Is WAR the Answer?

Many of my friends think not.  One goes so far as to question the work of Baseball Prospectus in its entirety because while it discusses its metrics, it does not explain them or define them.  So while a statistic like WAR intrigues him, he puts little stock in it because he does not know how it is calculated.

Oh, I tell him, look at Baseball Reference for career WAR and you have to conclude that it is a robust statistic because all the all-time greats rank at the top of the lists.  Ergo, the BP people are getting something right.  No, is the vigorous counter, all that means is that human observations and the old stats told us who was good, and those were good enough to tell us who the stars were and are.  What he is protesting, when you get down to it, is that the stat guys have taken all of the fun out of debates as to who was better, a province of the liberal arts guys who liked baseball without having to have earned a degree in higher math to understand it. 

The purpose of this writing, though, is not to discuss the topic in the headline, which is a teaser.  WAR seems here to stay.  Assuming, for purposes of this argument, that it has merit, what does it mean for player salaries?  Whose salaries am I thinking of particularly -- well, those of Mike Trout and Mookie Betts.  Why, do you ask?  Simple?  Both are better players -- and you could argue significantly better players -- than both Bryce Harper and Manny Machado.  In WAR terms, twice to three times as good.  So, if Harper just signed a 13-year, $330 million contract, how much are Trout and Betts worth? 

Let's say Harper had a WAR of 4.0 last season, Trout 8.3 (he was injured for a while) and Betts 10.  Simple math tells you that both of them could be worth double what Harper is worth per year, perhaps even more than that.  The numbers do not lie -- these two players, right now, are the best position players in the game.  Both will get huge paydays. 

And, in the meantime, because analytics' influence progressed more rapidly than the assumptions on which the Collective Bargaining Agreement is based, the mean salary will continue to drop.  The very productive will get paid richly, but the other 80% will get paid lower than the average.  Watching how MLB and the MLBPA address this issue, along with the fact that the average age of a fan is 55 and the games take too long to play, will be compelling theater.  But make no mistake about it, the superstars can help a good team become great and an a so-so average attendance rocket. 

So is WAR the answer?  How about PECOTA, BABIP, True Average and a lot of terms that get tossed out there but are unexplained, leaving the rest of us to bob our heads or else risk revealing that we are ignorant about baseball's important numbers.  My guess is that not only is WAR the answer, there are other sub-WARS that figure into a team's analytics too.  And while such analytics might be good to help a team win games, they also help further alienate a fan base that simply wants to relate to a national pastime, two-out rallies, the pop of a fastball into a catcher's mitt, a hot dog with spicy mustard and a cool breeze coming in from center field. 

WAR is not the answer for fans.  It is the answer for management and for the elite players.  That is, until the owners and the players' union go to war.