baseball sabr question - Sporting Events and Fantasy Sports

Two Plus Two Forums Sports and Games Sporting Events

baseball sabr question

Post Reply Subscribe

...

01-09-2008 , 11:21 PM

Kneel B4 Zod

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Dec 2003 Posts: 27,952

most sabr people have settled on 1.8 *OBP + SLG as a better correlation to run scoring than OBP + SLG.

but, does the type of SLG matter? ie does a higher ISO SLG make a guy more valuable, or does it mean he just has more power?

ie 2 guys each have .400 OBP and .500 SLG. one has a higher ISO SLG than the other. does this matter in determining value?

Quote

01-09-2008 , 11:23 PM

J.R.

Econ Forum Czar

Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 8,292

Are singles more, the same, or less valuable than walks?

Quote

01-09-2008 , 11:25 PM

Kneel B4 Zod

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Dec 2003 Posts: 27,952

Quote:

Originally Posted by J.R.

Are singles more, the same, or less valuable than walks?

well, more. let me see what I am missing...

Quote

01-09-2008 , 11:35 PM

J.R.

Econ Forum Czar

Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 8,292

Linear Weights 2004-2006:

1B--.465
2B--.775
3B-1.056
HR-1.396
BB--.319
OUT-(-.292)
NonIntBB-.333

Singles are worth a lot more than walks (like nearly 50% more) and each extra base you reach off a hit is of less marginal value than the hit itself.

Here is a good thread on OBP and SLG weighting, although you are better off using something properly constructed instead of trying to "force" OPS to be less wrong.

Quote

01-09-2008 , 11:36 PM

Kneel B4 Zod

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Dec 2003 Posts: 27,952

similar question, real world example.

Jim Rice 1978: .315 / .370 / .600. stole 7 bases, caught 5 times.

Dwight Evans 1981: .296 / .415 / .522. stole 3 bases, caught 2 times.

Evans gets an .eqa of .328, and Rice an .eqa of .313. big edge to Dewey, even though his OBP*1.8+SLG is a bit lower and his baserunning is about the same. why is this? I realize .eqa and 'adjusted' OPS won't be the same, but that seems like a big difference

Last edited by Kneel B4 Zod; 01-09-2008 at 11:42 PM.

Quote

01-09-2008 , 11:38 PM

K.O.S.

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 20,798

Why not just use EqA or something else that's better than OPS?

Quote

01-10-2008 , 12:04 AM

J.R.

Econ Forum Czar

Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 8,292

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kneel B4 Zod

EQA sets the average hitter as a .260 eqa, whatever line that is for that particular year. And then adds in a bunch of other adjustments. This means any event in year 1 is invariably weighted slightly differently in year z by EQA.

Quote

01-10-2008 , 12:12 AM

zer0

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 5,835

your question is essentially:

is .250/.350/.500 the same as .300/.350/.500, right?

the player with the lower average will be more valuable

Quote

01-10-2008 , 01:17 AM

Jack of Arcades

Jumbo Jack

Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 23,569

Ever so slightly, but yes, the player with the lower average is more valuable.

Quote

01-10-2008 , 07:15 AM

#10

J.R.

Econ Forum Czar

Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 8,292

It does depend on run environment

Quote:

I just tried with a weird environment (OBA/SLG of .393/.493), and in this case, the higher the BA, the more runs scored. I then tried the other way, with .289/.351, and this time the LOWER the BA, the more runs scored.

The "break-even" point seems to be about .360/.450. That is, at that level, the change in batting average (and I checked from .200 to .340) made zero change to the run production of the team.

The more successful batters are, the less important xbhs are as you can drive in runs with singles more easily, as you can just string together reaching base and score. The less successful hitters are, the more important xbhs are, because its harder to string together baserunners.

MLB is at (OBA/SLG) .336/.422

Quote

01-10-2008 , 07:31 AM

#11

THEOSU

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 11,554

offense was down in 81 as well - ops adjusted for fenway was .714 in 1981, in 1978 it was .746. dewey's ops+ was 162 in 81, rice's was 157.

also, dewey's rate of gidp was slightly lower.

Quote

01-10-2008 , 09:33 AM

#12

Kneel B4 Zod

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Dec 2003 Posts: 27,952

Quote:

Originally Posted by zer0

your question is essentially:

is .250/.350/.500 the same as .300/.350/.500, right?

the player with the lower average will be more valuable

why is that?

Quote

01-10-2008 , 10:12 AM

#13

anononon

Guest

Posts: n/a

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kneel B4 Zod

why is that?

see also:

Quote:

Originally Posted by J.R.

It does depend on run environment

Quote:

already been answered

Quote

01-10-2008 , 10:26 AM

#14

kyro

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 30,354

Quote:

Originally Posted by zer0

your question is essentially:

is .250/.350/.500 the same as .300/.350/.500, right?

the player with the lower average will be more valuable

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kneel B4 Zod

why is that?

I'm assuming it has to do with both players making outs the same amount of times, but the player with the lower batting average is getting "better" hits than the guy with the higher average. Am I correct?

Pretty interesting.

Quote

01-10-2008 , 10:31 AM

#15

kyro

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 30,354

Or I could have just read JRs post and tried to decipher it myself. So, it's not always the case that the guy with the lower average will be more valuable, as it depends on the value of the OBP/SLG? Makes sense.

Quote

01-10-2008 , 06:26 PM

#16

prohornblower

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 38,283

Quote:

Originally Posted by kyro

That's what it looks like to me, pretty interesting.

So, if OBP is the same, then the guy with "fewer better" hits is more valuable?

But didn't someone already determine that the guy with the higher average is getting more singles (and fewer walks than the other guy)? And that singles are "almost 50% more valuable than walks?

So wouldn't that have to be considered, as well?

Plus, I guess I'm not understanding why "fewer better" hits are better, given similar OBP. As someone pointed out, isn't there a law of diminshing returns, with each of the 3 subsequent bases reached on any given hit?

Quote

01-10-2008 , 06:33 PM

#17

prohornblower

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 38,283

Quote:

Originally Posted by J.R.

Linear Weights 2004-2006:

1B--.465
2B--.775
3B-1.056
HR-1.396

Pretty cool stuff.

Wouldn't a homer be worth at least 4 times as much as a single, though? Given that a run scores every time on a homer?

Quote

01-10-2008 , 06:52 PM

#18

DesertCat

I am a Regulator

Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 13,743

Quote:

Originally Posted by prohornblower

Pretty cool stuff.

Wouldn't a homer be worth at least 4 times as much as a single, though? Given that a run scores every time on a homer?

A HR can score between 1-4 runs. A single can score between 0-2 runs (barring a throwing error), and leaves a baserunner on who can possibly score as well. So 4x is a little high.

Quote

01-10-2008 , 06:52 PM

#19

anononon

Guest

Posts: n/a

Quote:

Originally Posted by prohornblower

Pretty cool stuff.

Wouldn't a homer be worth at least 4 times as much as a single, though? Given that a run scores every time on a homer?

No, the research on TangoTiger's site (look up BaseRuns - BsR) proves why as well. It's interesting stuff.

Quote

01-10-2008 , 06:54 PM

#20

Dudd

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 54,153

Quote:

Originally Posted by prohornblower

Pretty cool stuff.

Wouldn't a homer be worth at least 4 times as much as a single, though? Given that a run scores every time on a homer?

No, because the resulting run expectation changes with a single. With a homer, it clears the bases and adds a run. So, let's say with no one on and no outs, the run expectation is .5 runs, this is not exact but I'm just estimating for an example. If a home run is hit, a run scores, the resulting run expectation is still .5, so the value of that home run is 1 run. Now, let's say a runner singles. The resulting run expectancy is .9, and no runs have scored. So, the value of that single is .4 runs. Different base/out combinations have different values, and you can find an average value of each event, but it's not as simple as you might think.

Quote

01-10-2008 , 08:51 PM

#21

prohornblower

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 38,283

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dudd

but it's not as simple as you might think.

lol, clearly this stuff isn't simple at all. Look how many bad decisions are made everyday by F.O.'s, managers, and players. I wish I had more time to really dig in and learn about this stuff because two things I love are numbers and baseball, but I'm satisfied enough in the meantime firing questions at those who do find the time.

Quote

01-11-2008 , 02:06 AM

#22

ArcticKnight

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 21,517

Damn, I thought this was leading to the annual Ichiro versus Dunn "who is a better hitter" debate.

Quote

Post Reply Subscribe

...