Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
I don't think many people would argue that a 3 run double that made the score 8-2 with 1 out in the bottom of 7th inning is as big a hit as a double that drives home a runner from first to break a tie with 2 outs in the top of the 8th. It turns out the 3 run double would increase your chances of winning by 2%, the tie-breaking double increases the hitting team's chances by a whopping 32%
Can we just burn and bury WPA already? The run you score in the first helps your team win just as much as the tie-breaker in the bottom of the 9th, you just didn't know it yet.
Once you divide WPA by LI don't you just get the linear-weights value of the event?
I'm not defending WPA, but can someone explain why it's so terrible? It seems to get bashed a lot here, but I think I missed the point where the arguments were made against it.
To be honest, it doesn't seem worse than something like RBIs, though it doesn't seem better. It still seems like a good (highly) context-dependent stat, though I might be missing something important. It certainly seems lousy as a prediction.
the bottom of the ninth of a 1-0 game feels more 'clucthy' than a homerun in a 1-0 game in the third inning, but as far as helping to provide the win, they are exactly the same thing
I disagree. when a player hits a solo home run in the 3rd inning of a 0-0 game, the result of the last six innings is undetermined, while hitting one in the 9th, the first 8 innings have already been determined. There is no way to know that the HR in the 3rd will end up being the game winner until it's over and unless you believe in a deterministic universe, it wasn't.
I can make reasonable arguments that a solo homerun in the 3rd inning is MUCH more valuable than one hit in the 9th inning of a 1-0 game
I'd like to see those arguments.
I'm not convinced that a homerun in the ninth inning of a 1-0 game is more valuable than one in the third inning. I'm not sure how anyone could even think such a thing.
This is an exaggeration, right? It's patently obvious why the late homerun might be considered more valuable.
Per WPA, if I hit a huge clutch homer in the 8th, I get credit for it even if my bullpen proceeds to blow the game. In your system? Does the clutch homer have any value at all?
Per WPA, a leadoff single is worth whatever it's worth no matter what follows. Per your accounting, the value of a leadoff single is contingent on what the following hitters do. In fact, it's contingent on the outcome of the entire game.
(Also, I think that "value" is nebulous enough that it might allow some consideration of the emotional impact. I think WPA is fascinating and fun, even if it's useless to GMs.)
What is the difference between that and WPA where every value of the event is based upon what preceeded it?
I just do not understand or accept a system that will say a solo homerun in a 1-0 game, value is different just because of what inning it happened. That is utterly unacceptable. It makes absolutely zero sense to me.
And yet you accept a system where the value of the homerun is different based on unknowable future events? Your system is vastly, vastly worse
Actually I don't accept any system that tries to sell narrative as a stat.
I think it's pretty clear that the game context in which an event occurs matters. There is a reason that managers use their best relivers when up by 1-3 runs in the 9th and their worst when up or down by 10 in the 9th. When a batter hits a solo home run in the 3rd inning, it could be the only run of the game or maybe it ends up a blowout anyway or maybe his team will lose anyway so it's a home run that could be important, while in the 9th inning of such a game it is crucial. On the flip side, that home run in the 9th of a 12-3 game is extremely unlikely to be of consequence. So, HR late and close > HR early > HR late in blowout.
Basically you reject any attempt at finding context-based "value." If I were a GM, I would too. But I'm not, I'm a baseball fan, so I enjoy looking at and debating these things.
I enjoy debating everything(one of my many faults) but I just don't see any difference between the situation that we have been talking about(and to make it simple. Just assume we are talking about a solo homerun in a 1-0 game as this illustrates the point from both sides the simplest)
Again, you need to define "value." I can't really engage you on this issue if you don't do that.
So effectively, if you hit a HR in a scoreless game in the third, it is still a 7 inning game. Once you get to a tied game in the ninth though, it is a one inning game. The value of runs is magnified accordingly
Don't you see where the logical conclusion is? Explain to me how a homerun I hit in a loss is anything other than valueless, according to you.
I don't see how I'm supposed to make headway here.
No it's incremental in your chances of winning the game. That is what most stats are trying to measure how much does your performance help your teams odds of winning.
Hr late in a 1-0 game is not more valuable than a homerun early in a 1-0 game, I know I'm never going to convince you guys of that, but it isn't. It feels more valuable or clutch, but it actually isn't.
Yes, it is.
After Montanez's double in the top 2nd, WPA says the p(win) was already 64%. Seems a bit high no, it's still a scoreless game.
There will be a high correlation between a game's WPA leader and a poll of fans who watched the game as to who was the "player of the game".
Hr late in a 1-0 game is not more valuable than a homerun early in a 1-0 game
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
Login to Join (8 members)
Page rendered in 0.6420 seconds, 57 querie(s) executed