71% or 72%? Seeing as how the exact definition of repl level is a bit fuzzy anyway, why not simply use the nice round 70% value that I posted on Fanhome a month or 2 ago?
Posted by on 01/04 at 09:05 PM
Re Re Placement Levels
January 02, 2005
OK, here’s another take on Win Shares replacement level. Someday I may get it right.
This may be the winter of my Replacement Level discontent. I got a lot of superb feedback from my previous article regarding Win Shares Replacement Level, and so I went back to the drawing board a bit. Unfortunately, a few other projects got in my way, and I’m only now getting around to posting my results. Sorry about the time delay.
I’ll post my update in a few shorts articles. First, here’s a corrected table of Replacement Level Win Shares. GuyDM mentioned the obvious: I was calculating Replacement Level incorrectly. Instead of taking the Replacements’ Win Shares Percent (WSP) as a percent of the Regulars, I should take the WSP as a percent of the overall WSP for the position.
I don’t know if that made any sense to you, but here is an updated table of Win Shares Replacement Level by position. To calculate a player’s WSAR, you would multiply his expected Win Shares by the position-specific Replacement Level Percent, and subtract that total from the player’s total Win Shares.
Oy. Enough. This table is just like the one from the previous table, but it also includes each position’s overall WSP, and a recalculated Replacement Level. Overall, it looks like a Replacement Level of about 71% or 72% is appropriate, for a Win Total of 58 games over a 162-game schedule.
| Regulars | Replacements | Overall WSP |
Replacement Level |
|||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Position | WS | ExpWS | WSP | WS | ExpWS | WSP | ||
| Outfield | 3058 | 2523 | 0.606 | 724 | 858 | 0.422 | 0.559 | 75% |
| Second Base | 906 | 818 | 0.554 | 243 | 319 | 0.380 | 0.505 | 75% |
| First Base | 1067 | 865 | 0.617 | 246 | 296 | 0.416 | 0.566 | 74% |
| Catcher | 748 | 698 | 0.536 | 200 | 286 | 0.350 | 0.482 | 73% |
| Third Base | 915 | 841 | 0.544 | 191 | 287 | 0.334 | 0.491 | 68% |
| Shortstop | 920 | 871 | 0.529 | 143 | 220 | 0.325 | 0.487 | 67% |
Heh. Actually, I was thinking of using 71.57%. What do you think?
Seriously, you’re right, David. Anything around 70% seems appropriate right now. I’m sure that you, I or others will come along with new insights about the whole replacement level thing.
Posted by studes on 01/04 at 09:13 PM
Well, one thing you can play with is converting the pennants-added value approach to WSh. I’m sure you recall that article by Wolverton. I tried finding the best repl estimate to match up with pennants added. A typical backup repl level is -20 Slwts/162G. I get a level of about -12/162 as a proxy for giving some added value to high-peak seasons, according to the spotty info in the article.. Doing a quick conversion (which may be wrong on a detailed follow-up), I’m getting about 82% in WSh as opposed to the normal 70%. Is this higher repl level “better”? Who knows.
Posted by on 01/05 at 09:52 AM
Page 1 of 1 pages
| <<Previous Article: Shortstops and Defensive Win Shares | Next Article: Hall of Fame Win Shares>> |