How Can the 2024 Season Be Viewed as a Success for Byron Buxton?

[UK Twin]

I'm not keen on putting a minimum number of games that Buck needs to play in CF to be a success. What we need is Buck to be in the right frame of mind to be a force at the plate. It's certainly very encouraging that his ST workload is mirroring Correa's. His body seems to be coping with returning to CF. 

All being well, I think we can be hopeful of him hitting over 30 HR's and driving in 80+. 

[rv78]

17 minutes ago, UK Twin said:

In a perfect world yes but that doesn't exist. If we look at some other star players, Ohtani won't be pitching at all this year and will be limited to DH. Angels will almost certainly manage Trout's workload to some extent after his injury problems. 

Both are earning a LOT more than Buxton (backloaded contract notwithstanding).

If Buxton does get any of the incentive bonuses in his contract then quite frankly we'll all be delighted and the 15mill AAV will an absolute bargain. 

The last 2 CFers for the Twins that showed any talent remotely comparable to Buxton were Puckett and Torii Hunter. They must have lived in a perfect world that didn't exist. They played everyday. Shame on me for expecting that out of the great Byron Buxton. Between Buck and Sano, they're two of the most highly OVER-RATED and OVER-HYPED players ever to put on a Twins uniform.

[Whitey333]

Anyone the values Buxtons "production"  in his career at over $150 million is certai ly not watching him "play"  To play you must be on the field or in the lineup regularly.  That value for Buxton is as absurd as the new metric era is in the game itself.

[Trov]

For me, if he can play 80 games in CF and 20 plus games as DH with above average offense, while stealing some bases, it will be a huge success.  I do not expect it at all.  It is great he is playing CF, but he has found about one hundred different ways to miss games in his career, I am sure he will find a new way even if he knee holds up. 

[Otaknam]

We don’t have to over think this. It’s about his health. No pulled hamstring running to first base. No concussion running into the wall. No broken hand when hit by a pitch. Sarcastically no hangnails or mystery injuries that keep him on the injured list for a month. He needs to play 140 games, with at least 120 in the outfield. 260 BA, high OPS, 25 home runs, 90 RBI. 

[bean5302]

15 hours ago, mnfireman said:

Several publications/websites are out there that have put a $$$ value on WAR, and $8 MM is about the value they have  come up with....so yes you can put a value on WAR.

That's not exactly what those values indicate. The $8MM value is basically the total money spent / total production for free agents that teams signed. It's the free agency market value. Not truly production value.

I generally advocate for a $6MM per WAR value for free agents as it seems like teams generally pay about $6MM per WAR they expect to get. i.e. player is expected to be a 4 WAR player = $24MM AAV. 5 WAR player = $30MM AAV, etc.

What happens is the player expected to produce 5 WAR for $32MM actually produces 4 WAR so the teams wind up paying about $8MM/WAR due to lower than expected production.

In terms of valuing WAR directly, it is absolutely not a direct correlation in reality and most sources make that very clear. Fangraphs talks about that specifically in that 1 WAR for an 87 win team is worth an enormous amount more than for, say, a 68 win team or a 105 win team.

I'd also say the more value a player generates over the expected every day player is truly worth more because the additional contribution they provide reduces the burden on the rest of the entire roster. The roster is fixed. 26 people. Those 26 people need to contribute a total of about 44 WAR to expect to get into the playoffs. 9 hitters 2.5 WAR, 5 backups 1.0 WAR, 5 starters 2.3 WAR, 8 bullpen 0.6 WAR. Something like that. A position player who generates 10 WAR means the rest of the starting position players only need to average 1.5 WAR instead of 2.5 WAR, and 1.5 WAR players are easy to come by for cheap.

[mnfireman]

2 hours ago, bean5302 said:

In terms of valuing WAR directly, it is absolutely not a direct correlation in reality and most sources make that very clear. Fangraphs talks about that specifically in that 1 WAR for an 87 win team is worth an enormous amount more than for, say, a 68 win team or a 105 win team.

 

So, in 1972 Steve Carlton put up a 12.5 WAR season, the second best post-1927 WAR season, for the 59-97 Phillies and Gaylord Perry put up 11 WAR for the 72-84 Guardians. By this logic, the A's (WS Champions) Joe Rudi (6.1 WAR), Catfish Hunter (5.9 WAR) and two players at 5.6 WAR, were each worth close to or more than either of those 2. It wasn't their fault they put up GREAT seasons for also-ran teams. That is why I don't place much value on those type of metrics, especially when the metrics have to be quantified.