Comparing wins above replacement across baseball history

This paper introduces iWAR, a system for estimating wins above replacement from historical Retrosheet play-by-play records. We compare its runs-allowed (RA) and fielding-independent pitching (FIP) versions with Baseball-Reference WAR (bWAR), FanGraphs WAR (fWAR) and run-based alternatives. The common historical sample contains 1,471 team-seasons across 79 years and 1,441 consecutive franchise pairs. Under the fixed conversion to wins, same-season mean absolute error was 3.695 credited wins per 162 games for iWAR RA, compared with 4.724 for bWAR and 4.744 for fWAR: reductions of 21.793% and 22.112%. The paired differences were -1.030 and -1.049, with conditional 95% calendar-block intervals of [-1.367, -0.706] and [-1.398, -0.725]. Calibration preserved most of these advantages. A broader bWAR comparison across 118 years retained a smaller advantage; modern differences were smaller or sometimes reversed. PythagenPat reconstructed records more closely than every WAR total. Next-season replay gave nearly identical fixed-map errors for iWAR FIP and fWAR, while calibration changed their ordering. An amended chronological learned-model analysis of 1,552 franchise pairs gave neural RMSE 10.163, versus 9.946 for the development-selected ridge comparator (difference +0.217; conditional interval [0.015, 0.474]). This work provides a new, specialized framework for analyzing WAR across eras and provides context for future work using learning models.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
arXiv (Cornell University)
Published
2026-10-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2610.39088
Primary Topic
Sports Analytics and Performance
Type
preprint
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
preprint

Comparing wins above replacement across baseball history

Michael Doane
arXiv (Cornell University)
Sports Analytics and Performance
preprint

Comparing wins above replacement across baseball history

Michael Doane
preprint en

Abstract

This paper introduces iWAR, a system for estimating wins above replacement from historical Retrosheet play-by-play records. We compare its runs-allowed (RA) and fielding-independent pitching (FIP) versions with Baseball-Reference WAR (bWAR), FanGraphs WAR (fWAR) and run-based alternatives. The common historical sample contains 1,471 team-seasons across 79 years and 1,441 consecutive franchise pairs. Under the fixed conversion to wins, same-season mean absolute error was 3.695 credited wins per 162 games for iWAR RA, compared with 4.724 for bWAR and 4.744 for fWAR: reductions of 21.793% and 22.112%. The paired differences were -1.030 and -1.049, with conditional 95% calendar-block intervals of [-1.367, -0.706] and [-1.398, -0.725]. Calibration preserved most of these advantages. A broader bWAR comparison across 118 years retained a smaller advantage; modern differences were smaller or sometimes reversed. PythagenPat reconstructed records more closely than every WAR total. Next-season replay gave nearly identical fixed-map errors for iWAR FIP and fWAR, while calibration changed their ordering. An amended chronological learned-model analysis of 1,552 franchise pairs gave neural RMSE 10.163, versus 9.946 for the development-selected ridge comparator (difference +0.217; conditional interval [0.015, 0.474]). This work provides a new, specialized framework for analyzing WAR across eras and provides context for future work using learning models.

arXiv (Cornell University)
Sports Analytics and Performance
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon