Win Shares

Jason Moyer · 06-04-2002, 08:17 AM

I'm almost finished putting together 2 spreadsheets. One for calculating Short Form Win Shares, and one for calculating Long Form Win Shares. The short form version is finished, the long form is finished except for one step (distributing win shares to individual pitchers).

Would these be remotely interesting to anyone? Also, would anyone use a utility that pulled this info from csv exports and calculated it automatically? I'm thinking about refining the spreadsheet further to remove most of the middle steps and then I may write a csv-parser/win share calculator if there is demand for it. The results, even with the long form method, will be less than accurate because of trades/releases/career ending injuries, but I figure it's better than nothing. On the other hand, I dunno if I really want to take the time to code something that 3 people will use.

Jason

eneubaue · 06-04-2002, 08:20 AM

Jason,

I'd definitely use it...

Subby · 06-04-2002, 08:57 AM

It's a good start, to be sure.

Unfortunately, OOTP does not track player stats by team within a single year (a games weakness), so it's hard to track how a player does for a certain team if said player gets traded one or more times in a single season...

If we get to a point where we can get accurate winshares, then I think there would be good uses for such a utility...unfortuntely we are not there yet...

Scott Vibert · 06-04-2002, 09:04 AM

I think it still could be interesting to look at.. but Subby does raise some valid points.

Jason Moyer · 06-04-2002, 09:27 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Subby:
If we get to a point where we can get accurate winshares, then I think there would be good uses for such a utility...unfortuntely we are not there yet...<hr /></blockquote>There were 3 statistical obstacles that I remember while compiling the formulas.

1. As you mention, the lack of team splits for players.
2. The lack of Runs/Earned Runs/ERA for Catchers.
3. The lack of accurate league/team double play totals (well, and fielding info in general on a league/team scale).

2 isn't particularly necessary, since you don't use it to distribute win shares among catchers before the 1980's anyway. 1 and 3 kill the entire idea, unfortunately.

There are other things that make the process much more tedious than it should be. Having team totals and league totals for every stat tracked in the game would make the process simple. Having team fielding totals split by position would be even better. Ultimately I hope in a future version that it is possible to pull this info from with in the game. For instance, being able to look at putouts on a league scale, then filter them down to putouts made by third basemen, then filter them down to putouts made by third basemen by team. Same thing with all the fielding stats and all the minor hitting stats (SH, SF, etc).

Edit: That said, you could accurately calculate Win Shares in HH2k3, and with the way the league leaders boards are setup (absolute genius, IMHO) you could do it easily.

Jason

[ 06-04-2002, 03:30 PM: Message edited by: Jason Moyer ]

bbo4 · 06-04-2002, 09:49 AM

I would use it but I still don't know exactly what win shares does for people. What's the theory behind this stat again?

Killebrew · 06-04-2002, 10:24 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by bbo4:
I would use it but I still don't know exactly what win shares does for people. What's the theory behind this stat again?<hr /></blockquote>It's a recent Bill James formula for deciding how many team wins each player is responsible for, anotherwords an effort to determine a players real value. Beyond that simple description it gets complex - James wrote a book ("Win Shares") describing the formula....

Book Description:
Win Shares, a revolutionary system that allows for player evaluation across positions, teams and eras, measures the total sum of player contributions in one groundbreaking number. James' latest advancement in the world of statistical analysis is the next big stepping-stone in the "greatest players of all-time" debate. For as long as baseball has been played, fans have struggled to compare the legends of the game with today's stars. Win Shares by Decade is just one of the many sections you'll find inside to help you judge who ranks where among the pantheon of baseball greats.

OldGiants · 06-04-2002, 11:01 AM

Can there be negative win shares? If not, I'd have to question the validity of the analysis.

Malleus Dei · 06-04-2002, 11:07 AM

Win Shares is a very legitimate statistic.

My suggestion would be produce the utility, and then let's badger Markus to update the game so the game would work properly with it.

Or maybe we should just ask Markus to add Win Shares to the game stats...

fluharty · 06-04-2002, 11:27 AM

badgering him might be more fun

Jason Moyer · 06-04-2002, 12:42 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by OldGiants:
Can there be negative win shares? If not, I'd have to question the validity of the analysis.<hr /></blockquote>Team's can't win negative games, so no you can't.

Win shares, put simply, is the team's wins multiplied by 3 and then divided among the players on the team.

If a player rates negatively when it comes time to claim their win shares, they are dropped from the analysis because they are not contributing to the team's wins.

It should also be noted that the last full-time player to have negative offensive claim points in the win shares system was from around 1910, iirc. In order to get 0 win shares you baseically have to sit on the bench for 150 games, and even then it's likely you'll get some credit for the team's wins.

Pick up the book, it's very interesting and I feel strongly that most of the system is correct. I think that there should be more weight placed on the defense, or that the weight placed on the defense should be partially determined by runs/game of the league, but overall it is pretty much right on.

The beauty of win shares is that you can compare a player from 1920 with a player from 1980 and see who was better, even though the range/average statistics have changed greatly since then.

Jason

mking55 · 06-04-2002, 12:52 PM

I am the first to admit that I am far from a mathematical mind.
Secondly, I have been a fan of Bill James writing for over 20 years and own several of his books.
Third, I am almost finished reading the book WinShares.

What's my point? I don't get it. He spent 4+ years figuring this out? What for? Is it valid? What does it mean?

It reads to me, when I can follow it, like "I decided to this, and then I multiplied by that, after which I divided by that, and then I remembered that Peter Palmer is a good guy and I have nothing against him so I spit on his linear weights in a friendly manner, and I took the square root of 7 (don't ask me why but it works) and I got the win shares. Trust it, it's the best stat ever."

For those of you who like it, if you don't mind, please enlighten me with what you like about it and why you think it works. To me, I don't see the reasoning why I believe is should work.

Thank you.

Jason Moyer · 06-04-2002, 01:19 PM

I think understanding the system is easier if you do two things: 1. realize that it's not perfect, but it's the best we have available and 2. look at it in outline form

Basically here is a good summary of how you figure win shares. I'm not going into the different ways that he weighs things, but you'll get my point:

1. Start with team wins
2. Multiply times 3 - this is a team's win shares.
3. Divide this between offense and defense
4. Divide the offensive win shares between players based on their runs created per out.
5. Divide the defensive win shares between pitching and defense.
6. Divide the pitching win shares between pitchers based on how many runs they saved compared to norm, with a slight weight given to win/loss record and saves.
7. Divide the fielding win shares between fielding positions.
8. Divide the fielding position win shares between individual fielders based on weighted stats.

The offensive win share concept I find pretty straightforward. Teams win by scoring as many runs as possible in 27 outs. The runs you create for your team vs. the number of outs you create is a great indicator of your relative worth to the team, with your bat.

The pitching win shares are a bit more complicated. Essentially, a pitcher is given the most credit for striking out people, not allowing home runs, and not allowing walks with some weight given to ERA and W/L/SV. The win shares system assumes that while a pitcher does have an effect on the number of hits he gives up, the defense should also be given credit for those hits. Greg Maddux will allow a lot more hits with a weak defense than he will with a good defense, it's common sense. The things a pitcher has the most control over are K's, BB's, and HR's.

Fielding is perhaps the most complicated, and where most people are likely to disagree with James. However, I think this portion is where he actually contributes his most groundbreaking work ever.

Just to give some examples, catchers are generally credited based on how many runners they throw out, how many assists they record, and how many independent putouts they record (i.e. putouts that aren't strikeouts, since catchers are credited for those as well). There is a ton of insight into both the individual performances of catchers using this method (Johnny Bench's statistics are incredible if you remove strikeouts from his fielding stats) and also how the position itself has evolved over time. Since 1900 the number of independent putouts by catchers in proportion to other putouts has decreased steadily. Why? Are there fewer bang-bang plays at the plate? Fewer popups fielded by the catcher? Who knows. But with this information we can start to really analyze how the numbers depict the game.

Other interesting defensive information that he focuses on... First baseman's independent putouts, i.e. putouts that aren't the results of assists by other infielders. First baseman's independent assists, i.e. assists that aren't the result of quick flips to the pitcher.

Further, the beauty of this is, there is finally concrete proof that a fielder's raw total chances has nothing to do with how good of a fielder he is. By comparing a fielder's statistics to the total balls in play and the situations in which those balls in play are occuring (i.e. are there a lot of men on first? Maybe that's why there are so many double plays!) you start to unravel the puzzle of fielding stats, which are normally meaningless.

My favorite part of calculating Win Shares is going through the tedious bits where you determine expected stats. For instance, given a certain number of balls in play, and a certain ground ball ratio, and a certain number of men on first base (all of these estimated using normal fielding stats) you can estimate how many double plays a team should have made that year, assuming their double play ability was average.

Interesting interesting stuff. If you're having a hard time grasping it, sit down with a notebook someday and make an outline of the formula. It's a lot more straightforward than it appears.

Jason

[ 06-04-2002, 07:22 PM: Message edited by: Jason Moyer ]

mking55 · 06-04-2002, 02:55 PM

Jason, I understand the formulas. I can sit down with pen and paper (if anyone still does that) and calculate them. However, my question is "what makes them valid". In theory, I could come up with a pretty believable theory on how to calculate something. You can get numbers to do your lying for you. I think my question is, reputation aside, what makes his theory valid?

EagleEye_0 · 06-04-2002, 03:02 PM

I dont much about the formula, but from what I've read the basis of the winshare idea sounds like a very valid one. Its not an absolute, but looks like it may be the best we have.

Ryan W. · 06-04-2002, 03:52 PM

If anyone has the formulas for figuring out win shares (or close as we can get in OOTP

), I could plug it into the player pages for my new reference utility. Drop me a line at rwollmuth@hotmail.com.

Thanks!

Jason Moyer · 06-04-2002, 04:08 PM

Hey, wallman, I'll post a URL to this thread when I have my spreadsheets done.

I have the spreadsheet for short-form Win Shares finished, still trying to get the pitcher distributions for the long-form done. Bought Puresim today finally so I'm kinda busy for the night.

Jason

Jason Moyer · 06-04-2002, 04:20 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by mking55:
Jason, I understand the formulas. I can sit down with pen and paper (if anyone still does that) and calculate them. However, my question is "what makes them valid". In theory, I could come up with a pretty believable theory on how to calculate something. You can get numbers to do your lying for you. I think my question is, reputation aside, what makes his theory valid?<hr /></blockquote>Basically, there are numerous reasons I think it works well (including Bill's reputation of course).

Some of the defensive ideas are really out there, and he doesn't explain everything as well as he should IMHO.

I can follow his logic and I find it to be completely sound as far as the Offensive/Defensive split, the Pitching/Fielding split, and the individual win share claims for hitters and pitchers go.

I also agree with his analysis 100% up to the point where claim percentages for individual fielding positions on a team are figured. He even does a good job, later in the book, of explaining the .52 defense weight that he uses.

Where he loses me, and I'm guessing this is where you're having a problem too, is when he applies weights to the claim percentages at each position - I would assume that if you just divided each of those by the total claim percentages that you would get the correct stake of win shares. However, he multiples the claim percentages by different numbers for each position, based on his own opinion of how fielders should be weighted pre-1930 and post-1930. Basically, he says that all things being equal, a catcher accounts for 19% of a team's defensive worth, a shortstop 18%, and so on. I would like to see where that's coming from...is it an observation he's made? I want to see that statistics that he's basing those weights on. I can't say that I particularly disagree with him, but I want to know where they're coming from.

The individual fielder claims are sketchy too, but at least he explains his methods.

Jason

Jason Moyer · 06-04-2002, 04:25 PM

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

Recte44 · 06-05-2002, 08:21 AM

Jason, as a "James-onite", I would love to have access to the Win Shares spreadsheet you are working on. Let me know.

06-04-2002, 08:17 AM	#1
Jason Moyer Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Pittsburgh Posts: 5,003	Win Shares I'm almost finished putting together 2 spreadsheets. One for calculating Short Form Win Shares, and one for calculating Long Form Win Shares. The short form version is finished, the long form is finished except for one step (distributing win shares to individual pitchers). Would these be remotely interesting to anyone? Also, would anyone use a utility that pulled this info from csv exports and calculated it automatically? I'm thinking about refining the spreadsheet further to remove most of the middle steps and then I may write a csv-parser/win share calculator if there is demand for it. The results, even with the long form method, will be less than accurate because of trades/releases/career ending injuries, but I figure it's better than nothing. On the other hand, I dunno if I really want to take the time to code something that 3 people will use. Jason __________________ "I pretty much popped everything cold turkey. We were doing steroids they wouldn't give to horses." -- Tom House "I was very fortunate to have a pitching coach by the name of Tom House...Tom, I really miss those days that we spent in the weight room and out on the field working together." -- Nolan Ryan's HoF Induction Speech

06-04-2002, 09:27 AM	#5
Jason Moyer Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Pittsburgh Posts: 5,003	</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by Subby: <strong>If we get to a point where we can get accurate winshares, then I think there would be good uses for such a utility...unfortuntely we are not there yet...</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">There were 3 statistical obstacles that I remember while compiling the formulas. 1. As you mention, the lack of team splits for players. 2. The lack of Runs/Earned Runs/ERA for Catchers. 3. The lack of accurate league/team double play totals (well, and fielding info in general on a league/team scale). 2 isn't particularly necessary, since you don't use it to distribute win shares among catchers before the 1980's anyway. 1 and 3 kill the entire idea, unfortunately. There are other things that make the process much more tedious than it should be. Having team totals and league totals for every stat tracked in the game would make the process simple. Having team fielding totals split by position would be even better. Ultimately I hope in a future version that it is possible to pull this info from with in the game. For instance, being able to look at putouts on a league scale, then filter them down to putouts made by third basemen, then filter them down to putouts made by third basemen by team. Same thing with all the fielding stats and all the minor hitting stats (SH, SF, etc). Edit: That said, you could accurately calculate Win Shares in HH2k3, and with the way the league leaders boards are setup (absolute genius, IMHO) you could do it easily. Jason <small>[ 06-04-2002, 03:30 PM: Message edited by: Jason Moyer ]</small> __________________ "I pretty much popped everything cold turkey. We were doing steroids they wouldn't give to horses." -- Tom House "I was very fortunate to have a pitching coach by the name of Tom House...Tom, I really miss those days that we spent in the weight room and out on the field working together." -- Nolan Ryan's HoF Induction Speech

06-04-2002, 09:49 AM	#6
bbo4 Minors (Triple A) Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: South of Boston, Ma Posts: 214	I would use it but I still don't know exactly what win shares does for people. What's the theory behind this stat again? __________________ "In 1962 I was named Minor League Player of the Year. It was my second season in the Bigs."

06-04-2002, 10:24 AM	#7
Killebrew Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2001 Posts: 3,326	</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by bbo4: <strong>I would use it but I still don't know exactly what win shares does for people. What's the theory behind this stat again?</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">It's a recent Bill James formula for deciding how many team wins each player is responsible for, anotherwords an effort to determine a players real value. Beyond that simple description it gets complex - James wrote a book ("Win Shares") describing the formula.... Book Description: Win Shares, a revolutionary system that allows for player evaluation across positions, teams and eras, measures the total sum of player contributions in one groundbreaking number. James' latest advancement in the world of statistical analysis is the next big stepping-stone in the "greatest players of all-time" debate. For as long as baseball has been played, fans have struggled to compare the legends of the game with today's stars. Win Shares by Decade is just one of the many sections you'll find inside to help you judge who ranks where among the pantheon of baseball greats. __________________ FOBL Capital City Metropolitans CDL Minnesota Twins

06-04-2002, 12:42 PM	#11
Jason Moyer Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Pittsburgh Posts: 5,003	</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by OldGiants: <strong>Can there be negative win shares? If not, I'd have to question the validity of the analysis.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Team's can't win negative games, so no you can't. Win shares, put simply, is the team's wins multiplied by 3 and then divided among the players on the team. If a player rates negatively when it comes time to claim their win shares, they are dropped from the analysis because they are not contributing to the team's wins. It should also be noted that the last full-time player to have negative offensive claim points in the win shares system was from around 1910, iirc. In order to get 0 win shares you baseically have to sit on the bench for 150 games, and even then it's likely you'll get some credit for the team's wins. Pick up the book, it's very interesting and I feel strongly that most of the system is correct. I think that there should be more weight placed on the defense, or that the weight placed on the defense should be partially determined by runs/game of the league, but overall it is pretty much right on. The beauty of win shares is that you can compare a player from 1920 with a player from 1980 and see who was better, even though the range/average statistics have changed greatly since then. Jason __________________ "I pretty much popped everything cold turkey. We were doing steroids they wouldn't give to horses." -- Tom House "I was very fortunate to have a pitching coach by the name of Tom House...Tom, I really miss those days that we spent in the weight room and out on the field working together." -- Nolan Ryan's HoF Induction Speech

06-04-2002, 08:20 AM	#2
eneubaue Minors (Double A) Join Date: Dec 2001 Posts: 156	Jason, I'd definitely use it...

06-04-2002, 08:57 AM	#3
Subby Major Leagues Join Date: Dec 2001 Posts: 375	It's a good start, to be sure. Unfortunately, OOTP does not track player stats by team within a single year (a games weakness), so it's hard to track how a player does for a certain team if said player gets traded one or more times in a single season... If we get to a point where we can get accurate winshares, then I think there would be good uses for such a utility...unfortuntely we are not there yet...

06-04-2002, 09:04 AM	#4
Scott Vibert Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: My Computer Posts: 8,182	I think it still could be interesting to look at.. but Subby does raise some valid points.

06-04-2002, 11:01 AM	#8
OldGiants Registered User Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 211	Can there be negative win shares? If not, I'd have to question the validity of the analysis.

06-04-2002, 11:27 AM	#10
fluharty All Star Starter Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Morgantown, WV Posts: 1,023	badgering him might be more fun

06-04-2002, 12:52 PM	#12
mking55 All Star Starter Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Boading, China Posts: 1,249	I am the first to admit that I am far from a mathematical mind. Secondly, I have been a fan of Bill James writing for over 20 years and own several of his books. Third, I am almost finished reading the book WinShares. What's my point? I don't get it. He spent 4+ years figuring this out? What for? Is it valid? What does it mean? It reads to me, when I can follow it, like "I decided to this, and then I multiplied by that, after which I divided by that, and then I remembered that Peter Palmer is a good guy and I have nothing against him so I spit on his linear weights in a friendly manner, and I took the square root of 7 (don't ask me why but it works) and I got the win shares. Trust it, it's the best stat ever." For those of you who like it, if you don't mind, please enlighten me with what you like about it and why you think it works. To me, I don't see the reasoning why I believe is should work. Thank you. __________________ Why do you live in Boading? Somebody has to. http://adventuresinjurong.wordpress.com/

06-04-2002, 01:19 PM	#13
Jason Moyer Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Pittsburgh Posts: 5,003	I think understanding the system is easier if you do two things: 1. realize that it's not perfect, but it's the best we have available and 2. look at it in outline form Basically here is a good summary of how you figure win shares. I'm not going into the different ways that he weighs things, but you'll get my point: 1. Start with team wins 2. Multiply times 3 - this is a team's win shares. 3. Divide this between offense and defense 4. Divide the offensive win shares between players based on their runs created per out. 5. Divide the defensive win shares between pitching and defense. 6. Divide the pitching win shares between pitchers based on how many runs they saved compared to norm, with a slight weight given to win/loss record and saves. 7. Divide the fielding win shares between fielding positions. 8. Divide the fielding position win shares between individual fielders based on weighted stats. The offensive win share concept I find pretty straightforward. Teams win by scoring as many runs as possible in 27 outs. The runs you create for your team vs. the number of outs you create is a great indicator of your relative worth to the team, with your bat. The pitching win shares are a bit more complicated. Essentially, a pitcher is given the most credit for striking out people, not allowing home runs, and not allowing walks with some weight given to ERA and W/L/SV. The win shares system assumes that while a pitcher does have an effect on the number of hits he gives up, the defense should also be given credit for those hits. Greg Maddux will allow a lot more hits with a weak defense than he will with a good defense, it's common sense. The things a pitcher has the most control over are K's, BB's, and HR's. Fielding is perhaps the most complicated, and where most people are likely to disagree with James. However, I think this portion is where he actually contributes his most groundbreaking work ever. Just to give some examples, catchers are generally credited based on how many runners they throw out, how many assists they record, and how many independent putouts they record (i.e. putouts that aren't strikeouts, since catchers are credited for those as well). There is a ton of insight into both the individual performances of catchers using this method (Johnny Bench's statistics are incredible if you remove strikeouts from his fielding stats) and also how the position itself has evolved over time. Since 1900 the number of independent putouts by catchers in proportion to other putouts has decreased steadily. Why? Are there fewer bang-bang plays at the plate? Fewer popups fielded by the catcher? Who knows. But with this information we can start to really analyze how the numbers depict the game. Other interesting defensive information that he focuses on... First baseman's independent putouts, i.e. putouts that aren't the results of assists by other infielders. First baseman's independent assists, i.e. assists that aren't the result of quick flips to the pitcher. Further, the beauty of this is, there is finally concrete proof that a fielder's raw total chances has nothing to do with how good of a fielder he is. By comparing a fielder's statistics to the total balls in play and the situations in which those balls in play are occuring (i.e. are there a lot of men on first? Maybe that's why there are so many double plays!) you start to unravel the puzzle of fielding stats, which are normally meaningless. My favorite part of calculating Win Shares is going through the tedious bits where you determine expected stats. For instance, given a certain number of balls in play, and a certain ground ball ratio, and a certain number of men on first base (all of these estimated using normal fielding stats) you can estimate how many double plays a team should have made that year, assuming their double play ability was average. Interesting interesting stuff. If you're having a hard time grasping it, sit down with a notebook someday and make an outline of the formula. It's a lot more straightforward than it appears. Jason <small>[ 06-04-2002, 07:22 PM: Message edited by: Jason Moyer ]</small> __________________ "I pretty much popped everything cold turkey. We were doing steroids they wouldn't give to horses." -- Tom House "I was very fortunate to have a pitching coach by the name of Tom House...Tom, I really miss those days that we spent in the weight room and out on the field working together." -- Nolan Ryan's HoF Induction Speech

06-04-2002, 02:55 PM	#14
mking55 All Star Starter Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Boading, China Posts: 1,249	Jason, I understand the formulas. I can sit down with pen and paper (if anyone still does that) and calculate them. However, my question is "what makes them valid". In theory, I could come up with a pretty believable theory on how to calculate something. You can get numbers to do your lying for you. I think my question is, reputation aside, what makes his theory valid? __________________ Why do you live in Boading? Somebody has to. http://adventuresinjurong.wordpress.com/

06-04-2002, 03:02 PM	#15
EagleEye_0 All Star Starter Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 1,426	I dont much about the formula, but from what I've read the basis of the winshare idea sounds like a very valid one. Its not an absolute, but looks like it may be the best we have.

06-04-2002, 03:52 PM	#16
Ryan W. Jack of all trades Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Somewhere, not sure where. Maybe nearby, maybe far away. Posts: 1,370	If anyone has the formulas for figuring out win shares (or close as we can get in OOTP ), I could plug it into the player pages for my new reference utility. Drop me a line at rwollmuth@hotmail.com. Thanks! __________________

06-04-2002, 04:08 PM	#17
Jason Moyer Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Pittsburgh Posts: 5,003	Hey, wallman, I'll post a URL to this thread when I have my spreadsheets done. I have the spreadsheet for short-form Win Shares finished, still trying to get the pitcher distributions for the long-form done. Bought Puresim today finally so I'm kinda busy for the night. Jason __________________ "I pretty much popped everything cold turkey. We were doing steroids they wouldn't give to horses." -- Tom House "I was very fortunate to have a pitching coach by the name of Tom House...Tom, I really miss those days that we spent in the weight room and out on the field working together." -- Nolan Ryan's HoF Induction Speech

06-04-2002, 04:20 PM	#18
Jason Moyer Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Pittsburgh Posts: 5,003	</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by mking55: <strong>Jason, I understand the formulas. I can sit down with pen and paper (if anyone still does that) and calculate them. However, my question is "what makes them valid". In theory, I could come up with a pretty believable theory on how to calculate something. You can get numbers to do your lying for you. I think my question is, reputation aside, what makes his theory valid?</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Basically, there are numerous reasons I think it works well (including Bill's reputation of course). Some of the defensive ideas are really out there, and he doesn't explain everything as well as he should IMHO. I can follow his logic and I find it to be completely sound as far as the Offensive/Defensive split, the Pitching/Fielding split, and the individual win share claims for hitters and pitchers go. I also agree with his analysis 100% up to the point where claim percentages for individual fielding positions on a team are figured. He even does a good job, later in the book, of explaining the .52 defense weight that he uses. Where he loses me, and I'm guessing this is where you're having a problem too, is when he applies weights to the claim percentages at each position - I would assume that if you just divided each of those by the total claim percentages that you would get the correct stake of win shares. However, he multiples the claim percentages by different numbers for each position, based on his own opinion of how fielders should be weighted pre-1930 and post-1930. Basically, he says that all things being equal, a catcher accounts for 19% of a team's defensive worth, a shortstop 18%, and so on. I would like to see where that's coming from...is it an observation he's made? I want to see that statistics that he's basing those weights on. I can't say that I particularly disagree with him, but I want to know where they're coming from. The individual fielder claims are sketchy too, but at least he explains his methods. Jason __________________ "I pretty much popped everything cold turkey. We were doing steroids they wouldn't give to horses." -- Tom House "I was very fortunate to have a pitching coach by the name of Tom House...Tom, I really miss those days that we spent in the weight room and out on the field working together." -- Nolan Ryan's HoF Induction Speech

06-04-2002, 04:25 PM	#19
Jason Moyer Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Pittsburgh Posts: 5,003	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 "I was very fortunate to have a pitching coach by the name of Tom House...Tom, I really miss those days that we spent in the weight room and out on the field working together." -- Nolan Ryan's HoF Induction Speech

06-05-2002, 08:21 AM	#20
Recte44 Global Moderator Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Oconomowoc, WI Posts: 2,754	Jason, as a "James-onite", I would love to have access to the Win Shares spreadsheet you are working on. Let me know. __________________ Matt Rectenwald Commissioner, GM: Las Vegas Hustlers, The Brewster Baseball Association- fictional league (JOIN NOW)