Batting Average and HR's= Overrated

[deeman11747]

Here goes my rant....

Two stats... the Batting Average and Home Run totals need to be removed from most arguements and considerations for MVP and other things comparing players. Let me break it down.

Batting average shows how well a player hits the baseball obviously. Well the first thing i was taught by a bunch of minor leaguers I know is that is that they learned that in baseball... your job is to get on base. So the best players are the ones who do their job the best. Since On Base % represents how much you get on base... that should replace the BA as the most important stat. MVP is Most Valuable Player... not Leagues Best Hitter...therefore OBP should be a much bigger factor than BA.

Secondly...why are HR's such a big deal. It must be because "chicks dig the long ball." Seriously think of it this way.

Lets say there are two players are on the same team The both get 450 AB's. They both get 150 hits that year. Player A hits 100 singles ....50 doubles.... drives in 100 runs... and scores 100 runs.

Player B hits 100 singles...50 HR's...drives in 100 runs.... and scores 100 runs.

They both produced the same exact runs... but in different ways. I'll guarantee that Player B would get recognized as the better player.

Now lets look at this.

Hits = Higher BA
Higher BA= Higher OBP
Higher OBP= Higher frequency of runs scored

Since you win games by scoring runs... not by just getting on base... runs scored in theory should be the most important stat. Only problem with that is... theres too much of a variable factor because it relies on how well your teammates knock you in which is out of your control.

Therefore OBP should be the most important stat in baseball because it is the one stat that shows how much you help your team raise the frequency of runs scors and since you win games by scoring runs... thats the most important thing.



Please feel free to comment because I'm sure I'm wrong somewhere.

[rsox]

Re: Batting Average and HR's= Overrated

You've been watching I,Max haven't you?.

[rsox]

Re: Batting Average and HR's= Overrated

You've been watching I,Max haven't you?.

[scoman]

Re: Batting Average and HR's= Overrated

Here goes my rant....

Two stats... the Batting Average and Home Run totals need to be removed from most arguements and considerations for MVP and other things comparing players. Let me break it down.

Batting average shows how well a player hits the baseball obviously. Well the first thing i was taught by a bunch of minor leaguers I know is that is that they learned that in baseball... your job is to get on base. So the best players are the ones who do their job the best. Since On Base % represents how much you get on base... that should replace the BA as the most important stat. MVP is Most Valuable Player... not Leagues Best Hitter...therefore OBP should be a much bigger factor than BA.

Secondly...why are HR's such a big deal. It must be because "chicks dig the long ball." Seriously think of it this way.

Lets say there are two players are on the same team The both get 450 AB's. They both get 150 hits that year. Player A hits 100 singles ....50 doubles.... drives in 100 runs... and scores 100 runs.

Player B hits 100 singles...50 HR's...drives in 100 runs.... and scores 100 runs.

They both produced the same exact runs... but in different ways. I'll guarantee that Player B would get recognized as the better player.

Now lets look at this.

Hits = Higher BA
Higher BA= Higher OBP
Higher OBP= Higher frequency of runs scored

Since you win games by scoring runs... not by just getting on base... runs scored in theory should be the most important stat. Only problem with that is... theres too much of a variable factor because it relies on how well your teammates knock you in which is out of your control.

Therefore OBP should be the most important stat in baseball because it is the one stat that shows how much you help your team raise the frequency of runs scors and since you win games by scoring runs... thats the most important thing.



Please feel free to comment because I'm sure I'm wrong somewhere.

In my opinion,OPS is the most important offensive stats,it gives you a all around measurement of a player season.

[scoman]

Re: Batting Average and HR's= Overrated

Here goes my rant....

Two stats... the Batting Average and Home Run totals need to be removed from most arguements and considerations for MVP and other things comparing players. Let me break it down.

Batting average shows how well a player hits the baseball obviously. Well the first thing i was taught by a bunch of minor leaguers I know is that is that they learned that in baseball... your job is to get on base. So the best players are the ones who do their job the best. Since On Base % represents how much you get on base... that should replace the BA as the most important stat. MVP is Most Valuable Player... not Leagues Best Hitter...therefore OBP should be a much bigger factor than BA.

Secondly...why are HR's such a big deal. It must be because "chicks dig the long ball." Seriously think of it this way.

Lets say there are two players are on the same team The both get 450 AB's. They both get 150 hits that year. Player A hits 100 singles ....50 doubles.... drives in 100 runs... and scores 100 runs.

Player B hits 100 singles...50 HR's...drives in 100 runs.... and scores 100 runs.

They both produced the same exact runs... but in different ways. I'll guarantee that Player B would get recognized as the better player.

Now lets look at this.

Hits = Higher BA
Higher BA= Higher OBP
Higher OBP= Higher frequency of runs scored

Since you win games by scoring runs... not by just getting on base... runs scored in theory should be the most important stat. Only problem with that is... theres too much of a variable factor because it relies on how well your teammates knock you in which is out of your control.

Therefore OBP should be the most important stat in baseball because it is the one stat that shows how much you help your team raise the frequency of runs scors and since you win games by scoring runs... thats the most important thing.



Please feel free to comment because I'm sure I'm wrong somewhere.

In my opinion,OPS is the most important offensive stats,it gives you a all around measurement of a player season.

[scoman]

Re: Batting Average and HR's= Overrated

In my opinion,OPS is the most important offensive stats,it gives you a all around measurement of a player season.

OPS,is the truest measurement of a players offensive production,imho.

[scoman]

Re: Batting Average and HR's= Overrated

In my opinion,OPS is the most important offensive stats,it gives you a all around measurement of a player season.

OPS,is the truest measurement of a players offensive production,imho.

[Misfit]

Re: Batting Average and HR's= Overrated

While I think your argument has validity, I still don't buy it.

Batting average is somewhat of an overrated stat. However, I'd rather have a guy who can hit .330 than one who hits .280 obviously. OBP is probably more important, but not always.

I think you have to consider the player's role on the team before you judge what the best measuring tool is for them. A leadoff man is supposed to score runs and get on base. Therefore, OBP and runs scored should be the most important stat for a leadoff hitter.

Conversely, if your cleanup hitter has an OBP of .400 but isn't driving in runs he's not being productive. The cleanup hitter needs a good batting average because in most instances a walk isn't going to bring in a run. And he probably isn't a gifted runner so he's going to be station to station on the basepaths which can at times hinder run scoring.

The easiest way to knock in the most runs at once is the homerun. A double is never going to drive in more than 3 runs, neither is a single or a triple, but a homerun can knock in 4. The homerun is the most efficient means of scoring runs because the batter drives himself in (and anyone on base) without making an out. That and the intangibles it brings. A homerun at a key moment can spark a rally or cap off a big comeback. It creates momentum and demoralizes opposing teams.

[Misfit]

Re: Batting Average and HR's= Overrated

While I think your argument has validity, I still don't buy it.

Batting average is somewhat of an overrated stat. However, I'd rather have a guy who can hit .330 than one who hits .280 obviously. OBP is probably more important, but not always.

I think you have to consider the player's role on the team before you judge what the best measuring tool is for them. A leadoff man is supposed to score runs and get on base. Therefore, OBP and runs scored should be the most important stat for a leadoff hitter.

Conversely, if your cleanup hitter has an OBP of .400 but isn't driving in runs he's not being productive. The cleanup hitter needs a good batting average because in most instances a walk isn't going to bring in a run. And he probably isn't a gifted runner so he's going to be station to station on the basepaths which can at times hinder run scoring.

The easiest way to knock in the most runs at once is the homerun. A double is never going to drive in more than 3 runs, neither is a single or a triple, but a homerun can knock in 4. The homerun is the most efficient means of scoring runs because the batter drives himself in (and anyone on base) without making an out. That and the intangibles it brings. A homerun at a key moment can spark a rally or cap off a big comeback. It creates momentum and demoralizes opposing teams.

[snepp]

Re: Batting Average and HR's= Overrated

I have to go with Misfit's line of thinking. Yes OBP is a very important number to look at, but like he said, a walk isn't going to drive in any runs. I'd much rather have a higher average and lower OBP in the cleanup spot over a lower average, high OBP hitter. The opposite holds true for a leadoff hitter. I don't care if his average stinks as long as he's getting on base, assuming he has enough speed to avoid logjams on the bases (Oakland's failed attempt to have Jeremy Giambi hit leadoff a couple years back).

[snepp]

Re: Batting Average and HR's= Overrated

I have to go with Misfit's line of thinking. Yes OBP is a very important number to look at, but like he said, a walk isn't going to drive in any runs. I'd much rather have a higher average and lower OBP in the cleanup spot over a lower average, high OBP hitter. The opposite holds true for a leadoff hitter. I don't care if his average stinks as long as he's getting on base, assuming he has enough speed to avoid logjams on the bases (Oakland's failed attempt to have Jeremy Giambi hit leadoff a couple years back).

[CMH]

Re: Batting Average and HR's= Overrated

You obviously need a lot of variation in this.

OBP is very very important (and I love the stat - especially OPS).

But, batting average is hits. And with a high batting average you are also counting doubles, triples and homeruns. A walk is just a move to first.

Am I saying that batting average is more important than OBP? No. I'm not saying either is more important.

However, you should have a good balance. You can have a guy with a .400 OBP, but if he's only batting .250, what good is he really doing the team besides getting to first? I know that sounds kinda dumb because getting on base is indeed the most important thing in baseball, but you have to take into account his other at-bats. I rather have a guy with a .360 OPB and a .280 average over a guy with a .400 OBP and a .250 average. Got me?

That being said. If a guy is hitting .300 and only has a .320 OBP, I wouldn't be too happy with him. There are too many variations to really consider.

The best method is to take everything into account and evaluate it. OPS is probably the best stat to do just that. It never lies.

[CMH]

Re: Batting Average and HR's= Overrated

You obviously need a lot of variation in this.

OBP is very very important (and I love the stat - especially OPS).

But, batting average is hits. And with a high batting average you are also counting doubles, triples and homeruns. A walk is just a move to first.

Am I saying that batting average is more important than OBP? No. I'm not saying either is more important.

However, you should have a good balance. You can have a guy with a .400 OBP, but if he's only batting .250, what good is he really doing the team besides getting to first? I know that sounds kinda dumb because getting on base is indeed the most important thing in baseball, but you have to take into account his other at-bats. I rather have a guy with a .360 OPB and a .280 average over a guy with a .400 OBP and a .250 average. Got me?

That being said. If a guy is hitting .300 and only has a .320 OBP, I wouldn't be too happy with him. There are too many variations to really consider.

The best method is to take everything into account and evaluate it. OPS is probably the best stat to do just that. It never lies.

[Blzer]

Re: Batting Average and HR's= Overrated

Batting average is an overrated stat... only it's not unfair, and it should not be removed. It should be added on to.

Hot Zones are very important. You know, the nine strikezone zones, and the 16 outside of them (for those that swing at balls). What's so important is to know that the people with the higher averages are getting fat pitches. People were all saying what kind of numbers Pujols was putting up last year with his batting average... he's getting FAT pitches. Bonds? Well, let me put it this way... he had more pitches stuck on the low-outside corner than he did down the middle. We have to consider that also.

[Blzer]

Re: Batting Average and HR's= Overrated

Batting average is an overrated stat... only it's not unfair, and it should not be removed. It should be added on to.

Hot Zones are very important. You know, the nine strikezone zones, and the 16 outside of them (for those that swing at balls). What's so important is to know that the people with the higher averages are getting fat pitches. People were all saying what kind of numbers Pujols was putting up last year with his batting average... he's getting FAT pitches. Bonds? Well, let me put it this way... he had more pitches stuck on the low-outside corner than he did down the middle. We have to consider that also.