2025-2026 Tigers Off Season Thread

[gehringer_2]

14 minutes ago, buddha said:

war has always overly benefitted starting pitchers who accumulate innings.

the fact that park effects can change year to year without any physical change to the park itself or change to the general weather patterns tells me that players who play in the park have as much or more influence on the "park effect" that season than the modelers would have you believe.

two comments on that: 

Weather is local, changes from year to year, and is what drives some of the park effect anomalies you see. The year Target opened we were in MnStP, everyone was paranoid by August that the park was playing way too huge. It was just a really weird year in Mineapolis - lots and lots of cool nights in a place where summer is usually really hot. It's never played that big again.

I agree there does seem to be something to a team effect on park factors. COPA definitely seems to play big when the Tigers are bad, more average when the team is average to good. I'd guess that when the home team is lousy, visitors with a lead just feel less pressure to score more so I believe in some cases you do get a certain amount of cross correlation that you don't want to be there.

Edited 2 hours ago by gehringer_2

[Tiger337]

1 hour ago, buddha said:

war has gone from being a really interesting statistical way to analyze player value to overrated gospel.  

it places too much emphasis on things like park effects, fielding, and base running, and not enough emphasis on hitting.  

just my .02.

like most stats, i like it when it supports my argument and dislike it when it doesnt.

That's because you're an offensive snob.  

[Tiger337]

 

41 minutes ago, buddha said:

war has always overly benefitted starting pitchers who accumulate innings.

the fact that park effects can change year to year without any physical change to the park itself or change to the general weather patterns tells me that players who play in the park have as much or more influence on the "park effect" that season than the modelers would have you believe.

Park effects are not annual.  They are averaged over 3-5 years.

As for the innings. are you talking annual or career?  Given how difficult it is for pitchers to pitch deep into games now, I believe innings have become more valuable now and should be rewarded more than ever for single seasons.  For historic WAR, the value of the cumulative effect of WAR is questionable.  It depends on whether you favor peak value or career value.  If you like peak value more, then you can use WAA (Wins above average).  In this case, a pitcher can not accumulate value unless he is better than average.  

I do agree WAR should not be gospel and that it is overused

Edited 2 hours ago by Tiger337

[buddha]

31 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

That's because you're an offensive snob.  

true.

[NorthWoods]

4 hours ago, gehringer_2 said:

That aspect doesn't worry me so much. Even if he is disconnecting mentally from a *future* with Detroit,  if he is angling for a record setting deal, he is going to be driven to perform in the '26 *present* to get it.

You're probably right, just the whole scenario of rooting for a guy that's planning to ditch the team and town is somewhat distasteful.   I know it happens in other sports but *usually* you don't know until after the fact.

[chasfh]

2 hours ago, buddha said:

war has always overly benefitted starting pitchers who accumulate innings.

the fact that park effects can change year to year without any physical change to the park itself or change to the general weather patterns tells me that players who play in the park have as much or more influence on the "park effect" that season than the modelers would have you believe.

Because WAR is a cumulative stat. A pitcher with a 4 WAR in 180 innings is not as good on a per-start basis as one who has 4 WAR in 120 innings, although that's not necessarily a bad thing—there is value in good volume, too.