A simple case study of the importance of OBP

[BigbadB]

Let's compare the Reds and Cubs teams of 2005. We know the Reds pitching was HORRIBLE. And that horrible pitching is what made them a less than mediocre team. What the Reds quietly did last year offensively was a thing of beauty. If the Reds could figure out how to combine decent pitching with their philosophy on hitting, they would be a scary team to compete against.

 

The Cubs batted .270 AVG as a team last year (2nd in NL)

The Reds batted .261 AVG as a team last year (7th in NL)

 

The Cubs SLG was .440 (2nd)

The Reds SLG was .446 (1st)

 

The Cubs scored 703 runs (9th)

The Reds scored 820 runs (1st)

 

That's nearly 1 run per game more than the Cubs.

 

The Cubs had 1506 hits (1st :shock: )

The Reds had 1453 hits (6th)

 

The Cubs had 540 XBH's

The Reds had 572 XBH's

 

The Cubs stole 65 bases

The Reds stole 72 bases

 

The Cubs walked 419 times. (dead last in NL)

The Reds walked 611 times. (2nd)

 

Ignoring all the injuries last year, the Cubs were one of the better teams offensively in the NL if you don't look at walks and runs scored. If Nomar, Ramirez and Walker were healthy all year and if Baker just stuck Murton out there and let him play everyday, it's quite possible the Cubs would have been #1 offensively in many of the offensive categories.

 

However, if you look closely at their poor walk rate, it most resembles their poor run production. Let's look a little closer at the OBP's of the players on each team for all players with at least 100 at bats:

 

Reds: .387/.371/.371/.369/.362/.356/.355/.352/.338/.333/.324/.319/.308/.304

Cubs: .418/.386/.358/.355/.345/.336/.322/.320/.301/.298/.289/.287/.274/.254

 

The .386 is Murton (140 AB's). The .358 was Ramirez (injured). The .355 is Walker (injured). The .345 was Barrett (part timer).

 

The Reds had NO players with a less than .300 OBP. Of the Reds players that had more than 200 AB's, only two players had an OBP lower than .324.

 

The Cubs had 5 players with a less than .300 OBP. Of the Cubs players that had more than 200 AB's, 5 had an OBP lower than .324.

 

The Reds are a small market club, unable to afford to go out and land premium players at each position. The Cubs are a big market club that has all the resources they need. There is absolutely no excuse to trade for, sign or promote any player that cannot provide an OBP of at least .320 (except maybe back up catcher). The starting line up should feature players with a minimum OBP of .340. The starting line up should fall somewhere between .340 and .360 with the Cubs resources.

 

It is my belief that if the Cubs put 8 players on the field with a .350+ OBP day in and day out, they would be right at the top in runs scored, which far and away is the most important stat for an offense.

 

If the aggresive plate approach hasn't been proved fruitless over these past 3 seasons under Dusty, I really don't know what to think.

 

We had 50 more hits than Cincinnati, yet they outscored the Cubs by more than 100 runs. The nearly 200 more walks Cincinnati had "might" have a little something to do with that. Ya think?

 

That's why I'm all about OBP! In case you were wondering. :D

[MeatampPotatoesMan]

it's just timely hitting. stats don't show that. (i'm being sarcastic)

[CardsFanInChiTown]

it's just timely hitting. stats don't show that. (i'm being sarcastic)

 

I think it's more due to bunting and being able to move the runners over.

[Guest]

it's just timely hitting. stats don't show that. (i'm being sarcastic)

 

I think it's more due to bunting and being able to move the runners over.

Don't forget hustle. You gotta have hustle.

Edited November 12, 2005 by Anonymous

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

BBB,

 

Excellent study. And I agree wholehartedly. With the Cubs resources we should have a line-up where every hitter is near the 350 or better range in OBP.

[USSoccer]

it's just timely hitting. stats don't show that. (i'm being sarcastic)

 

I think it's more due to bunting and being able to move the runners over.

Don't forget hustle. You gotta have hustle.

 

Exactly. It's because ARam doesn't run ground balls out. :roll:

[Outshined_One]

it's just timely hitting. stats don't show that. (i'm being sarcastic)

 

I think it's more due to bunting and being able to move the runners over.

Don't forget hustle. You gotta have hustle.

 

And good chemistry, imo.

[Mark Priors Calves]

it's just timely hitting. stats don't show that. (i'm being sarcastic)

 

I think it's more due to bunting and being able to move the runners over.

Don't forget hustle. You gotta have hustle.

 

And good chemistry, imo.

 

guys who create "havoc" on the basepaths?

[LeftCoastCubFan]

It’s the sabermathematicians in the back room crunching the numbers! :-k

 

On the flip side: San Diego 4th in walks with 600 (11 less then Cinci), 5th in OBP at .333 (.006 behind Cinci), but 13th in runs scored with 648 (19 less then the Cubs). How can that happen? 181 more walks, but 19 less runs then the woeful Cubbies (or the Dodgers 5th in walks and 18 less runs then the Cubs). Maybe batting average and slugging are equally important. Just maybe?

 

In the last 4 years, 8 of 16 NL playoff teams were in the top 5 in OBP. But those 8 teams were all also in the top 5 in ERA. 7 of the 8 were also in the top 5 in slugging; which is exactly what you would expect. A team that scores and doesn’t allow scoring is going to make the playoffs. But half the teams made it to the playoffs were not the top OBP teams. Maybe there could be more then one way to win? This year we had the 11th in AL OBP White Sox play the 13th in the NL OBP Astros; the Marilins won in 2003 being 9th in NL OBP. There is more then one way to build a better mousetrap.

 

If we improved our OBP just .010 we would have been in the top 5. A healthy and productive Nomar at short everyday with a .350 or so OBP; and Corey just duplicating his .320 OBP from 2004 or improving upon it would have made up all or most of the difference. Remove the 350 plate appearances of Dubois/Hollandsworth sub .300 OBP with a league average outfielder and we would have been closing in on Cinci.. We were not that far off. Call it bad luck or bad choices, but we were not that far off. Our problems had more to going from a top pitching staff to a mediocre one then anything else.

 

Team OBP (hand in hand with slugging) is important when looking at team scoring, but not always a major factor in evaluating a players value to a team. If Neifi walked just once more a week (I know that’s impossible) he would be in the .340 OBP range. But is that one more walk a week more valuable then the hit or two he takes away a week over a lesser defensive player?

 

It also doesn’t matter where a player bats in the lineup. There is a correlation between team OPS and runs scored, but there is none I know of that correlates to batting order. Yes, batting low OBP players in front of Derrek Lee will likely lower his individual stats. No, it does not lower runs score for the team. Baseball Prospectus a few years ago concluded that the only issue is number of at bats are higher at the top of the order, so you are giving lesser hitters more at bats. But even Billly Beane wouldn’t have the guts to bat Lee and Ramirez one and two. Remember the difference between .300 and .400 isn’t 100, it’s 10%. A hit every 2 or 3 games, but in baseball nobody can predict when in which game or inning a player will hit them. Only the Psychic Network and the God of your choice know.

 

I’m not advocating for Neifi. Though I have no problem on the bench, or even as a replacement starter due to injuries, the 2/5 was a bit out there.

 

Yes OBP is important, but it’s not the only thing. Pitching, defense, and slugging are equally important.

[NewUserName]

I do agree that we need to improve our team OBP. Also not just walks but taking more pitches period. I didnt read the prospectus article on batting order but it doesnt make sense. having players who are more likely to get on base in front of your best hitters would seem to be the most productive way to score runs. I am sure if they did the research though.

 

Something that left coast did kind of bring up and I havent heard it said much here though is this. If Prior, Zambrano and Wood are not great I dont think we win the WS. We dont make the playoffs if at least 2 of them are not in the running for the cy young award. So all the offseason moves and speculation are moot unless this happens. this doesnt mean that we shouldnt improve our offense but we were below 500 for more reasons than low OBP

[stitchface]

actually I would think the three of them being solid throughout would be sufficient if we strengthen the offense and bullpen. leftcoast is right of course, at least about slugging (I couldn't care less about batting average). Only OBP has been proven by others with far more time to research it, to be about 30 percent more important than slugging. defense is important but not nearly as much as pitching, slugging, and OBP.

[MeatampPotatoesMan]

where is the link to this BP study? i'd be interested in reading it.

[MeatampPotatoesMan]

Beane wouldn't bat DLee and ARam 1 and 2? He batted Giambi in his prime at leadoff.

 

OBP isn't the endall though. OBP has become more expensive since Moneyball and the A's early success (Boston and the Blue Jays have zeroed in on some of the same players). The market for baseball players has become more efficient and still the Athletics have continued to win. There is a lot more there than OBP (the A's don't currently have stellar team OBP b/c of payroll concerns).

 

It isn't black magic. Somehow the sabermetricians are exploiting market inefficiences while the old skool organizations (Cubs included) flounder in the woods.

[RockTheIvy]

It’s the sabermathematicians in the back room crunching the numbers! :-k

 

On the flip side: San Diego 4th in walks with 600 (11 less then Cinci), 5th in OBP at .333 (.006 behind Cinci), but 13th in runs scored with 648 (19 less then the Cubs). How can that happen? 181 more walks, but 19 less runs then the woeful Cubbies (or the Dodgers 5th in walks and 18 less runs then the Cubs). Maybe batting average and slugging are equally important. Just maybe?

 

In the last 4 years, 8 of 16 NL playoff teams were in the top 5 in OBP. But those 8 teams were all also in the top 5 in ERA. 7 of the 8 were also in the top 5 in slugging; which is exactly what you would expect. A team that scores and doesn’t allow scoring is going to make the playoffs. But half the teams made it to the playoffs were not the top OBP teams. Maybe there could be more then one way to win? This year we had the 11th in AL OBP White Sox play the 13th in the NL OBP Astros; the Marilins won in 2003 being 9th in NL OBP. There is more then one way to build a better mousetrap.

 

If we improved our OBP just .010 we would have been in the top 5. A healthy and productive Nomar at short everyday with a .350 or so OBP; and Corey just duplicating his .320 OBP from 2004 or improving upon it would have made up all or most of the difference. Remove the 350 plate appearances of Dubois/Hollandsworth sub .300 OBP with a league average outfielder and we would have been closing in on Cinci.. We were not that far off. Call it bad luck or bad choices, but we were not that far off. Our problems had more to going from a top pitching staff to a mediocre one then anything else.

 

Team OBP (hand in hand with slugging) is important when looking at team scoring, but not always a major factor in evaluating a players value to a team. If Neifi walked just once more a week (I know that’s impossible) he would be in the .340 OBP range. But is that one more walk a week more valuable then the hit or two he takes away a week over a lesser defensive player?

 

It also doesn’t matter where a player bats in the lineup. There is a correlation between team OPS and runs scored, but there is none I know of that correlates to batting order. Yes, batting low OBP players in front of Derrek Lee will likely lower his individual stats. No, it does not lower runs score for the team. Baseball Prospectus a few years ago concluded that the only issue is number of at bats are higher at the top of the order, so you are giving lesser hitters more at bats. But even Billly Beane wouldn’t have the guts to bat Lee and Ramirez one and two. Remember the difference between .300 and .400 isn’t 100, it’s 10%. A hit every 2 or 3 games, but in baseball nobody can predict when in which game or inning a player will hit them. Only the Psychic Network and the God of your choice know.

 

I’m not advocating for Neifi. Though I have no problem on the bench, or even as a replacement starter due to injuries, the 2/5 was a bit out there.

 

Yes OBP is important, but it’s not the only thing. Pitching, defense, and slugging are equally important.

 

Great post!!!

[stitchface]

batting order does matter, just not very much (this is what BP says). and you are correct that beane is not obsessed with OBP so much as value. oakland continues to succeed via the draft more than anything else adding harden, crosby, swisher, johnson and others as well as trades calero, haren, etc.

[RockTheIvy]

batting order does matter, just not very much (this is what BP says). and you are correct that beane is not obsessed with OBP so much as value. oakland continues to succeed via the draft more than anything else adding harden, crosby, swisher, johnson and others as well as trades calero, haren, etc.

 

Good point, Moose. I think people overlook that a main reason Beane looked at OBP when evaluating a player was that it was so undervalued, and ignored in favor of average. That does not mean guys that hit .300 are necessarily bad, it just means that there were players that were being misevaluated (Bellhorns, Hattebergs etc) and he took advantage of it. I think I read somewhere that they believe defense is the new OBP? But i could be making that up.

[stitchface]

People mistakenly believe the walk is the value when in reality its not making an out. Therefore, OBP is a direct reflection of not making an out. runs=plate appearance-outs-LOBs. So the more plate appearances relative to your outs, the more you score. The number of outs is fixed so to score more, get more plate appearances and leave fewer runners on base.

 

anyway, I don't know if defense is the new obp, or even what that means actually, but I do think the Cubs staff would benefit from better defense more than an average staff. With the number of walks the Cubs allow, they need to get outs when they are made. On the other hand, they allow fewer balls in play than any other team, so maybe defense is less important? Also, the Cubs play in a small park so defensive range in the outfield is less important. I think Wilkerson is a good fit because of that and because his marginal power will be boosted by Wrigley.

[MPrior]

It’s the sabermathematicians in the back room crunching the numbers! :-k

 

On the flip side: San Diego 4th in walks with 600 (11 less then Cinci), 5th in OBP at .333 (.006 behind Cinci), but 13th in runs scored with 648 (19 less then the Cubs). How can that happen? 181 more walks, but 19 less runs then the woeful Cubbies (or the Dodgers 5th in walks and 18 less runs then the Cubs). Maybe batting average and slugging are equally important. Just maybe?

 

In the last 4 years, 8 of 16 NL playoff teams were in the top 5 in OBP. But those 8 teams were all also in the top 5 in ERA. 7 of the 8 were also in the top 5 in slugging; which is exactly what you would expect. A team that scores and doesn’t allow scoring is going to make the playoffs. But half the teams made it to the playoffs were not the top OBP teams. Maybe there could be more then one way to win? This year we had the 11th in AL OBP White Sox play the 13th in the NL OBP Astros; the Marilins won in 2003 being 9th in NL OBP. There is more then one way to build a better mousetrap.

 

If we improved our OBP just .010 we would have been in the top 5. A healthy and productive Nomar at short everyday with a .350 or so OBP; and Corey just duplicating his .320 OBP from 2004 or improving upon it would have made up all or most of the difference. Remove the 350 plate appearances of Dubois/Hollandsworth sub .300 OBP with a league average outfielder and we would have been closing in on Cinci.. We were not that far off. Call it bad luck or bad choices, but we were not that far off. Our problems had more to going from a top pitching staff to a mediocre one then anything else.

 

Team OBP (hand in hand with slugging) is important when looking at team scoring, but not always a major factor in evaluating a players value to a team. If Neifi walked just once more a week (I know that’s impossible) he would be in the .340 OBP range. But is that one more walk a week more valuable then the hit or two he takes away a week over a lesser defensive player?

 

It also doesn’t matter where a player bats in the lineup. There is a correlation between team OPS and runs scored, but there is none I know of that correlates to batting order. Yes, batting low OBP players in front of Derrek Lee will likely lower his individual stats. No, it does not lower runs score for the team. Baseball Prospectus a few years ago concluded that the only issue is number of at bats are higher at the top of the order, so you are giving lesser hitters more at bats. But even Billly Beane wouldn’t have the guts to bat Lee and Ramirez one and two. Remember the difference between .300 and .400 isn’t 100, it’s 10%. A hit every 2 or 3 games, but in baseball nobody can predict when in which game or inning a player will hit them. Only the Psychic Network and the God of your choice know.

 

I’m not advocating for Neifi. Though I have no problem on the bench, or even as a replacement starter due to injuries, the 2/5 was a bit out there.

 

Yes OBP is important, but it’s not the only thing. Pitching, defense, and slugging are equally important.

 

You make some good points. However, I take issue with a few of them. First off, BbB was not saying that taking walks was the only metric with which to measure a team's offensive success; he was merely pointing out that the Cubs, who were near tops in nearly every other offensive category, but dead last in walks, didn't score a lot of runs. In other words, the Cubs as a team obviously undervalue the walk, and it's the most glaring problem with our offense - and is probably a big part of the reason we didn't score so many runs. So your point about the Padres and Dodgers taking a lot of walks and scoring fewer runs is not really pertinent, as the Padres and Dodgers weren't in the top of most other offensive categories.

 

Secondly, with respect to Neifi, you said: "But is that one more walk a week more valuable then the hit or two he takes away a week over a lesser defensive player?" As far as I can tell, there is no way you can make the claim that he would take away a hit or two a week more than a lesser defensive SS would. In fact, I'm pretty sure it's not even close to that.

 

Lastly, you close your post with "Yes OBP is important, but it’s not the only thing. Pitching, defense, and slugging are equally important."

 

Here's my take. Pitching is MORE important than OBP alone, as Pitching represents nearly all of your ability to prevent runs, while OBP is only one facet of your ability to score runs (albeit a very important one). Defense isn't even close. I have yet to hear a convincing argument that good defense is anywhere near as important as OBP; the runs you score with a high OBP almost always will far outstrip any runs you fail to prevent with an average-to-below average defense. Slugging is not as important as OBP, although I'll be the first to admit that it's close.

[cjbucks]

Isn't Moneyball just about a small market low budget team taking advantage of inefficiences in the market as opposed to just getting guys to take walks? Don't you think that if for some reason teams stopped valuing home runs Beane would start snapping up all the cheap 30 hr guys on the market?

 

As for the Cub's aggressive approach my non sabermetric viewpoint on that is JUST TAKE A FEW PITCHES ONCE IN A WHILE!!! It drives me crazy when we get into the 5th inning and out pitch count is in the 90 range and the opposing pitcher is in the 60's. Drive me nuts!!

[UK1679666180]

It's more important that the hitters in front of Lee and Ramirez improve their OBP compared to overall improvement. Of course, getting better OBP from the 1/2 hitters will improve the OBP overall (assuming the other 6 spots in the order remain similar to last year).

 

The Cubs offense was hurt by having Perez, Macias, and Patterson hitting in front of Lee and Ramirez. They would've been hurt if they hit 7 or 8 as well, but the pitcher would not have been driving them in as frequently as Lee.

 

No, the team OBP wasn't a big factor as far as the actual #, just where it was weak that made the difference.

 

Imagine if it was slugging % we're talking about, could you imagine if your 3/4 hitters had the lowest slugging % of all the 8 position players on the field and yet were being put in the lineup everyday hitting 3rd/4th. The Baseball world would think that whoever put that lineup together has no business putting one together. I feel similar about a lineup that has the 2 lowest OBPs hitting 1-2.

[samhainn77]

I personally think this is a flawed study. I don't see "intangibles" or "team chemistry" factored in anywhere.

[Lefty]

However, if you look closely at their poor walk rate, it most resembles their poor run production.

 

Comparing the runs scored by each team is not necessarily the best way to point out the Cubs' problem. Most Runs Created formulas indicate that the Cubs should have scored a lot more runs than they did with the offensive stats that they had (BP had them at about 746 runs).

 

The way to look at it, I think, is that the Cubs hit .270 and had a .324 team OBP, while their opponents hit .250 and had a .325 OBP. Most studies show that an unintentional walk is worth about .33 runs. Cub batters walked 419 times, their opponents 576 times. That's about 5 or 6 games in the standings lost on the walk differential. Of course if they had more walks they wouldn't have hit .270, but it's definitely something to work on on [sic] both sides of the ball.