Haven't paid attention to $$/WAR for free agents in a while, but apparently it's still in the $8-$10M range? Isn't that where we were at five years ago, or have I completely lost it?
Comments
Log in with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
This is absolutely great, as are all things Clemens writes. It makes sense too, given the discount applied to non-elite players, skillsets, esp as they become higher variance
Maybe Moneyball rn is getting high variance, sub-elite players at 31ish (about to pass their aging curve prime)
Jk...kinda?
it's not that hard to check. You just take their projection for next year and subtract a half win per year over life of contract. Adames was $12+m per win.
other way around. I just checked. $10.77m/win for hitters projected to be over two wins next year, $9.3m/win for pitchers projected to be over two wins next year.
Probably should separate pitchers and hitters out at this point, at least without doing the math it seems like they were valued pretty differently this offseason
I think the practical replacement level has changed (especially for pitchers) as teams have leaned more into optimizing matchups and shuttling optionable players back and forth
Ok, so if pitcher rep level has gone up, teams want to pay for fewer "classic WAR", meaning the $$/WAR for pitchers will go down (as observed, a little.) Argument is consistent.
Pitchers would be higher risk, yes, even when appropriately projecting playing time? If so, is higher variation more or less costly? Is higher variation something that favors teams (lowers variability in the aggregate) over players (each additional dollar less important)?
I remember reading earlier this offseason that it finally looked like it had jumped to $11M, but, yeah it was stagnate for an embarrassingly long amount of time.
man I *just* saw a chart that indicated the marginal value ($) of WAR on a curve with the team's projected record. as a normie I feel like that's where the discussion has led
Comments
So skills a player has the most control over (TTO, etc) drive value more than defense or defense-reliant skills 1/2
If all that makes sense?
Maybe Moneyball rn is getting high variance, sub-elite players at 31ish (about to pass their aging curve prime)
Jk...kinda?
(I'd make a stuff plus reference here but I'm still not quite sure how it works)
http://tangotiger.com/index.php/site/comments/valuation-implication-of-straying-from-the-.300-win-replacement-level
And even *if* MLB-wide rep level isn't higher, teams spending money tend to be better and have a higher *org* rep level.