What's up with WAR these days?

[silverZ]

I'm wonder what WAR is going to look like in 5, 10, 20 years from now. Defensive metrics have a long way to go before being reliable.

[bayside]

The problem with WAR is that you need a lot more data to get a significant sample. I read 3 yrs somewhere and we're talking about 1/2 a season of stats so far. I also think defense is weighted too highly. I know they have mathematical basis for their formulas but I disagree with the value of awful hitters that are posting 15+ UZR/150 rates. An example is Joe Crede in 2009 (I'm a Twins fan). He hit .225/.289/.414/.703 in 90 games and put up a 1.8 WAR. Over a season that's a 3.5 WAR player that was an awful hitter. I'm sorry but he was awful regardless of his great defense.

3 years is only for defensive metrics (and even then its an unknown how accurately defenses are measured).
the offensive component of WAR is almost identical for all systems and is based on runs created. it is pretty accurate even on a game by game basis. the formula is pretty well worked out

[kab21]

The problem with WAR is that you need a lot more data to get a significant sample. I read 3 yrs somewhere and we're talking about 1/2 a season of stats so far. I also think defense is weighted too highly. I know they have mathematical basis for their formulas but I disagree with the value of awful hitters that are posting 15+ UZR/150 rates. An example is Joe Crede in 2009 (I'm a Twins fan). He hit .225/.289/.414/.703 in 90 games and put up a 1.8 WAR. Over a season that's a 3.5 WAR player that was an awful hitter. I'm sorry but he was awful regardless of his great defense.

3 years is only for defensive metrics (and even then its an unknown how accurately defenses are measured).
the offensive component of WAR is almost identical for all systems and is based on runs created. it is pretty accurate even on a game by game basis. the formula is pretty well worked out

Yeah, I didn't think I needed to break it down that far but that's what I'm talking about.

[Ender]

Defensive WAR is still shaky in general and pitching WAR is worthless, so you have to take most of it with a grain of salt.

[bayside]

I wouldnt say pitching WAR is completely worthless...
Its a decent way to compare pitchers vs other pitchers to see how they stack up against each other. The fact that its based on FIP is what makes it so shaky.
but it definitely isnt a great idea to use WAR to compare batters to hitters

[jfg]

The only thing I could see about Baseball Reference's WAR is that it rewards players who excel in both aspects. Castro is 5th in d-war but he's not at the top of the list for WAR. That says something for it I think. I just don't know how good of a fielder Lawrie is, I've barely watched him play. But, if he is a very good but not great hitter and is an elite fielder, I might be able to get behind that. All of the other fielders at the top that I've watched are definitely good fielders, all of the other hitters at the top of the war are good hitters....

[Ender]

I wouldnt say pitching WAR is completely worthless...
Its a decent way to compare pitchers vs other pitchers to see how they stack up against each other. The fact that its based on FIP is what makes it so shaky.
but it definitely isnt a great idea to use WAR to compare batters to hitters

Yeah the fact it is based on FIP is what makes it worthless. You take out the 'luck' from BABIP and LOB% and for some odd reason choose to ignore the luck involved in HR/FB. You get the worst of all worlds given how they do WAR. I'd rather base it off of ERA or xFIP, FIP itself is the most worthless composite stat.

[jorgesca]

Is there any pitcher's WAR based on SIERA? Or are there really only those 3 WARs out there?