Slugging or On Base Fueled OPS?

[Shilzzz]

So I've been reading arguments lately by people who prefer players with an OPS that is driven by slugging, while others say that is a ridiculous statement, and these people desire a larger percentage coming from the hitter getting on base. I have yet to see this argument substantially proven either way, and would like it if someone, whatever position you hold, could explain your stance while statistically backing it up.

 

Thanks.

[wolf stansson]

Rick Ankiel prefers slg fueled OPS, whilst I think not creating outs is more important.

 

Although since there is a correlation between slg and ops, maybe you'd want slg?

 

Nah, obp is better...

Edited August 4, 2007 by wolf stansson

[seanimal]

I tend to think of it this way: outs are incredibly precious. At the end of every game, each team eventually ends up creating 27, however, it is generally the team that takes the longest to do it who wins. Having a high slugging can be meaningless if you don't have a high enough OBP with which to maximize the amount of opportunities you can use to utilize your slugging ability. I could be way off though. Edited August 2, 2007 by seanimal

[Mephistopheles]

So I've been reading arguments lately by people who prefer players with an OPS that is driven by slugging, while others say that is a ridiculous statement, and these people desire a larger percentage coming from the hitter getting on base. I have yet to see this argument substantially proven either way, and would like it if someone, whatever position you hold, could explain your stance while statistically backing it up.

 

Thanks.

 

 

1.8*OPB + SLG is a lot more accurate than OBP+SLG, so obviously an OBP driven one is better. There really isn't room for discussion. Anyone who knows anything that uses OPS as a starting point will agree with this assessment. Like I said, carry on. There's no way to argue for SLG.

[KingCubsFan]

If given the choice between a player with an elite slugging percentage and an elite OBP, I'll take the guy with the SLG, because anyone who puts up a top SLG basically has to be able to walk a lot too. Team-wise though, I'd take OBP

[dougdescenzo]

If given the choice between a player with an elite slugging percentage and an elite OBP, I'll take the guy with the SLG, because anyone who puts up a top SLG basically has to be able to walk a lot too. Team-wise though, I'd take OBP

 

That makes no sense. On base percentage has a higher correlation to runs scored the choice is clearly the player with the higher OBP.

[wolf stansson]

If given the choice between a player with an elite slugging percentage and an elite OBP, I'll take the guy with the SLG, because anyone who puts up a top SLG basically has to be able to walk a lot too. Team-wise though, I'd take OBP

 

That makes no sense. On base percentage has a higher correlation to runs scored the choice is clearly the player with the higher OBP.

I think he is saying that since a high slg correlates to a high obp and not the other way around that he like slg.

[seanimal]

If given the choice between a player with an elite slugging percentage and an elite OBP, I'll take the guy with the SLG, because anyone who puts up a top SLG basically has to be able to walk a lot too.

 

Joe Carter disagrees.

[dougdescenzo]

If given the choice between a player with an elite slugging percentage and an elite OBP, I'll take the guy with the SLG, because anyone who puts up a top SLG basically has to be able to walk a lot too. Team-wise though, I'd take OBP

 

That makes no sense. On base percentage has a higher correlation to runs scored the choice is clearly the player with the higher OBP.

I think he is saying that since a high slg correlates to a high obp and not the other way around that he like slg.

 

So then he is saying he would take the player who has both a high slugging and a high obp, which of course would be the choice. But if made to choose between player A with most of his ops made up of slugging percentage, or player B whose ops is on-base oriented the choice is clearly player B.

[Lockes Eye Scar]

If given the choice between a player with an elite slugging percentage and an elite OBP, I'll take the guy with the SLG, because anyone who puts up a top SLG basically has to be able to walk a lot too.

 

Joe Carter disagrees.

 

Or Soriano

[Transmogrified Tiger]

If given the choice between a player with an elite slugging percentage and an elite OBP, I'll take the guy with the SLG, because anyone who puts up a top SLG basically has to be able to walk a lot too. Team-wise though, I'd take OBP

 

That example doesn't make sense though. It's not like a game show where we can only see this guy's SLG and only see this other guy's OBP, and you make a decision from there. You can see both, so both should be used.

[wolf stansson]

If given the choice between a player with an elite slugging percentage and an elite OBP, I'll take the guy with the SLG, because anyone who puts up a top SLG basically has to be able to walk a lot too.

 

Joe Carter disagrees.

Beyond the onjectionable use of the exception to the rule to prove a point, Joe Carter didn't have elite slg, but yes I agree that obp is more important. I'm just saying they aren't mutually exclusive.

Edited August 2, 2007 by wolf stansson

[Lockes Eye Scar]

If given the choice between a player with an elite slugging percentage and an elite OBP, I'll take the guy with the SLG, because anyone who puts up a top SLG basically has to be able to walk a lot too.

 

Joe Carter disagrees.

Beyond the onjectionable use of the exception to the rule to prove a point, Joe Carter didn't have elite slg.

 

This guy would be the best example http://www.baseball-reference.com/g/gonzaju03.shtml

[wolf stansson]

If given the choice between a player with an elite slugging percentage and an elite OBP, I'll take the guy with the SLG, because anyone who puts up a top SLG basically has to be able to walk a lot too.

 

Joe Carter disagrees.

Beyond the onjectionable use of the exception to the rule to prove a point, Joe Carter didn't have elite slg.

 

This guy would be the best example http://www.baseball-reference.com/g/gonzaju03.shtml

No he isn't. Look at his highest slg years and you'll find some very serviceable obp's. As his slg rose, so did his obp.

 

Soriano

This is probably the best exception, but he still doesn't have an "elite" slg.

[Lockes Eye Scar]

Juan Gonzalez never walked a lot. He might have put up decent OBP a few years, but these were the years he also put up a high average.

[KingCubsFan]

If given the choice between a player with an elite slugging percentage and an elite OBP, I'll take the guy with the SLG, because anyone who puts up a top SLG basically has to be able to walk a lot too. Team-wise though, I'd take OBP

 

That example doesn't make sense though. It's not like a game show where we can only see this guy's SLG and only see this other guy's OBP, and you make a decision from there. You can see both, so both should be used.

I agree. I was saying that someone who puts up a .550-.600 slugging will inevitably also have a high OBP (unless he's Alfonso Soriano). The guy with a .400 OBP will have a solid slugging percentage, but not necessarily an elite one

[KingCubsFan]

If given the choice between a player with an elite slugging percentage and an elite OBP, I'll take the guy with the SLG, because anyone who puts up a top SLG basically has to be able to walk a lot too.

 

Joe Carter disagrees.

Beyond the onjectionable use of the exception to the rule to prove a point, Joe Carter didn't have elite slg, but yes I agree that obp is more important. I'm just saying they aren't mutually exclusive.

Yeah, that's not what I mean when I'm talking about elite slugging percentages

[Mephistopheles]

sammy sosa guys. for instance, sosa's 98:

 

.308/.377/.647

 

His .647 SLG was good for 3rd in the majors and his OBP was good for 43rd in baseball. This caused his EqA to be 12th in the majors...way behind a guy who slugged 100 points less than him (Olerud).

[Mephistopheles]

If given the choice between a player with an elite slugging percentage and an elite OBP, I'll take the guy with the SLG, because anyone who puts up a top SLG basically has to be able to walk a lot too.

 

Joe Carter disagrees.

Beyond the onjectionable use of the exception to the rule to prove a point, Joe Carter didn't have elite slg, but yes I agree that obp is more important. I'm just saying they aren't mutually exclusive.

Yeah, that's not what I mean when I'm talking about elite slugging percentages

 

the problem is that who cares? We're not asking if a high OBP guy is more valuable than a high SLG guy. We're basically saying if two players have an identical OPS, who do you take, the guy with the higher OBP or SLG. In this context we DO KNOW that a point higher on SLG means a point lower on OBP.

[KingCubsFan]

sammy sosa guys. for instance, sosa's 98:

 

.308/.377/.647

 

His .647 SLG was good for 3rd in the majors and his OBP was good for 43rd in baseball. This caused his EqA to be 12th in the majors...way behind a guy who slugged 100 points less than him (Olerud).

I'd take 98 Sosa over 98 Olerud

[Mephistopheles]

sammy sosa guys. for instance, sosa's 98:

 

.308/.377/.647

 

His .647 SLG was good for 3rd in the majors and his OBP was good for 43rd in baseball. This caused his EqA to be 12th in the majors...way behind a guy who slugged 100 points less than him (Olerud).

I'd take 98 Sosa over 98 Olerud

 

You'd also be wrong. Olerud had a .447 OBP that year. .447!

[Geech]

I'd take 98 Sosa over 98 Olerud

 

I sure wouldn't.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

If given the choice between a player with an elite slugging percentage and an elite OBP, I'll take the guy with the SLG, because anyone who puts up a top SLG basically has to be able to walk a lot too. Team-wise though, I'd take OBP

 

That example doesn't make sense though. It's not like a game show where we can only see this guy's SLG and only see this other guy's OBP, and you make a decision from there. You can see both, so both should be used.

I agree. I was saying that someone who puts up a .550-.600 slugging will inevitably also have a high OBP (unless he's Alfonso Soriano). The guy with a .400 OBP will have a solid slugging percentage, but not necessarily an elite one

 

Again, you know what both the OBP and SLG are. There's no point in saying "more likely to", you have it. Unless you're talking about projecting from year to year(which it appears you're not), and even that is an entirely different discussion.

[brinoch]

The only "clock" in baseball are the 27 outs each team starts the game with. I'll take the OBP guy, thank you very much.

[illiniguy]

sammy sosa guys. for instance, sosa's 98:

 

.308/.377/.647

 

His .647 SLG was good for 3rd in the majors and his OBP was good for 43rd in baseball. This caused his EqA to be 12th in the majors...way behind a guy who slugged 100 points less than him (Olerud).

I'd take 98 Sosa over 98 Olerud

 

You'd also be wrong. Olerud had a .447 OBP that year. .447!

Wow, that is insane. Olerud is very underrated. What happened to his career that he retired so young?