The 2013 Sox and OPS

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from BosoxJoe5. Show BosoxJoe5's posts

    Re: The 2013 Sox and OPS

    In response to Softlaw1's comment:

    Napoli is a much better contract, imho.

    If Napoli could show up for work and played better defense he'd be a much better value and fit. Of course, he doesn't, so AGon is a better value and fit.



    How many catchers play more than 120 games?

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from BosoxJoe5. Show BosoxJoe5's posts

    Re: The 2013 Sox and OPS

    In response to Softlaw1's comment:

    WAR does not include defense or other factors. It's worthless to assess value and fit.



    One of the complaints about WAR is that it over values defense. Fielding Runs accounts for one-sixth of a players WAR.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Drewski5. Show Drewski5's posts

    Re: The 2013 Sox and OPS

    In response to BosoxJoe5's comment:

     

    In response to Softlaw1's comment:

     

    WAR does not include defense or other factors. It's worthless to assess value and fit.

     



    One of the complaints about WAR is that it over values defense. Fielding Runs accounts for one-sixth of a players WAR.

     

     



    It absolutely overvalues D at positions like LF, RF, 1B.  Case in Point: Josh Reddick.

    D is 2/3 of a players overall value at some postions (SS) and hardly relevant in others (LF, 1B).  To imply that D is 1/6 value, regardless of position, is overly simplistic and shows a flaw in the formula.  This flaw is why it overvalues guys like Reddick and undervalues guys like Miggy.

     

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Drewski5. Show Drewski5's posts

    Re: The 2013 Sox and OPS

    WAR/$ or anyother kind of overall metric / $  (even a perfect one) isnt the whole arguement re: value and fit.

    A 30 HR , .315 hitter is more valuable at 20M / yr than a .300 hitter , 20 HR at 10M/yr.   Even though the production is better with the latter from a $ for $ standpoint, you have to pay a premium for elite players.

    9 solid players rarely win anything.  In sports, it usually comes down to your best vs my best.  

    We won in 2004 and 2007 by having elite top of the rotation pitchers and elite middle of the order sluggers.  

    AGON , even at 20M / yr, was a better value and fit because he was an elite middle of the order slugger, something that this team needs.

    Naps was the best we could do considering the trade market (I cant believe how much was given up for Dickey, Shields)  and b/c of current roster construction (not enough power from corner OF positions, forcing us to overpay for Napoli's power).  However he isnt as valuable as AGON was, even in light of contract.

    Do you think we could use Naps (w his current deal) to unload two awful contracts and still get 2 legitimate pitching prospects back?

    Note: When I say AGON, I mean 2007-2011 AGON.  There is reason to believe that he isnt that guy anymore.  Not saying he isnt.  Just saying I used 2007-2011 AGON for this comparison.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from 808soxfan. Show 808soxfan's posts

    Re: The 2013 Sox and OPS

    In response to Drewski5's comment:

    WAR/$ or anyother kind of overall metric / $  (even a perfect one) isnt the whole arguement re: value and fit.

    A 30 HR , .315 hitter is more valuable at 20M / yr than a .300 hitter , 20 HR at 10M/yr.   Even though the production is better with the latter from a $ for $ standpoint, you have to pay a premium for elite players.

    9 solid players rarely win anything.  In sports, it usually comes down to your best vs my best.  

    We won in 2004 and 2007 by having elite top of the rotation pitchers and elite middle of the order sluggers.  

    AGON , even at 20M / yr, was a better value and fit because he was an elite middle of the order slugger, something that this team needs.

    Naps was the best we could do considering the trade market (I cant believe how much was given up for Dickey, Shields)  and b/c of current roster construction (not enough power from corner OF positions, forcing us to overpay for Napoli's power).  However he isnt as valuable as AGON was, even in light of contract.

    Do you think we could use Naps (w his current deal) to unload two awful contracts and still get 2 legitimate pitching prospects back?

    Note: When I say AGON, I mean 2007-2011 AGON.  There is reason to believe that he isnt that guy anymore.  Not saying he isnt.  Just saying I used 2007-2011 AGON for this comparison.




    Very good points, IMO, especially the comparison between high average team players versus elite players in key positions..... like an elite pitcher getting the ball twice in a playoff series where you can almost count on a 2-0 result in a 5 or 7 game series.


    Should be interesting to watch AGON this year. Maybe his power returns, but I did not consider him elite last year, but he was durable.


    Most players/prospects will be average to high average players if they make it at all. That is why trading them for a Stanton or a Manny is a better option in the long run. IMO of course. Right now, the RS could afford a trade.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedSoxKimmi. Show RedSoxKimmi's posts

    Re: The 2013 Sox and OPS

    In response to Drewski5's comment:

    It absolutely overvalues D at positions like LF, RF, 1B.  Case in Point: Josh Reddick.

    D is 2/3 of a players overall value at some postions (SS) and hardly relevant in others (LF, 1B).  To imply that D is 1/6 value, regardless of position, is overly simplistic and shows a flaw in the formula.  This flaw is why it overvalues guys like Reddick and undervalues guys like Miggy.

     




    Fangraphs WAR makes an adjustment for defensive position played.  My understanding is that adjustments have been made for things like position, park, league, and baseball era (steroid era, for instance), therefore comparisions can be made between players regardless of the differences in these factors.

     

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from BosoxJoe5. Show BosoxJoe5's posts

    Re: The 2013 Sox and OPS

    In response to RedSoxKimmi's comment:

    In response to Drewski5's comment:

     

    It absolutely overvalues D at positions like LF, RF, 1B.  Case in Point: Josh Reddick.

    D is 2/3 of a players overall value at some postions (SS) and hardly relevant in others (LF, 1B).  To imply that D is 1/6 value, regardless of position, is overly simplistic and shows a flaw in the formula.  This flaw is why it overvalues guys like Reddick and undervalues guys like Miggy.

     




    Fangraphs WAR makes an adjustment for defensive position played.  My understanding is that adjustments have been made for things like position, park, league, and baseball era (steroid era, for instance), therefore comparisions can be made between players regardless of the differences in these factors.

     

     



    This is another issue with WAR differs from site to site.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedSoxKimmi. Show RedSoxKimmi's posts

    Re: The 2013 Sox and OPS

    In response to BosoxJoe5's comment:

    This is another issue with WAR differs from site to site.




    This is true. 

    WAR is by no means a perfect stat, and no single stat should ever be used in trying to evaluate a player or in comparing two or more players.  IMO, however, WAR does give a pretty good basis in being able to compare players.

     

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from dgalehouse. Show dgalehouse's posts

    Re: The 2013 Sox and OPS

    There is absolutely nothing wrong with the time-tested stats for player evaluation. Putouts , assists and fielding percentage for defense. Batting average,  Home Runs, RBIs , runs scored, on base pct. , slugging pct. and strikeouts for offense. Won / loss record , ERA and strikeouts / walks for pitchers. People get too carried away with the newer metrics. How many even know how WAR is computed ?   OPS is nothing more than the addition of slugging and on base percentages. And , it gives exactly equal weight to each, which is questionable.  I guess it is fun for the wannabe Bill James to play around with all these numbers, but it is not really necessary for player evaluation. The best method still is to watch the games and form your opinions.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: The 2013 Sox and OPS

    In response to Softlaw1's comment:

    WAR does not include defense or other factors. It's worthless to assess value and fit.



    All these years of bashing WAR, and he didn't even know what it was (is).

    WAR does include defense and other factors, clown.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from pelosireturns. Show pelosireturns's posts

    Re: The 2013 Sox and OPS

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:

    There is absolutely nothing wrong with the time-tested stats for player evaluation. Putouts , assists and fielding percentage for defense. Batting average,  Home Runs, RBIs , runs scored, on base pct. , slugging pct. and strikeouts for offense. Won / loss record , ERA and strikeouts / walks for pitchers. People get too carried away with the newer metrics. How many even know how WAR is computed ?   OPS is nothing more than the addition of slugging and on base percentages. And , it gives exactly equal weight to each, which is questionable.  I guess it is fun for the wannabe Bill James to play around with all these numbers, but it is not really necessary for player evaluation. The best method still is to watch the games and form your opinions.



    Agreed

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from mef429. Show mef429's posts

    Re: The 2013 Sox and OPS

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:

    There is absolutely nothing wrong with the time-tested stats for player evaluation. Putouts , assists and fielding percentage for defense. Batting average,  Home Runs, RBIs , runs scored, on base pct. , slugging pct. and strikeouts for offense. Won / loss record , ERA and strikeouts / walks for pitchers. People get too carried away with the newer metrics. How many even know how WAR is computed ?   OPS is nothing more than the addition of slugging and on base percentages. And , it gives exactly equal weight to each, which is questionable.  I guess it is fun for the wannabe Bill James to play around with all these numbers, but it is not really necessary for player evaluation. The best method still is to watch the games and form your opinions.




    well many of those stats are based on team performance or just circumstance (runs scored, RBI, defensive opportinities, W/L etc..) Sabermetric stats attempt to isolate the impact an individual has and take out all other factors. That way you can more easily compare player A to player B with most all variables being equal. thats why stats like OPS+ or FIP can be extremely useful

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from SonicsMonksLyresVicars. Show SonicsMonksLyresVicars's posts

    Re: The 2013 Sox and OPS

    In response to RedSoxKimmi's comment:

    In response to BosoxJoe5's comment:

    This is another issue with WAR differs from site to site.



    This is true. 

    WAR is by no means a perfect stat, and no single stat should ever be used in trying to evaluate a player or in comparing two or more players.  IMO, however, WAR does give a pretty good basis in being able to compare players.

     




    It does.  Also across leagues, positions, eras, etc.  Great simple starting point tool.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedSoxKimmi. Show RedSoxKimmi's posts

    Re: The 2013 Sox and OPS

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:

    There is absolutely nothing wrong with the time-tested stats for player evaluation. Putouts , assists and fielding percentage for defense. Batting average, Home Runs, RBIs , runs scored, on base pct. , slugging pct. and strikeouts for offense. Won / loss record , ERA and strikeouts / walks for pitchers. People get too carried away with the newer metrics. How many even know how WAR is computed ? OPS is nothing more than the addition of slugging and on base percentages. And , it gives exactly equal weight to each, which is questionable. I guess it is fun for the wannabe Bill James to play around with all these numbers, but it is not really necessary for player evaluation. The best method still is to watch the games and form your opinions.



    There is nothing wrong with many of those stats, if used in conjunction with others, although I personally have no use for Wins/Losses for pitchers. The newer stats give so much more information about a player's ability. Do you not see any importance in a defender's range, for instance?

    Of course watching games is still important as well. There is a common misconception that people who like stats don't watch the games and have no clue about what goes on during a game. That is simply not true.

    There are two problems with watching games and not looking at the stats to support your opinions:

    1. Opinions tend to be biased.

    2. There is no way to accurately compare two or more players unless you've watched said players play just about every game.

    Why not use the stats along with watching the games?

    As far as OPS goes, giving the same weight to OBP and SLG is questionable. There is a stat out called GPA (Gross Production Average) which weighs OBP 1.8 times SLG, which is how it should be. I have no idea why this stat has not caught on.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from yankenstein3. Show yankenstein3's posts

    Re: The 2013 Sox and OPS

    If you click on a player's splits in batting for any single year on Baseball-reference.com among the splits you will see are the player's splits in wins and losses.  Though I have never purposefully looked up those splits, I do notice when I look up splits for defensive position, which I have done frequently enough over the years that I'd guess I must have noticed well over 100 such splits.  Up until a few minutes ago, I'd had never seen a split for "in wins" that had either a lower BA or lower OPS than for "in losses".  It makes sense that over a career or even over a full season, at least if the player was a regular, that players would tend to have higher BA and OPS in wins than in losses because their teams won in the "in wins and lost in the "in losses".   While that doesn't guarantee the team will have been better offensively, we all know that in actuality, that is the case.  With the number of runs teams score in the last decade or two, teams win the vast majority of games they score six or more runs and lose the vast majority of games in which they score three runs or less. 

    Teams score more runs in their wins and losses, so I expected to see the same trend for individuals.  I started to notice, in passing, that every player had a better BA and OPS "in wins" than "in losses", so any time I look at defensive position splits, I take literally a second or two to check out the BA and OPS "in wins" and "in losses".  To my surprise, as noted above, I had yet to find a single player who had a lower BA or OPS "in wins" than "in losses" for any season a player was a regular.  

    Until today.  When I looked up Russell Martin's 2012 splits as a catcher (because of a comment in the Yankee off-season thread) I saw his BA and OPS "in wins" and "in losses" and they popped out at me because they were different from every other "in wins" and "in losses" split I had seen

    I present you Russell Martin's

    Game Outcome for Team Split G GS PA AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI SB CS BB SO BA OBP SLG OPS TB GDP HBP SH SF IBB ROE BA bip tOPS+ sOPS+ in Wins 70 68 277 242 35 47 9 0 14 36 4 0 29 63 .194 .293 .405 .698 98 7 5 1 0 0 2 .200 95 67 in Losses 63 52 208 180 15 42 9 0 7 17 2 1 24 32 .233 .333 .400 .733 72 6 3 1 0 0 3 .248 106 141
    Now, I have no idea what it means, if anything, that Russell had a 39 point better BA and a 35 point better OPS in losses than in wins.  His AB/HR, AB/RBI, and Run/PA were all higher in wins than in losses, so he was still contributing more to the Yankee offense scoring runs in wins than in losses, so it is not like his offense went to waste and was concentrated only in losses.

    Mind you, originally, I didn't expect to see every player have a higher BA and OPS in wins than in losses.  But after seeing a 100 such cases (or maybe much more than that?), it was kind of a shock to see an exception.   I believe the anomaly is because Martin hit just .211 overall.  I don't imagine I have looked up the splits of many players with such a low batting average.  It seems to me that such a player, with so few hits/game, may not have the typical distribution in wins and losses because of random anomolies in small samples.  Intuitively, it makes sense to me to see more anomalies in a player with fewer hits than the typical player as, in general, the smaller the sample size, the more a split may reveal an anomaly caused by small sample issues.

    This may interest no one.  So be it.  I think I have the right answer for Russell Martin's anomalous stats "in wins" vs "in losses".  But if anyone with a statistical bent has any input, I'd love to hear it.  I'd also love to hear from anyone who has noticed stats "in wins" and "in losses" before, particularly, if you had noted, as I had, approximately what percentage of players had better BA and OPS in "in wins" than "in losses".
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from SonicsMonksLyresVicars. Show SonicsMonksLyresVicars's posts

    Re: The 2013 Sox and OPS

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:

    There is absolutely nothing wrong with the time-tested stats for player evaluation. Putouts , assists and fielding percentage for defense. Batting average,  Home Runs, RBIs , runs scored, on base pct. , slugging pct. and strikeouts for offense. Won / loss record , ERA and strikeouts / walks for pitchers. People get too carried away with the newer metrics. How many even know how WAR is computed ?   OPS is nothing more than the addition of slugging and on base percentages. And , it gives exactly equal weight to each, which is questionable.  I guess it is fun for the wannabe Bill James to play around with all these numbers, but it is not really necessary for player evaluation. The best method still is to watch the games and form your opinions.



    There is nothing wrong with SOME of those stats e.g. HR, OBP, SLG, K/W.  There is a LOT wrong with some of them e.g. RBI, R, BA.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from BosoxJoe5. Show BosoxJoe5's posts

    Re: The 2013 Sox and OPS

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:

    There is absolutely nothing wrong with the time-tested stats for player evaluation. Putouts , assists and fielding percentage for defense. Batting average,  Home Runs, RBIs , runs scored, on base pct. , slugging pct. and strikeouts for offense. Won / loss record , ERA and strikeouts / walks for pitchers. People get too carried away with the newer metrics. How many even know how WAR is computed ?   OPS is nothing more than the addition of slugging and on base percentages. And , it gives exactly equal weight to each, which is questionable.  I guess it is fun for the wannabe Bill James to play around with all these numbers, but it is not really necessary for player evaluation. The best method still is to watch the games and form your opinions.




    Tradition fielding stats are increditability useless. A better SS is going to get to more ball and have more chances, he is going to make more errors than a SS with less range.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from BosoxJoe5. Show BosoxJoe5's posts

    Re: The 2013 Sox and OPS

    In response to SonicsMonksLyresVicars' comment:

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:

     

    There is absolutely nothing wrong with the time-tested stats for player evaluation. Putouts , assists and fielding percentage for defense. Batting average,  Home Runs, RBIs , runs scored, on base pct. , slugging pct. and strikeouts for offense. Won / loss record , ERA and strikeouts / walks for pitchers. People get too carried away with the newer metrics. How many even know how WAR is computed ?   OPS is nothing more than the addition of slugging and on base percentages. And , it gives exactly equal weight to each, which is questionable.  I guess it is fun for the wannabe Bill James to play around with all these numbers, but it is not really necessary for player evaluation. The best method still is to watch the games and form your opinions.

     



    There is nothing wrong with SOME of those stats e.g. HR, OBP, SLG, K/W.  There is a LOT wrong with some of them e.g. RBI, R, BA.

     




    OPS I think is the best offensive statistic. The higher the better regardless of how you get there.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from dgalehouse. Show dgalehouse's posts

    Re: The 2013 Sox and OPS

    It is difficult to judge a defender's range without watching the games.  An infielder with good range will tend to have more assists. An outfielder with good range will tend to have more putouts. On base percentage is important , but batting average should not be discounted. In most cases , a walk is not as good as a hit.  A pitcher's won / loss record should be looked at in conjunction  with his ERA.  If both are good , you know you have a good pitcher.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: The 2013 Sox and OPS

    In response to pelosireturns's comment:

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:

     

    There is absolutely nothing wrong with the time-tested stats for player evaluation. Putouts , assists and fielding percentage for defense. Batting average,  Home Runs, RBIs , runs scored, on base pct. , slugging pct. and strikeouts for offense. Won / loss record , ERA and strikeouts / walks for pitchers. People get too carried away with the newer metrics. How many even know how WAR is computed ?   OPS is nothing more than the addition of slugging and on base percentages. And , it gives exactly equal weight to each, which is questionable.  I guess it is fun for the wannabe Bill James to play around with all these numbers, but it is not really necessary for player evaluation. The best method still is to watch the games and form your opinions.

     



     

    Agreed




    +1

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: The 2013 Sox and OPS

    In response to BosoxJoe5's comment:

    In response to SonicsMonksLyresVicars' comment:

     

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:

     

    There is absolutely nothing wrong with the time-tested stats for player evaluation. Putouts , assists and fielding percentage for defense. Batting average,  Home Runs, RBIs , runs scored, on base pct. , slugging pct. and strikeouts for offense. Won / loss record , ERA and strikeouts / walks for pitchers. People get too carried away with the newer metrics. How many even know how WAR is computed ?   OPS is nothing more than the addition of slugging and on base percentages. And , it gives exactly equal weight to each, which is questionable.  I guess it is fun for the wannabe Bill James to play around with all these numbers, but it is not really necessary for player evaluation. The best method still is to watch the games and form your opinions.

     



    There is nothing wrong with SOME of those stats e.g. HR, OBP, SLG, K/W.  There is a LOT wrong with some of them e.g. RBI, R, BA.

     

     




    OPS I think is the best offensive statistic. The higher the better regardless of how you get there.

     




    Agreed...its the best SINGLE offensive stat, though the weighted one Kimmi mentioned should also be considered. For pitchers I think ERA or ERA+ is the best SINGLE statistic. That said, you have to use more than one stat to properly evaluate a player...but there is no need to use all of them. Four or five should give you a pretty good idea of a player's value.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from mef429. Show mef429's posts

    Re: The 2013 Sox and OPS

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

    In response to BosoxJoe5's comment:

     

    In response to SonicsMonksLyresVicars' comment:

     

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:

     

    There is absolutely nothing wrong with the time-tested stats for player evaluation. Putouts , assists and fielding percentage for defense. Batting average,  Home Runs, RBIs , runs scored, on base pct. , slugging pct. and strikeouts for offense. Won / loss record , ERA and strikeouts / walks for pitchers. People get too carried away with the newer metrics. How many even know how WAR is computed ?   OPS is nothing more than the addition of slugging and on base percentages. And , it gives exactly equal weight to each, which is questionable.  I guess it is fun for the wannabe Bill James to play around with all these numbers, but it is not really necessary for player evaluation. The best method still is to watch the games and form your opinions.

     



    There is nothing wrong with SOME of those stats e.g. HR, OBP, SLG, K/W.  There is a LOT wrong with some of them e.g. RBI, R, BA.

     

     




    OPS I think is the best offensive statistic. The higher the better regardless of how you get there.

     

     




     

    Agreed...its the best SINGLE offensive stat, though the weighted one Kimmi mentioned should also be considered. For pitchers I think ERA or ERA+ is the best SINGLE statistic. That said, you have to use more than one stat to properly evaluate a player...but there is no need to use all of them. Four or five should give you a pretty good idea of a player's value.




    I value WHIP more than ERA. Especially in smaller sample sizes.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: The 2013 Sox and OPS

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:

    There is absolutely nothing wrong with the time-tested stats for player evaluation. Putouts , assists and fielding percentage for defense. Batting average,  Home Runs, RBIs , runs scored, on base pct. , slugging pct. and strikeouts for offense. Won / loss record , ERA and strikeouts / walks for pitchers. People get too carried away with the newer metrics. How many even know how WAR is computed ?   OPS is nothing more than the addition of slugging and on base percentages. And , it gives exactly equal weight to each, which is questionable.  I guess it is fun for the wannabe Bill James to play around with all these numbers, but it is not really necessary for player evaluation. The best method still is to watch the games and form your opinions.




    Fielding % has to be the worst stat to judge a player ever invented. Even if the scoring was consistent and objective, it would tell just a small fraction of what is need to evaluate who is a great fielder or not.

    Put outs and assists are near useless as well, unless you relate them to innings played. RF9 is better, but even that stat is flawed.

    Yes, OPS is flawed because it counts SLG% as equal to OBP. However, it is way better than using just BA HR and RBIs (old school).

    A better stat would be to maybe weigh OBP 2:1 to SLG%.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from dgalehouse. Show dgalehouse's posts

    Re: The 2013 Sox and OPS

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:

     

    There is absolutely nothing wrong with the time-tested stats for player evaluation. Putouts , assists and fielding percentage for defense. Batting average,  Home Runs, RBIs , runs scored, on base pct. , slugging pct. and strikeouts for offense. Won / loss record , ERA and strikeouts / walks for pitchers. People get too carried away with the newer metrics. How many even know how WAR is computed ?   OPS is nothing more than the addition of slugging and on base percentages. And , it gives exactly equal weight to each, which is questionable.  I guess it is fun for the wannabe Bill James to play around with all these numbers, but it is not really necessary for player evaluation. The best method still is to watch the games and form your opinions.

     




     

    Fielding % has to be the worst stat to judge a player ever invented. Even if the scoring was consistent and objective, it would tell just a small fraction of what is need to evaluate who is a great fielder or not.

    Put outs and assists are near useless as well, unless you relate them to innings played. RF9 is better, but even that stat is flawed.

    Yes, OPS is flawed because it counts SLG% as equal to OBP. However, it is way better than using just BA HR and RBIs (old school).

    A better stat would be to maybe weigh OBP 2:1 to SLG%.




    Of course putouts and assists have to be related to innings played. 

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: The 2013 Sox and OPS

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:

     

    There is absolutely nothing wrong with the time-tested stats for player evaluation. Putouts , assists and fielding percentage for defense. Batting average,  Home Runs, RBIs , runs scored, on base pct. , slugging pct. and strikeouts for offense. Won / loss record , ERA and strikeouts / walks for pitchers. People get too carried away with the newer metrics. How many even know how WAR is computed ?   OPS is nothing more than the addition of slugging and on base percentages. And , it gives exactly equal weight to each, which is questionable.  I guess it is fun for the wannabe Bill James to play around with all these numbers, but it is not really necessary for player evaluation. The best method still is to watch the games and form your opinions.

     




     

    Fielding % has to be the worst stat to judge a player ever invented. Even if the scoring was consistent and objective, it would tell just a small fraction of what is need to evaluate who is a great fielder or not.

    Put outs and assists are near useless as well, unless you relate them to innings played. RF9 is better, but even that stat is flawed.

    Yes, OPS is flawed because it counts SLG% as equal to OBP. However, it is way better than using just BA HR and RBIs (old school).

    A better stat would be to maybe weigh OBP 2:1 to SLG%.




    Apparently there is such a stat. It weights OBP to SLG at 1.8 to 1. Kimmi mentioned it earlier. Its not widely used, apparently.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share