it shouldn't matter, the other guy is better. you keep saying it, but i haven't seen you try to prove it. i know, because i don't really know how to prove it. then how can you say so definitively that one guy is better than the other? i guess i shouldn't have said it with as much certainty, but i feel strongly that i am right about this. feel free to prove me wrong. Well, my first thought was that there's not enough information. My second thought is: it depends. If I was forced to hazard a guess, based on an "all things being equal"/league-average lineups and opposition, that the HR guy would "create" more runs, and thus be more valuable, despite creating more outs. I say that because even if tango's data is true and the HR guy K's all this other AB's, you don't subtract the run value of the K from the run value of the HR, because the run value of the HR is still there. This is where line-up "position" matters, because say, top-of-the-order guys who play a bunch of games are going to average close to 5 PA's a game, but if they're at the bottom, they're going to be closer to 4 PA's per game. by my rudimentary calculations, the HR guy ((162)(1.397)) is more valuable until the BB guy gets to 701 PA's (226.314/.323), at which point the latter begins to create more runs.