Mookie Betts Is the WAR Champion of 2018
Before examining Mookie Betts and Mookie Betts’ excellent 2018 season in earnest, allow me first to address some claims I have no intention of making in what follows. I will not, for example, state definitively that Mookie Betts is the most talented player in the majors. I will not suggest that Betts ought obviously to be the MVP of the American League. I will not argue that Wins Above Replacement is an infallible measure of player value. I will also not contend that FanGraphs’ version of WAR is necessarily superior to others that exist.
What I will say is that WAR is a metric designed to account for the ways in which a player contributes on the field and to translate those various contributions into wins. While the methodology employed by FanGraphs differs slightly from the one used by Baseball-Reference, for instance, both are constructed with the same end in mind — namely, to estimate the value of a ballplayer relative to freely available talent. Each represents an attempt to answer a good question in a responsible way.
According to the version of WAR presented at this site, Betts was the major leagues’ most valuable player this year. By FanGraphs’ calculations, he was worth just over 10 wins relative to a replacement player. As Craig Edwards recently noted, that 10-win threshold is pretty significant: the “worst” player to reach it since the beginning of last century is Norm Cash. Cash, according to Jay Jaffe’s JAWS metric, was more or less his era’s Mark Teixeira. Whatever one’s opinion of Mark Teixeira, it’s encouraging if he represents the floor for a player’s career projection. It’s difficult to record a 10-win season by accident. Mookie Betts is very good.
What follows is an account of how Betts produced those 10 wins — an anatomy, as it were, of a historically great season. By examining the constituent elements of WAR — and Betts’ performance in each category — it’s possible perhaps to arrive at a better sense of what is required for a player to distinguish himself amongst his peers. It might also possibly allows us to better appreciate what a special talent Betts has become.
Batting Runs: +62.2
The batting element of WAR is calculated, more or less, by translating all the hitterly events (walk, single, double, etc.) into runs. By this measure, Betts ranked second among all major leaguers behind Mike Trout — and finished just ahead of teammate J.D. Martinez.
For all his success before the 2018 campaign, Betts was a much more dangerous hitter this year — and his game was basically without flaw. He walked more often than most major leaguers, made contact more often than most major leaguers, and barreled the ball more often than most major leaguers. That translated into a batting title and the fourth-highest isolated-power mark among the league’s 140 qualified hitters. Mookie Bets both hit and hit for power.
According to Statcast, Betts hit for the most power on May 2nd. Over the course of the whole season, he hit only two balls an estimated 440 feet or better this year. Both occurred on the same day and both were recorded against Danny Duffy.
Here’s somewhat unnecessary video footage of the first:
And perhaps even less essential footage of the second:
Baserunning Runs: +6.9
While Betts’ game power has emerged mostly since his promotion to the majors, his footspeed has been regarded as asset for the duration of his professional career. Indeed, even Baseball America’s draft report for Betts was dedicated largely to the impact that Betts’ abilities as a runner would have on his value.
Of Betts, Baseball America wrote in 2011:
He’s an above-average runner but not a true burner. However, he has good baserunning instincts, and his running ability should play in pro ball offensively. Some scouts believe the speed will play better defensively and want to shift him to center field. Others believe his solid first-step quickness and quick-twitch athleticism give him a chance to stay in the infield, though more likely at second base than at short.
Betts really isn’t among the league’s fastest major leaguers. His sprint-speed mark of 28.1 feet per second this year, for example, places him within the top-third of all major leaguers by that measure but not much higher than that. As anticipated, though, his instincts allow the raw tool to play up. By the methodology employed by FanGraphs — which accounts for stolen-base success (wSB), other baserunning acts (UBR), and double-play avoidance (wGDP) — Betts has produced the second-most baserunning runs among all major leaguers over the four years during which he’s recorded a full complement of plate appearances. He sits behind only Billy Hamilton by that measure. This year, he finished eighth among the league’s 140 qualifiers, his 30-for-36 stolen-base record yielding 3.1 runs, the seventh-best mark among all major leaguers.
With a view, once again, to complementing words with only somewhat relevant images, here’s video of Betts’ 30th stolen base of the season:
Positional Adjustment: -5.3
Measuring defense is a two-part endeavor. Metrics like Defensive Runs Saved (DRS) and Ultimate Zone Rating(UZR) are used to assess a fielder’s positive- or negative-run contributions, but those figures only measure a performance relative to players at the same position — and position plays a large role in determining a player’s overall value as a defender. While Cody Bellinger has actually acquitted himself well in center field despite having played the bulk of his major-league innings at first base, that’s an atypical outcome. (Imagine, by way of comparison, Jesus Aguilar attempting a similar feat.) A full season of the former position is worth considerably more (+2.5 runs) than the latter (-12.5).
Betts isn’t a prototypical right fielder. Indeed, he recorded zero appearances at the position as a minor leaguer, making almost all his starts during that period at second base. The presence of Dustin Pedroia moved him to the outfield, however, and the presence of Jackie Bradley Jr. to right, which is where he has resided since the beginning of 2016 campaign. His -5.3 figure for positional adjustment reflects a 2018 season spent mostly in right (-7.5 per 162 games) but with a handful of center-field starts adding a bit of positive value, as well.
Fielding Runs: +16.8
While Betts is technically used by the Red Sox as right fielder, he possesses the athleticism of player who occupies a much more challenging place on the defensive spectrum. This is revealed by the numbers. Since the beginning of the 2016 campaign, Betts has recorded a +57.8 UZR in right field — the best single mark by any player at any position. That more than compensates for the negative positional adjustment of right field, placing Betts fifth among all qualifiers over the last three years. His +15.3 runs in right field this year were the second-most by a player at his respective position. (And he added to that figure with a few stray runs in center.) Overall, despite passing the majority of the season in right field, Betts was baseball’s 12th-most valuable defender according to our calculations.
Betts made two plays this year, according to the criteria used by Inside Edge, on which there was a “remote” chance of converting an out — that is, somewhere between 1% and 10%. Those are represented by the red dots below.

The first of those catches occurred on April 24th and was rated as a “four-star play” by Statcast. (Credit to reader greenie for noting that the wrong video had been embedded here.)
The second happened on May 13th and was designated as a “five-star play”:
*****
This doesn’t represent the totality of the WAR calculation. To reach the final number, one also has to add a league adjustment (+1.8 runs in Betts’ case), replacement adjustment (+18.4), and then to convert those runs into wins. (For the purposes of 2018 WAR, a win is worth roughly 9.7 runs.) Those figures all have less to do with Betts himself, though, and more with the accounting necessary for the final mark to answer the question it purports to answer.
Along those lines, I should also note that the figures on the WAR leaderboard are subject to some slight alterations. The defensive numbers don’t include Game 163 yet (and won’t till Sunday). Plus, further minor adjustments to the data or methodology could add or subtract a tenth of a run or two.
Whatever minor adjustments might occur, however, none of them will invalidate Betts’ outsize influence on a postseason-bound Boston club or render his play any less impressive. Betts is one of baseball’s best hitters, best runners, and best fielders. That combination of talents is rare — but also necessary when endeavoring to author a campaign as notable as the one Betts has just produced.
Carson Cistulli has published a book of aphorisms called Spirited Ejaculations of a New Enthusiast.
The first of the two remote catches didn’t look like it had a 1-10% chance to be caught. He coming in at a pretty decent angle to track the ball and doesn’t even go at full speed and catches it pretty high off the grass. I think he would have caught the ball if it were another five feet away. Even off the bat it didn’t look like a definite hit, Second play was incredible and Betts is obviously a fantastic player so this is just a comment on that one play.
Agreed. Does anyone know the basis for the catch difficulty? Is it just the percentage of similarly hit balls that are caught (regardless of defenders and defensive alignment)? Does it take into account that Betts is playing RF? Does it take into account where he was positioned when contact is made?
If a catcher sprinted to the OF and somehow caught a ball hit to the track, would that be a “more difficult” catch than if an OF caught it?
It includes hang time, velocity of the hit, position of the player, and distance traveled. It doesn’t take into account walls or foul territory which would add even more to that catch
It’s tough to tell for certain but it looks like he had the batter shaded well over toward CF and/or got an insanely good jump on that ball too.
The first ball was extremely difficult to catch. What makes Betts amazing is that his first step, speed and route efficiency made it look easy. The second catch reflected more of his speed, while the first was all the stuff you don’t see on TV.
Would be great to see where he started out on that play, a second before the camera cut to him. Based just on the catch probability I’m guessing it was a long way from where he first showed up on screen. Even on the replay he’s already well in motion by the time you see him.
yeah super players have just started running when the camera cuts them so you know he at least got a better jump than that. even in the second play, it doesn’t look like he’s going that fast, but his path is just so direct.
The first video is tagged as April 24th, but the video is from the game at Oakland on April 20th. Mookie did have a 4-star catch in the game on the 24th, in Toronto, with a catch probability of 31%, that looked way more impressive than the above video. I can’t find any Statcast info for the catch posted above.
The catch from the 24th is here:
https://www.mlb.com/redsox/video/c-1972265783?tid=240568594
You are very correct. Duly edited. Thanks.
Honest question here:
Betts’ range factor per game in both right and center field were slightly below league average (2.04 vs 2.05 in RF; 2.29 vs 2.54 in CF) . He had only 1 error (great), but also only 5 assists which is pretty low. How is his defense in RF worth 15.3 runs and his total defense worth almost 17 runs (just under 2 fWAR)? I just don’t understand (or know how to calculate) how his defense helps him that much.
A solid eyeball test for defensive stats is to look at all the inside edge buckets: He made very single routine (90-100% ) play. He made 86.7% of likely (60-90%) plays. He made 100% of even (40-60%) plays. He made 40% of unlikely (10-40%) plays . He made 10.5% of remote (1-10%) plays. He consistently made more plays in each probability bucket than an average defender would have and did quite a bit better than that in many/most of the buckets.
The average-ish range factor jives with his good but nowhere near elite footspeed. Also he has an icredible CF playing next to him that likely takes some opportunities away for him to range toward CF.
Range factor isn’t even normalized for the number of opportunities! It’s another one of those stats like the pitching win that sticks around primarily because it has a catchy name that makes it sound like it reflects something it doesn’t really measure (very well, or at all).
I just wanted to comment Mike Trout for the laughs. Mookie had a great season, don’t get triggered guys. Mike Trout is still the best in the game.
Yes, the MOP.
I hope I’m wrong, but I feel like there are going to be voters who vote for Jose Ramirez and his 60 games played against the worst division in baseball, or Mike Trout who does actually deserve consideration but his numbers I don’t think match Mookie’s on a per-game basis. His defense is not near as Elite either, and the base running I would say is a wash
I agree, but I wonder what impact J.D. Martinez has on Mookie’s offensive production? He definitely adds protection, and in my opinion Trout’s ability to get on base closes their defensive gap. Also, Trout is an excellent baserunner.
I thought studies show protection to be a myth. Or close to
Plus JD bats 3 spaces behind, not one.
Studies show that protection absolutely changes a player’s results.
The change just usually comes out to a wash, because the extra average and slugging production is usually offset by the decline in walk rate.
I don’t see why it matters who someone plays against. You play the schedule you are given.
Betts’s defensive numbers are crazy good, too-good-to-be-true good.
Over the past three seasons, his fielding has been on par with Russell, Seager, Hamilton, and Pillar.
(And better than JBJ, his neighbor)
And it is not some statistical fluke as his numbers has been pretty stable year in year out
and the results are similar whether using UZR or DRS.
However, the real question is, all other things equal, would any team really take Betts’s defense
over plus shortstop (Russell, Seager) or elite center fielder (Hamilton, Pillar) defense in a vacuum?
I highly doubt it and this is where I cannot fill in the gap between the numbers and the reality.
I am convinced that part of his too-good-to-be-true numbers has to do with the weird shape of Fenway’s right field. My totally shot-in-the-dark explanation is that because of the huge shape, he is given far more responsibility than most right fielders and he’s good enough to convert.
I see where you’re coming from, but I think that mental block in believing Betts is on par with Hamilton and Pillar defensively (though looking at UZR and DRS “on par” looks more like “a damn sight better than”) comes precisely from all other things NOT being equal.
With Pillar’s meh offensive profile and Hamilton pretty much just able to that one thing he does, you likely spend a large majority of your “thinkin’ ’bout Kevin and/or Billy Time” thinking in terms of their great defensive skills. They don’t distract you with any pesky interesting Offense, and so become synonymous with stellar defensive outfielders.
Betts on the other hand does so much other stuff well. He’s such a complete player that the defensive stuff gets folded in to your conception of him as a player. Then you end up giving short shrift to his D almost on accident, simply because it’s not his only elite skill to focus on.
I think the phenomenon may be even more pronounced in this case as Primarily Defense/Defense Only starting OFs are not as common as their IF brethren.
Just a theory.
Anti-all-rounder bias is real. I think of this as the Beltran Problem.
Right. They tend to have to do a little something extra to distinguish themselves defensively IE highlight reel jumping/diving catches on the reg, having an accurate canon for an arm, etc.
Eh…
My question is a more generic
“Can a RF be more defensively valuable than an elite CF or a plus shortstop?”
The numbers say yes… but can they really?
Feel free to replace Betts with Ichiro/Heyward in their defensive primes.
Similar things were said about Alex Gordon for years when his raw defensive numbers were better than, say, Mike Trout’s in CF. How could a player at a non-elite defensive position be considered (by UZR and others) more valuable than others at the top of the defensive spectrum?
In Gordon’s case, I felt he was nearly perfect in the eye test, making essentially no real mistakes.
Yes, Alex Gordon was one of the names that came to mind as well.
Interestingly, he experienced one of the largest drops when UZR data were updated so his numbers look less ridiculous.
https://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/instagraphs/2018-uzr-and-uzr-update/
Of course, Betts’s defensive numbers are still insane under the new ‘dampened’ methodology.
So my conclusion is that at least one of the following must be true.
a) Defensive numbers for Betts(/Heyward/Ichiro/Gordon) is too high.
b) Defensive positioning adjustment for WAR is too small.
c) Betts is actually defensively more valuable than elite center fielders such as Hamilton and Pillar contrary to what I think to be popular belief.
One factor to consider is that Fenway’s RF is possibly the most difficult defensive outfield assignment in baseball. It is cavernous and oddly shaped with next to no foul ground before you hit a wall or Pesky’s pole. Mookie is an elite defender covering an extremely challenging RF with aplomb.
His assist totals have fallen off because no one runs on him any more. Check his assist totals the last two or three seasons. I’m sure there’s a stat that measures how often runners have the chance to take an extra base and how often they choose not to challenge Mookie’s arm in those situations. I would just have no idea where to find such a stat but I’m sure it exists.
He had the insanely-hot start, but I kept thinking he’d cool off somewhat and not be able to keep pace with Trout. He proved me wrong. He deserves the MVP this year.
He does and he has completely earned it, but what is crazy is just how well a player has to play in order to keep pace with Mike Trout.
I still don’t understand how he hit for those slugging numbers. His ISO an SLG percentages are just such statistical outliers, they shouldn’t have been possible. They’re over 4 standard deviations higher than his previous career marks.
Doubling his BB% from 2016 to now probably helped. Also his GB/FB at .75 to go along with career highs in LD%, FB%, Pull%, and Hard% suggests some launch angle fiddlin’ on his part. As a RH hitter at Fenway I imagine that means a lot more balls banging off the monster.
He was exploitable on the outer half of the plate prior to this season. He closed that hole up and the league has yet to find a new weak point to attack.
In addition to his increased walk rate as mentioned previous, he had a lot of doubles plus home runs. He had almost double the number Trout had. 84 total XBH this year out of 180 total hits is a pretty dang good ratio.
He completely changed his approach and got much better at the plate. Pretty simple.
Maybe one day I will care about WAR, not there yet.
Predictable downvotes.
I mean, downvoting aside, it does kind of raise the question of what on earth you’re doing here, posting these comments.
Blindly accepting WAR is as wrong as to ignore it completely. I have found it to be less and less of a determining factor in my valuations of players the more I see it in action. Has Mike Trout been the best player in baseball since 2012, absolutely, did I need some number to tell me that, absolutely not. Was Mike Trout the best player in the AL this year, no, Mookie Betts was better. I am not so insecure that I need reinforcement to tell me what I already know. Springsteen said it eloquently “God have mercy on the man who doubts what he is sure of”. WAR is trying to tell me that Marcus Semien was a better player than Xander Bogaerts this year. On what grounds? Bogaerts .883 OPS, Semien .706 OPS with a 135-94 OPS+ edge. No amount of defense or base running can make up that difference and Bogaerts has been steady in the field and fine on the bases. Am I wrong to question whether a man who plays only 15% of his teams innings, no matter how well and in what role, is more valuable to his team than a man who plays almost 100% at a level unsurpassed by any other player in the league. WAR says I am but I must disagree. Are starting pitchers, especially now in their diminished role when even the best, very often, aren’t even around when the game is decided, some sort of deity that makes them just that much more valuable. Sometimes that is the case. Kershaw in 2014 was an example but if there is a worthy position player it would take a year like that regardless of what WAR says. The more I see Bogaerts-Semien comparisons the less value I see in WAR.
2018 Fangraphs WAR
Xander Bogaerts 4.9
Marcus Semien 3.7
To be fair, Baseball Reference has it 4.3 to 3.8, in favor of Semien.
Of course, part of that is simply playing time: Semien played in 23 more games and had 123 more PAs than Bogaerts.
Beyond that, Baseball Reference hates Bogaerts’ defense whereas Fangraphs rates it as average (they both rate Semiens’ defense as a positive).
This has been the basis of my losing confidence in WAR. Any body should understand and accept that given an identical set of facts then the results should not vary as dramatically as they do in various regimens. It sounds like a religious battle, my WAR is the real WAR and I am going to attack you to prove it. It has to create doubt in the minds of people who have not closed their thought processes. I didn’t say that I do not accept some information that WAR provides but these questions have made me rethink how much value it really offers.
It’s like saying you think the speedometer on your car isn’t working quite right, so you’re losing confidence in miles per hour. You just sound confused about what WAR is.
If what you really don’t like here is Baseball-Reference WAR’s defensive numbers, then (a) welcome to the club, and (b) your real quarrel isn’t with “WAR” but with DRS, the defensive metric that it incorporates.
Only if I had two speedometers giving me different numbers. I have a huge problem with all defensive metrics. I have not put in a lot of study on the intricacies of DRS and UZR therefore I am not about to say one is better than the other when my basic premise is that all defensive metrics suck. My favorite was a catch that Bradley Zimmer made last year. After a full out sprint he dove headlong for quite a distance and back-handed a long drive in left center. Then the metric comes up that it was a 3-star catch, catchable 24% of the time. It was uncatchable 99.9% of the time! I do not know which system was used but it didn’t help my perception of the validity of what is being offered as valid information. I doubt if you asked any member of Red Sox Nation if they were extremely satisfied with Bogaerts defense this year the answer would be absolutely.
UZR, meanwhile, throws out any play that includes a shift…which is, of course, 17% of all plays in a given season.
No defensive metric currently in existence quantifies the totality of a player’s defensive contributions as effectively as wRAA and RE24 do a player’s offensive ones.
Until such a metric does exist, people are entirely justified in questioning the final number that any version of WAR spits out.
I don’t think anyone here disagrees about any of that.
Some people here tend to take any questioning of defensive stats as a personal affront, haha.
I think we always have to remember that WAR is the start of a conversation of a player’s performance, rather than a purely scientific measure thereof.
There are entirely valid reasons to not view the number FG’s WAR model spits out as the end-all be-all of player valuation, whether it’s because you don’t weight defensive numbers as heavily as the pretty much infallible offensive numbers FG offers…or even because you prefer to swap in RE24 for wRAA when evaluating a player’s MVP case, because you don’t think the “Value” of a player’s production is context-neutral.
The “Why” is much more important than the “Whether,” when it comes to someone’s view on WAR.
I often look at oWAR first because I find it to be the most trustworthy of the three inputs. After reading a post earlier this week, I thought this tactic might help support my anecdotal opinion that JD Martinez was a better hitter than Betts. Oops.
If you wanted to measure the anecdotal opinion that one player’s hitting was more “impactful” than another’s, in terms of real runs scored, even if there’s a gap in base stats, you can look at RE24 vs wRAA.
Mookie beats out JD by 7.5 runs of wRAA, but JD accumulated 8.5 more runs of RE24 over the course of the season.
(Mookie’s being on base so frequently for him certainly had an impact, however).
Thank you for summing up what I said very succinctly. There are more than a few people on this blog who think that any person who questions anything about sabermetrics is a traitor to their idol. It is rather interesting that I would be called out for questioning the results as they are presently being presented because my belief in the use of statistics to improve team results goes back well before Bill James to the first man to really offer some challenges to the “Book”, a man named Earnshaw Cook. He published Percentage Baseball in 1964 and while most of his ideas were of questionable value, batting order arrangement was perhaps his most interesting, he was 100% correct in saying that the sacrifice bunt was the worst play in baseball. That is how someone gains an advantage and Earl Weaver understood it and Weaver never would give up an out for 90 feet. Recognizing these true little advantages are what made Earl Weaver one of the greatest managers ever and are what all in the game are looking for but the information must be rock solid and not open to wildly different interpretations.
Check out Baseball Reference which I have always used.
“Has Mike Trout been the best player in baseball since 2012, absolutely, did I need some number to tell me that, absolutely not. ”
Wasn’t that long ago that lots of people were insisting that Trout was overrated, that he was just a product of WAR, that he wasn’t the best player in baseball. If you weren’t one of them,, congratulations, but lots of people disagreed even with WAR.
“No amount of defense or base running can make up that difference and Bogaerts has been steady in the field and fine on the bases.”
Of course it can! The difference between Bogaerts and Semiens’ offense was about 30 runs in Bogaerts favor. Leaving aside baserunning, do you honestly believe that the range of fielding at shortstop is less than 30 runs???
I have always loved stats and I enjoy spending time researching players. Love of stats, love of baseball, and love of tradition. Nothing wrong with different types of opinions in my book. Sadly around here people don’t seem to like that.
You cite the OPS gap as an indicator of Bogaerts’ clear superiority, but he plays half his games at Fenway, perhaps the best park in baseball for right handed hitters. Meanwhile, Semien’s home park is O.co, where fly balls go to die. WAR accounts for that.
Bogaerts is the better hitter, but not to the degree that OPS implies.
But aren’t we told that OPS+ is designed to take ballpark variables into account? Can’t have it both ways.
OPS (and OPS+) is a junk stat. It equally weights OBP and SLG even though OBP is more valuable. And it double counts base hits, since hits feed into both OBP and SLG.
Of course I agree with you about that but in this specific case, the non-junk version, wRC+, has Bogaerts over Semien 133-95, which doesn’t change the comparison materially. The real problem here is basically that “I don’t believe WAR” actually means “I don’t like and/or understand defensive metrics.” But if we put that aside I think we might all actually agree that something slightly weird happened with Marcus Semien’s defensive metrics this year.
That is exactly a key part of my questioning the entire system of defensive metrics. How does Marcus Semien go from unbelievable bad to Mark Belanger, best I ever saw, or perhaps I should just use Andrelton Simmons. I am not saying that he didn’t, i may doubt it a lot, but I think I am allowed to question if he did and that leads me back to what started all this discussion. Simple doubt about the efficacy of the defensive metrics as they are now constituted. All the while I am watching Xander Bogaerts make only 10 errors, I know, I know that there is more involved but a lot can be said for solid steady “D” and he isn’t late career Derek Jeter out there. Without bias and without seeing any numbers I could never rank Marcus Semien as a top rank SS or defender and when I saw the bWAR numbers I was shocked.
Baseball Reference has Semien at +9 defensive runs for 2018. That’s nowhere near Belanger or Simmons. Before that he was at -9 runs for his whole career. So a little below average, not “unbelievable bad”.
Beyond that, defensive stats are always going to be noisy because most plays are routine. Which means that the sample size for discriminating between fielders is very small. For example, in 2018, Semien, had 104 opportunities that were rated between remote (1-10%) and likely (60-90%). We don’t expect batters to be consistent across sample sizes of 104, so why would we expect fielders to be consistent across those types of sample sizes?
I don’t care if Semien has the range of a B-52. 35 errors is unbelievably bad.
Oh there’s no doubt that Bogaerts was a better hitter than Semien. But we should still advocate using the most accurate stats available to determine that.
The disconnect between the percentages of the Inside Edge catch probability and Statcast hit probability on the 2nd defensive play is interesting.
The play is classified as 1-10% playable, while simultaneously having only a 5% Statcast hit probability.
Wouldn’t it be neat to combine these metrics into one.
I think for this particular case- and someone who knows better should correct me if I’m wrong- it’s because a lot of balls hit in that area end up going foul. So it’s not likely he makes the play, but even if he didn’t, it wouldn’t necessarily end up as a hit.
I think that’s right. Out probability and hit probability should only be expected to be complements when you’re 100% certain the ball’s in fair territory.
The reason is because the hit probability only takes launch angle and velocity into consideration.
Notably absent is the direction of the ball.
Therefore, balls that are barely fair could have low hit probability but tough to catch while balls that are hit right at the defenders and look like easy plays could have a high hit probability.
Mookie had and absolutely monster season. He’ll win the MVP and he completely deserves it. Great job to him. That being said, it is crazy how good a player has to play in order to just beat out Trout in WAR. It’s crazy that they both did this in a season where they each missed time due to injury. However in Trout’s case, he also had about ten days where he played through an injured hand and not only did it not help his WAR, it hurt it. Those ten days did happen, so Betts did have the better season (and maybe it would have been better anyway), but it is crazy what one has to do to keep up with Trout. This is the first year that Trout hasn’t lead the league in bWAR, fWAR, and WARP during which he has qualified for the batting title. (Last year, when he missed an even larger chunk of the season he still placed high – I think in the top 5 – in each. He even had a higher WARP than Altuve). And this year, while Betts lead in bWAR and fWAR, Trout still lead in WARP.
That’s it. That ends my mandatory pro Trout rant on a WAR article. Betts is an absolutely amazing player, but don’t lose track of the once in a lifetime greatness which is Mike Trout just because we have gotten so used to how great he is.
Are we talking AL-only?
Harper beat him out in 2015 in rWAR, WARP, and (by a fraction of a run) fWAR.
Yes, by “league” I meant the AL. And beyond that, I think that I mean just position players. I think that the most recent change in bWAR has Trout now in second behind Kluber one year and I’m not sure in regards to Fangraphs and Prospectus
Significant is that Betts accumulated those 10.4 WAR in just 136 games. If he had played a more typical 154 games (at the same level) his WAR would have been 11.8 — historically elite.
on a WAR per PA basis he just had a better season than Trout has ever had…and one could argue he’s getting jobbed by the defensive numbers since he’d play CF on 9/10 of other clubs.
Or, since Betts’ career UZR/150 is 15 points better in RF than CF, one could argue that our defensive adjustments are off, and the current WAR model actually inflates his value.
But wait, isn’t that almost what you’d expect it to be? The positional delta from CF to RF is 10 runs, which is to say RF should be 10 runs “easier” for someone with Betts’s talent to play, so there’s only even 5 runs of mysterious variation there (which I’d presume to be noise).
(I guess the positional adjustments are on a 162-game basis so the real number might be slightly more than 5, but you get the point.)
When a CF-caliber defender steps into a corner, there’s usually a 15-20 run delta.
Look at, say, early career Brett Gardner.
Since 2010, 7 of the top 10 UZR/150 seasons have accumulated the majority of their value in the corner OF. Lagares, Bourn and Cain are the only exceptions.
I think the gap between the average CF and average RF, in a position swap, would likely be much closer to 15 runs than 10.
To be fair though, Trout also played through an injury for ten days this year. It’s kind of crazy what one has to do just to keep up with Trout
Actually, the mention of Cash is very relevant. His wRC+ that year was about 50 points above his career value. So is Mookie’s this year.
That is true. But I’m not sure I see the significance in comparing their careers. Apart from Cash’s extraordinary season in ’61, he never again topped 5.2 WAR in a 16 season career. Mookie has beaten Cash’s 5.2 WAR in three of his four seasons. In the last three years, Mookie was first in WAR once, and second in WAR once. I don’t see any relevant comparison to Cash, even as a floor.
It is difficult for people not familiar with Betts 2017 season to understand what a strange outlier it was. Comparing BABIP for the past 3 years 2016 was .322, 2017 was .268 and 2018 was .368. That .100 variation has to be one of greatest deltas for anybody with over 500 PA’s ever. Little more is needed to explain the weird discrepancy between the two seasons. This is really a normal reversion to the mean but spread over a two year cycle. Projections aren’t worth even spending the two seconds it takes to type them but a BABIP in 2019 around .320 with his other skills might produce another 8+ WAR.