WAR MOST OVERRATED FORMULA IN BASEBALL
-
@eatyum said in WAR MOST OVERRATED FORMULA IN BASEBALL:
@ilvmyjeep said in WAR MOST OVERRATED FORMULA IN BASEBALL:
This thread has obviously become completely derailed. There is merit to some things that have been mentioned but like most arguments, the longer it goes on, the more it gets further away from the original point.
WAR is a great tool to evaluate a player’s season/career, but it’s just a piece of the puzzle. Yes, some people live and die by WAR. If Player X posted more WAR than Player Y, then that’s enough for some people to claim Player X was superior. That’s not to say Player X wasn’t superior, just that WAR by itself is not enough to come to that determination.
Derek Jeter, Barry Larkin, Alan Trammell. Three HOF shortstops with very similar career WAR totals.
Derek Jeter, 71.3 bWAR 73.0 fWAR.
Barry Larkin, 70.5 bWAR 67.0 fWAR.
Alan Trammell, 70.7 bWAR 63.7 fWAR.There’s no way anyone could use WAR alone to claim one of those shortstops was better than the other two. Other criteria needs to be evaluated too.
How many people are only using WAR and nothing else? I’d suspect not many. But WAR is the go to stat right now and it’s the first comparison used, so for sure some out there would say Jeter was the best of those 3 because his career WAR is highest.
Maybe he was, maybe he wasn’t, but WAR alone is definitely not enough to determine that. As I understood it, that was the original point of the thread.
No, his biggest original point was that you can't compare WAR between different time periods. So you can't use it to help compare players from different eras. Which is false.
eatyum That is correct
-
@eatyum said in WAR MOST OVERRATED FORMULA IN BASEBALL:
@ilvmyjeep said in WAR MOST OVERRATED FORMULA IN BASEBALL:
This thread has obviously become completely derailed. There is merit to some things that have been mentioned but like most arguments, the longer it goes on, the more it gets further away from the original point.
WAR is a great tool to evaluate a player’s season/career, but it’s just a piece of the puzzle. Yes, some people live and die by WAR. If Player X posted more WAR than Player Y, then that’s enough for some people to claim Player X was superior. That’s not to say Player X wasn’t superior, just that WAR by itself is not enough to come to that determination.
Derek Jeter, Barry Larkin, Alan Trammell. Three HOF shortstops with very similar career WAR totals.
Derek Jeter, 71.3 bWAR 73.0 fWAR.
Barry Larkin, 70.5 bWAR 67.0 fWAR.
Alan Trammell, 70.7 bWAR 63.7 fWAR.There’s no way anyone could use WAR alone to claim one of those shortstops was better than the other two. Other criteria needs to be evaluated too.
How many people are only using WAR and nothing else? I’d suspect not many. But WAR is the go to stat right now and it’s the first comparison used, so for sure some out there would say Jeter was the best of those 3 because his career WAR is highest.
Maybe he was, maybe he wasn’t, but WAR alone is definitely not enough to determine that. As I understood it, that was the original point of the thread.
No, his biggest original point was that you can't compare WAR between different time periods. So you can't use it to help compare players from different eras. Which is false.
I guess you did not read my original statement here it is:
Why do people only compare player from different ERA using WAR and not considering all stats or how good a player really was in his time based on how the game was in the era of that player. I will never understand it.
-
Any stat that claims Yadi isn’t good enough for the hall ain’t good enough for me
-
A admin locked this topic on
