Can you name the top 100 MLB position players in 2011 according to Fangraphs WAR? by Flock_Masta_P

WAR	Player	Team
9.4		Red Sox
8.7		Dodgers
8.3		Blue Jays
8.0		Red Sox
7.8		Brewers
7.7		Rangers
7.3		Tigers
7.0		Yankees
6.9		Royals
6.9		Reds
6.6		Rays
6.6		Red Sox
6.4		Diamondbacks
6.3		Rockies
6.2		Mets
6.1		Rays
6.0		Reds
5.9		Phillies
5.8		Angels
5.7		Rangers
5.7		Pirates
5.6		Rangers
5.6		Yankees
5.5		Tigers
5.5		Brewers
5.5		Giants
5.2		Tigers
5.1		Yankees
5.1		Cardinals
5.0		Cardinals
5.0		Cardinals
4.9		White Sox
4.8		Orioles
4.7		Padres

WAR	Player	Team
4.7		Astros/Phillies
4.7		Mets/Giants
4.6		Diamondbacks
4.5		Rangers
4.5		Marlins
4.3		Angels
4.3		Blue Jays
4.3		Orioles
4.3		Diamondbacks
4.2		Royals
4.2		Yankees
4.2		Yankees
4.2		Brewers
4.2		Astros/Braves
4.2		Rangers
4.2		Red Sox
4.1		Cardinals
4.1		Rockies
4.1		Rays
4.0		Angels
4.0		Brewers
3.9		Phillies
3.8		Phillies
3.8		Rangers
3.8		Indians
3.8		Yankees
3.8		Rays
3.7		Red Sox
3.7		Brewers
3.7		Braves
3.6		Indians
3.6		Cubs
3.6		Diamondbacks
3.6		Angels

WAR	Player	Team
3.5		Nationals
3.4		Cubs
3.4		Nationals
3.3		Padres
3.3		Marlins
3.3		Rockies
3.3		Reds
3.2		Astros
3.2		Mets
3.1		Astros
3.1		White Sox
3.1		Nationals
3.1		Twins
3.1		Yankees
3.0		Marlins
3.0		Pirates
2.9		Tigers
2.9		Orioles
2.9		Royals
2.9		Red Sox
2.9		Dodgers
2.9		Rockies
2.8		Phillies
2.8		Rays
2.8		Phillies
2.8		Tigers
2.8		Cardinals
2.8		Diamondbacks
2.8		White Sox
2.7		Blue Jays
2.7		Padres
2.7		Marlins

Javascript is not currently enabled on your browser.
If you do have Javascript enabled:
This site uses javascript to make the magic happen.
Please turn on javascript and reload this page, or use a more current browser (like Firefox)

Top 100 MLB Position Players in 2011 (fWAR) Quiz

by Flock_Masta_P

Created Nov 30, 2011 in Sports
Game Plays 1,986

Friend Scores and Standings

Loading friend results....

Top Games Today in Sports

Top Games with Similar Tags

Top User Games in Sports

Comment below threshold: show it

	tk_go_giants:	Nov 30th, 2011 at 08:16 GMT	2 points
	So the same Ryan Howard that finished 10th in National League MVP voting couldn't even crack the top 100 position players in baseball? Sounds about right.

Comment below threshold: show it

	spyroninja:	Nov 30th, 2011 at 15:25 GMT	8 points
	I love you Flock! WAR isn't useless, Jimmy; your observations are much more irrelevant than WAR is because WAR fully discloses how it determines a player's value while we have to just take your word for it on whatever you say. I would say, on the whole, these values are NOT out of whack and very far from TOTALLY out of whack. I hope the reason you don't appreciate it isn't because you don't understand it because if that's the case, then you're not really qualified to speak on it.

	sox_fan1468927:	Nov 30th, 2011 at 15:27 GMT	0 points
	jimmydoom: What seems totally out of whack?

	guyleguy:	Nov 30th, 2011 at 16:38 GMT	2 points
	Well, I love beating up on Ryan Howard as much as the next guy, but an entire season of Howard is probably a bit more valuable than 171 PAs of Alejandro De Aza, who played about 60% of his defensive innings in a corner OF spot. bWAR/rWAR (whatever you wanna call it) has Howard at 2.7 and De Aza at 2.1, which seems more accurate.

	jimmydoom:	Nov 30th, 2011 at 16:43 GMT	-1 points
	no, i know and understand what WAR is, but it strikes me as odd that someone like ryan howard isn't on this list and a-rod is (and as high as he is) when he missed over 60 games in 2011 and the yankees continued to win with the platoon of pena/nunez/chavez producing both offensively and defensively at third base (not to mention in spite of his lack of production in games he DID play during the season). what exactly did a-rod do on the field this past season to prove himself a winner?

	Flock_Masta_P:	Nov 30th, 2011 at 17:00 GMT	5 points
	Looking at the individual components of WAR, A-Rod fielded better, ran the bases better, and played a tougher position than Howard. The only thing Howard had on A-Rod was games played.

	tk_go_giants:	Nov 30th, 2011 at 18:13 GMT	0 points
	@jimmydoom "what exactly did a-rod do on the field this past season to prove himself a winner?" It's not about players proving themselves winners. The whole point of the WAR statistic is to separate the contributions of the individual from the overall success of the team. It's impossible to tell exactly how much each player contributes to a winning team, even with advanced statistics, so your attempt to ignore the stats and throw out your own perceptions is a complete waste of time.

	jimmydoom:	Nov 30th, 2011 at 18:34 GMT	0 points
	tk, doesn't WAR stand for wins above replacement? and didn't the yankees continue to win utilizing a-rod's replacements? i don't understand how i'm ignoring the stats and not separating his individual contributions from the success of the team as a whole by pointing out that during his absence, the yankees, as a team, continued to win (playing well over .500 at that) while a-rod's replacements were solid contributors.

	spyroninja:	Nov 30th, 2011 at 18:55 GMT	3 points
	@Jimmy: reread what you just wrote. How ARE you separating individual contributions when the argument you just made has its foundation in the fact that the Yankees, as a team, won despite a platoon filling in for A-Rod? How does that relate at all to A-Rod's contributions with the glove and bat? It doesn't. Not only that, but I don't think you understand what a "replacement player is." WAR doesn't compare A-Rod to those who took his spot; a replacement player is a hypothetical statistically average contributor to a team and WAR compares that player's contributions to those of real players. (That's why Adam Dunn's WAR was -2.9.) What the Yankees do as a team has no impact on what a player on the Yankees does as an individual. The Yankees won without A-Rod cuz they're frckin STACKED. The Phillies won DESPITE Howard cuz THEY are stacked. But their individual contributions to the team's winning is what WAR measures. What A-Rod's WAR indicates is that had he been healthy, the Yankees would have won MORE because he contributes that many more wins on the field.

	tk_go_giants:	Nov 30th, 2011 at 18:57 GMT	1 point
	Yes, WAR stands for wins above replacement. But the replacement player it refers to is not the team's backup, it's an arbitrary player the team could pick up for next to nothing. In other words, it's more Garrett Atkins than Eric Chavez. Also, regardless of the team's record with and without A-Rod, it's clear that even at this point in his career he is a well above average third baseman, especially offensively. You can't simply look at the record and say that they were just as good with him as without him, because this ignores contributions from the rest of the team, and countless other outside influences. It pretty much all boils down to the fact that you have no argument here.

	tk_go_giants:	Nov 30th, 2011 at 19:06 GMT	0 points
	@spyroninja Well said. You beat me to it, and you said it better. What jimmy is saying is like arguing that the Giants caught a break when Buster Posey got injured, because their win percentage was actually higher this season with Eli Whiteside and Chris Stewart behind the dish.

	johnlk:	Nov 30th, 2011 at 19:51 GMT	3 points
	Can't one think there are serious problems with the way Fangraphs calibrates its WAR figures without being a know-nothing who thinks Ryan Howard should be MVP? The way that fWAR, in particular, weights positions, assesses defense and base-running, focuses on offensive stats that are designed to predict future value rather than measure current value, and sets the replacement levels are all problematic. The fact that, somehow, almost all of the top players are center fielders, shortstops, and second basemen, suggests how problematic their formula is.

	guyleguy:	Nov 30th, 2011 at 20:16 GMT	2 points
	Well said, johnlk. Not everyone who criticizes fWAR and other sabermetrics is a reactionary, crotchety, Murray Chass-esque luddite. Personally, my individual 'feel' for the best/most valuable players matches with bWAR/rWAR more than with fWAR.

	sox_fan1468927:	Dec 2nd, 2011 at 06:29 GMT	2 points
	BrokenBahamut: Out of the three players you named, only Barmes plays one of the positions you named.

	guyleguy:	Dec 2nd, 2011 at 18:01 GMT	3 points
	For Fowler and De Aza, it looks like Fowler got a huge baserunning boost (also had a much better wOBA than I expected) and De Aza got a giant fielding boost. Fowler gets some position value for being a CF but actually got dinged for poor fielding.