OPS? Over rated stat or not?

[RoseBowlMtg]

I would like to know what the fans of OPS think about this:

 

player: BA, HR, RBI, OPS:

A: .273, 21, 49, 861

B: .308, 13, 108, 799

Did player A have a better year since his OPS was 62 points higher and had more HR's or did player B have a better year since he batted 35 pts higher and knocked in 59 more runs?

OPS world for A, RBI world for B I assume.

So how did these players do with risp?

A: 19-98 .194 2 HR's, 22 RBI's

B: 63-169 .373 5 HR's, 91 RBI's

Player A didn't do as well with risp but his OPS doesn't factor that. Only those who look deeper do I guess.

Player A didn't have as many opportunities so let's get that straight.

A: 33-169 .195, 3 or 4 HR's 38 RBI's

B: 63-169 .373, 5 HR's 91 RBI's

For the life of me I don't understand how people can not consider this when evaluating a player. RBI's do matter when you look at the meat of it and OPS is not the get all for stats.

Player A: Sixto Lezcano 1977 OPS 861

Player B: Ted Simmons 1983 OPS 799

The only thing Lezcano did better was to hit 14 solo HR's creating a higher OPS.

Just curious how many of you very intelligent baseball fans view this. I can't believe you say RBI's are meaningless and don't look at how the player did with risp to add to your evaluation. RBI's is a bad stat is lazy imo. Why not look deeper then compare players.

OPS of 861 is beat out by an OPS of 799 and by a lot.

Thoughts?

Thanks

[TooLiveBrew]

The only thing Lezcano did better was to hit 14 solo HR's creating a higher OPS.

 

Well all Simmons did was get luckier & drive in more runs. If Lezcano had more men on base in front of his 21 HR, his RBI total would be higher. What stands out that Simmons did better was bat for a significantly higher average, and stay on the field for more ABs (seemingly). Since BA w/RISP tends to be a luck-oriented (read: fluctuates from year-to-year) stat, and RBI depends almost exclusively on your teammates' production, I'd say the BA was the one thing Simmons did better.

 

However, without looking into it, Lezcano looks to have drawn his fair share of BBs in order to carry such a high OPS.

[sbrylski]

For the life of me I don't understand how people can not consider this when evaluating a player. RBI's do matter when you look at the meat of it and OPS is not the get all for stats.

 

Sure, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that Player B, Simba, had the better season of the two. However, I'll take Player A, Sixto, going foward every time.

 

Simba did better in the RISP situation, and also had nearly twice as many opportunities. When evaluating an individual and projecting his value going forward, we have to elimitate the latter factor. RBI is largely a function of opportunity. Ignoring BA w/RISP for the moment, the guy with the better BA and SLG is going to hit more RBI's in the same number of situations, you can't argue against that. That's step one in removing RBI's from player evaluation relevence.

 

Step two is addressing the high variance in BA w/RISP. Here's your selected season compared to the one after:

 

Sixto:

1977 - .194 / .339 / .306 / .645

1978 - .229 / .381 / .394 / .775

 

Simba:

1983 - .373 / .423 / .544 / .967

1984 - .269 / .303 / .418 / .721

 

In both cases, each player regressed back to the mean by a large margin.

 

(Side note: Over his career, Simba does have one of the highest differences between his stats w/RISP and with the bases empty in league history, I believe. But this doesn't necessarily make him a better player, but possibly a better run producer.)

 

Third aspect to address is the narrow focus of RBI and BA. The most basic goal of a batter is to not make an out. Not only do statistical studies show maintaining a high OBP is the most important thing for a batter to do, but it makes perfect logical sense as well. BA doesn't fully represent this ability, and RBI ignores it almost completely. Half of OPS is OBP. In fact, OPS even undervalues OBP. The other component of OPS, SLG, is going to be the biggest RBI generating statistic - and it eliminates the opportunity factor.

 

I'll take OPS over BA/RBI.

 

(And GPA ([OBP*1.8+SLG]/4) over OPS.)

[logan82]

OPS is a good stat, but doesn't tell you much unless it is shown along with OBP and BA.

[mothershipconnection]

"Better year" is somewhat hard to define if you're not looking at individual stats only. Like TLB said, Lezcano was hurt by not having men on base when he hit homers. If you look at the teams they played on, the '83 club was a more powerful offense overall, scoring 764 runs wile the '77 club scored 639. RBI would be a more meaningful comparison if they played on the same team, but even then it's invalidated by who hits in front of them, as two identical OPS values won't produce the same RBI's, etc when one player hits behind studs and the other hits at the bottom of the order behind light hitting middle infielders and catchers.

 

In Simmons' favor, the OPS difference between the two is largely in less valuable SLG, as Sixto had an OBP of .358 while Simmons had an OBP of .351, so it's closer than the 62 OPS points suggests.

 

In terms of RC/G, Sixto holds the edge 6.3 to 5.3.

 

RBI's is a bad stat is lazy imo.

 

I think RBI is valuable when conceptualized as a team stat indicating runs scored. Otherwise, it simply fluctuates too much due to team performance to tell you that much. If you don't have runners to drive in, you can only get RBI numbers by hitting solo homers, which would have left Bonds in his ridiculous season with 73 RBI. It's not that RBI is "bad", so much as it is very incomplete.

 

Like you conceded, Lezcano had far fewer opportunities to knock in runs, but you can't just extrapolate a small sample to a larger one and assume Sixto would have been equally crappy. And not just looking at RISP, Simmons has 600 AB while Lezcano had 400. Not all RBI come with RISP, as a double with a man on first also scores a run, so Sixto was hurt by having only 2/3 the AB Simmons had, not just lower AB with RISP. Still, the rate is not the same, but again, you have to look at the team around him and also not assume Sixto would have been as bad with runners on in the opportunities embedded in the next 200 AB.

 

OPS is a good stat, but doesn't tell you much unless it is shown along with OBP and BA.

 

I'd actually state that the other way around, in that the two latter stats don't tell you much without knowing the other component(s) of OPS.

[RoseBowlMtg]

You guys are great! Player vs run producer? I have always thought the run producer was the better offensive player.

 

I know year to year there is plenty of varience but I picked out these two years since Sixto had so few RBI's with his HR's and Simba had plenty of RBI's without HR's so why did that happen and do HR's weigh the OPS stat too much obscuring production?

 

First off I know you can't for sure prorate Sixto's production by 50% higher to match Simmons since he might have hit better. Let's see how the base numbers look if Sixto would have produced like Simmons.

 

...........................AB, H, 2B, 3B, HR, RBI, BB, K

Sixto in 400 AB's 400, 109, 21, 4, 21, 49, 52, 78

Sixto in 600 AB's 600, 164, 32, 6, 32, 74, 78, 117 (At Sixto's rate)

At Simba's pace: 600, 171, 34, 5, 25, 85, 66, 95

 

So if Sixto produced the extra AB's at Simmons' pace he would have been within 23 RBI's but have 7 fewer HR's. Why?

 

All RBI's are not in risp like mentioned so how did they do with men on and men not on?

 

men on....ave, AB, H, 2B, 3B, HR, RBI, BB, K

Sixto: ....254, 173, 44, 8, 2, 7, 35, 33, 39

Simba:...343, 271, 93, 21, 3, 6, 101, 23, 21

 

In 74% fewer AB's Sixto had 34.7% of Simba's RBI's. Up Sixto to 600 AB's = 53 RBI's vs Simba's 101

 

no one on:

Sixto: .286, 227, 65, 13, 2, 14, 14, 19, 39

Simba: .280, 329, 92, 18, 0, 7, 7, 18, 30

 

Sixto out hit Simba slightly and had 7 more solo HR's.

 

So now let's breakdown how they did with runners on.

 

man on 1st: ave, H, AB, HR, RBI

Sixto: .333, 25-75, 5, 13

Simba: .294, 30-102, 1, 10

 

Sixto knocked in 8 teammates to Simba's 9 but Sixto did better

 

man on 2nd:

Sixto: .250, 10-40, 1, 7

Simba: .418, 23-55, 3-24

 

Sixto knocked in guy from 2nd 6 out of 40 times or 15% vs Simmons 21 out of 55 times or 38.2%

 

man on 3rd:

Sixto: .250, 2-8, 0, 3

Simba: .421, 8-19, 1-12

 

Sixto knocked in guy from 3rd 3 out of 8 times or 37.5% vs Simmons 12 out of 19 times or 63.2%

 

man on 1st and 2nd:

Sixto: .083, 2-24, 0-3

Simba: .353, 12-34, 0-12

 

Sixto knocked in guys from 1st and 2nd, 3 out of 24 times or 12.5% vs Simmons 12 out of 34 times or 35.3%.

 

man on 1st and 3rd

Sixto: .176, 3-17, 1, 5

Simba: .324, 11-34, 1, 21

 

Sixto knocked in guys from 1st and 3rd 4 out of 17 times or 23.5% vs Simmons 20 out of 34 times or 58.8%.

 

man on 2nd and 3rd

Sixto: .400, 2-5, 0, 4

Simba: .154, 2-13, 0, 7

 

Sixto knocked in guys from 2nd and 3rd 4 out of 5 times or 80% vs Simmons 7 out of 13 times or 53.8%.

 

Bases juiced:

Sixto: .000, 0-4 0, 0

Simba: .500, 7-14, 0-15

 

Sixto did squat with the bases jammed and Simba knocked in 15 runs out of 14 times or 107%.

 

There you go when broken down you can tell how well Simmons did with runners on.

 

95 RBI's in 271 AB's or 35.1% vs 28 RBI's in 173 AB's or 16.2%

 

My problem with some that blow off RBI's is when you look at the entire picture you can tell why a player knocked in more runs than another instead of just saying it's too variable to rely on. Interesting stat when people say Simmons was on a better team was both players had 100 topst.

 

 

other stats:

 

2 out risp:

Sixto: 11-48, 12 RBI's .229 (8 singles, 3 doubles, 9 BB, 9 K's, 14 TB's, 37 outs )

Simba: 31-71 37 RBI's .437 (24 singles, 4 doubles, 1 triple, 1 HR, 37 TB's, 10 BB, 7 K's, 40 outs)

 

late and close:

Sixto: 16-69 .232, 8 RBI's (9 singles, 2 doubles, 1 triple, 4 HR's, 7 BB, 14 K's, 32 TB's, 53 outs)

Simba: 40-109 .367, 33 RBI's (31 singles, 5 doubles, 1 triple, 3 HR's, 5 BB, 10 K's, 56 TB's, 69 outs)

 

innings 7-9:

Sixto: 28-125, .224, 13 RBI's, (16 singles, 5 doubles, 1 triple, 6 HR's, 13 BB, 28 K's 53 TB's, 97 outs)

Simba: 64-183, .350, 43 RBI's, (50 singles, 6 doubles, 2 triples, 6 HR's, 11 BB, 20 K's, 92 TB', 119 outs)

 

OPS:

Sixto 861

Simba 799

 

Sorry about so much information but this gets to me when people use OPS as the get all. Because Sixto hit 7 more solo shots in 2/3rd the AB's does not make for a more productive year.

[TooLiveBrew]

I don't think that everyone uses OPS as the be-all, end-all. I certainly don't, but since it's a rate-based stat, it tells you more about a player than counting stats like RBI - expecially, since it's entirely out of a player's control how frequently his teammates get on base. I don't recall where Lezcano batted in the order, but his higher BB rate might have helped Simmons pile up those RBI.

 

Again, I think the main thing to take away from your comps are that Simmons was around for more ABs, and was in a slot in the lineup that was more conducive to driving in runs. No matter how you slice it, as OPS goes, the superior number is always more desirable. I'm sure one could come up with an example where a guy with the higher OPS produced better counting stats in fewer ABs than another player with an inferior OPS in more ABs.

[RoseBowlMtg]

I don't think that everyone uses OPS as the be-all, end-all. I certainly don't, but since it's a rate-based stat, it tells you more about a player than counting stats like RBI - expecially, since it's entirely out of a player's control how frequently his teammates get on base. I don't recall where Lezcano batted in the order, but his higher BB rate might have helped Simmons pile up those RBI.

 

Again, I think the main thing to take away from your comps are that Simmons was around for more ABs, and was in a slot in the lineup that was more conducive to driving in runs. No matter how you slice it, as OPS goes, the superior number is always more desirable. I'm sure one could come up with an example where a guy with the higher OPS produced better counting stats in fewer ABs than another player with an inferior OPS in more ABs.

 

2live good points as always but when you don't have the same AB's why not look at it for how well they did when they did have the opportunity.

 

Simmons hit .343 with runners on and 101 RBI's in 271 AB's at a 37.1% clip

Lezcano hit .254 with runners on and 35 RBI's in 173 AB's at a 20.2% clip

 

If Sixto knocked in runs at a 20.2% clip for Simba's 271 AB's he'd have 55 RBI's

If Simba knocked in runs at a 37.1% clib for Sixto's 173 AB's he'd have 64 RBI's

 

So if Sixto had 150% the AB's that Simmons had he would have had fewer RBI's based on their production.

 

There are a bunch of examples of how looking at OPS alone misses out on the production of players.

 

I appreciate the feedback since so many of you are knowledgeable on stats I always enjoy baseball stat indepth looks so thanks.

[RoseBowlMtg]

When evaluating an individual and projecting his value going forward, we have to elimitate the latter factor. RBI is largely a function of opportunity. Ignoring BA w/RISP for the moment, the guy with the better BA and SLG is going to hit more RBI's in the same number of situations, you can't argue against that.

Well why not?

 

Two players gets up 4 times twice with no one on and twice with a runner on second:

 

Player A doubles twice with no one on and K's twice with runners on second. 2-4 .500 ave 1.00 slugging OPS of 150 0 RBI's

 

Player B singles twice with runners on and K's twice with no one on. 2-4 .500 ave .500 slugging OPS of 100 2 RBI's

 

Player A has the higher OPS but he didn't get the hits with runners on so you need to factor that in. That's why I feel you need to look at risp since everyone has those situations so how did they do in those situations. Sixto hit .254 with runners on and .286 with no one on while Simba hit .343 with runners on and .280 with no one on.

[sbrylski]

When evaluating an individual and projecting his value going forward, we have to elimitate the latter factor. RBI is largely a function of opportunity. Ignoring BA w/RISP for the moment, the guy with the better BA and SLG is going to hit more RBI's in the same number of situations, you can't argue against that.

Well why not?

Notice I said "in the same number of situations". Your analysis had the players in varying situations, one with runners on and one without. Why penalize a player for having less opportunities?

Point two in my quoted post addresses that while BA w/RISP could possibly be used in retrospect to support an argument over which player had a better season, it can not be relied upon as a predictor of future success. (You'll need a minimum of 1000 AB's w/RISP to statistically support that a player might continue to hit better than normal in certain situations, and even then it may not hold true.)

I guess the important distinction to make is the difference between evaluating the worth of a player in retrospect verse their projected worth in the future. If you're advocating using RBI in something like MVP voting, I can at least see your side - but this then becomes a more subjective debate, I think.

 

EDIT: Your = You're; That's a weird word anyway. Looks French to me.

[TooLiveBrew]

2live ... when you don't have the same AB's why not look at it for how well they did when they did have the opportunity.

You're sort of comparing OPS as being overvalued when considering RBI as well. The problem is that OPS is a rate stat, where the batter most always has (at least some) control over what happens/the outcome. Since a guy can't make his teammates get on base, you can't say the same for RBI, obviously.

 

You're right in that if one uses OPS as the only measuring stick, there'd be relevant info excluded. However, OPS is a very good stat to use if you're only going to use one (but that's not to say that only using one stat is the way to go).

 

As sbryl mentioned, RBI (and other counting stats) have value - for sure. It's just that you can't really tell anything from the stats other than, 'Event X happened in the past.' With a large sample of OPS, you have a nice idea (obv. keeping in mind progression/regression/aging) of what to expect from a batter. You could quite easily have Player A go from one year where he drove in 100 RBI while hitting 20 HR, to another year where he hit 20 HR and drove in 80 RBI - with literally no change in OPS.

[RoseBowlMtg]

Two players gets up 4 times twice with no one on and twice with a runner on second:

 

I tried to make it the same but they got hits in different situations. Point aside though you guys are on the same page as me digging deeper into stats to see the story.

 

Here is one of my favorites:

 

Carlton Fisk in 1974 had an OPS of 934 his career high where he hit 11 HR's and 26 RBI's

 

Carlton Fisk in 1985 had an OPS of 808 where he hit 37 HR's and 107 RBI's

 

Besides the number of AB's what were the difference in those years?

 

In 1974: .233 ave with risp with 0 HR's 13 RBI's, with no one on .333 with 9 of his 11 HR's solo

 

In 1985: .336 ave with risp with 8 HR's 66 RBI's, with no one on .199!

 

Is a 934 OPS hitting .233 with risp better than a 808 OPS with a .336 with risp?

 

If no is it because in 74 Fisk hit .333 with no one on compared to hitting .199 with no one on in 85?

 

OPS is way off on this year not only because he was injured in 74 but because how he performed.

[TooLiveBrew]

That Fisk example is a great one to illustrate why rate stats (such as OPS) are a much more accurate way of evaluating a player. Did Fisk suddenly forget/remember how to drive in runs in any given year? No - he just fared better/had better luck in some years than in others.

 

I don't know if you can say one season from your Fisk example is 'better' than the other, since I don't for a second want to suggest that driving in runs shouldn't be rewarded. But basically if you have a choice between a player whose OPS seems to fluctuate greatly from year to year (probably would be rare) or a player whose BA w/RISP or runners on base fluctuates greatly from year to year, go with the guy whose OPS stays steadiest.

[RoseBowlMtg]

2Live I understand the fluctuation very well and look at OPS+ over a career moreso. My favorite stat is when you look at OPS then risp and see how well they did with their chances which everyone has chances which takes out the variables.

[homer]

The nice thing about OPS is it's a decent quick and dirty look at a player's offensive production. You can say "This guy had an OPS of .850" and be reasonably certain he had a good year. Sure two guys with OPSs of .850 could have produced different levels of value (i.e. one had a higher OBP than the other) but they both had nice seasons.

 

It's difficult to do that with RBI - you more or less are forced to look at other stats to judge worth in that case. Not to mention the fact that you are relying on other people's abilities to get on base before you.

 

But OPS is not the end all be all stat of course. It's a nice starting point that typically corresponds with runs created.

 

OPS is not without its flaws though. OXS is probably a better performance gauge.

[Fatter than Joey]

I don't recall where Lezcano batted in the order, but his higher BB rate might have helped Simmons pile up those RBI.

 

They never played together.

 

RBM -- I think I can boil this down to one sentence

 

You want RBI to matter, because if so, you can make a compelling argument for Simmons induction into the HOF.

 

Sixto > Simba

 

I remember Hal McRae rack up a lot of RBIs as a Royal -- primarily because they had a lot of fast guys on the basepaths in that big stadium -- unlike Cooper that had a lot of station to station guys that also hit a lot of HRs.

[RoseBowlMtg]

RBM -- I think I can boil this down to one sentence

 

You want RBI to matter, because if so, you can make a compelling argument for Simmons induction into the HOF.

 

Sixto > Simba

Stats are a wonderful thing and RBI's to matter because I like to see players on my team to knock in runs with risp. That is the optimum in baseball and to say RBI's don't matter since you can't control how many people get on base before you. That is so true but so is how did you do with those guys on in front of you. It won't be the same opportunity but by digging simply that much deeper you can see that OPS doesn't tell the story of this scenario.

 

Lezcano: RISP: 19-98 with 22 RBI's

Simmons: RISP: 63-169 with 91 RBI's

 

Sixto had an RBI every 1.16 hits

Simmons had an RBI every 1.44 hits

 

Sixto had an RBI every .224 AB's

Simmons had an RBI every .538 AB's

 

Sixto hit .194 risp

Simmons hit .373 risp

 

Now I understand the small scale take but this happened and the difference is huge so let's switch their production around and see what happens:

 

If Sixto hit .373 risp instead of .194 he would have been 37-98

If Simba hit .194 risp instead of .373 he would have been 33-169

 

If Sixto would have had an RBI every 1.44 hit like Simmons he would have had 53 RBI's

If Simba would have had an RBI every 1.16 hit like Sixto he would have had 38 RBI's

 

Sixto had 22 RBI's

Simba had 91 RBI's

 

 

Sixto > Simba ?? Tell me that when you look at these numbers that you can see why Simmons helped his team so much more by hitting .373 with risp vs Sixto's .194. If RBI's are not a strong stat they get a whole lot stronger when you dig to see why it happened.

[Fatter than Joey]

Sixto had an RBI every 1.16 hits

Simmons had an RBI every 1.44 hits

 

Sixto had an RBI every .224 AB's

Simmons had an RBI every .538 AB's

 

The problem with this -- is that you (generally speaking) assume that these numbers were a function of the player's talent rather than the situations that they were in.

[RoseBowlMtg]

Sixto had an RBI every 1.16 hits

Simmons had an RBI every 1.44 hits

 

Sixto had an RBI every .224 AB's

Simmons had an RBI every .538 AB's

 

The problem with this -- is that you (generally speaking) assume that these numbers were a function of the player's talent rather than the situations that they were in.

 

I am sorry for being too basic I guess Fatter but I don't understand what you are saying. When a batter has a risp and another player does too why is that a different situation. I understand all risp are not considered equal and I will delve into that to show you more detail but a risp is a risp and Sixto hit .194 and Simba hit .373. Do you think I am taking a leap that a batter hitting .373 in those situations would knock in more runs than one hitting .194? Maybe I am too dense too assume this so I will check. Maybe Bob Uecker was a better hitter than Rod Carew but that's not a fair comparison since that was only .200 vs .331. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

 

 

[RoseBowlMtg]

So let's look at their AB's with runners on: (man on first = 1--) (man on second and third -23)

 

 

..................H-AB, 2B, 3B, HR, RBI, BA, OBP, OPS

1-- Sixto: 25-75, 5, 1, 5, 13, .333, .419, 1.046

Simmons: 30-102, 1, 1, 10, .294, .327, .778

 

Sixto did better and knocked in the runner from first 8 times to Simmons 9 but Sixto's 5 HR's won out

 

-2- Sixto: 10-40, 1, 1, 1, 7, .250, .375, .775

Simmons: 23-55, 4, 1, 3, 24, .418, .508, 1.199

 

RBI's don't matter but Sixto knocked in the runner on second 6 times vs Simmons 21 times. Simba much better

 

--3 Sixto: 2-8, 1, 0, 0, 3, .250, .533, .908

Simmons: 8-19, 3, 0, 1, 12, .421, .409, 1.146

 

Simmons 2 SF caused a lower obp vs BA and Sixto didn't have a SF. Simmons was 13-21 knocking in the run vs Sixto's 3-8 (.619 vs .375)

 

12- Sixto: 2-24, 1, 0, 0, 3, .083, .214, .339

Simmons: 12-34, 2, 1, 0, 12, .353, .405, .876

 

WOW!

 

1-3 Sixto: 3-17, 0, 0, 1, 5, .176, .222, .575

Simmons: 11-34, 0, 0, 1, 21, .324, .350, .762

 

Sixto knocked in 4 of the 34 runners vs Simmons 20 for 68 (.118 vs .294)

 

-23 Sixto: 2-5, 0, 0, 0, 4, .400, .625, 1.025

Simmons: 2-13, 1, 0, 0, 7, .154, .313, .544

 

Sixto did better in his 5 AB's

 

123 Sixto: 0-4, 0, 0, 0, .000, .000, .000

Simmons: 7-14, 0, 0, 15, .500, .438, .938

 

Simmons performed and Sixto didn't but Simmons 3 SF's hurts his OPS.

 

Overall record with men on:

 

Sixto: 44-173, 8, 2, 7, 35, .254, .372, .817,

Simba: 93-271, 21, 3, 6, 101, .343, .389, .898

 

OPS with no one on:

Sixto: .893

Simmons: .715

 

 

OPS/OPS w/no one on/ OPS with runners on

1977 OPS 861/ .893/ .817

1983 OPS 799/ .715/ .898

 

So Sixto had a better OPS with no one on vs Simmons OPS with runners on. If you had a preference what would you prefer.

 

OPS can be a valuable stat but you need to look deeper and hopefully your guys OPS was better with runners on but this shows a huge reason Simmons knocked in 59 more runs with an OPS 62 points lower. His OPS with runners on was 81 points higher!

[Baldkin]

Are RBI's important? Sure, they are.

 

But over a single season, less than 200 ABs, those numbers are not something that can predict future success.

 

They are largely a function of men being on base in front of a guy.

 

Braun hit .330 and had 35 HRs and didn't even get to 100 RBI's.

 

Is that because he's a terrible "clutch" hitter? Or is that because we had a huge void in the 2-hole most of the season?

 

You can play with numbers all you want, but for predicting *future success* OPS is eleventy billion times better than RBI's.

[TooLiveBrew]

Eleventy billion is a well-researched, accurate scientific estimation. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gif

 

I think in any given season, the BA w/RISP is hugely important, but you just can't use it the same way you can OPS (or other rate stats).

[TerraceReserved]

Braun hit .330 and had 35 HRs and didn't even get to 100 RBI's.

Is that because he's a terrible "clutch" hitter? Or is that because we had a huge void in the 2-hole most of the season?

Not to nitpick, but Braun didn't have 100 RBI becuase he only played in113 games. He actually hit very well with RISP, hitting .990.

He did have slightly less runners on base for him, with only 302 baserunners compared to league average of 312. (in his # of PA) That was probably due to having Hardy batting 2nd.

Okay, I'm nitpicking.

[RoseBowlMtg]

We all have to agree that hitting .373 is better than .194. By looking at BA/risp you can tell how many opportunities one has and how well they did. OPS does not differentiate btwn risp and not. That is why Sixto had an OPS of 62 pts higher even though he was far less productive signified by an OPS of 645 with risp and 893 with no one on. Simmons was 967 with risp and 715 with no one on. To me a simple delve into the numbers and you can see why Simmons had 59 more RBI's because he hit so much better with risp. A simple look shows you why and by doing it explains it.

[TooLiveBrew]

Right - and I mean no offense in saying, 'Of course Simmons had more RBI if he hit better & had more chances with RISP.' The reason OPS is valued highly is that it doesn't rely upon as many variables as RBI & BA w/RISP... again coming to the point about what a batter can & can't control. However, in your example(s), obviously the batter can control how he does in such situations. It's just that, even for the best hitters, that success rate varies from year to year, whereas OPS tends to be more consistent.