He uses two 2003 Mariner third basemen, Jeff Cirillo and Willie Bloomquist to prove his point. He shows that Bloomquist got 65 fewer plate appearances, but did better during his time there. Here's a quote from the book.
Bill Felber wrote:In sum we have two players, one playing poorly and the other so-so, the key difference being that the fellow who played poorly was on the field more. How should those players be rated?
Since he was worse over a longer period of time, there is no good reason why Cirillo should rate on a par with Bloomquist. Yet because it considers only positive accomplishments--of which an important one could essentially be described as hanging around--Win Shares rates Cirillo and Bloomquist dead even. Both get three Win Shares in the James system.
He then refers to a system developed by Pete Palmer, called Batter Fielder Base Stealer Wins and Pitcher Wins, or BFW/PW for short. Felber writes this of the Palmer system:
Bill Felber wrote:Palmer's BFW/PW system, for example, determines that while Bloomquist (-1.3) was hardly an asset to the 2003 Mariners, he was significantly less of a liability than Cirillo (-2.7).
So the BFW/PW system gives no credit to a player for hanging around for a long time, but measures both the positive and negative of every player rated.
My question is...which system is better? It sounds to me like the BFW system is more complete, though I've never heard of it before. Are there any sites that have each players' BFW/PW rating?