sheethead

An officer approached Lincecum's 2006 Mercedes and smelled marijuana as the pitcher rolled down his window. It still doesn't say that Lincecum was smoking while driving. In fact the article states... Lincecum did not appear to be impaired behind the wheel and is not being charged with a felony crime, Schatzel said. FYI, if you have a little (3.3g) sack of sweet dank in your glove box (I assume Tim would only roll with the best), it will reek up the vehicle. My point is that no where in the story does it state the Lincecum was driving and smoking, and it was the poster that jumped to this conclusion.

The trade works for me for many reasons, the most being that JJ Hardy is not rock solid mentally. The crying and the self loathing he displayed regarding his demotion, subsequent call-up, and proposed switching of positions was evidence that JJ doesn't have an ideal baseball make-up mentally (sort of like Manny Parra). I will miss him, for about a day. He WAS good, great even at times. But Hardy had a forgettable 2009, and there is no way anyone can be certain he will turn it around. All this can be discounted by some due to the fact that I am not in love with home runs. I LIKE home runs, but I will not worship a player because they can hit X amount of them in a season (especially when a bulk of the home run total occurs in a span of two or three weeks throughout a 6 month season). I look forward to watching Gomez grow in CF for the Brewers.

The only real problem I see with it is that he was driving while smoking. Where did it say he was smoking while he was driving?

Would everyone be so venomous if the Yankees lost out in the ALDS and the Twins kept up their hot streak to get to the World Series? I think the point is that the odds of the Twins getting hot enough to beat the Yankees were not good. I believe the Yankees were -800 to win the first game. That is about as lopsided as it comes, especially for the playoffs. The Yankees did not simply get hot to win the Championship this year. They has mega talented superstars (as they do every year). Its just that this year they had it where it counts most in the playoffs... pitching. Its crazy that $200+ million only gets you two stud starting pitchers these days. But hey, what can you do. Hope to get lucky I guess (and lucky involves Yankees getting hurt, unfortunately).

Baseball is metaphorically most like Nascar; they both just run around in circles to the same 'ol tune--and quite frankly it's getting boring. Nice. But keep in mind, even Nascar has rules in place to even the playing field. Its not like Jimmy Johnson gets to put a faster engine with a higher engineered body on his car to gain him an advantage of winning every race. Bleh, the also ran teams that the Yankees and Red Sox look down on should find a way to secede from MLB and form their own league. Let the Yankees play the Red Sox 60 times a year. See how proud of themselves they would be winning a championship in a league of 8 teams.

I know, it was mostly tongue in cheek. But it was fairly obvious Suppan got lucky and should have been a #5 type guy in any rotation after 2006, and Melvin thought otherwise.

They also bought their 2008 3rd place finish in the AL East. It was the 2008 3rd place finish that prompted a $400+ million spending spree on THREE players! The Brewers finished third this year, how much do you think they are going to spend on free agents this year? The fact is, there is a farm system built within the big league. Its called the "other half" of the teams. Cashman says, "You can call us anything you want. You're also going to have to call us world champions." This from a GM who, despite spending hundreds of millions of dollars on players like Giambi, Pavano, Sheffield, Randy Johnson, Mike Mussina, etc. kept his job despite not winning a championship for 9 years. That's amazing to me. What isn't amazing is the fact that the Yankees won the WS this year, and they are set up nicely for the next 4-5. Strap in, its the late 90's all over again in baseball. I would just hope Melvin stays the heck away from Hideki Matsui. Don't even think about it Doug!

Yep, four-year, $15.1M. Don't know what I was looking at.

I think most people's problems with fangraphs is due to baseball's brutally archaic salary structure. You don't get to 'get paid' for the first 6 years you're in the league, and then most guy that reach that point are overpaid from then on out. Stephen Strasburg received $50m for 6 years without having to throw a pitch in an MLB game. I would equate that to getting paid. I'm not saying this is the norm, but for many first round picks, they are overpaid from the beginning.

It's very important to remember that this doesn't take into consideration pre-arby players, arby players, and players who never hit free agency, but sign long term deals. So I take it a signing of a Sabathia or Teixeira type deal would significantly inflate the dollar values Fangraphs attaches to their player's WAR. Is that correct? sheet, did you miss this post from rluzinski? I got it, but I missed the seven part series on what goes into their calculation. It would need for it to be part of my job in order to care that much. Guess it was made available, my badhttp://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/ohwell.gif I'll quit now while I'm behind, and promise to stay away from this topic going forward.

All bated balls used in UZR are designated as soft, medium or hard. Hard hit balls are accounted for. Is defensive positioning factored in (where the outfielder was positioned prior to the ball being put into play)? I could see numerous close games causing a fielder's zone rating to suffer depending on whether they are playing shallow/deep or in/dp dept.

Then why post this? I also feel badly for people who believe they understand exactly what goes into computing WAR, when in actuality there is no way most people could possibly know all the variables Fangraphs uses to come up with their numbers. Key variables are proprietary information, and not available to the public. Because I still haven't seen anyone come up with Fangraph's version. I missed that word, and for the confusion causing sloppiness I apologize. But when I do feel somewhat vindicated when I see someone calculate Fangraph's WAR, then state: Now I checked fangraphs, and their value says 43.0 runs above replacement, and 4.3 wins. So I was pretty close. Looks like the hitting is 2 runs different, don't know what would cause that. Ahhh, we don't know what would cause that? THAT is what I am and have been saying. This illustrates my point about how, in actuality there is no way most people could possibly know all the variables Fangraphs uses to come up with their numbers. If you can't get to their figure, then its a secret, right? But then the argument becomes, well its close enough and you are missing the point. Its a circular argument that those who bought in don't see what I am saying, even though I understand completely what they are saying. Someone even called it MIDDLE SCHOOL MATH!! I have no recollection of middle school math involving an infinite number of correct answers. Granted the multiplication, division and addition are middle school, but the variables are not given which is why everyone comes up with different answers. But that's okay, because its all close enough? Most of the formula is available, I get it. I argue Fangraphs has tweaked it and now we don't know why there are differences with their numbers versus what you or I can calculate on our own. When I "mocked" it was not directed at the methodology or the parameter, it was the fact that we don't know why there is a difference with Fangraph's calc. I am not trying to call you out, and I think you make a lot of valid points here, but I am also not sure what you expect me and other posters to do. Lock the thread? Heh. I apologize for acting too defensively. I don't need any reason why people like the metric, I see why people like it.

But again you have to use your brain here, nobody is going to argue the value of Kapler based on such a small sample What does sample size have anything to do with valuing .239/.329/.439 in 238 plate appearances at $5.2 million? The only thing I see, is that if Kapler put up the same numbers in 620 plate appearances he would be worth only that much more per Fangraphs.

According to you, that invalidates all the methodologies used. That's a weak argument. If someone is arguing that I am trying to invalidate the methodology, they are missing the point. My argument from the beginning of this thread was the dollar value Fangraphs is placing on WAR. I am arguing the overall value of this methodology, and my feeling of its uselessness. I go back to the point of this thread... $5.2 million for Gabe Kapler's .239/.329/.439 in 238 plate appearances??? Not even close, and I don't care if Kapler is 23 or 54. Age is irrelevant when given this amount of production. Lots of data with endless explanations and justification equals a headache and all this bickering. At the end of the season, the Yankees spend $200++ million and are in the World Series. Now that's Moneyball, and can be booked for the next half decade. The Phillies are no slouches with their payroll either. Will some bottom scraping payroll team (Tampa) get a crumb every now and then? Sure, but doesn't today's baseball economy just make all the SABR work seem fruitless? Maybe Cashman will write a book... "Winning: Snatching Victory from 29 Other Teams." It will have nothing to do with geeked-up stats, and everything to do with explaining when he sees a top free agent, he signs him. A single chapter may suffice, and it should include an explanation as to why even the Yankees wouldn't pay Gabe Kapler $5.2 million for any of his seasons. I still can't wait for the next reference justifying why Melvin paid who what because their WARP/WAR/VORP/WSP/WSAA is much higher than so and so's. Makes for intriguing discussion anyway. Also, one thing zone rating doesn't take into account is how many excessively windy games a certain player plays in, how many games were played on a slick surface due to rain, how injured a specific player is at the time they are playing, or if its a contract year. I'm sure I could come up with more, but I'm done for now. Viva sabermetrics, for it gives many people something to do. We all need things to do.

It's a 2-run difference, and I honestly don't know what would cause it. That's what I'm saying.

If you are above average and have had 600 PAs, you get 20 bonus points. Is that right?

CC is on his way to an 0-2 WS showing. He didn't pitch poorly, but the Yankees had to use five relievers after his departure (not saying its his fault). While I wish I could see the Yankees lose Game 6 at home, I am calling for Phillies in 5 (Yankees win tonight, as they are Pedro's daddy).

I'm showing you that Fangraphs doesn't have a magical WAR machine that spits out the values. I don't have a problem understanding this. Please stop insinuating that I do. I can do it entirely by hand. It doesn't match. I will give you credit for the work, but you are losing points for having a different answer. Middle school math is a science, and there is always a single answer. This is why I claim they are using figures that are not publicized. Unlike how people keep incorrectly stating I think the methodology is proprietary, its what goes into the actual calculation that remains a mystery. Otherwise, we would all get the same numbers, right? I guess close isn't good enough for me to say you are dead on.

Yeah all thinking like that got us was a 1 year turnaround of the Mariners! I am not sure I would go as far as saying the Mariners are turned around.

I don't like when I see people say something along the lines of "I don't need WAR to tell me player A is better than player B, I just know." That is your opinion and is perfect valid, but why knock an attempt to quantify a range of opinions when better options are not available? Who says they "just know?" There are a plethora of actual statistics to look at when judging players. I simply am not in tune with having to multiply by 2.5, put to the power of the wind/continental divide, doubled and then taken as the reciprocal to end up at the conclusion that Nyjer Morgan is more valuable than Ryan Braun. Its comical to me. I get the attempt, I am just saying there is no way I could buy in at any kind of level to where I would be citing the results in an attempt to validate my or anyone else's opinion. but unless you are able to watch every MLB game to effectively judge defensive value while simultaneously coming up with your own way to compare different positions I don't think you have to watch every game to determine the value of a players defense, unless you happen to watch Luis Castillo in that one game (then you might have to watch a few extra Mets games). I am also not sure why we have to compare 1B to Catchers to CFers. Every team needs at least one of each, even if one is -1.5 time less valuable than the other. Now I checked fangraphs, and their value says 43.0 runs above replacement, and 4.3 wins. So I was pretty close. Looks like the hitting is 2 runs different, don't know what would cause that. But the point is made. I would think the point is that the numbers should be the same. The positional adjustments were made by Tango and were formed by comparing players who moved positions over the years. This is where judgment kicks in, and quantification checks out (and may lead to funky end results).

I guess I need to read The Book (extensively) to find out why the baselines are what they are, and how the "boosts" allocated to certain positions, AL vs. NL, etc. are determined. I understand SS is harder to play than 1B (methodology). What I don't understand is why its +1.5 harder. It just seems arbitrary to me right now. Now, I am sure I can read the explanation as to why that should be that number, and it probably makes sense. But I will need to put faith in that person's perceptions over another person's perception. Maybe I will dig in this winter to find the root of what bothers me with Tango's numbers.

Looper had some half way decent statistics this year Other than wins (slightly useless "stat"), what was decent about Looper? I don't need Fangraphs to tell me that he was a bottom scraping SP in the league in 2009, most of his stats will tell you that. That's why I wish Fangraphs would just get rid of that column since people don't seem to understand it... I agree, and I think that might be the point of this thread. Discounting one statistic from your repertoire because of a few examples or because the "player value" statistic is ridiculous means you have one less source of information to go from and I can't get behind that stance. WAR is not an official statistic in my opinion, its a parameter. If it was a statistic, it could be observable and be a function of a sample where the function itself is independent of the sample's distribution. Since only the proprietors know exactly how WAR is calculated, how can anyone consider it a statistic. The methodology is available, but no one has yet to show me HOW ITS ACTUALLY CALCULATED. A statistic is an observable random variable, which differentiates it from a parameter, a generally unobservable quantity describing a property of a statistical population. I don't look at just one or two metrics to compare players, but I generally like to use statistics that have clearly defined calculations. All the other metrics appear to be fantasy type stats that are beloved only by hardcore baseball geeks. Thus, I understand why actual calculations of such metrics are held proprietary, because they have flaws (as admitted by proponents here). Stats don't have flaws. Limitations? Of course. My point? I have never needed a parameter like WAR to tell me who a better baseball player is, and I doubt many GM's need it either.

If somebody tells you that they outright HATE a certain ethnicity, do you let them go into all of the reasons why they hate that ethnicity, or can you simply make note of the end result (the hate of the ethnicity or for instance Kapler being worth over 5 million last year) and realize it's not worth your time? But there is value in understanding how Kapler was valued at $5 million last year, from what I am reading. The value in understanding is the knowing how not to value players in the real world, but how they are valued in a vacuum of all else being equals (every team has Yankee money to play with). If you don't want to use Fangraphs or WAR at all, that is your decision and I won't try to change your mind. Two years from now there will be a new hot stud stat to cite and use for or against certain players. Maybe I will get on board with that one. WAR doesn't impress me much, but I honestly see how it is liked. Its a fantasy stat, and fantasy stats are fun. I posed the question earlier (using a point from another poster), who thinks Nyjer Morgan is more valuable than Ryan Braun? Any takers? I can see why that question is being ignored, if being done so on purpose.

I think that depends on the team offering. Milwaukee might have to actually beat another teams offer in order to keep him here. Milwaukee tax...

Why should we only look to the methodology, when the end result is what is constantly being cited and put in front of us? Not to mention the methodology is proprietary and not available for public scrutiny. Only the ideas are available, but the calculations are not. If the end result doesn't make sense, then why should anyone care about scrutinizing the methodology. Its the other way around... show me a sensible end result, and then I will care more about how you got there (just to make sure the whole process isn't fudged to make it look good). Otherwise just call it a fantasy stat and don't try to lead people to believe that it is in any way relevant to real life happenings (hint: use the Euro symbol). Questioning the dollar values Fangraphs places on players has nothing to do with being closed minded, and I feel sorry for people who blindly accept the figure placed in front of them by a website, without understanding why it looks so ridiculous to most people. I also feel badly for people who believe they understand exactly what goes into computing WAR, when in actuality there is no way most people could possibly know all the variables Fangraphs uses to come up with their numbers. Key variables are proprietary information, and not available to the public.