from Amazon
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
WAR to dollar valuation, but roster space management
I posted this at BTF, and I’m looking for someone to bite:
If you don’t believe that 2 3WAR players and 1 6WAR players are worth the same, then speak in terms of dollars and tell me how much a 3 WAR player should get in (free agent) salary and how much a 6 WAR player should get.
It’s all well and fine to say that they are not the same, but then tell me at how many WAR the one guy needs to match the 2 3WAR guys. 6.1? 6.2? 7? What exactly.
***
“It depends on the team...”
Ok, so give me the range based on your examples. Find me a team that has a bunch of 1-2 WAR players on the bench, and that trading away 2 3WAR guys for a 6 WAR guy is a net plus.
And then tell me at what point would it break-even.
The Dodgers OF might be a good one. But, that’s not going to change the value of the OF, because they’ll simply trade whatever it is they can’t maximize by putting him on the field.
I have not yet been presented (ever!) with any practical example where this 2-for-1 roster-spots has more than a 0.25 win impact either way.
These theoretical objections simply have little foundation, practically speaking.
I would love to be proved wrong.
***
“...then doesn’t it make tons of sense for them to trade 2 3 WAR players for a 6 WAR player”
If it makes tons of sense to make that trade, at what point would it be a break-even move? Trading those 2 guys for a 4.5 WAR player?
The reality is that that 1.5 WAR player who is sitting on the bench (say as an OF) can be traded for a 1.5 WAR player who can be a starter in the IF.
And each of these players, the 1.5, the 3, the 6, will all be valued as if they are 6MM, 12MM, and 24MM players respectively (more or less), and will be traded based on those asset valuations.
***
WAR = playing Time * (Talent over baseline)
playing Time itself is a function of Talent over baseline (plus management stubborness).
***
I’m trying to have a basis for discussion by coming up with specific scenarios (as drdr did) and then forcing people to come up with a dollar valuation under those specific scenarios. (If the scenario is not specific enough, then make it more specific.)
Please don’t come up with reasons as to why we can’t have a discussion!
Unless someone wants to come up with a plausible scenario where 2 3WAR players are not going to get paid anything close to 1 6WAR player (or 2 2WAR players compared to 1 4WAR player, if you object to the scarcity of 6WAR players), then I’m going to continue to maintain that the status quo is that the 2-for-1 makes nary a difference.