I'm sorry I ever asked lol.
OBPS
Collapse
Recommended Videos
Collapse
X
-
-
Re: OBPS
"Slugging Percentage (SLG) = Total Bases ÷ At Bats
Total Bases = Singles + (2 x Doubles) + (3 x Triples) + (4 x Home Runs)
Total Bases (alternate method) = Hits + Doubles + (2 x Triples) + (3 x Home Runs)[1]"
It literally tells you it's weighted though. The weighted portion of the formula is HOW you learn what total bases are. In that formula, it shows the doubles triples and home runs have a higher base weight cause? They created more bases. That is how the formula is being used, it makes those hits worth more. Your own source shows how you found total bases is that each hit was weighted more depending on how many bases they made.
Yes slugging is found with total bases/at bats but to find those total bases you HAVE to learn it by doing a formula that weights the hits equal to how many bases each hit created.
The hits don't matter. We are just using them to "learn" the number we need to calculate SLG.
If that number were known, we could calculate SLG right away. That number (total bases) is NOT a weighted number. The player got X number of bases in Y number of at bats. HOW he got those bases has no bearing on his SLG. Just that he got those bases.
If we don't know the number of bases the player got, then we have to find out. To do so, we use a simple equation to do so. Doing so still comes up with that same UNWEIGHTED number of bases, which is then used to calculate SLG
At bats is a fixed number.
Total bases is a fixed number.
Just because we have to solve for one of tjose numbers doesn't make it "weighted"
We aren't counting hits, or weighing hits. We are just using things we do know (hits, bases per each hit) to calculate the number we don't know, but need to know to determine SLG.Comment
-
Re: OBPS
Yet again you show the flaw.
The hits don't matter. We are just using them to "learn" the number we need to calculate SLG.
If that number were known, we could calculate SLG right away. That number (total bases) is NOT a weighted number. The player got X number of bases in Y number of at bats. HOW he got those bases has no bearing on his SLG. Just that he got those bases.
If we don't know the number of bases the player got, then we have to find out. To do so, we use a simple equation to do so. Doing so still comes up with that same UNWEIGHTED number of bases, which is then used to calculate SLG
At bats is a fixed number.
Total bases is a fixed number.
Just because we have to solve for one of tjose numbers doesn't make it "weighted"
We aren't counting hits, or weighing hits. We are just using things we do know (hits, bases per each hit) to calculate the number we don't know, but need to know to determine SLG.
It is IMPOSSIBLE to not calculate the number of total bases without knowing that formula. This again is just math, it isn't a flaw it's just how things are calculated.
You keep wanting to talk about total bases, but logically there is NO way to know how many total bases there is without doing this math. Even if they gave you the number on an MLB stat sheet SOMEONE or SOMETHING had to do that math.
This is science at this point, a universal LAW. To find the total bases you must know the total hits and what kind of hits they were. There is zero way of finding this out without that data point. This is just data, I work with data all the time you can't solve for something if you don't have data points.
The data points for total bases must use a weighted formula to account for how many bases each hit produces. Yes in the end once you find total bases the ratio comes out the same but in order to find the number to learn that ratio you had to use a formula that weighted those hits compared to the bases they produced.
Of course a guy who has 10 AB that got 6 bases from a home run and double has the same slugging as a guy with 10 AB with 6 bases from two tripples. For that math those bases don't matter they both had 10 AB and they both got 6 bases. But the only way you knew that they both got 6 bases was you were aware that a triple was worth 3 bases ( so 3x2) and you knew the home run was worth 4 bases and the double 2 bases (so 4+2).
I have never once claimed how you get these bases matters, or that a home run if it was created in 4 AB was worth more than 4 singles in 4 AB. All I have ever said was the formula to learn how many total bases must by definition weight each hit by their perspective total bases generated then added up divided by their total at bats to find their slugging.
This is not in anyway claiming a home runs 4 bases generated is worth more than 4 singles if both were produced in 4 at bats, this is just saying you had to know in order to learn a home run was 4 bases to times it by 4.
It is not adding ANY significance to how the bases were generated, it is literally just the term of the math formula... that's it. You have constantly put emphasis on somehow thinking that saying that the hits have to be weighted to find out how many bases they are worth but that is just a term of phrase it inherently means nothing.
20 HR 4 triples 10 doubles and 30 singles we know is 142 bases, if we got those bases in any other format in the same number of at-bats in the scheme of this formula it doesn't matter, but how you learned how many bases they each are worth is by how many bases a hit produces.
This is why for instance a grand slam is still only worth 4 bases, even though it made 4 RBI.... there is no special weight other than you generated 4 bases. An HR is a hit, a single is a hit, a double is a hit... they are all hits. We know only how many bases those hits are worth by labeling them by the generated bases.
Once those bases are found any significance of the hit itself is lost, it no longer matters... but much like any mathmatical constant if you don't know the formula it means nothing.
If you try to solve a quadratic formula without following the formula you will not get the right answer, you must know how the formula works.
A better example is to look at it like this
TB/AB where TB is equal to (S+Dx2+Tx3+Hx4) this is the mathematical formula used to solve for slugging, which is an example of a weighted formula. If I give you the numbers for S, D, T, H, and AB you can solve this formula... just like if I give you the numbers for a quadratic formula you can solve that formula.
It's just how the formula works, it doesn't make the end answer of total bases worth more or less or mean more or less it's just math.
Understand how the formula works to find out the total bases changes literally nothing about the formula itself and the answer it produces. If both hitters have the same total bases vs the same total AB they both have the same slugging. Where the number gains significance is only when it is compared to other numbers such as BA and OBP. By itself, it just tells you a player's ratio of bases per at-bat which again has no bearing on how those bases are gathered.Last edited by ExarKub00720; 06-18-2021, 03:07 PM.Comment
-
Re: OBPS
Another simple way to put it.
A player gets 25 total bases (TB) in 50 at bats (AB) with 18 hits (H) what is his slugging pct (SLG)
We have all the info we need to find the SLG of .500 actually we have tio much info. We don't need to know how many hits, or what type of hit, because it doesn't matter. We know how many bases he got.
Is this a weighted average? No. It is simply bases per at bat.
Same player, same question, asked a different way.
A player gets 15 singles, a double, and 2 Home Runs in 50 at bats. What is his SLG?
We don't initially have enough info to find the SLG right away. So we have to first find the existing, but unknown value for TB. we do this, and get the result of 25. Again, not a weighted result. We just beeded to find it, because it wasnt initially known.
Now we can find the SLG of .500
Neither is a weighted average. The second way just needed a further step to find the value of an unknown but existing number.
Slugging percentag is NOT a weighted average. It is simply the average number of bases earned per at bat.
Case closed.Comment
-
Re: OBPS
I have not tried to claim how one guy gets his total bases vs how another guy gets his total bases is weighted i have only ever claimed the type of formula used is called a weighted formula. How someone gets th7e bases doesn't matter in the scheme of how you use ane calculate this formula, only that the type of formula used is an example if a weighted formula.
Obviously once you so the math ane findthe total bases all significance of a hit being a single vs a double vs a triple vs a home run is lost. Knowing the type of hit only mattered when using to solve the formula as otherwise you can not solve it.
if tou were told someone has 40 hits and no knowledge of the type of hits yo could not solve what their total bases is. After you find total bases though none of it matters and it all comes out the the same answer regardless.Comment
-
Re: OBPS
I have not tried to claim how one guy gets his total bases vs how another guy gets his total bases is weighted i have only ever claimed the type of formula used is called a weighted formula. How someone gets th7e bases doesn't matter in the scheme of how you use ane calculate this formula, only that the type of formula used is an example if a weighted formula.
Obviously once you so the math ane findthe total bases all significance of a hit being a single vs a double vs a triple vs a home run is lost. Knowing the type of hit only mattered when using to solve the formula as otherwise you can not solve it.
if tou were told someone has 40 hits and no knowledge of the type of hits yo could not solve what their total bases is. After you find total bases though none of it matters and it all comes out the the same answer regardless.Comment
-
Re: OBPS
OMG MODS PLEASE DELETE I TAKE IT ALL BACK I KNOW EXACTLY WHAT OPS IS LETS ALL JUST PRETEND THIS NEVER HAPPENEDComment
-
Re: OBPS
If you had a class with a friend and the grades were weighted and you both got 90 grades it didn't matter if one did better here or one did better there, cause in the end they both got the 90s. Just cause the formula to solve their grade is called a weighted average formula doesn't mean diddly once you solve for the grade.
The same is true for slugging. The formula for solving slugging percentage is an example of the weighted average formula. That's just what it is called though, if two guys both get .400 slugging it doesn't mean anything at all that one did it with mostly doubles and the other guy got mostly home runs as long as the math at the end of the day says they got .400 then that's all that matters, they are both producing .4 bases per at-bat.
I have never once tried to claim because the name of the mathematical formula that is used to solve for slugging is called a weighted average formula, that in turn, it means the answers you get to have more "weight" They don't, so stop being pedantic just trying to be difficult.
NO ONE IS SAYING ONE SLUGGING AVERAGE IS WORTH MORE THAN ANOTHER!Comment
-
Re: OBPS
This is an amazing thread.
Also whoever says it's weighted is wrong. They try to cite sources but they are applying a term to weighing the bases which give you a non weighted counting number which is TB.
If yoh wanted a weighted slugging stat you would need to apply a weighted percentage to how valuable each type of hit is. Traditional slugging percentage does not do this.
Slugging percentage just takes TB/AB=%. The math alone says the percentage is not weighted.
You want a close approximation to weighted slugging (it doesn't exist) look at weighted OBA. https://library.fangraphs.com/offense/woba/
Sent from my iPhone using Operation SportsComment
-
Re: OBPS
1. Why don't you guys just ask an AP Stats teacher to chime in on this?
2. The thread reminds me of ones on guitar forums that argue about whether "Sweet Home Alabama" is in the key of G or D...
3. Semantics, in the end.Comment
-
Re: OBPS
It’s closer to a ratio of anything, how many times does x happen when you do y. Because the name the type of formula used to solve for slugging is a weighted average formula it was believed that it meant that slugging itself was weighted, it’s not.
Slugging can show a lot of things when you look at it compared to other numbers, but in the end the number you get is simply going to just mean that’s how many bases on average a player gets per at-bat.
So to sum it all up, how you get bases doesn’t matter at all, how you add them up used though an example of what is called a weighted average but again that just is the name of that math formula and doesn’t hold any real significance outside of that’s just what it’s called.Last edited by ExarKub00720; 06-19-2021, 05:53 PM.Comment
-
Re: OBPS
You guys ever watch this video? It's pretty good.
Comment
-
Re: OBPS
That's hilarious though.Comment
-
Re: OBPS
This was how it all started. I was referencing the name of the formula and saying the slugging, despite the name, isn’t a percentage. That began this misunderstanding that spiraled this all out.
It’s closer to a ratio of anything, how many times does x happen when you do y. Because the name the type of formula used to solve for slugging is a weighted average formula it was believed that it meant that slugging itself was weighted, it’s not.
Slugging can show a lot of things when you look at it compared to other numbers, but in the end the number you get is simply going to just mean that’s how many bases on average a player gets per at-bat.
So to sum it all up, how you get bases doesn’t matter at all, how you add them up used though an example of what is called a weighted average but again that just is the name of that math formula and doesn’t hold any real significance outside of that’s just what it’s called.
This is an amazing thread.
Also whoever says it's weighted is wrong. They try to cite sources but they are applying a term to weighing the bases which give you a non weighted counting number which is TB.
If yoh wanted a weighted slugging stat you would need to apply a weighted percentage to how valuable each type of hit is. Traditional slugging percentage does not do this.
Slugging percentage just takes TB/AB=%. The math alone says the percentage is not weighted.
You want a close approximation to weighted slugging (it doesn't exist) look at weighted OBA. https://library.fangraphs.com/offense/woba/
Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports
This is exactly the point I was making. Slugging percentage/average is an unweighted average. Total bases is a non weighted number. Just because you need to use a formula to find that number (when the number isn't given) and that formula is similar to a weighted formula, doesnt make the result a "weighted result"Comment
-
Re: OBPS
You literally quoted where you stated "Slugging isn't a percentage, it's a weighted average" Then claim you never called it that.
This is exactly the point I was making. Slugging percentage/average is an unweighted average. Total bases is a non weighted number. Just because you need to use a formula to find that number (when the number isn't given) and that formula is similar to a weighted formula, doesnt make the result a "weighted result"
You then assumed I meant that as slugging has weight which wasn’t at all what I was referenced. Baseball has so many mislabeled terms. If you recall you kept insisting slugging was a percentage until you finally admitted it’s closer to an average.
I am not sure how though the name of that math formula type causes such a big fuss when everyone agrees that how you get bases doesn’t matter in terms of how you use the formulas. It’s just s name, things have names doesn’t change how you interrupt the math. It could have been called the death formula wouldn’t meant a single thing.Comment
Comment