From: fester@island.COM (Mike Fester)
Subject: Re: Sheffield is NL MVP
Organization: /usr/local/rn/organization
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 15:14:16 GMT

In article <1992Oct06.221113.16526@watson.ibm.com> mjones@donald.aix.kingston.ibm.com writes:
>In article <1992Oct6.182056.1015@island.COM> fester@island.COM (Mike Fester) writes:
>>>This is absurd.  OBP is not attempting to measure a player's overall
>>Now, it's no more "absurd" than saying "the problem with SLG is that it doesn't
>>include walks", now is it?
>
>Very much so. OBP measures, exactly, the percentage of times a batter
>doesn't make an out. Whether he doesn't make that out by walking or by
>homering is irrelevant AS FAR AS OBP IS CONCERNED. Claiming that OBP should
>differentiate between walks and homers is like complaining that you can't
>use a ruler to tell if something is red.

Very good. Now, SLG measures, exactly, the relative number of bases a batter
well get in a charged at bat. Whether he gets on base via walk or HBP is 
irrelevant AS FAR AS SLG IS CONCERNED. As for your complaint about not being
able to use a ruler to measuer redness, i'll have to bow to you on that one.
No one *I* know attempts such things. (Well, the Japanese are working on
things like that).

>>>value or anything like that.  It's simply the percentage of the time a
>>>player doesn't make an out.  Why should homers count more in OBP than
>>>walks?  Slugging, OTOH, is measuring how much a player can move runners
>>>along (and how far he can get by himself), and walks do move other
>>>players along.
>>Sometimes.
>
>Almost as much as singles, in fact. (If you're the Red Sox, almost *exactly*
>as much.) Therefore, if SLG is a measure of runner (including batter-runner)
>advancement, then walks should count almost as much as singles.

But it is NOT a measure of runner advancement, now is it, Mr Jones? It is a
measure of BATTER advancement in a charged at-bat, where he doesn't force
possible other runners into making outs. 

>>>>>Of course it can.  But if two players have the same OPS but different OBP and
>>>>>SLG, you should take the higher OBP, unless it's an extreme case like a taller
>>>>>version of Eddie Gaedel.
>>>>Nope. Way too many exceptions (even at the team level) to make a statement like
>>>>that. I'd take a guy that matched my team's needs the best.

>Mike, I've become convinced that you are deliberately being difficult on
>this point. In general, OBP is a scarcer skill than SLG. Take a random

What do you think you mean by "scarcer"? In fact, the average OBP values
are lower, but this is LARGELY an artifact of the way the two are measured.
Period. 

>sampling of players if you don't believe me. Also, OBP is a skill that
>improves your *team* more than SLG, because adding OBP increases the number
>of PA's a team will get in a season. There *are* exceptions to the RC model
>at the team level, but there are really pretty few of them. Even with the

Pretty few, hunh? This year, Baltimore, Milwaukee, Minnesota, Detroit, Toronto,
all seem to be a bit out of whack with each other.

>exceptions, RC fits the team run scoring model better than anything else
>anyone's come up with. In the real world, where there are realistically
>never players whose OBP is more than, say, .020 higher than their SLG over a
>reasonable number of PA's, a player with equivalent OPS and higher OBP is

I suppose id you define "realistic # of PA's" as that for which this is true,`
you are correct. In any event, it's a pretty meaningless statement: MOST of
your OBP and MOST of your SLG are from the same source- hits.

>virtually always going to improve your team more than his lower-OBP
>equivalent.
>
>>>That's probably true, but most teams in the majors (if not all) need OBP
>>>more than they need SLG, so therefore OBP is more valuable.
>>?? It depends on your team. As both contribute to scoring (and BTW, for the
>>most part, they are the same thing) it would depend on your team's needs. 
>>Another high OBPer behind Thomas isn't going to drive him in any more often.
>
>The same thing? I'm afraid I don't understand this at all.

You don't understand that, for the most part, OBP and SLG have as their 
largest contributor, hits (actually, entirely, in the case of SLG, which 
attaches a relative value to the type of hits)?

>Let's consider Thomas. Say that he has George Bell hitting behind him. Bell
>had a .713 OPS, made up of .417 SLG and .296 OBP. What happens if we
>exchange him for, say, Chad Curtis? His OPS was .712, on .374/.338. Now what
>happens? Well, Curtis probably drives in Thomas directly a bit less often.

How much less often over the course of a season? 10 times? 20 times?

>On the other hand, in the same number of PA's that Bell had (637), Curtis
>would have made 27 fewer outs. That's another ENTIRE GAME's worth of outs
>that are now opportunities for other players to drive in Thomas. But, you

So how many runs can the Sox expect to score in another game?

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