It tells a story that can be informative and also deceiving

The basic raw information, such as wins/losses, fielding average, RBI, even batting average) doesn't tell the whole story. So new statistics such as WAR were invented (for and by pencilheads) to try and remove variables like park dimensions/altitude, aberrational years (1930, high pitching mounds etc.). differences in time periods, strength of opponent to allow comparisons between players in a neutral environment and across the years. More sophisticated fielding and other measures were introduced to reward players for getting to balls and penalizing those with limited range.

One can justly argue that WAR is a comparison that is best done for players in the same time period. That a player from 1920 has the same WAR as a modern player doesn't mean that someone with the same skills as that 1920 player would have the same success in modern baseball. One could also argue that (like politics) using modern-day criteria to judge players from a previous generation emphasizes different qualities.

Apparently Bill James opposes using WAR as the ultimate decision point in close MVP races and thinks other data (late game/close game performance for one)should be factored into new statistics. He also believes WAR overrates older era players, since there was much more of a disparity in the statistics of top players from average players than would be found today. Sports data, even advanced metrics, can be beneficial, but also can tell the wrong story IMO.

while they may reveal a lot, they rarely show you what you really want to see.

Thomas 10075 PA 404 Win Shares = 24.938 PA per Win Share
Grich 8220 PA 330 WIn Shares = 24.909 PA per Win Share

NUTHIN!

Grich likely makes up a lot of ground by playing defense and running the bases. The WAR defensive metrics are not quite right but they do give us an idea.

For positional players, I'd say their potential value is 60% hitting, 30% fielding and 10% baserunning.

And particularly for first basemen. Keith Hernandez's career dWAR? 1.3. Don Mattingly? -6.2. Both are considered to be the two best defensive first basemen of all time and neither crack the top-1000 in dWAR. The all-time leader in dWAR, Roger Connor at 6.3, ties him for 502nd amongst all players.

I tend to look more at FanGraphs for defensive metrics because they include defensive runs saved, range, and zone ratings. But those only go back 20 years or so, which makes it tough to compare.*


*It is helpful to know that Derrick Jeter has the lowest Defensive Runs Saved of all time at -165.

And when one has a higher slugging percentage obviously he’s getting more extra base hits.

Fielding, fine, Grich was a very good fielder in a middle infield position while Frank was a mediocre first baseman and then was a DH.

But I truly don’t think that alone is what should make up the difference in player value when there is such a large difference in offense. My God, Frank had a higher OPS than Willie Mays and Hank Aaron. His OPS is a mere .002 lower than Stan Musial’s.