- Jun 20, 2015
- 857
- 93
OPS is very accurate, IMO. only thing that most OBP % metrics miss is ROE. it can be a significant number of times a player reaches base and impacts the game. BUT I understand why it's not included in standard measuring.
Probably because it was designed for a level of play where a player may reach on a error 5 times in 162 games..lol.OPS is very accurate, IMO. only thing that most OBP % metrics miss is ROE. it can be a significant number of times a player reaches base and impacts the game. BUT I understand why it's not included in standard measuring.
Did you just ignore the correlations @Nimrod gave or are you arguing that correlation to runs scored is somehow the wrong statistic to look at to show relevance? If it is the latter than tell us how (statistically) you are determining OBP is a better measure.
@Nimrod showed correlation with runs scored for both MLB and SEC softball. So what measure (eg either the correlation that @Nimrod used or something else) did Moneyball and The Book use to determine that OBP was better than using a combined statistic like OPS? That said, at the end of the day OPS and OBP are close enough (at least when using @Nimrod 's data) that it probably won't make a huge difference.I am not arguing anything, they are not my original thoughts. Simply walk through the math of it.
No one thinks that SLG and OBP are equal when it comes to scoring runs. OBP is almost double SLG (I can't recall the exact number, 1.8 maybe). This comes not from me but from the people that wrote Money Ball and "The Book" (how to optimize your batting lineup).
Hell even the Wikipedia page on OPS has a "Criticism" section. These aren't new thoughts.
If you guys have some different math then by all means publish so we can review. There are much better stats to use.
Especially if your reaching means a run scores or the ROE turns into a run itself. In a perfect world, there'd be no ROE but you're putting the ball in play and making them make a play - still should count for something and not be as meaningless as a strikeout or a non-moving out.i don't disagree, but looking at stats from my 18u fall games, 32 games played, we have 54 ROE. maybe score keeper too tough, maybe not, lots of variables.
But it still can be a real number. LOL
GC includes a ROE number..nobody is stopping anybody from using it..lol.Especially if your reaching means a run scores or the ROE turns into a run itself. In a perfect world, there'd be no ROE but you're putting the ball in play and making them make a play - still should count for something and not be as meaningless as a strikeout or a non-moving out.
Perhaps, but the ROE stat is there regardless right?I believe default in GC is to discard ROE, you have to specifically tell it to included them in OBP if you want ROE included.