[DC 86]

WAR is the most overrated “statistic “ out there. As the song goes: War, uh, what is it good for? Absolutely nothing.”  Except for agent in negotiations.

Don’t tell me, for example. the combo of Posey/Casali is worth only 1.4win over THEIR replacement.  I know WAR is supposed league average. But that doesn’t mean much either.  EDIT- ok. I misinterpreted the data.  It’s a figure that they exceed WAR at their position relative to rest of league.  So it’s, using Catcher, 1.4/better than other teams WAR.  I Still think it’s overrated, overused and not particularly telling.

It’s a team. With real players. It’s not APBA.

I'm not sure I understand your last statement. 

Are you saying "real players ... not APBA" meaning that statistics aren't highly relevant to evaluating performance, but that instead some subjective assessment of intangible human qualities is more accurate?

Or are you saying that there's another publicly available all-encompassing metric that is superior? if so, which one is more telling?

WAR posits that the five biggest contributors to the Giants success this year were starting pitching, relief pitching, Crawford, Belt and Posey. That seems to align extremely well with the non-statistical eye test.

[DC 86]

WAR is the most overrated “statistic “ out there. As the song goes: War, uh, what is it good for? Absolutely nothing.”  Except for agent in negotiations.

Don’t tell me, for example. the combo of Posey/Casali is worth only 1.4win over THEIR replacement.  I know WAR is supposed league average. But that doesn’t mean much either.  EDIT- ok. I misinterpreted the data.  It’s a figure that they exceed WAR at their position relative to rest of league.  So it’s, using Catcher, 1.4/better than other teams WAR.  I Still think it’s overrated, overused and not particularly telling.

It’s a team. With real players. It’s not APBA.

I'm not sure I understand your last statement. 

Are you saying "real players ... not APBA" meaning that statistics aren't highly relevant to evaluating performance, but that instead some subjective assessment of intangible human qualities is more accurate?

Or are you saying that there's another publicly available all-encompassing metric that is superior? if so, which one is more telling?

WAR posits that the five biggest contributors to the Giants success this year were starting pitching, relief pitching, Crawford, Belt and Posey. That seems to align extremely well with the non-statistical eye test.