Dave Cameron今天有段话在讲BR跟FG投手WAR的计算方式我觉得很一针见血
This is the thing that people get wrong about pitcher WAR the most. FIP-based
WAR doesn’t measure anything that did not actually happen. It is not
comprehensive in its measurements of things that did happen, but it also does
not claim to be comprehensive. It is an incomplete measure of pitcher
performance, but it exclusively measures events that demonstrably occurred.
很多人都搞错了(BR在还原过去这方面做得比较好)。以FIP为基础的WAR(FG版)并没有
放进任何不曾发生的原素。它并不能完整的反映发生过的每一件事，但它也从没宣称
它做得到。它是一个不完整的投手估量系统，但它并不估量从未发生的事。
Using an RA based WAR and then making adjustments for assumed defensive
contribution — as B-R does — makes that pitching WAR construct guilty of
the thing that FIP-based WAR is most often incorrectly accused of doing. When
you start making guesses about how much a pitcher or a fielder contributed to
the results of their balls in play, then you are no longer measuring what
actually happened.
以RA为基础然后修正防守(BR版)才犯了这个大家都拿来指控FG版的错。当你开始猜测
哪些贡献归投手哪些归防守者的时候，你才放进了从未发生的事情。
(你搞错了，你全家都搞错了)
It is completely fair to criticize FIP-based WAR for not measuring everything
that happens, much like it is fair to criticize current catcher defense
ratings for not measuring everything that catchers do that impact run
prevention. It is incorrect to state that FIP measures things that did not
happen or represents a hypothetical. FIP constrains itself to only measuring
things that we know were almost entirely dependent on solely the
pitcher/hitter match-up. Starting at RA9 and working your way backwards from
there introduces the hypotheticals, not the other way around.
你完全可以说FG版不完整，就像你可以说捕手的守备贡献计算不完整一样，但说FG放进
没发生的事情或者放进假设出来的情境就大错特错了。FIP反映的是目前我们所知几乎
只跟投手与打者有关的原素。从RA出发再一样样修正回去才真正设了一堆假设。
: 对我个人来说完全无法理解BR这样做是为什么，BR承认他们相信BABIP不受控制(在统计上
: 来看这没有不承认的道理)，那么这样大费周章的校正到底所为何来呢？而且守备校正本
: 来就是争议最多的地方，既然同样是想还原不受守备影响的投手本身的能力，除非他今天
: 不相信BABIP不能被控制，不然这样实在没有道理

PUSH~