Re: Wow Castro

[Magnetic Curses]

i'd rather the player have power. patience will come after he murders pitchers consistently and they start pitching around him.

 

Colvin needs to have this beaten into him then.

 

hopefully, it will come. but i don't think anyone's convinced he can keep it up. if he does, eventually, they will start respecting him.

[hawkeyecub]

In 234 AB's: .308/.358/.449. And he's only a child.

[Sammy Sofa]

It bears repeating:

 

http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f19/TheMojoPin/hope-1.png

[Geech]

The question was not why OBP is undervalued in computing OPS; the question was why OBP is more valuable than SLG. Thus, scale is irrelevant. Thus . . . ugh, Kyle is right.

 

I don't think that's true at all. If OBP and SLG existed on a "normalized" scale -- ie if you divided SLG by 4 -- then a point of SLG would be way more valuable than a point of OBP. The scale totally matters.

 

Just off the top of my head, a point of OBP is typically considered to be worth 1.6 points of SLG. Do the math.

[Magnetic Curses]

uk has a good formula for weighting obp when configuring true ops.

[carolinacubbie]

Honest question. I know it is easy to argue what is better OBP or SLG. I know it is unreasonable to think this, but if a guy hits a home run every 5 at bats, but gets out all the other four, he is far, far more valuable than a guy who hits a single 2 out of every 5 at bats, even though that guy's OBP is double the other guys.

[TruffleShuffle]

Honest question. I know it is easy to argue what is better OBP or SLG. I know it is unreasonable to think this, but if a guy hits a home run every 5 at bats, but gets out all the other four, he is far, far more valuable than a guy who hits a single 2 out of every 5 at bats, even though that guy's OBP is double the other guys.

 

not positive about this, but i don't think he's far, far more valuable.

[Sammy Sofa]

Especially if the singles guy is hitting in front of the HR guy.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Simple answer: OBP is on a 1.000 scale, SLG is on a 4.000 scale. In actual practice, each point of OBP isn't the equivalent of 4 points of SLG (otherwise a good SLG would be around 1.600), but on average, OBPs hover around .330, while SLGs hover a little over .400 on average.

 

That's not really the reason. That's like saying dollars are worth more than yen because dollars come in denominations of up to $100 and and Yen up to 10,000. The scale has nothing to do with it.

If you had $100 and 10,000 yen in your pocket, would you rather have me hand you one more dollar or one more yen?

 

One more dollar. But the arbitrary number values assigned to the currency is only tangential to the reason.

 

Maybe dollars and yen were a bad example. Let's try this one:

 

Nigerian Naira come in denominations up to 1,000. Would you rather have 1 dollar or 10 Naira?

 

Anyway, currency is probably a bad example all around, so let's try some baseball ones:

 

Stolen base percentage is scaled to 1. SLG is scaled to 4. In which stat is a point more valuable?

 

ERA is scaled to infinity, balk percentage is scaled to 1.

Edited July 25, 2010 by Hairyducked Idiot

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Honest question. I know it is easy to argue what is better OBP or SLG. I know it is unreasonable to think this, but if a guy hits a home run every 5 at bats, but gets out all the other four, he is far, far more valuable than a guy who hits a single 2 out of every 5 at bats, even though that guy's OBP is double the other guys.

 

not positive about this, but i don't think he's far, far more valuable.

 

Using linear weights, I get the first guy as +0.36 runs per five plate appearances (+1.4 for the home run, -(4 x 0.26)=1.04 for the outs).

 

The singles guy is worth +0.16 ((.47x2)-(.26x3)).

 

0.20 per 5 PAs is almost 3 wins per season. That's quite a bit.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

The question was not why OBP is undervalued in computing OPS; the question was why OBP is more valuable than SLG. Thus, scale is irrelevant. Thus . . . ugh, Kyle is right.

 

I don't think that's true at all. If OBP and SLG existed on a "normalized" scale -- ie if you divided SLG by 4 -- then a point of SLG would be way more valuable than a point of OBP. The scale totally matters.

 

Just off the top of my head, a point of OBP is typically considered to be worth 1.6 points of SLG. Do the math.

 

It's coincidental that OBP is more valuable than slugging, but less than four times as valuable. It's not a function of the scales.

 

Also, the relative value of OBP and SLG depends on the prevailing league environment. In higher and lower OBP environments, the relative value of SLG changes.

[Guest]

OBP is more valuable b/c baseball is a team game. How much? I don't know.

[davearm2]

Simple answer: OBP is on a 1.000 scale, SLG is on a 4.000 scale. In actual practice, each point of OBP isn't the equivalent of 4 points of SLG (otherwise a good SLG would be around 1.600), but on average, OBPs hover around .330, while SLGs hover a little over .400 on average.

 

That's not really the reason. That's like saying dollars are worth more than yen because dollars come in denominations of up to $100 and and Yen up to 10,000. The scale has nothing to do with it.

If you had $100 and 10,000 yen in your pocket, would you rather have me hand you one more dollar or one more yen?

 

One more dollar. But the arbitrary number values assigned to the currency is only tangential to the reason.

 

Maybe dollars and yen were a bad example. Let's try this one:

 

Nigerian Naira come in denominations up to 1,000. Would you rather have 1 dollar or 10 Naira?

 

Anyway, currency is probably a bad example all around, so let's try some baseball ones:

 

Stolen base percentage is scaled to 1. SLG is scaled to 4. In which stat is a point more valuable?

 

ERA is scaled to infinity, balk percentage is scaled to 1.

Look as we all know, OPS is OBP *plus* SLG.

 

The fact that these two metrics are being treated as additive implies they are of equal marginal value.

 

That is incorrect. 1 point of OBP has a higher marginal value than 1 point of SLG.

 

Therefore, there's an inherent flaw in OPS. Which I believe is the original point being made.

 

Now if there was some stat out there that was the sum of SLG and SB%, or one that was ERA + Balk%, then you'd have a valid point.

Edited July 25, 2010 by davearm2

[davearm2]

OBP is more valuable b/c baseball is a team game. How much? I don't know.

No OBP is more valuable because it has a higher correlation with runs scored.

[Geech]

It's coincidental that OBP is more valuable than slugging, but less than four times as valuable. It's not a function of the scales.

 

Also, the relative value of OBP and SLG depends on the prevailing league environment. In higher and lower OBP environments, the relative value of SLG changes.

 

I don't dispute the second part of your post, but it's still in large part a function of scales. If the equations were different, they would well have different values, as I demonstrated. Scale is legitimately one of the reasons that OBP is more valuable than SLG. I don't understand why you are having so much trouble with this.

[Guest]

It's coincidental that OBP is more valuable than slugging, but less than four times as valuable. It's not a function of the scales.

 

Also, the relative value of OBP and SLG depends on the prevailing league environment. In higher and lower OBP environments, the relative value of SLG changes.

 

I don't dispute the second part of your post, but it's still in large part a function of scales. If the equations were different, they would well have different values, as I demonstrated. Scale is legitimately one of the reasons that OBP is more valuable than SLG. I don't understand why you are having so much trouble with this.

It could be the phrasing...

 

Scale is one of the reasons why each point of OBP is more valuable than a point of slugging.

 

As davearm2 points out, correlation with runs scored is why OPB is more valuable than slugging.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Look as we all know, OPS is OBP *plus* SLG.

 

The fact that these two metrics are being treated as additive implies they are of equal marginal value.

 

That is incorrect. 1 point of OBP has a higher marginal value than 1 point of SLG.

 

Therefore, there's an inherent flaw in OPS. Which I believe is the original point being made.

 

Now if there was some stat out there that was the sum of SLG and SB%, or one that was ERA + Balk%, then you'd have a valid point.

 

Nitpick: OPS isn't a statistic. It's a metric.

[Garwilly]

I read this article by Neyer years ago and the usage of "1.4*obp + slg = wOPS" has kind of stuck with me.

[Guest]

Castro is now playing at a 4 WAR pace, has moved into the top 5 in SS wOBA, and is nearly into the top 5 in SS UZR. Obviously things are going to look the best at the peak of the hot streak, but he can still regress a bit and still be a 3 win player, at age 20.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Castro is now playing at a 4 WAR pace, has moved into the top 5 in SS wOBA, and is nearly into the top 5 in SS UZR. Obviously things are going to look the best at the peak of the hot streak, but he can still regress a bit and still be a 3 win player, at age 20.

 

Honest question: How much further could he project?

 

On the one hand, his skill set doesn't seem to leave much room for massive improvement. I don't think he's ever going to draw a lot more walks than he does, and he'll add some power but will never be a great power hitter.

 

On the other hand, guys who can excel in the major leagues at age 20 tend to be elite players. It's a really exclusive club.

[erik316wttn]

Castro is now playing at a 4 WAR pace, has moved into the top 5 in SS wOBA, and is nearly into the top 5 in SS UZR. Obviously things are going to look the best at the peak of the hot streak, but he can still regress a bit and still be a 3 win player, at age 20.

 

Honest question: How much further could he project?

 

On the one hand, his skill set doesn't seem to leave much room for massive improvement. I don't think he's ever going to draw a lot more walks than he does, and he'll add some power but will never be a great power hitter.

 

On the other hand, guys who can excel in the major leagues at age 20 tend to be elite players. It's a really exclusive club.

 

Maybe a really good #2 hitter (Jeter-esque) when he peaks?

[Outshined_One]

Starlin Castro's slash line against the Cardinals this season: .526/.526/.737/.1.236. :shock:

 

I like.

[JonJayCutler]

Honest question: How much further could he project?

 

I see it like this:

 

Best-case scenario-Hanley Ramirez.

 

More likely scenario-Rafael Furcal.

 

Worst-case scenario-Orlando Cabrera.

 

Can't really go wrong with either of the first two.

[KingCubsFan]

Honest question: How much further could he project?

 

I see it like this:

 

Best-case scenario-Hanley Ramirez.

 

More likely scenario-Rafael Furcal.

 

Worst-case scenario-Orlando Cabrera.

 

Can't really go wrong with either of the first two.

With his skill set, I think Jeter is a better best-case scenario

[JonJayCutler]

Honest question: How much further could he project?

 

I see it like this:

 

Best-case scenario-Hanley Ramirez.

 

More likely scenario-Rafael Furcal.

 

Worst-case scenario-Orlando Cabrera.

 

Can't really go wrong with either of the first two.

With his skill set, I think Jeter is a better best-case scenario

 

Probably, but I keep thinking about how Hanley's power pretty much came out of nowhere. It's very unlikely but it could happen. I don't think Castro will ever have Hanley's stolen base capabilities though.