Everyone who says Pujols should be the MVP..

[treebird]

How is that evaluation fair, since almost every team has a different number of total win shares? If two players hypothetically performed exactly the same, and were on teams with drastically different records, wouldn't their win shares vary as well?

 

The reason the team with the better record has a better record is because they have better players overall. Say Neifi and Eckstein have each had the exact same season to this point, value wise. Eckstein won't have a higher value than Neifi because guys like Pujols and Edmonds will be taking up all those extra win shares.

 

I'm sure now I'm getting into where Win Shares gets really complex, but how do you account for chance? Performance numbers don't correlate precisely with win-loss record, correct?

 

This is something that people complain about. Basically, if a guy is lucky, he gets credit for it. If a team is lucky, they get credit for it.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

How is that evaluation fair, since almost every team has a different number of total win shares? If two players hypothetically performed exactly the same, and were on teams with drastically different records, wouldn't their win shares vary as well?

 

The reason the team with the better record has a better record is because they have better players overall. Say Neifi and Eckstein have each had the exact same season to this point, value wise. Eckstein won't have a higher value than Neifi because guys like Pujols and Edmonds will be taking up all those extra win shares.

 

I'm sure now I'm getting into where Win Shares gets really complex, but how do you account for chance? Performance numbers don't correlate precisely with win-loss record, correct?

 

This is something that people complain about. Basically, if a guy is lucky, he gets credit for it. If a team is lucky, they get credit for it.

 

Okay, thanks for indulging me.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

I don't think it is so much a "what have you done for me lately" attitude as it is that it is important to finish the season strong to get your team into the playoffs.

 

Wins in April are just as important as wins in August. I look at how valuable the player was to his team. In April and May there were a number of times Lee carried the team. In fact, while I'm sure the Cardinals would have struggled without Pujols, had the Cubs not had Lee, we would have been selling off parts at the end of July.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

EDIT: Here's an extreme example. Pujols gets traded to an expansion team who's pitching staff consists of 9 year olds. That team wins 12 games all year. Pujols if he is 100% of the team gets 36 win shares, a number that Derrek Lee surpasses if he is on a .500 team. So Pujols could never make an out, and not have as many win shares as Lee will at his current pace.

 

This is beyond me. I haven't read the book in a while, but I don't remember any way to account for such an extreme example. If someone smarter would like to help, that'd be great. Otherwise, that question is going unanswered.

 

Do you have the book? It's been out of print and I'm trying to get my hands on a copy.

[1wizard]

Wins in April are just as important as wins in August. I look at how valuable the player was to his team. In April and May there were a number of times Lee carried the team. In fact, while I'm sure the Cardinals would have struggled without Pujols, had the Cubs not had Lee, we would have been selling off parts at the end of July.

 

I agree that Lee was extremely important at the beginning of the year, but he has not had the same influence on his team since the ASB. And if the Cards would not have Albert (I am hesitant to even imagine), their lineup would be really weak. I don't think a lot of people realize the influence Albert has on the team and how much he changes the course of a game (by just being in the lineup). Look at the lineup they keep winning with. Most of these guys are not every day players and have never been. The only three players that have been every day players are Eck, Edmonds (struggling mightly), and Grudz.

 

Eck

So

Grudz

Edmonds

Mabry 1st

Nunez

JRod

Mahony/Diaz

P

 

Compare to the Cubs w/o D. Lee:

 

Lawton

Walker

ARam

Nomah

Burnitez 1st? (don't know who Dusty would play 1st)

Murton

Barrett

Patterson

P

 

 

It appears that the Cubs lineup is more talented than that of the Cardinals. So I do not buy this agruement that the Cards would still be a playoff team w/o AP. I personally do not think they would be, especially considering the injuries to Walker, Rolen, Molina, and Sanders.

[gus_dog]

Compare to the Cubs w/o D. Lee:

 

Lawton

Walker

ARam

Nomah

Burnitez 1st? (don't know who Dusty would play 1st)

Murton

Barrett

Patterson

P

 

Todd Walker

[1wizard]

Lawton

Walker (1st)

ARam

Nomah

Burnitez/Murton

Perez

Barrett

Patterson

P

[treebird]

EDIT: Here's an extreme example. Pujols gets traded to an expansion team who's pitching staff consists of 9 year olds. That team wins 12 games all year. Pujols if he is 100% of the team gets 36 win shares, a number that Derrek Lee surpasses if he is on a .500 team. So Pujols could never make an out, and not have as many win shares as Lee will at his current pace.

 

This is beyond me. I haven't read the book in a while, but I don't remember any way to account for such an extreme example. If someone smarter would like to help, that'd be great. Otherwise, that question is going unanswered.

 

Do you have the book? It's been out of print and I'm trying to get my hands on a copy.

 

Yes, I have it. If you ever found a copy, I'd reccomend it. It's a great resource, and some of this essays are really excellent.

[1908]

EDIT: Here's an extreme example. Pujols gets traded to an expansion team who's pitching staff consists of 9 year olds. That team wins 12 games all year. Pujols if he is 100% of the team gets 36 win shares, a number that Derrek Lee surpasses if he is on a .500 team. So Pujols could never make an out, and not have as many win shares as Lee will at his current pace.

That's not an example; that's fiction. Pujols would no longer be playing on an MLB team.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

EDIT: Here's an extreme example. Pujols gets traded to an expansion team who's pitching staff consists of 9 year olds. That team wins 12 games all year. Pujols if he is 100% of the team gets 36 win shares, a number that Derrek Lee surpasses if he is on a .500 team. So Pujols could never make an out, and not have as many win shares as Lee will at his current pace.

That's not an example; that's fiction. Pujols would no longer be playing on an MLB team.

 

9 year olds was just an exaggeration to get the point that the team would be terrible. My point was that players on teams with very low win totals could get shortchanged with Win Shares.

[1908]

EDIT: Here's an extreme example. Pujols gets traded to an expansion team who's pitching staff consists of 9 year olds. That team wins 12 games all year. Pujols if he is 100% of the team gets 36 win shares, a number that Derrek Lee surpasses if he is on a .500 team. So Pujols could never make an out, and not have as many win shares as Lee will at his current pace.

That's not an example; that's fiction. Pujols would no longer be playing on an MLB team.

 

9 year olds was just an exaggeration to get the point that the team would be terrible. My point was that players on teams with very low win totals could get shortchanged with Win Shares.

Have you read the book? I'm at work so I don't have my copy handy but I know that point is addressed multiple times.

[treebird]

EDIT: Here's an extreme example. Pujols gets traded to an expansion team who's pitching staff consists of 9 year olds. That team wins 12 games all year. Pujols if he is 100% of the team gets 36 win shares, a number that Derrek Lee surpasses if he is on a .500 team. So Pujols could never make an out, and not have as many win shares as Lee will at his current pace.

That's not an example; that's fiction. Pujols would no longer be playing on an MLB team.

 

9 year olds was just an exaggeration to get the point that the team would be terrible. My point was that players on teams with very low win totals could get shortchanged with Win Shares.

Have you read the book? I'm at work so I don't have my copy handy but I know that point is addressed multiple times.

 

I found the essay about good teams vs bad teams, and he does explicitly discuss this. He basically just says that the system is carefully designed to be fair towards all players, regardless of teammated. Then he has a long list of players who had very similar seasons, except on teams of wildly different success, and shows that the have similar win share totals.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

EDIT: Here's an extreme example. Pujols gets traded to an expansion team who's pitching staff consists of 9 year olds. That team wins 12 games all year. Pujols if he is 100% of the team gets 36 win shares, a number that Derrek Lee surpasses if he is on a .500 team. So Pujols could never make an out, and not have as many win shares as Lee will at his current pace.

That's not an example; that's fiction. Pujols would no longer be playing on an MLB team.

 

9 year olds was just an exaggeration to get the point that the team would be terrible. My point was that players on teams with very low win totals could get shortchanged with Win Shares.

Have you read the book? I'm at work so I don't have my copy handy but I know that point is addressed multiple times.

 

No I haven't, in fact I don't know which book you're referring to.

[1908]

No I haven't, in fact I don't know which book you're referring to.

That would be Win Shares by Bill James.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

No I haven't, in fact I don't know which book you're referring to.

That would be Win Shares by Bill James.

 

And it's extremely hard to find. I wish my library had it so I could check it out and then claim to have lost it and pay them for it.

 

I found one at Powells online, and they wanted $133 for it.

[treebird]

No I haven't, in fact I don't know which book you're referring to.

That would be Win Shares by Bill James.

 

And it's extremely hard to find. I wish my library had it so I could check it out and then claim to have lost it and pay them for it.

 

I found one at Powells online, and they wanted $133 for it.

 

ill sell you my copy for 132 dollars

[wekse]

hey vance, check ebay....they have a copy for 42.95 buy it now.

 

 

HERE

[treebird]

hey vance, check ebay....they have a copy for 42.95 buy it now.

 

 

HERE

 

 

you couldve waited to see if he wanted my copy

[wekse]

sorry tree :cry:

[imb]

yeah, come on weske, you know better than that.

[wekse]

who is weske?

[imb]

that's what i was wondering

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

hey vance, check ebay....they have a copy for 42.95 buy it now.

 

 

HERE

 

 

you couldve waited to see if he wanted my copy

 

:lol:

[1908]

hey vance, check ebay....they have a copy for 42.95 buy it now.

 

 

HERE

Amazon has that price beat.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

hey vance, check ebay....they have a copy for 42.95 buy it now.

 

 

HERE

Amazon has that price beat.

 

I had searched Amazon a while back and there weren't any. Thanks everyone.