There's something really refreshing about Wedge's candor. I mean, what he's saying is fairly in your face, but it actually could be a lot worse.

He's saying, "Ryan is capable of being successful, but he needs to figure it out."

He could have said, "Maybe Ryan's just not good enough to be a major-league player."

I mean, you can "practice" and "focus" as much as you want, but if you aren't good enough, you're not a major-league player.

As a failed prospect himself, I guess Wedge knows something about not being a major-league player.

Ryan presently has the third-highest WAR on the club among hitters and is coming off a 3.5-win season.

What was it Bill James said about clubs that focus exclusively on players' weaknesses rather than their strengths?

Ryan presently has the third-highest WAR on the club among hitters and is coming off a 3.5-win season.

What was it Bill James said about clubs that focus exclusively on players' weaknesses rather than their strengths?

That may well be, but .149/.267/.230 is not going to get the job done, even if he plays SS like Ozzie Smith's more talented brother. This isn't 1972.

A team believing Brendan Ryan is an answer is asking the wrong question.

What was it Bill James said about clubs that focus exclusively on players' weaknesses rather than their strengths?

I think he said they're the same clubs that trade for garbage first basemen and then later have to give up a good young pitcher to acquire the player they could have had in the first place.

Yeah, Ryan's offense has been really bad so far but it's likely to get somewhat better and he is far from the biggest problem on the team right now.

That Dustin Ackley, in two years, he has a chance to be a legit All-Star.

And that there is Brendan Ryan. In two years he has a chance to be thirty-two.

Ryan presently has the third-highest WAR on the club among hitters

That may well be, but .149/.267/.230 is not going to get the job done

How the hell is he above replacement? Does WAR think they were going to replace him with ME?

How the hell is he above replacement?

It isn't ... although it's not as far below as you might think. It would have been better phrased to say he has the 3rd highest WAR among position players. bWAR already rates him +6 defensively and only -5 offensively plus he's a SS. So he's actually above-average by WAR.

It also helps Ryan that Seattle's hitters suck. Figgins is also -5, Smoak is -8. As a team, they are -16 (88 OPS+).

EDIT: Also the question is who better than Ryan. Don't know who they've got in the minors but Kawasaki is the only other guy to play SS this year in Seattle and he's hitting 194/286/194. Also note Wedge's focus on BA ... fair enough, 149 totally sucks but three Seattle starters have a worse OBP than Ryan's 267. If I were an Ms fan, I'd be happier if he was saying Ryan had to get up to a 300 OBP or something.

Hmmm. wouldn't let me edit a 2nd time so ...

To answer my own question, Carlos Triunfel, 22 at AAA hitting 277/331/474. Also Nick Franklin, 21 at AA, 318/373/467 and top 100 BA prospect. Chances are Ryan's days are numbered regardless of how well he hits.

WAR among position players changed recently to be adjusted for position.

Now when position players are ranked by WAR, the top 29 players (1.5 WAR and above) include 9 middle infielders.

Also the 2012 Brendan Ryan (OPS+ 46) has more WAR than 2012 Curtis Granderson (OPS+ 143).

WAR will all even out at the end of the year. What seems to be happening is that the full positional adjustment is given at the start of the year, instead of being proportional to the amount of playing time actually accrued.

Smoak is starting to hit.

I don't think that's it.

Last year the "Rpos" (runs added to or taken away based on positional scarcity) looks like it was, for example, -10 for 1B and +8 for C. In 2012 it's -2 and +2.

Last year's top 29 included seven middle infielders, and Jose Reyes at 30.

These adjustments seem really big and I'm not sure what they mean. Why did 3B get +1 last year, and CF get +2? There's no good way to do it.

WAR among position players changed recently to be adjusted for position.

To what are you referring? To my knowledge there's been no adjustment to WAR for position. I think they have moved to a new defensive system however.

(Note, some of the sub-bits have been adjusted -- for example dWAR now includes Rpos as does oWAR. But WAR ^= oWAR + dWAR anymore because that would be double-counting position. They also took pitchers out of the hitting numbers for "average" but that shouldn't make a huge difference, just moves the zero point.)

Granderson's "problem" is mainly that WAR hates his defense this year. On the non-Rbat components, he was only -4 last year. This year, in a little over 20% of the PA, he's -7. So he's on pace to lose about 30 more runs, mainly due to defense. Take away 30 runs from last year and he's an average player.

Ryan on the other hand is on pace to save about 10 more runs on defense this year which will balance out the 10 more runs he's on pace to lose with the bat.

I will grant that a 12-run gap for 100 points of OPS+ even in s small sample seems too small to me.

I will grant that a 12-run gap for 100 points of OPS+ even in s small sample seems too small to me.

I dug up my old spreadsheets which have the Extrapolated Runs formula. Entering the stats for the two players and applying BBRef's three-year park factor for the stadiums gave me 22.5 runs for Granderson vs. 7.9 for Ryan. So that's only a 14.6 run difference between them by that method and those types of run estimators are supposed to be the portion of saber stats that we have solid confidence in the accuracy of.

Saying that it's just BBRef's new formula that is causing weird results between those two would be inaccurate anyway because Fangraphs likes Granderson's defense even less (-9.7 for the season) and has Ryan up .6 WAR to .4 for Granderson. Baseball Gauge's WAR is more favorable to Granderson but still gives him only .6 (Ryan at .3) while BPro's WARP has them even at .5. So that's four different methods of measuring total production and they all agree that Ryan is a contributor so far despite the horrid offense while Granderson hasn't been of great value even with the .900+ OPS.

In the at-bat last night, Wedge said that Ryan “has got to be able to defend himself...

Ryan: "Get clear, Wedge, you can't do any more good back there."

This is where dWAR loses me... I refuse to believe that someone posting that sort of slash line is actually above replacement level. Maybe it's Chassian stubbornness, but I have to think triple AAA and major league benches are littered with guys who can play a good SS but can't hit. Yes, yes - so perhaps Ryan plays an excellent SS... I just still don't buy that any level of SS is enough to compensate for a line that is essentially that of a decent hitting SP.

This is where dWAR loses me... I refuse to believe that someone posting that sort of slash line is actually above replacement level. Maybe it's Chassian stubbornness, but I have to think triple AAA and major league benches are littered with guys who can play a good SS but can't hit. Yes, yes - so perhaps Ryan plays an excellent SS... I just still don't buy that any level of SS is enough to compensate for a line that is essentially that of a decent hitting SP.

Concur, but this is largely an artifact of using a 30-game sample of defensive stats like it means anything. I'd much rather they used a pro-rated pre-season estimate of rfield (+15 for EX, +7 for Good, +0 for AVG, etc.) and not use actually defensive stats until the season is over.

I am quite confident that Ryan's 43 OPS+ has not delivered more value than Granderson's 138 OPS+ this season.

I refuse to believe that someone posting that sort of slash line is actually above replacement level.

Multi-year park factor: 92. Combine that with the continuing league-wide offensive decline, and that gets you a surprising distance toward Ryan's raw slash line.

Multi-year park factor: 92. Combine that with the continuing league-wide offensive decline, and that gets you a surprising distance toward Ryan's raw slash line.

But isn't that an example of a misleading effect of using a single uniform park factor for all hitters?

IIRC, Safeco mostly surpresses RH power, of which Brendan Ryan has none. I have a hard time seeing a slap hitter like him suffering the full park effect at Safeco. Whereas, a RH pull power guy like Adrian Beltre probably suffered by far more than the stated effect.

But isn't that an example of a misleading effect of using a single uniform park factor for all hitters?

If we're talking talent, then maybe. If we're talking value, then no. A guy who is hurt less than usual by a bad park or aided more than usual by a good park is adding value - the runs count the same.

Also, Safeco suppresses batting average even more than power, iirc. So it'll hurt a guy like Ryan significantly, too.

But isn't that an example of a misleading effect of using a single uniform park factor for all hitters?

It might be. If it is, though, it's an effect that would also be in place for his WAR calculation, right?

It might be. If it is, though, it's an effect that would also be in place for his WAR calculation, right?

Yes, I'm saying the WAR may be off.

Also, Safeco suppresses batting average even more than power, iirc. So it'll hurt a guy like Ryan significantly, too.

Is there anywhere you can see component park factors? Especially, mult-year?

It's a value stat. The value of runs in a park is determined by the overall ease of run scoring in that environment. If your skill set plays well somewhere such that you produce more runs than would be expected, that doesn't change the value of the runs you're producing. The relationship between the player and the park is a worthwhile consideration when trying to estimate the overall talent of a particular player, but for a value stat it's irrelevant.

Is there anywhere you can see component park factors? Especially, mult-year?

The Bill James book publishes them. ESPN.com has single-year component factors, but you can average them together.

So, from "Beyond the Boxscore", I found 2006-10 component park factors.

Seattle has 0.96 overall, but 1B/BIP is neutral (1.00), and BB and K seem to balance (1.03 and 1.04) The damage is all in 2B, 3B and HR (0.98, 0.95, and 0.90).

It's a value stat. The value of runs in a park is determined by the overall ease of run scoring in that environment. If your skill set plays well somewhere such that you produce more runs than would be expected, that doesn't change the value of the runs you're producing. The relationship between the player and the park is a worthwhile consideration when trying to estimate the overall talent of a particular player, but for a value stat it's irrelevant.

But Ryan's likely AAA no-hit replacement SS would likely have exactly the same skill set? All poor hitting MIF have that skill set.

So? The runs he produces have a value determined by the run-scoring environment.

I guess you're arguing that replacement level for up-the-middle positions should be higher in parks which have a major suppressive effect on power. It's really hard for me to imagine that's a significant effect.

So? The runs he produces have a value determined by the run-scoring environment.

I guess you're arguing that replacement level for up-the-middle positions should be higher in parks which have a major suppressive effect on power. It's really hard for me to imagine that's a significant effect.

I don't know what the answer is. But, a guy hitting as badly as you'd expect from any AA slick-fielding no bat SS rushed to the bigs, needs to get docked.

I just don't think it's possible to adjust somebody's value by adding or subtracting the value of the position he plays. Yes, Joey Votto is less valuable because he can't play SS. But shouldn't he be, like, infinitely less valuable? As in if he was playing shortstop, he would have the worst defensive statistics of anybody ever, by far. Five errors a game. Whereas if you put Brendan Ryan at 1B he would just be a single hole in the lineup and would probably improve the defense.

Are there more people out there who would be better than Joey Votto at SS, or better than Brendan Ryan at 1B?

This extends logically to conclude that every catcher is more valuable than everybody else (except Matt LeCroy).

I just don't think it's possible to adjust somebody's value by adding or subtracting the value of the position he plays. Yes, Joey Votto is less valuable because he can't play SS. But shouldn't he be, like, infinitely less valuable? As in if he was playing shortstop, he would have the worst defensive statistics of anybody ever, by far. Five errors a game. Whereas if you put Brendan Ryan at 1B he would just be a single hole in the lineup and would probably improve the defense.

I see it more as the value Brendan Ryan brings to a team is that it allows for someone like Joey Votto to also be in the starting nine. (Assuming an NL team with no DH) Ryan gets a bonus value because you can have Prince Fielder in the lineup with him, whereas with Votto you can't (or at least you'll be giving up some runs by putting Votto in LF to do it).

I think the issue is what snapper outlines in #19. It's a month and a half into the season and the defensive component of WAR is working on a tiny sample size. If Ryan could continue this pace and be a +48 or whatever with the glove then he probably could be above replacement with his slash line. But that's not likely to happen.

The other thing seems to be that since the WAR adjustment last week defensive values seem to have jumped quite a bit.

Is there anywhere you can see component park factors? Especially, mult-year?

Seamheads.com Ballparks Database

Yes, Joey Votto is less valuable because he can't play SS. But shouldn't he be, like, infinitely less valuable? As in if he was playing shortstop, he would have the worst defensive statistics of anybody ever, by far. Five errors a game.

You're vastly overestimating the damage that Votto would do on defense. Troy Tulowitzki led the majors in range factor last year with 4.84 plays made at shortstop per game. Votto would have to be kicking every single groundball to shortstop, every single day, to be making five errors a game.

As much of a lummox as Votto is, he'd still be able to handle the routine grounders. My guess is that he would cost you about two singles a game over the run-of-the-mill bad shortstop.

Yes, Joey Votto is less valuable because he can't play SS. But shouldn't he be, like, infinitely less valuable? As in if he was playing shortstop, he would have the worst defensive statistics of anybody ever, by far.

What, the worst of anybody, ever? That's a pretty high bar. I mean, Kevin Mitchell played shortstop in the majors. So did Piano Legs Hickman. And then you've got all those 19th century guys making 100+ errors a year because they didn't use gloves. Billy Shindle once spent a full year and put up a .856 F% at short. Would Votto really be worse than that?

My guess is that he would cost you about two singles a game over the run-of-the-mill bad shortstop.

At least until a take-out slide on a double play attempt ended his season.

There are two issues here. One is that small sample sizes of defensive ratings are skewing things, if these numbers were to continue over the course of the season then Ryan would have an amazing defensive season and Granderson an abysmal one (and again the Granderson thing isn't an issue of BBRef's new defensive ratings, UZR has him as even worse this season). Since it's unlikely that either is going to be the case things will regress to the mean over the full season.

The other problem is that WAR doesn't actually measure what a player contributes to the team, it measures his performance against what a non-existent theoretical player would do in his place. If you compared Granderson and Ryan to players that played average defense and hit for a 100 OPS+ (or played -20 defense and hit for a 150 OPS+, the point being that they're compared to players of equal value on the field) then Granderson would come out ahead because he's actually doing more on the field, it's just harder to find someone who could play SS and hit acceptably. In some situations I think that looking at performance through the lens of positional scarcity is the wrong way to do it.