Help me prove that OBP and OPS are "better" stats than AVG.?

Question

I'm a saber geek - I know that on base percentage (OBP), slugging percentage (SLG), and OPS (on base plus slugging) are better indicators of a quality baseball player than batting average (AVG). However, my Neanderthal friends remain unconvinced. Does anyone have a link to a concise article or argument?

Answer 1

Baseball Prospectus has a good article about the value of offensive measures, and they obviously feel that batting average by itself is lacking:

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=2562

Hopefully your friends will be able to grasp the concept of why OBP and SLG need to be taken into consideration along with batting average, but sometimes it's tough to undo years of having the importance of batting average beaten into people's heads.

Answer 2

This is simple! If a guy does not get on base then he can't score and if he can't score that is 1 less run on the board which in the game of baseball is the difference between a W or an L in the standings! You have to get on base! SLG is not that big off a deal unless you are the 3,4,5,6 hitters then you should be getting a ton of R.B.I.'s and SLG helps that of course! But no on base no score!

Answer 3

Ask them if a home run is equivalent to a single.

If they answer Yes, then, hell, batting average is their comprehensional limit. Because AVG treats all hits equally, and considers walks beneath notice.

What is more important is, both SLG and OBP better correlate to run-scoring than does AVG, and runs (even your friends should realize) are critical to winning games.

Edit: aww, wookit aww the widdle thumbsies-downsies. Someone out there doesn't like having his or her widdle childhood dweams of batting avewage as The Wun Twoo Stat demolished with intellectual authority. Go back to the shadows, philistine. I banish thee in the Names of Palmer, Thorn, and St. James.

Answer 4

Tell them also average versus avg with runners on and avg with runners in scoring position (RISP) is a lot better than sheer AVG. A guy who can hit in the clutch and when others are on base is definitely more important. Since your question had already been answered I wanted to add a little more fuel to seal the deal.

Look at Derek Jeter versus A-Rod. DJ has a lot higher average but they have about same OBP. But A-Rod has a higher OPS.

Answer 5

Have your friends read the book "Moneyball" by Micheal Lewis. There are a few chapters in the middle that do a great job to explain the entire sabermatrician theory pertaining to offensive production.

OBP is simply the calculation of how many times you came to the plate and did not make an out. The entire mission of a hitter is to not make an out, thus get on base (most of the time). It is impossible for a hitter to score a run unless he gets on base.

SLG% just shows how likely a hitter is going to hit for extra bases in the event he does get a hit. Doubles, triples, and homers are better than singles.

Answer 6

I totally agree with you that OBP and OPS are better indicators of how good of a hitter a person is. Here is a scientific article regarding OPS. I hope this helps.

http://www.geocities.com/art_andrews/ops.html

Answer 7

First off, OBP includes walks and AVG doesn't. You can't score a run if you aren't on base.

Answer 8

http://www2.iwu.edu/economics/PPE13/houser.pdf
http://www.homerunweb.com/onbase.html

also go to the bookstore and get baseball between the numbers, its a great read for saber geeks.