From: fester@island.COM (Mike Fester)
Subject: Re: Sheffield is NL MVP
Organization: /usr/local/rn/organization
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 14:50:41 GMT

In article <1992Oct2.192424.1763@cs.cornell.edu> tedward@cs.cornell.edu (Edward [Ted] Fischer) writes:
>In article <1992Oct2.151212.2535@island.COM> fester@island.COM (Mike Fester) writes:
>Detroit may or may not be using the optimal lineup.  Personally, I
>would bat Tettleton third and Fryman fifth.  But it is *nowhere* near
>as bad as the Orioles.  You babble about OPS, but the point of the
>Tigers lineup is that high *OBP* players are at the top, and high
>*SLG* players are behind them.  Which is a sensible way to order the

Tettleton and Fryman?

>lineup.  And the Tigers haven't had Cuyler batting #3 for most of the
>season.  Unlike the Os who have the Streak Zombie chowing those
>high-leverage AB.  There's a difference between "not optimal" and
>"horrible".  The Tigers (IMHO) don't make out the optimal lineup.  The
>Orioles play a *horrible* lineup.

First of all, Fryman's SLG (as of Sept ~30) was .425, not exactly conducive
big RBI total. Second, Whitaker's SLG is higher than Fryman's. Third, Baltimore
has, by almost any measure, a better lineup than Milwaukee. Hasn't helped
immensely. And finally, everyone's favorite, Dan Gladden, has batted second
quite a bit this year (not to mention batted leadoff). And Tet's SLG and OBP
are both higher then Fryman (and Fielder, for that matter). hasn't slowed 
'em up much at all.

>>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".
>
>Well, yes.  Obviously.  Rare skills are always more valuable than the
>more plentiful ones.  In the real world, SLG is easier to find than
>OBP.  And so OBP happens to be worth a little more.  If the world were
>to change, this balance would change.

"Rare" skills? This is simply not the case. The relative point values are
an artifact of the way they are measured, and little more than that. They
contribute about equally.

>>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.

>I believe I *do* use it properly.  My use of OBP and SLG is certainly
>more valid than most of your objections (which are usually based on
>anecdote or small-sample examples).  I will often mention OPS as a
>rough measure of a player's value, but I don't try to equate a
>.350/.450 player with a .400/.400 player.  They may be roughly equally
>valuable, but they certainly have different skills!

I believe the discussion centered around TEAMS with roughly equal and similar
OPSs.

>>>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".
>
>That is said sarcastically.  But there is some truth to it.  Lou
>Gorman comes pretty close to making more mistakes than not.  And
>usually when he doesn't make a mistake, the move was obvious to begin
>with (like signing Clemens, or trading Reardon).

And for things like "because of park effects, we know Caminiti is a better 
hitter than Pendleton"?

Mike
-- 
Disclaimer - I'm only doing what the little voices tell me to do. 
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball