Actually, I shouldn't say I agree with him on the positional weights. I think it's ridiculous that he gives catchers a 19% stake, by default, of the defensive win shares. There's no way a catcher is worth more than a shortstop in terms of generating wins for a team. He has an effect, which can be observed via team ERA, but stolen bases/caught stealing are practically worthless in terms of winning and almost every other chance that a modern catcher is credited for is a strikeout.
A shortstop or modern second baseman (post-1930) has a much larger effect on the offense that is being generated against his team than James gives credit for, IMHO. I don't think catchers deserve much more of a share than first basemen do. Aside from a marginal effect on the team ERA, because of the way they handle a pitching staff, they're basically useless.
Jason
__________________
"I pretty much popped everything cold turkey. We were doing steroids they wouldn't give to horses."
-- Tom House
"In 1973, the year I first ran for Congress, the House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce concluded a year-long investigation that found--and I quote--'drug use exists...in all sports and levels of competition...In some instances, the danger of improper drug use--primarily amphetamines and anabolic steroids--can only be described as alarming'"
-- Henry Waxman
|