If you're DM, what do you do to make this team better?

[theavrock]

Polish Falcons]

Its just so frustrating looking at the WAR for position players on this team:

 

Lucroy 1.4 despite missing time

Fielder 3.7

Weeks 3.4

Betancourt -0.7

McGehee -0.8

Hart 1.5 despite missing time and taking a while to find his swing

Morgan 1.8

Gomez 1.5

Braun 4.1

 

 

This team is getting great production out of 6 positions and putrid production out of two.

Where do you find this information? Would it be possible to post other teams? Is it normal to expect positive WAR from 8/8 players on a team and say anything with negative WAR is "putrid"? At least for me this is totally out of context, and I'm not really familiar with WAR, but I would expect that most teams have a mix of players above and below replacement. Without seeing the league wide data I would guess the Brewers WAR mix is somewhere between normal and good compared to the rest of the league. Otherwise every team in the league would be on pace for 100 wins.

I just looked at the NL Central.

The Cardinals and Reds have no players with 300+ PA's with negative WAR's

The Cubs, Pirates and Astros only have 1

The Brewers have two.

So the two teams we are supposed to be competing for the division with (I know the Pirates are there now, but I don't see the pitching continuing the way it is currently) do not have a single regular contirbutor posting a negative WAR. The Brewers have two.

The info can be found at

 

The Cubs, Pirates and Astros only have 1

 

The Brewers have two.

 

[url=http://www.fangraphs.com'>www.fangraphs.com

]www.fangraphs.com[/url]

EDIT: To further expand on that I looked at every division and checked each team in the top half of the division and only the White Sox, Giants and Phillies have 1 player with a negative WAR and 300+ PA's

So the Brewers are the only team with 2 players with negative WAR's and 300+ PA's in the top half of their division. I would imagine if I looked at the bottom half there would be other teams that have this distinction but the Brewers are the only ones who are competing for their division with guys like Betancourt and McGehee getting regular AB's

[ninja33]

You're probably not having a great year when in your best month you hit .284/.281/.409/.690.

A .690 OPS would be rank 11th among shortstops. I understand that almost all of that is offset by awful defense...but it's worth pointing out that that isn't a terrible line for a SS. I agree with just about everyone that I would be happier if Yuni wasn't playing SS...but I don't think that problem has a solution unless Melvin makes a trade

[pitchleague]

I would argue that Betancourt's problems are not his hitting (.284 avg is fine and .409 slugging, while low, at least means he's not an all-singles hitter) but rather his eye at the plate. When you consistently swing at the first pitch or are swinging for the fences like he does, he's not going to draw walks and thus the on-base pct. is going to crummy darn low. Consequently, the OPS sucks as a result.

 

A .690 OPS does indeed suck. If the guy would ever walk he could be seen as a (slight) positive in the lineup. I wonder where he acquired the mentality to swing early and often. Was it from growing up and playing in Cuba? Is the Cuban baseball culture like this, especially with younger players? I'm actually honestly asking here.

 

The swinging for the fences and routinely popping up to the infield is what gets me going. It's like he sees the big boppers doing it and connecting for long HRs and he strides to the plate trying to "one of the guys" or something.

 

edit: Crud, I forgot to put something on topic. . . . uh . . . I really think Melvin, Ash, and Roenicke will be getting together over the break and talking things over and making some changes. Be it lineup decisions, bullpen issues, or callups from the minors, I'd venture a guess that something is on the horizon that we'll all be discussing next week.

[trwi7]

I wonder where he acquired the mentality to swing early and often. Was it from growing up and playing in Cuba? Is the Cuban baseball culture like this, especially with younger players? I'm actually honestly asking here.

The commonly used phrased for Caribbean hitters is "You don't walk off the island." Basically saying in order for them to get noticed, they swing at pretty much anything and everything.

 

 

[Funketown]

You're probably not having a great year when in your best month you hit .284/.281/.409/.690.

A .690 OPS would be rank 11th among shortstops. I understand that almost all of that is offset by awful defense...but it's worth pointing out that that isn't a terrible line for a SS. I agree with just about everyone that I would be happier if Yuni wasn't playing SS...but I don't think that problem has a solution unless Melvin makes a trade

Not all OPS's are created equal. OBP-heavy OPS figures are far better than SLG heavy OPS figures, hence the use of linear weights or the quick rule (1.7)*OBP+(SLG). Simply put, a .350/.340/.690 would be fine, but .280/.410/.690 is pretty brutal.

[monty57]

You're probably not having a great year when in your best month you hit .284/.281/.409/.690.

A .690 OPS would be rank 11th among shortstops. I understand that almost all of that is offset by awful defense...but it's worth pointing out that that isn't a terrible line for a SS. I agree with just about everyone that I would be happier if Yuni wasn't playing SS...but I don't think that problem has a solution unless Melvin makes a trade

But you are comparing his best month to what everyone else has done all year. For the year, Yuni's at .604, only leading Ian Desmond of Washington. I knew he wasn't a good hitter, but I expected a lot more from Yuni at the plate this season than he has shown. He has been bad.

 

 

[MJLiverock]

I just looked at the NL Central.

The Cardinals and Reds have no players with 300+ PA's with negative WAR's

The Cubs, Pirates and Astros only have 1

The Brewers have two.

So the two teams we are supposed to be competing for the division with (I know the Pirates are there now, but I don't see the pitching continuing the way it is currently) do not have a single regular contirbutor posting a negative WAR. The Brewers have two.

The info can be found at www.fangraphs.com

EDIT: To further expand on that I looked at every division and checked each team in the top half of the division and only the White Sox, Giants and Phillies have 1 player with a negative WAR and 300+ PA's

So the Brewers are the only team with 2 players with negative WAR's and 300+ PA's in the top half of their division. I would imagine if I looked at the bottom half there would be other teams that have this distinction but the Brewers are the only ones who are competing for their division with guys like Betancourt and McGehee getting regular AB's

Most teams only have a few players with over 300 PA's but looking at the Reds, they have their 4 best players over 300 PA's and no one else. But they do have Janish with 246 PA's and a -0.2 WAR, and Renteria with 159 PA's and a 0.1 WAR.

 

The Cardinals also only have 4 players with ovner 300 PA's but they do have Theriot at 334 with a 0.4 WAR and Descalso at 238 with a 0.4 WAR and Schumaker at 186 with a 0.4 WAR.

 

I seriously doubt that WAR is so precise that it can be used to determine there is any difference in a -0.2 and a 0.4 player over 250 or so PA's and a few defensive plays.

 

That is probably my biggest beef with how WAR is often used - - assigning a precision to the stat claiming that decimal place differences in players has a meaningful or exact quantifiable difference. What is the margin of error on the stat 1, 0.5? The defensive stats are suspect over small samples, not to mention the whole debate about how accurate they are, also the accuracy of the mythical replacement level. I have no problem with using WAR to say player X is bad, O.K. or good, but when it is used to say a guy who is a few decimal places away from another guy is some meaningful difference or can really be translated into wins I have diffculty in that premise.

 

 

[theavrock]

I just looked at the NL Central.

The Cardinals and Reds have no players with 300+ PA's with negative WAR's

The Cubs, Pirates and Astros only have 1

The Brewers have two.

So the two teams we are supposed to be competing for the division with (I know the Pirates are there now, but I don't see the pitching continuing the way it is currently) do not have a single regular contirbutor posting a negative WAR. The Brewers have two.

The info can be found at www.fangraphs.com

EDIT: To further expand on that I looked at every division and checked each team in the top half of the division and only the White Sox, Giants and Phillies have 1 player with a negative WAR and 300+ PA's

So the Brewers are the only team with 2 players with negative WAR's and 300+ PA's in the top half of their division. I would imagine if I looked at the bottom half there would be other teams that have this distinction but the Brewers are the only ones who are competing for their division with guys like Betancourt and McGehee getting regular AB's

Most teams only have a few players with over 300 PA's but looking at the Reds, they have their 4 best players over 300 PA's and no one else. But they do have Janish with 246 PA's and a -0.2 WAR, and Renteria with 159 PA's and a 0.1 WAR.

 

The Cardinals also only have 4 players with ovner 300 PA's but they do have Theriot at 334 with a 0.4 WAR and Descalso at 238 with a 0.4 WAR and Schumaker at 186 with a 0.4 WAR.

 

I seriously doubt that WAR is so precise that it can be used to determine there is any difference in a -0.2 and a 0.4 player over 250 or so PA's and a few defensive plays.

 

That is probably my biggest beef with how WAR is often used - - assigning a precision to the stat claiming that decimal place differences in players has a meaningful or exact quantifiable difference. What is the margin of error on the stat 1, 0.5? The defensive stats are suspect over small samples, not to mention the whole debate about how accurate they are, also the accuracy of the mythical replacement level. I have no problem with using WAR to say player X is bad, O.K. or good, but when it is used to say a guy who is a few decimal places away from another guy is some meaningful difference or can really be translated into wins I have diffculty in that premise.

 

I used 300 PA's because thats what Yuni and Casey have gotten. I wasn't giving it an in depth look I was just looking at players with negative WAR and pulling out those that had 300+ PA's. What you saw though kind of speaks to a different point. If the Reds 4 best players are getting the most AB's why are we giving so many AB's to guys with negative WAR's?

 

Also Yuni and Casey aren't sitting at -.2 or -.1 They are almost a full WAR negative right now for half a season. They are on pace to be - 3 WAR for the season. Thats not -3 WABOF (Braun or Fielder). That is replacement level. Something that theoretically anyone can provide.

.4 WAR is nothing to scoff at. Over a full season thats almost 1 win. if you have 4 guys you are at .8 WAR (over a full season) on one team and 4 guys at -.4 WAR that is a difference that playoffs can be decided by.

[MJLiverock]

The Brewers are giving the most PA's to their best players just as the other teams are. Casey and Yuni just haven't been hurt to knock down their playing time (Hart, Lucroy, Morgan have all missed time) or there hasn't been a viable replacement around to sub for them. Counsell is awful at the plate and Wilson hasn't been around all year and isn't very good either.

 

The Reds production out of SS using the 405 PA's from Janish and Renteria is -0.08 WAR just using a simple weighted average for their numbers. So although neither has 300 plus PA's platooning or sharing the duties between 2 bad players is no better, just as getting more of Counsell's bat wouldn't be helping anything.

 

The rest of the post just falls exactly into my issue with how WAR is used. Claiming miniscule WAR differences like 0.4 vs. 0 is actually that precisce and quantifiable. I don't buy that WAR is that precise given the inputs to create it.

[theavrock]

So you are saying that WAR sucks as a stat or that Yuni and Casey haven't been as bad as their WAR suggests relative to other teams?

 

I think it you picked any stat you like you're still going to find Yuni and Casey among the worst regulars in the major leagues.

 

The Janisch/Renteria -.08 is a lot different than -.7 of Yuni. If we don't agree on that then we will probably have to agree to disagree.

 

Even if we set the bar down to 100 PA's (which would be all be regulars)

 

Cards: 1

Reds: 1

Pirates: 2

Astros: 1

Cubs: 2

Brewers: 3

 

Maybe I am looking at it the wrong way, but the Brewers appear to be giving more AB's to players producing below replacement level.

[TheCrew07]

I'm sure for many people the WAR concept is immediately troubling because because the replacement player isn't always 2 wins below average. It's a concept that I also have trouble with which is why I never liked VORP at all. I use WAR because it's one of the few metrics that's relative easy for anyone to understand and is all encompassing.

 

The problem I think is that some people are willing to treat the numbers as absolute, when they certainly aren't, there is an error factor. Is a .6 player really better than a .4? Or a 3.5 better than 3? It's much easier to make comparisons against players who are obviously far apart... for example, and just so I don't have to go do reasearch as I've already looked, Escobar is over 1 and Betancourt almost -1. Escobar has clearly been the better player this year.

 

I think situations like Greinke don't help the cause either, the disparity pushes people to mistrust derived statistics. Historically the FIP and ERA will be fairly close, Greinke just happens to be an extreme case and is the poster child for the problems inherent in that kind of backwards calculation. There's just no way Greinke has been our most valuable pitcher so far this season. Generally speaking I don't like derived metrics at all, but I think WAR has it's uses given the proper context.

[MJLiverock]

I'm not arguing that Yuni and Casey haven't been terrible, I'm arguing that all those guys with WARs around 0 are also terrible and trying to say that -0.7 and -0.08 are essentially equally bad because the WAR stat isn't accurate to the level of detail to make statements that one is better than the other. I believe the margin of error on the stat is fairly large since it is made of a mythical replacement level, the way defense is added in and the way UZR/150 can bounce all over for a player when defensive ability probably doesn't really vary that much. A guy's UZR can fluctuate hugely, guys go from being awesome defensively to terrible in a year and back to awesome again, I don't buy that defensive ability fluctates that much. I accpet that UZR can give an idea of the general ability but not that you can start plugging it into a derivative stat and start stating that fluctations of decimal points of that derivative (WAR) are that precise or accurate to make statement like -.7 is vastly different than 0, especially since replacement level isn't even that exactly defined.

 

Not to mention the differences over small samples in defense. Just looking at the Cardinals, Tyler Green. His UZR/150 at SS this year is around 7 but when he moves over to 2B, an easier position, his UZR is -46. So he is a decent defender at SS one of the worst defenders in baseball at an easier defensive position?

 

J.J. Hardy gets praised for his D all the time but he is negative for the year on the UZR metrics. Renteria, whom many thought would be an upgrade this year is also negative on D, Theriot is terrible, just like Yuni.

 

Once I started looking at SS for the Reds, Cards, and Brewers they all stink but I can't buy into there being a big difference in suckitude between a -.7 and 0 WAR which is around where the other teams are getting. Platooning 2 bad players still results in bad numbers for the position. I'd rather not have 2 positions on the diamond being terrible but given the roster their isn't much choice, Counsell and Wilson aren't any better. Calling up Green and dumping any one of the 3 SS players may be the only potential upgrade. They won't dump Counsell and I don't think anyone will claim YB or Wilson and if so who cares. SS and 3B has suddenly become two weak spots all over baseball which makes finding an upgrade difficult.

[monty57]

Calling up Green and dumping any one of the 3 SS players may be the only potential upgrade.

 

That would be a big one. Taking Loe out of the "8th inning guy" role in favor of some mix of Hawkins/Saito/Braddock would be the biggest upgrade we could make, although it may not truly classify as an "upgrade" so much as an "adjustment." Replacing Kotsay with one of the .900-OPS guys in AAA would be a good one too.

[FVBrewerFan]

Since this debate started (probably well over a month ago) I said they won't make a move with McGehee until the AS break. We can agree, disagree, call RR/DM morons, but it is the reality. Now, if he goes 2-16 or something similar for the Reds series I will be irate if Green isn't called up, or even put Gamel at 3B if they're more comfortable with him.

 

You can hide Yuni in the 8 hole and he'll rake the occasional double. Look for a trade that improves SS position without giving up top level talent. Difficult, but all we're looking for is improvement both defensivel and at the plate- not a Reyes pipe dream.

 

But you can't hide Casey's bat. It's actually not even a tough decision anymore. As I've said before, either he figures it out in Nashville or he doesn't, but half of season was plenty of time for him to get things right.

 

8th inning is another obvious move. They caught lightning in a bottle with Loe for a year, great. Doesn't mean he has some sort of rite to be the 8th inning guy forever. I think RR has begun to figure that out.

 

Replacing Wilson or Counsell with a real bat off the bench is another no-brainer.

 

Trading for another LH in the bully would help.

 

Then the big one. Do they really go for broke and make a major move like the Sabathia trade again? This is still a rotation without a dominant #1 guy after all. If this really is an "all in" year, a stud SP may be needed for a realistic chance at a title. Hey....I'm not expecting this to happen, just throwing it out there.

[rluzinski]

"That is probably my biggest beef with how WAR is often used - - assigning a precision to the stat claiming that decimal place differences in players has a meaningful or exact quantifiable difference. What is the margin of error on the stat 1, 0.5? The defensive stats are suspect over small samples, not to mention the whole debate about how accurate they are, also the accuracy of the mythical replacement level. I have no problem with using WAR to say player X is bad, O.K. or good, but when it is used to say a guy who is a few decimal places away from another guy is some meaningful difference or can really be translated into wins I have diffculty in that premise."

I don't know error it could have. WAR is just trying to estimate the context neutral run value of a player's performance over a given time. A single is a single and it has a particular average run value (based on whatever method you use to value it). It is not a projection. If you want to use it as a projection, you would have to heavily regress them with only a half season of data.

[Raw Biz]

Then the big one. Do they really go for broke and make a major move like the Sabathia trade again? This is still a rotation without a dominant #1 guy after all. If this really is an "all in" year, a stud SP may be needed for a realistic chance at a title. Hey....I'm not expecting this to happen, just throwing it out there.

Without trading someone on the ML roster (like Hart, Braddock, Axford, etc.), I don't think there's any possible way to make a major move like the Sabathia trade. The pieces just aren't there in the minors. I would say Marcum has been a pretty solid #1 guy all year. If you're expecting more out of a #1 than him, you're probably looking at guys like Verlander, Lincecum, Sabathia, the Phillies top 3. There aren't very many of those guys and they usually aren't available. And when they are, they cost way more than what we have.

[MJLiverock]

"That is probably my biggest beef with how WAR is often used - - assigning a precision to the stat claiming that decimal place differences in players has a meaningful or exact quantifiable difference. What is the margin of error on the stat 1, 0.5? The defensive stats are suspect over small samples, not to mention the whole debate about how accurate they are, also the accuracy of the mythical replacement level. I have no problem with using WAR to say player X is bad, O.K. or good, but when it is used to say a guy who is a few decimal places away from another guy is some meaningful difference or can really be translated into wins I have diffculty in that premise."

I don't know error it could have. WAR is just trying to estimate the context neutral run value of a player's performance over a given time. A single is a single and it has a particular average run value (based on whatever method you use to value it). It is not a projection. If you want to use it as a projection, you would have to heavily regress them with only a half season of data.

I agree a single is a single, and very easy to measure and very easy to say a single is better than out, or a double is better than a single. Pretty binary easily observable so room for error in measuring it isn't that big.

 

But what is an out of zone play? Was there a shift? How hard was the ball really hit? what was the spin? Is there a bias in the categorizing of the play? How do you quantify exactly what replacement level is? Or that the replacement level player would have made the play. These are all open to interpretation which creates noise or errors around the number derived and they aren't as binary as a hit or an out.

 

Maybe player X is really good at moving to his left and is terrible going to his right but has a bunch of chances one way or the other in the small sample of a half a season or part of a season. How are outfielders with really a very limited number of chances that call for above and beyond just average OF ability whacked with huge negative numbers on D?

 

I don't believe in adding a bunch of imprecise factors together and then using the final number as a very precise one. I applaud the efforts to quantify defense but when someone says a guy with a defensive rating of 7.1 is noticably better than someone with a rating of 5.2 over half a season I don't buy it. Those numbers feed into the WAR calculation and are used to justify some meaningful difference between being 0 or -0.7. Not to mention the issue of replacement level.

 

I know we'll just have to disagree on the precision of WAR. I don't have a problem with using it over larger samples to give the general impression of how good a player is, i.e. good, bad, average but when people start using it to say adding this guy or that guy is going to win/cost half a game or whatever I'm skeptical in the difference between the players, especially in partial seasons or for one season.

 

 

[logan82]

I am not sure why this is a WAR discussion and I don't really think it is relevant. Even at this point in the season we shouldn't be changing our opinions on players much since the start of the season. Other than McGehee, the players that are the problem are the players we knew were going to be a problem at the start. The stink and we knew that from day one.

 

If we have half a team of negative WAR guys and no way to replace them then there isn't much to do except look at trades. That isn't the problem. We have guys in the minors who would make our team better. It is beyond ridiculous that we stick with players we knew were bad from the start and continue to stink.

 

If you thought McGehee was the guy who put up a .800 OPS with solid defense from 2009-2010 then you adjust those expectations down a bit. I never thought he was that guy. I thought he was more on the level of a platoon guy to begin with. Certainly not a guy who should be guaranteed a starting job this year. I don't see what bringing up Green to take some starts from McGehee does to hurt us at this point. McGehee isn't performing for whatever reason.

[joepepsi]

It pains me to say it, but I'm confident Kotsay is on the team for the rest of the year. As long as he can keep pinging the occasional single through the infield, Ron will be convinced he's the right Gritty Veteran Leader to take the team to the Pot O' Gold. He's raised his average 14 points in the last week. That's all any manager needs to justify his man love for a player.

[RockCoCougars]

Kotsay really isn't that bad as a 25th guy on the roster. I'm not saying he's a good player, but I've seen a lot worse- including Counsell. Sure, I wish they would have gotten Hinske instead, but Kotsay has filled in at four positions and he hasn't been horrible at the plate. Would Boggs be better? Maybe. But he doesn't really have a track record of success, and he's hitting .240 ish at Nashville. I guess that I don't get the hate for Kotsay.

[logan82]

Kotsay really isn't that bad as a 25th guy on the roster.

He is when there are better options. That is the one and only thing I care about. I don't care what other teams have as bench players. The only thing we should care about is if we have the 25 best players in our organization on the MLB squad. As of right now, we have better players in AAA than some of our players. Is it just flat out dumb not to make a move. If we are not competing for the playoffs, fine, leave a guy in the minors to develop or keep his service time down.

[theavrock]

Kotsay really isn't that bad as a 25th guy on the roster. I'm not saying he's a good player, but I've seen a lot worse- including Counsell. Sure, I wish they would have gotten Hinske instead, but Kotsay has filled in at four positions and he hasn't been horrible at the plate. Would Boggs be better? Maybe. But he doesn't really have a track record of success, and he's hitting .240 ish at Nashville. I guess that I don't get the hate for Kotsay.

He's batting .240, but he has a .408 OBP and an .867 OPS.

 

I don't look at Boggs as a savior, but he has gotta cover more ground in the OF and he has to be able to match the .644 OPS Kotsay is putting up.

Agreed with logan that we need to be putting our best players out there and I can't conceive of a way Kotsay is one of the 25 best options.

For those that want to know.

 

Taylor Green's current slash line is .306/.380/.533

Make the call Doug.

[MillerBombers]

Kotsay really isn't that bad as a 25th guy on the roster. I'm not saying he's a good player, but I've seen a lot worse- including Counsell. Sure, I wish they would have gotten Hinske instead, but Kotsay has filled in at four positions and he hasn't been horrible at the plate. Would Boggs be better? Maybe. But he doesn't really have a track record of success, and he's hitting .240 ish at Nashville. I guess that I don't get the hate for Kotsay.

He's batting .240, but he has a .408 OBP and an .867 OPS.

 

I don't look at Boggs as a savior, but he has gotta cover more ground in the OF and he has to be able to match the .644 OPS Kotsay is putting up.

Agreed with logan that we need to be putting our best players out there and I can't conceive of a way Kotsay is one of the 25 best options.

For those that want to know.

 

Taylor Green's current slash line is .306/.380/.533

Make the call Doug.

 

I don't get how this move hasn't been made yet. Hopefully, after

the break. If it works out great, if not oh well (can't be worse at

this point).

[EdgarDiazRocks]

How about getting a time machine and not releasing Mike Adams in the first place?

[mothershipconnection]

Apparently, the trick to getting Kotsay to hit better is to have my wife watch games. Last weekend, I told her that Kotsay and Betancourt are absolute garbage. So now she pays attention and Kotsay has been on a hitting streak. She's convinced that I just have some irrational grudge against the guy.

 

She understands why I said Betancourt sucks, though.