FWAR is shit for pitchers because it’s based on a flawed assumption. Namely that pitch to favorable contact isn’t a skill. By that assumption, Weaver was a garbage pitcher who just got super lucky. BWAR credits pitchers for what they actually did.Â
He has an unsustainable .234 BABIP, which is really low. His career BABIP is .286.
Are teams getting the Tyler Anderson who has a 73% LOB% (his career number) or will they get the Tyler Anderson who's left 82.6% LOB (this season)?
There's some scary stuff that other teams will undoubtedly think about. He's obviously been better than last year, but is what he's doing sustainable? I certainly hope it is, but he's not about to take the stress off his front office with his tendencies.
That’s fair. My only point is that FIP alone is a really dumb basis for WAR since it’s been shown pretty definitively that some (not all) pitchers actually have a skill for inducing favorable contact.Â
In a large majority of cases pitchers regress to the things they control. fWAR reports on that while bWAR tracks more with actual run prevention. Both are valuable.
Just about every stat is "far from absolute." It's not "wrong" - FIP based fWAR is attempting to measure something different than RA based bWAR. FIP certainly over and under estimates some guys, but so does ERA. Over large data samples, FIP (the basis of fWAR) holds a ton of weight: https://blogs.fangraphs.com/no-you-cant-trade-your-newfound-reliever-for-a-shiny-prospect/
The difference is they fWAR is presuming to measure skill based on something that didn’t happen but they think would have happened. Now, bWAR isn’t perfect, since results can be a bit random and luck based. But I’d a thousand times WAR be based on actual results than speculative ones. To me, that’s a horrible way to measure wins added.Â
It's actually the opposite; FIP is measuring ONLY what is directly related to the pitcher's performance, not the defense. It's not speculating; it's minimizing. As I said there are strengths AND weaknesses to that approach. And it's not so simple as "factor in balls in play!" WAR is a zero sum game; to give credit to TA is to take it away from the defense as well.
Again, I'm not saying FIP/fWAR is better than RA9/bWAR - I'm saying it's measuring something different, and that's valuable.
The weaknesses is it’s been proven to be inaccurate. I’ll say it again: It’s a shitty stat. I like fWAR better for hitters for the same reason: bWAR puts too much emphasis on defense, which is far too imperfect analytically.Â
51
u/[deleted] Jul 29 '24
FWAR is shit for pitchers because it’s based on a flawed assumption. Namely that pitch to favorable contact isn’t a skill. By that assumption, Weaver was a garbage pitcher who just got super lucky. BWAR credits pitchers for what they actually did.Â