many more wins this player gets for his team above an average player at that position. In a way, WAR measures how much a player is above average? Correct because "replacement" means an average player at that position, wins for your team above how many wins for your team an average player would help your team win? (That got rather long, sorry; but follow my logic.)

Okay, Colomen has a WAR right now of 1.7 (I found it on two different sources).  Colome has a save percentage of 95.5%. He has saved 21 or 22 save opportunties. 

Now this is where I have a problem. I also looked this up: the MLB average for saves is 64.24%. Therefore, by my logic, "replacement" for Colome would be someone who saves 64.24% of his save opportunities. 

So, putting that 64.24% (as replacement) in 22 save opportunities would be only 14.13 saves. An average closer, "replacement", would only have saved 14 of the 21 games Colome has saved. 

So, when looking at that, shouldn't Colome have a WAR of (his 21 saves minus the league average of 14.13 saves in 22 SOs)  therefore 21 - 14.13 = 6.86.

Right now, Colome's wins above an average relief pitcher/ closer is 6.86. 

Why isn't his WAR 6.86???? This makes no sense to me. 

That makes a lot more sense than his present WAR or 1.7. 

I also know that WAR figures in the team stats, like how the field or a pitcher's team defense would affect his value to the team. Well, if you look at that, remember that Colome's one blown save is because of a bonehead defensive play when Rondon threw home instead of the obvious throw to 1st to get the out. 

So, look at my logic and my math. Why doesn't Colome have a WAR of 6.86?

 

 

[Dam8610]

3 minutes ago, vilehoopster said:

Okay, I did my research on this. Explain to me where my math or logic is wrong.

First, WAR is wins above replacement. Now, the way I understand that stat, "replacement" is what an average player would acheive in that spot or position or whatever, and WAR measures how many more wins this player gets for his team above an average player at that position. In a way, WAR measures how much a player is above average? Correct because "replacement" means an average player at that position, wins for your team above how many wins for your team an average player would help your team win? (That got rather long, sorry; but follow my logic.)

Okay, Colomen has a WAR right now of 1.7 (I found it on two different sources).  Colome has a save percentage of 95.5%. He has saved 21 or 22 save opportunties. 

Now this is where I have a problem. I also looked this up: the MLB average for saves is 64.24%. Therefore, by my logic, "replacement" for Colome would be someone who saves 64.24% of his save opportunities. 

So, putting that 64.24% (as replacement) in 22 save opportunities would be only 14.13 saves. An average closer, "replacement", would only have saved 14 of the 21 games Colome has saved. 

So, when looking at that, shouldn't Colome have a WAR of (his 21 saves minus the league average of 14.13 saves in 22 SOs)  therefore 21 - 14.13 = 6.86.

Right now, Colome's wins above an average relief pitcher/ closer is 6.86. 

Why isn't his WAR 6.86???? This makes no sense to me. 

That makes a lot more sense than his present WAR or 1.7. 

I also know that WAR figures in the team stats, like how the field or a pitcher's team defense would affect his value to the team. Well, if you look at that, remember that Colome's one blown save is because of a bonehead defensive play when Rondon threw home instead of the obvious throw to 1st to get the out. 

So, look at my logic and my math. Why doesn't Colome have a WAR of 6.86?

 

 

That's not how WAR is calculated. Further, taking the league average save percentage is stupid, because closers are expected to get saves, whereas middle relievers and setup men are not, but they get a good chunk of the blown saves when they give up a lead.

[vilehoopster]

1 minute ago, Dam8610 said:

That's not how WAR is calculated. Further, taking the league average save percentage is stupid, because closers are expected to get saves, whereas middle relievers and setup men are not, but they get a good chunk of the blown saves when they give up a lead.

Obviously that's not how it's calulated or else Colome wouldn't have a WAR of 1.7. 

"whereas middle relievers and setup men are not, but they get a good chunk of the blown saves when they give up a lead." -- Right, these middle relievers are average or else they would be closers. But still their stats contribute to the MLB average, which would be what a "replacement" pitcher would be. 

Colome has won 6.86 more wins than an average replacement pitcher. 

[Chicago White Sox]

18 minutes ago, vilehoopster said:

Okay, I did my research on this. Explain to me where my math or logic is wrong.

First, WAR is wins above replacement. Now, the way I understand that stat, "replacement" is what an average player would acheive in that spot or position or whatever, and WAR measures how many more wins this player gets for his team above an average player at that position. In a way, WAR measures how much a player is above average? Correct because "replacement" means an average player at that position, wins for your team above how many wins for your team an average player would help your team win? (That got rather long, sorry; but follow my logic.)

Okay, Colomen has a WAR right now of 1.7 (I found it on two different sources).  Colome has a save percentage of 95.5%. He has saved 21 or 22 save opportunties. 

Now this is where I have a problem. I also looked this up: the MLB average for saves is 64.24%. Therefore, by my logic, "replacement" for Colome would be someone who saves 64.24% of his save opportunities. 

So, putting that 64.24% (as replacement) in 22 save opportunities would be only 14.13 saves. An average closer, "replacement", would only have saved 14 of the 21 games Colome has saved. 

So, when looking at that, shouldn't Colome have a WAR of (his 21 saves minus the league average of 14.13 saves in 22 SOs)  therefore 21 - 14.13 = 6.86.

Right now, Colome's wins above an average relief pitcher/ closer is 6.86. 

Why isn't his WAR 6.86???? This makes no sense to me. 

That makes a lot more sense than his present WAR or 1.7. 

I also know that WAR figures in the team stats, like how the field or a pitcher's team defense would affect his value to the team. Well, if you look at that, remember that Colome's one blown save is because of a bonehead defensive play when Rondon threw home instead of the obvious throw to 1st to get the out. 

So, look at my logic and my math. Why doesn't Colome have a WAR of 6.86?

 

 

Greg...I mean Vile, please do more research because you clearly don’t understand how WAR works based on your initial studies.

[Chicago White Sox]

Also, I love you’re allocating entire wins to the closer because of saves.

[Quin]

That would give him the single greatest relief season of all time by such a wide margin that we'd be asking for a Chapman package +++

 

[vilehoopster]

7 minutes ago, vilehoopster said:

Obviously that's not how it's calulated or else Colome wouldn't have a WAR of 1.7. 

"whereas middle relievers and setup men are not, but they get a good chunk of the blown saves when they give up a lead." -- Right, these middle relievers are average or else they would be closers. But still their stats contribute to the MLB average, which would be what a "replacement" pitcher would be. 

Colome has won 6.86 more wins than an average replacement pitcher. 

Also, when you use WAR to define replacement level when it comes to batting, is the WAR only figured out comparing only clean-up hitters or only lead-off hitters. No, WAR is figured out versus all hitters when trying to figure out value of wins added to a team. So replacement or average to figure out WAR for a closer should be against all pitchers who get a save opportunity. 

[Chicago White Sox]

3 minutes ago, vilehoopster said:

Also, when you use WAR to define replacement level when it comes to batting, is the WAR only figured out comparing only clean-up hitters or only lead-off hitters. No, WAR is figured out versus all hitters when trying to figure out value of wins added to a team. So replacement or average to figure out WAR for a closer should be against all pitchers who get a save opportunity. 

OMG, just please stop until you’ve done more research.

[Jerksticks]

Trout 

Bellinger

Scherzer

Colome

Yelich

[vilehoopster]

Because I questioned a stat that few understand (including me) but everyone quotes, people comment with quick, unsupported witty comments, but so what. 

Where is my logic wrong. Is my definition of replacement wrong?  Are my stats wrong?  Was my math wrong. Tell where I'm wrong in my logic instead of just dismissing my statement with an insult. 

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

WAR is cumulative. Relievers will always be slightly under valued because of the inning discrepancy and because leverage isnt worked in but teams value it.

1.7 WAR is high enough for a reliever this time of year. It's hard to impact a game similarly to a starter or position player when you only impact 80 innings a year even if they're high leverage.

Edited July 28, 2019 by Look at Ray Ray Run

[vilehoopster]

3 minutes ago, Jerksticks said:

Trout 

Bellinger

Scherzer

Colome

Yelich

 

4 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

OMG, just please stop until you’ve done more research.

Still short; still witty, still doesn't show where I'm wrong. If replacement in WAR means average, than my idea of WAR for closers makes more sense than what is ever being used now. Quit being short, funny, and insulting and explain where my logic is wrong. 

I can't debate an insult. 

[GermanSoxFan]

Replacement in WAR doesn't mean average. It's meant to represent a random guy called up from AAA. I couldn't tell how their methodology works, but it appears to be sound or it would have been challenged by now. IIRC the average WAR for position players is 2.

Edited July 28, 2019 by GermanSoxFan

[vilehoopster]

2 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

WAR is cumulative. Relievers will always be slightly under valued because of the inning discrepancy and because leverage isnt worked in but teams value it.

Okay, now this is a statement I can work with and really reply to. I assume inning descrepancy means that a closer pitches less innings than a starter, so does that mean he has less value??  To a degree that makes sense. But on the other hand, a closer pitches more critical innings when a manager is pulling out all the stops to score, shouldn't that add to a closer's WAR?

I have no idea what "leaverage isn't worked in" means. Please explain that. Then maybe I can debate that. 

But I know what "team value" means. And Colome has saved 21 of the Sox's 45 wins this year. That sounds like a lot of "team value" to me. Should his WAR be even higher because he has had fewer save opportunities. I would say yes. 

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

Just now, GermanSoxFan said:

Replacement in WAR doesn't mean average. It's meant to represent a random guy called up from AAA. I couldn't tell how their methodology works, but it seems sound or it would have been challenged by now. IIRC the average WAR for position players is 2.

The replacement level barometer is absurdly low. It's better than Hollinger absurdly low standard for PER, but 0 is not meant to be an actual big league talent and it's likely worse than a lot of AAA talent. 

[vilehoopster]

3 minutes ago, GermanSoxFan said:

Replacement in WAR doesn't mean average. It's meant to represent a random guy called up from AAA. I couldn't tell how their methodology works, but it appears to be sound or it would have been challenged by now. IIRC the average WAR for position players is 2.

I looked WAR up also and also saw this quote. But, as I see it, wouldn't a random guy from AAA have even a lower save percentage than 64%. Does that further help my argument that Colome should have an even higher WAR?

[Thad Bosley]

15 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

OMG, just please stop until you’ve done more research.

Either engage the guy in the discussion and help him understand the stat, as he’s politely asked the folks here to do, or STFU and just stay out of it.  No need to be condescending and insulting.  

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

An IP is an IP to WAR. doesnt matter when it happened or the situation. A starter will always have 2 or 3 times the chances to earn value than a reliever. It's really that simple.

[TaylorStSox]

These discussions always bring out the worst in people. This thread is going places. 

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

5 minutes ago, vilehoopster said:

I looked WAR up also and also saw this quote. But, as I see it, wouldn't a random guy from AAA have even a lower save percentage than 64%. Does that further help my argument that Colome should have an even higher WAR?

Save percentage has nothing to do with WAR. A save adds zero WAR to a relievers total.

[Chicago White Sox]

2 minutes ago, Fan O'Faust said:

Either engage the guy in the discussion and help him understand the stat, as he’s politely asked the folks here to do, or STFU and just stay out of it.  No need to be condescending and insulting.  

This dude claims to have researched the stat prior to challenging it and yet shows he has done no such thing based on his actual argument.  Maybe if you knew the poster’s history when it comes to advanced metrics (such as using the beloved “statnik” rip those who use them) you wouldn’t be coming to his rescue.  So hey, maybe take your own advice and stay out of it.

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

I'm sorry, closers get a 40% bump in their value for leverage. 40% doesn't make up for the 200%+ fewer innings pitched by closers than starters. 

Edited July 28, 2019 by Look at Ray Ray Run

[LeeElia]

Save % is a statistic that doesn’t provide any context. More specifically, a pitchers save % depends on multiple factors outside the control of the player. A better measurement of Colome’s value is the huge gap between his ERA and xFIP and his comically low k/9 rate. Stop valuing closers by save %. 

Even if he was the best closer ever you wouldn’t assign him the entire value of the win. Hitters production, defense, and the pitcher(s) that got the other 24 outs had something to do with the win as well.

 

[daggins]

WAR is an attempt to assign value to a player's performance - monetary value, that is. It's weighted to favor those that pitch more innings, so it will inherently favor SP over RP. That difference in volume, though, is why the game's best closers get a fraction of the money that the best SP will get, because they do a fraction of the work and create a fraction of the value - even if the innings pitched are high leverage. In your scenario, an average closer like Colome would somehow create a similar value to someone like Scherzer or Betts, despite doing far less to create value.

You can't say that relievers can only be measured against other relievers because that's like saying that bench players can only be measured against other bench players. You have to measure against a large, heterogeneous sample of players with varying playing times to create an accurate analysis.

Finally, "wins" here means nothing - its a leftover from earlier value models like "WARP" and based on what earlier projection models assigned to be the "value of a win". This is an imprecise way to measure actual wins, but a reasonable way to measure value.

In short, Colome won't be getting Mookie Betts money any time soon.

Edited July 28, 2019 by daggins

[kitekrazy]

54 minutes ago, vilehoopster said:

Because I questioned a stat that few understand (including me) but everyone quotes, people comment with quick, unsupported witty comments, but so what. 

Where is my logic wrong. Is my definition of replacement wrong?  Are my stats wrong?  Was my math wrong. Tell where I'm wrong in my logic instead of just dismissing my statement with an insult. 

This is the new Sox Talk.