While a reliever prospect who turns into a pretty good reliever and manages say an average of 1.2 WAR may have succeeded in the role for which he was drafted, he’s still providing a very limited value to his team. One can call him a “success” if one wishes, but I don’t think relievers deserve any more of a bump than they already get from the leverage element of the WAR calculation. In short, I think a 1.2 WAR reliever isn’t an average player but he gives something to his time, much like a decent bench player. Therefore I think they are rightly in the “contributor” category.

Also, if a player has bad years to start and then puts up a couple of good years, he could be much more valuable to a team then a player who puts up about 1.5 WAR a year every year. This suggests that the data should be weighted toward the last few seasons.

He came just short of saying that I can’t dress myself. But I do respect how he went all-in with his hyperbole.

They provide some really good info from time to time, but the bad apples spoil the bunch when it comes to commentors.

It has definitely changed over the years. At least it is not the kcroyals.com message board.

“usually garbage…stuff…[with] little understanding in … how the world is.” (When typing that joke, I realized that my ellipses editing actually improved the sensibility of that inane comment. You’re welcome?)

I have at times taken signficant umbrage at Neyer’s disdain for the Royals which I believe has often gone beyond fair criticism to mean spirited, hyperbolic ridicule. An example would be the time he said he was confident that the Royals would never again win the World Series, at any time, with any GM and any players. It’s impossible because they are the Royals.