From: fester@island.COM (Mike Fester)
Subject: Re: Sheffield is NL MVP
Organization: /usr/local/rn/organization
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 15:12:12 GMT

In article <1992Sep30.184922.22177@cs.cornell.edu> tedward@cs.cornell.edu (Edward [Ted] Fischer) writes:
>In article <1992Sep30.144756.1661@island.COM> fester@island.COM (Mike Fester) writes:
>>
>>(through Sept 21)
>>Baltimore .342 OBP, .402 SLG, 651 runs
>>Detroit   .336 OBP, .407 SLG, 724 runs

>So this is supposed to show that 5 points of SLG is worth 70+ more
>runs than 5 points of OBP?  Then Toronto (.332/.415) should have
>over 800 runs, right?  Even without their running game!

??? I DID point out that "it ain't necessarily so" that 5 points of OBP is
worth more than 5 points of SLG. Rather the whole point of the example, 
actually.

>All your example shows is that it is possible to have a good-hitting
>team that doesn't score runs.  You simply have to bat your best
>sluggers in the #1/#2/#7 spots, and put your worst sluggers #3/#4/#5.

It might be pointed out that Detroit's lineup is not exactly ideal. The 
numbers 3 and 4 hitters have relatively low OBPs (in fact, Detroit's #3 slot
has the #11 overall OPS production in the league), yet they still have the 
best offense. And no, the OPS of the leadoff slot is not that high; about 4th
or 5th in the league. #2 and #5 are very high, both actually and in comparison
to the league. How smart does THAT look?

>ALL OTHER THINGS BEING EQUAL, 1 point of OBP seems to be worth a bit
>more than 1 point of SLG.  Though you can come up with MILLIONS of
>examples where some things are not equal.  Like above.

Actually, the way Mr Thornley explained it is correct; ROUGHLY, SLG and OBP
are approximately of equal importance to scoring. The "fact" that 1 pt of
OBP is "worth more" than 1 pt of SLG is an aritfact of the way they are 
measured, and not due to any intrinisic value beyond that. As it happens now,
an "average" team has about a .315 OBP and *about* a .375 SLG "making" the
OBP "worth" 1.2 SLG points. Should the league avg SLG drop (for whatever
reason) and the OBP stay the same, the OBP will "devalue". Of course, this 
seems kind of silly, phrased that way. OBP would NOT have become worth less,
nor would SLG become worth more. Simply the compared averages will have changed.

>You continually rag on the use of OPS, claiming that it is missing
>important factors.  So why don't you come up with anything better?
>While it may not be perfect, it is usually pretty good.  And if it's
>the best thing we have...

Then why don't you use it properly? None of these are hard-coded numbers, and
there is a LOT of room to manuever. SLG apparantly CAN make up for lower 
(relative to another team) OBP, as can speed, etc.

>>Not to mention that at least one GM awarded a mutli-year, multi-million $$
>>contract to a 28 year-old, injury-prone catcher with a career OPS of ~.670
>>(Daulton). Or picked up a 29 year-old journeyman pitcher and decided to hand 
>>him the ball every 4th or 5th game (Stewart). Yep, really stupid, those GMs.

>Some of them are smarter than others.  The Red Sox have one of the
>dumber ones.

Again, you might point that out to those who blanketly state "The fact that 
GMs might chose 'A' confirms that my opposite choice of 'B' is correct".

Mike
-- 
Disclaimer - I'm only doing what the little voices tell me to do.