Comments on: When OPS Has Two Equal Halves http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/4315 This and that about baseball stats. Tue, 16 Jul 2013 17:01:55 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=4.6 By: Tomepp http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/4315/comment-page-1#comment-10949 Fri, 29 Jan 2010 18:36:02 +0000 http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/?p=4315#comment-10949 Note that someone with a .38451 OBP and a .38449 SLG would not make the list, while someone with a .38451 OBP and a .38549 SLG would - even though the former's numbers are 49 times closer than the latter's (.00002 difference vs. .00098 difference).

What might be more "interesting" in a mathy sort of way is to list players with 502+ PA with the smallest differential between their true OBP and SLG. Of course, you'd have to do that in an exported spreadsheet which calcultes the true values, as the PI only uses the rounded-off approximations. (You could narrow the list by starting with players whose |OBP-SLG| <= .001; this will catch guys like the former player in the example above.)

]]>
By: Tomepp http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/4315/comment-page-1#comment-10937 Thu, 28 Jan 2010 22:43:04 +0000 http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/?p=4315#comment-10937 Of course, these values are only "approximately equal" - equal when rounded to three decimal places. Unless their numerators and denominators were equal or integer multiples of a common factor (highly unlikely with 502+ PA), they are not truely equal. If we take the OBP and SLG to only two (or even one) significant digit, we can make the lists a lot longer.

]]>
By: Mike http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/4315/comment-page-1#comment-10891 Tue, 26 Jan 2010 23:38:50 +0000 http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/?p=4315#comment-10891 Actually, seven Hall Of Famers, counting Earl Greasy Neale (Pro Football Hall of Fame). I know that's not what was meant, but that fact has about as much interest and relevance as people having the same Slugging and OBP

]]>
By: JohnnyTwisto http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/4315/comment-page-1#comment-10864 Tue, 26 Jan 2010 05:49:30 +0000 http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/?p=4315#comment-10864 But their glossary looks about as bad as the one here.

]]>
By: JohnnyTwisto http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/4315/comment-page-1#comment-10863 Tue, 26 Jan 2010 05:48:51 +0000 http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/?p=4315#comment-10863 Fangraphs has recently added an indexed stat based on linear weights which does weight things "correctly." It is called wRC+. Billy Urbanski's 1935 was a 65 (60 by OPS+). 2009 leaders are here: http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=bat&lg=all&qual=y&type=1&season=2009&month=0

]]>
By: DavidRF http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/4315/comment-page-1#comment-10862 Tue, 26 Jan 2010 04:24:09 +0000 http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/?p=4315#comment-10862 #4. Actually OPS+ does weight OBP more than SLG. OPS+ is not 100*OPS/lgOPS, but 100*(OBP/lgOBP + SLG/lgSLG - 1). So, it weights OBP more than SLG by a factor of lgSLG/lgOBP. Last year, that weight was about 1.27 or so. Not as large a weight as most of the experts propose, but better than nothing.

]]>
By: Thomas L. http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/4315/comment-page-1#comment-10861 Mon, 25 Jan 2010 22:54:36 +0000 http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/?p=4315#comment-10861 Boy, Bill Urbanski's .286 OBP and SLG season in 1935 was one to write home about!

]]>
By: Mike Felber http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/4315/comment-page-1#comment-10860 Mon, 25 Jan 2010 22:36:47 +0000 http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/?p=4315#comment-10860 Nice. Butr where can I find a weighted" OPS +? Since I hear that nearly all experts consider the OBP significantly more important for a correlation with runs created, should we not all have that stat available routinely?

]]>
By: Allan http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/4315/comment-page-1#comment-10859 Mon, 25 Jan 2010 19:51:21 +0000 http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/?p=4315#comment-10859 But the real interesting one is the lowest one: Billy Urbanski's 286/286 in the still offensive-minded environment of 1935. That's a pretty bad season, although I haven't checked the OPS+ yet.

]]>
By: Jeff J. http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/4315/comment-page-1#comment-10858 Mon, 25 Jan 2010 15:10:59 +0000 http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/?p=4315#comment-10858 I'd guess that Hofman's .351 or maybe Norm Siebern's .379 in context is more impressive than Lofton's .408

]]>