Article: Anatomy Of A Mauer Boo

[Ultima Ratio]

Yeah... that's not how WAR works. Anyways, if he plays 140 games his WAR at this pace will be (140/22)*.6 = 3.8.

Thrylos said "WAR is cumulative. The more someone plays the higher it is. It is good for overall career value discussions (like HOF, draft retrospects etc) but not for immediate value... I think something like WAR/100 (PAs) is much better indicator of value at a particular moment/season."

 

Yeah thanks guys, I concede that using WAR was not the best stat, though as you both show, we can get a season's approximation from it with some calculations, though this depends on games played and at bats... unknown variables. The reason why I used WAR to begin with was because it includes defense and base running -- to head off the objection that I'm not taking into account and appreciating the full value of Mauer's performance (besides just hitting by using wOBA or another stat like OPS).

 

http://twinsdaily.com/webkit-fake-url://5F9336BE-A507-472F-9E82-62D5DB442650/image.tiffLet's just say this, in almost every statistic (I can't find one), Mauer is not performing like he did in 2009. It was his performance in 2009 that lead to his current contract. Therefore, I again conclude, in agreement with the author of this thread, that the anatomy of the boo/criticism of Mauer is not that he's playing poorly, but that he's not playing at the level he is being paid to perform at.

[Ultima Ratio]

Well, it's not going to let me post a screen capture.

[Jim H]

"Mauer may well be a wonderful player, and he might even get into the Hall of Fame some day, but I'd be shocked if the Twins ever won a World Series with Mauer in their uniform"

 

dwintheiser, My guess is that whether the Twins win a World Series with Mauer in the linup, will hinge more on the Twins finding or developing decent starting pitching than Mauer's leadership.

 

Puckett was universally lauded for his leadership but he "led" the Twins to far more losing seasons than winning ones. The winning seasons of 87, 88, 91, and 92 were all hallmarked by at least decent starting pitching. Interestingly enough, the Twins actually had a better record in 88 than 87, also a better record in 92 than 91, they just didn't win the divisons those years. I don't know if Puckett's leadership was better in those winning years than the losing ones or not.

 

I don't want to be a total smart ass here, but I don't think Mauer's leadership has much to do with the losing last year or this year. If the starting pitching somehow gets straightened away this year, we could very well see the Twins make a run back toward contention. We also we likely get to read how Mauer and Morneau helped "hold the team together thru all the early losing". That will be especially true if both start hitting good.

[Paul]

...And no matter how good Mauer is as a player, if he's not going to be a leader, I don't see the Twins getting the best performance out of their ballclub. Simple as that.

"And no matter how good Mauer is as a player" there will be no end to the blame we will heap on him.

[StormJH1]

Mauer may well be a wonderful player, and he might even get into the Hall of Fame some day, but I'd be shocked if the Twins ever won a World Series with Mauer in their uniform. Here's why I think that:

 

- Back when the Twins let Torii Hunter leave as a free agent, I made something like the following comment (on the old Twins Territory blog, if I remember right): "The Twins would eventually have to go from being Torii Hunter's team to being Joe Mauer's team, and if this is what it takes for that to happen, I'm OK with it." Except the Twins didn't become Joe Mauer's team, they became Johan Santana's team.

 

Well, that's OK, you might say. Santana was a legitimate superstar and was certainly capable of being team leader. Not a huge issue, right?

 

- The Twins then traded Santana so that they wouldn't lose him as a free agent. At that point, you'd expect the team to become Joe Mauer's team. Except the Twins didn't become Joe Mauer's team, they became Michael Cuddyer's team.

 

Well...that's still OK, you might say. After all, Cuddyer was the longest-tenured Twin, and Gardy does love his veterans. Cuddy was certainly respected in the clubhouse. Not a big deal, you might think.

 

- Now Cuddyer is gone and...

 

...is this Joe Mauer's team? Maybe Mauer wants to be the quiet clubhouse leader a la Amos Otis on the early '80s Royals teams or Bernie Williams on the late 90s Yankees teams. But teams also need visible leaders, and those leaders are generally the team's best players: George Brett on the Royals and Derek Jeter on the Yankees respectively, if we're continuing that analogy. The only thing I'm certain of is that Mauer doesn't want to be that kind of leader, because if he did, he's had plenty of opportunities to demonstrate it.

 

And no matter how good Mauer is as a player, if he's not going to be a leader, I don't see the Twins getting the best performance out of their ballclub. Simple as that.

This is kind of a new take on a well-beaten topic, and I like it. You can beat down his argument and say things like "he's just one guy" or that the charges about his "leadership ability" are either unfair or irrelevant. But I think this point exactly captures why people are so frustrated with this guy. It's not the single-digit home runs or the defensive approach at the plate. The injury issues are a part of it, but even the most ardent Mauer hater probably believes that Mauer wants to be in the lineup and helping his team whenever he can.

 

No, the problem with Mauer is that he doesn't WANT this to be his team. And like it or not, we paid him to make it his team. Everything from the St. Paul pedigree to Kemp's commercials with his mom, we looked at the numbers and the uneven track record and everyone KNEW we were overpaying him. And everyone, including me, came to the conclusion that "you gotta do it anyway".

 

Mauer can't get develop mystery illnesses and disappear from the media for two months, like he did in 2011. If he had a stronger presence in the media and in the community, and took ownership of this team, good and bad, we wouldn't be having these discussions. There are problems with Mauer that you can't measure with sabermetrics.

[Paul]

"And no matter how good Mauer is as a player" there will be no end to the blame we will heap on him.

But if he would only give back some money...we could ease up.

[StormJH1]

WAR is cumulative. The more someone plays the higher it is. It is good for overall career value discussions (like HOF, draft retrospects etc) but not for immediate value... I think something like WAR/100 (PAs) is much better indicator of value at a particular moment/season.

And I see your point about WAR, and raise you with the argument that "WAR is complete and utter garbage". The whole point of the Mauer defenders on this thread is that "Mauer is a very good player, but he's just 1/9 of a lineup". Then they throw out a WAR number which is synthetic number translating individual contributions into a team accomplishment: WINS.

 

I'm a fan of statistic that take good outcomes of things hitters are supposed to do and measure them. "Hits" does that. So do home runs, or batting average. I'm also a fan of statistics that take desirable outcomes of hitters and try to weight them for how desirable they are. Slugging percentage and OPS would be examples of that.

 

Where I struggle is when you show me two numbers like 2.2 vs. 1.7 and tell me that Player A has the higher "WAR" and is therefore the better player. Really? We know how many wins the Twins have. So why do I care about a number that tells me how many more wins the Twins should have playing Mauer as opposed to "replacement player X", when you didn't even use WINS to calculate the stat in any way? Sorry for the rant, but WAR has become like the "currency" on Twins Daily, and it needs to stop. At least the quoted poster acknowledges that it's worthless for determining "immediate value".

 

WAR....*huh!*....what is it good for? Absolutely nothing...

[JB_Iowa]

Leadership is something that is very difficult to judge from the outside but the defining moment for me in Joe Mauer's leadership (or lack thereof) was when he rehabbed in Florida last year.

 

Gardenhire wanted him to get some rehab days in Rochester. And, to me, it would have been a nice way for Joe Mauer to acknowledge the importance of Rochester to the organization and to reward Rochester's fans for putting up with the misery of last season.

 

But Mauer seemingly wouldn't do that. We'll never know, I guess, about the exact discussions between Bill Smith and Joe Mauer about a rehab stint in Rochester. On the other hand, does anyone think that if Ron Gardenhire and Joe Mauer both thought Mauer should spend a few days in Rochester, Smith would have prevented it?

 

Of course not. It is just proof to me that Mauer doesn't understand his leadership role within this organization. They aren't paying him just for his production on the field.

[CDog]

It's not the defensive approach at the plate. The injury issues are a part of it, but even the most ardent Mauer hater probably believes that Mauer wants to be in the lineup and helping his team whenever he can.

 

No, the problem with Mauer is that he doesn't WANT this to be his team.

 

Mauer can't get develop mystery illnesses and disappear from the media for two months, like he did in 2011.

The "defensive approach" that yields ridiculously offensive output? As for the second part quoted in the first paragraph above, you haven't read or listened to a lot of morons that I have. Many, many people believe exactly that (or at least pretend to, in my opinion, for the sake of their own ego).

 

How do you know what Mauer wants?

 

I never felt any sense of mystery over why Mauer was out in 2011. If you could read and not get caught up in mob mentality, it wasn't that hard. His legs didn't recover strength after knee surgery. The end.

[CDog]

And I see your point about WAR, and raise you with the argument that "WAR is complete and utter garbage". The whole point of the Mauer defenders on this thread is that "Mauer is a very good player, but he's just 1/9 of a lineup". Then they throw out a WAR number which is synthetic number translating individual contributions into a team accomplishment: WINS.

 

I'm a fan of statistic that take good outcomes of things hitters are supposed to do and measure them. "Hits" does that. So do home runs, or batting average. I'm also a fan of statistics that take desirable outcomes of hitters and try to weight them for how desirable they are. Slugging percentage and OPS would be examples of that.

 

Where I struggle is when you show me two numbers like 2.2 vs. 1.7 and tell me that Player A has the higher "WAR" and is therefore the better player. Really? We know how many wins the Twins have. So why do I care about a number that tells me how many more wins the Twins should have playing Mauer as opposed to "replacement player X", when you didn't even use WINS to calculate the stat in any way? Sorry for the rant, but WAR has become like the "currency" on Twins Daily, and it needs to stop. At least the quoted poster acknowledges that it's worthless for determining "immediate value".

 

WAR....*huh!*....what is it good for? Absolutely nothing...

This seems to be an indication that you don't understand how WAR is calculated or what it's measuring. It measures exactly what your second paragraph says you want it to.

[Mike Sixel]

"And no matter how good Mauer is as a player" there will be no end to the blame we will heap on him.

If you want to be the face of the franchise, you have to take the good with the bad. QBs get booed for the whole team's effort, not just their's, for example. If you want the big bucks, if you want the entire marketing campaing to built around you, if you want to be the face of the team, you need to realize you are going to take the brunt of the boos and badness, along with the goodness. If he didn't want that, he shouldn't have embraced it.

[Guest USAFChief]

This seems to be an indication that you don't understand how WAR is calculated or what it's measuring. It measures exactly what your second paragraph says you want it to.

Talk about irony.

 

Can you offer a single shred of hard evidence WAR does what you say it does?

 

I thought not.

[Mike Sixel]

USA, that's what it tries to do, no one can prove a positive....but that second paragraph is exactly what WAR is trying to do. And, it is based on hits, and slg and everything else you expect it to be based on.

[Paul]

If you want to be the face of the franchise, you have to take the good with the bad. QBs get booed for the whole team's effort, not just their's, for example. If you want the big bucks, if you want the entire marketing campaing to built around you, if you want to be the face of the team, you need to realize you are going to take the brunt of the boos and badness, along with the goodness. If he didn't want that, he shouldn't have embraced it.

If only you were there negotiating for the Twins, Mike. Kidding aside, what makes you think the Twins didn't know exactly what they were purchasing with their 183 million?

[Guest USAFChief]

USA, that's what it tries to do, no one can prove a positive....but that second paragraph is exactly what WAR is trying to do. And, it is based on hits, and slg and everything else you expect it to be based on.

I know exactly what WAR claims to measure. I'd venture I know more about WAR than most everyone here who tosses it about in an attempt to sound sophisticated. And of course people are free to do that.

 

But I get irritated when people claim WAR has been proven to measure anything. It hasn't.

 

I also disagree that no one can prove a positive. I think you have that backwards.

[Mike Sixel]

you can only prove something cannot happen, not that it can happen...

 

No one that is a true WAR believer would claim that it has been proven to do anything, not on the Fangraphs site.

[CDog]

Talk about irony.

 

Can you offer a single shred of hard evidence WAR does what you say it does?

 

I thought not.

Excellent argument. You've pulled off the written equivalent of putting your fingers in your ears and running around the room shouting, "Lalalalalala I can't hear you!"

 

WAR is a mathematical combination of measurement made from recorded observations. That's what I "say it does." The documentation is available for anyone who wants it. You claim to have read it. You have exhibited that you do not understand what you have read. In another thread you made claims that imply either a) you think temperature, pressure, and time are measured on the same scale in the same units or that you don't get the idea of adding. In that same thread, you claimed that arithmetic is not objective. At least this time you didn't make any claims quite that embarrassing, you only acted childish and ignorant.

 

We get that you don't understand the statistic. It almost seems "personal," though. Did WAR do something to you? It's just math, dude. It's not the enemy.

[Guest USAFChief]

Excellent argument. You've pulled off the written equivalent of putting your fingers in your ears and running around the room shouting, "Lalalalalala I can't hear you!"

 

WAR is a mathematical combination of measurement made from recorded observations. That's what I "say it does." The documentation is available for anyone who wants it. You claim to have read it. You have exhibited that you do not understand what you have read. In another thread you made claims that imply either a) you think temperature, pressure, and time are measured on the same scale in the same units or that you don't get the idea of adding. In that same thread, you claimed that arithmetic is not objective. At least this time you didn't make any claims quite that embarrassing, you only acted childish and ignorant.

 

We get that you don't understand the statistic. It almost seems "personal," though. Did WAR do something to you? It's just math, dude. It's not the enemy.

Previously you stated WAR "measures exactly" what another poster said he wanted measured.

 

Now you're backing away from that statement.

 

I'll accept that as a victory and humbly move on.

[CDog]

Previously you stated WAR "measures exactly" what another poster said he wanted measured.

 

Now you're backing away from that statement.

 

I'll accept that as a victory.

So you tell a lie and count that as a victory? That's kinda sad.

[bird]

Back to booing Mauer...those of you who have managed stock portfolios know that a stock can go down because investors don't know what to expect in the future. When uncertainty is prevalent, a vast majority of investors get real negative and very emotional. This is when the minority buys what the negative guys sell.

 

Mauer's stock has fallen because we don't know what to expect from him yet. I think the boos are from negative, uncertain fans. This WAR stuff? Nah. These boos have nothing really to do with a deep analysis by the boo birds.

 

Now, I've thought of booing General Soreness too. You know, I don't want him to change his swing to produce more power. But dammit, couldn't he occasionally adjust his swing in hitters counts and look to loft it out? Geez.