kab21 wrote: I think leadoff SB specialists are already overrated in the standard 5x5 format and this will only make it worse (esp because of H's).

do you mean because leadoff hitters get so many more ABs so they have more opportunities to accumulate hits? i thought including OBP contrasted nicely with that fact. im not sure how replacing AVG with 2 categories, hits and OBP, could make things "worse".

Without running the numbers through a value calculator (like rototimes) I'm guessing that ichiro would be a top 10 pick in this format.

The reason is that OBP is probably only slightly devalues leadoff hitters compared to avg but hits are a major advantage imo.

And like I said earlier in the thread when you want to make changes like this you should plug the changes into a value calculator and see if it does actually show the improvement that you intended. Or if it's just a change for the sake of making changes and makes everything worse.

by "running the numbers" do you mean that you can input your categories and the website will spit out a list of players ranked based on the parameters you chose? this would be pretty cool and i will look into the site you mentioned... however, im not sure how this would tell you if you the "new" categories were better or worse. who is to say that the resutls of the standard 5x5 cats rank players most closely to their actual MLB value? I mean is there a consensus ranking of real life player values that we can compare each output to?

I don't see what the big deal is about having averages and OBP in the same league. There are plenty of hitters that have the same AVG but vastly different OBPs due to walk rates. I don't see an issue with this at all, double counting. Players like Votto and Pujols with similar averages, but pujols draws more walks, and then gets a lot better OBP> More valuable.

ezvstheworld wrote:It would make a lot more sense to get swap AVG for SLG. As the guy before said, you effectively double count average and devalue power. Either that or swap OBP for OPS. Both combinations work much better than AVG and OBP in a 6x6.

There's nothing wrong with double-counting average and devaluing power. The most important base you reach when you're at bat is the first one.

That's not even true in any form of baseball. The most important base to reach is home plate, and 2B/3B/HR have a much higher chance of having someone reach home plate than getting a single.

One question that often comes up is "what is the relative value of on-base percentage (OBP) and slugging percentage (SLG)?" Is OBP 50% more important than SLG? Or 60%? Or something else? A stat called OPS simply adds the two, giving them equal weight. But maybe the weight should not be equal. For example, here is the regression equation of team runs per game for the years 2001-03:

R/G = 17.11*OBP + 11.13*SLG - 5.66

This makes OBP about 53% more important than SLG, a fairly typical result. .... A point of OBP is worth about .003 runs per game from the leadoff man (a .021 increase in the leadoff OBP would be about .063 runs more per game or 10 for a whole season, which usually means about 1 win) The value of OBP is much less for the number 8 man. For the leadoff man, OBP is three times as important as SLG. For the cleanup hitter, they are almost the same. So this analysis shows that the relative values of OBP and SLG could be different depending on the lineup position of the batter in question.

Overall, whether or not you get to base is more important than whether or not you advance extra bases. That helps, too, but not by as much. Overall, at least.

Last edited by Matthias on Thu Feb 24, 2011 2:56 am, edited 1 time in total.

0-3 to 4-3. Worst choke in the history of baseball. Enough said.

Ok i went to rototimes.com as kab21 suggested, found the "mlb player rater" under the "fantasy tools" tab, and ran the numbers with my league settings, and then again with standard 5x5 settings. Both lists were generated with the paramteres: 2010 stats, 12 teams, 11 hitters, 7 pitchers*, both AL and NL players, and all other settings were left at the default.

in one simulation i used the standard 5x5 cats; R, HR, RBI, SB, AVG in the other i used R, HR, RBI, SB, OBP, H - effectively replacing the AVG stat with 2 new stats: OBP and Hits

each screen cap shows the top 40 hitters, as valued by one of the above category sets. can you tell which list is which? what rankings would you say are closer to "real life" value? A)B)

i will reveal which list was generated with which stats later when i show the full screencaps.

*note - pitching is irrelevant in this context as hitters and pitchers are ranked separately by rototimes value generator

Last edited by cs3 on Thu Feb 24, 2011 3:06 am, edited 1 time in total.

Matthias wrote:There's nothing wrong with double-counting average and devaluing power. The most important base you reach when you're at bat is the first one.

That's not even true in any form of baseball. The most important base to reach is home plate, and 2B/3B/HR have a much higher chance of having someone reach home plate than getting a single.

One question that often comes up is "what is the relative value of on-base percentage (OBP) and slugging percentage (SLG)?" Is OBP 50% more important than SLG? Or 60%? Or something else? A stat called OPS simply adds the two, giving them equal weight. But maybe the weight should not be equal. For example, here is the regression equation of team runs per game for the years 2001-03:

R/G = 17.11*OBP + 11.13*SLG - 5.66

This makes OBP about 53% more important than SLG, a fairly typical result. .... A point of OBP is worth about .003 runs per game from the leadoff man (a .021 increase in the leadoff OBP would be about .063 runs more per game or 10 for a whole season, which usually means about 1 win) The value of OBP is much less for the number 8 man. For the leadoff man, OBP is three times as important as SLG. For the cleanup hitter, they are almost the same. So this analysis shows that the relative values of OBP and SLG could be different depending on the lineup position of the batter in question.

Overall, whether or not you get to base is more important than whether or not you advance extra bases. That helps, too, but not by as much. Overall, at least.

Does that account for the much higher variance in SLG vs. OBP though? Just by super-rough estimates off the top of my head, I think the 10th percentile and 90th percentile in OBP are probably something like .285 to .385 while for SLG it's like .325 to .525, so it makes intuitive mathematical sense for 1 point in OBP to make more of a difference than 1 point in SLG.

Rocinante2: you know Rocinante2: its easy to dismiss the orioles as a bad team ofanrex: go on Rocinante2: i'm done Rocinante2: lmao

Neato Torpedo wrote:Does that account for the much higher variance in SLG vs. OBP though? Just by super-rough estimates off the top of my head, I think the 10th percentile and 90th percentile in OBP are probably something like .285 to .385 while for SLG it's like .325 to .525, so it makes intuitive mathematical sense for 1 point in OBP to make more of a difference than 1 point in SLG.

A: No, I'm not sure if it accounts for the diff in variance. OBP mattering more than SLG is something I've seen a number of times. Generally the # I've seen used is that OBP is 1.8x more important than SLG. You'll sometimes see this discussed when people talk about if OPS is really the number that people should be using or if it should be a more weighted combination.

B: I'm not sure how the differences in variances is meaningful to the question. If there was an only 5-point variance in OBP, say from .330 to .335, then one would expect to see that OBP didn't do much to account for the differences in # of runs per game scored not that each point increase in OBP is worth 40x a point increase in SLG. I'm not sure where you go from saying that these two metrics have different variances to speaking about their relative importance in winning ball games. All I think that you're saying is that it takes further movement to go from a bad SLG to a good SLG than it does from a bad OBP to a good OBP so that of course you "need" to get more of an edge out of your OBP points. But I'm not sure that logically holds together.

0-3 to 4-3. Worst choke in the history of baseball. Enough said.

Doesn't look like much of an effect at all imo (I expected more). But both of them still favor SB's too much imo if you're trying to measure real-life value. If I were to tinker with settings I might swap BA for OBP or OPS (staying with 5x5). Or if I wanted 6x6 do hits and OPS (instead of BA) or TB's and OBP.

Or if a site had it use something like wOBA for the rate stat since I like it better than OBP or OPS.

Neato Torpedo wrote:Does that account for the much higher variance in SLG vs. OBP though? Just by super-rough estimates off the top of my head, I think the 10th percentile and 90th percentile in OBP are probably something like .285 to .385 while for SLG it's like .325 to .525, so it makes intuitive mathematical sense for 1 point in OBP to make more of a difference than 1 point in SLG.

A: No, I'm not sure if it accounts for the diff in variance. OBP mattering more than SLG is something I've seen a number of times. Generally the # I've seen used is that OBP is 1.8x more important than SLG. You'll sometimes see this discussed when people talk about if OPS is really the number that people should be using or if it should be a more weighted combination.

B: I'm not sure how the differences in variances is meaningful to the question. If there was an only 5-point variance in OBP, say from .330 to .335, then one would expect to see that OBP didn't do much to account for the differences in # of runs per game scored not that each point increase in OBP is worth 40x a point increase in SLG. I'm not sure where you go from saying that these two metrics have different variances to speaking about their relative importance in winning ball games. All I think that you're saying is that it takes further movement to go from a bad SLG to a good SLG than it does from a bad OBP to a good OBP so that of course you "need" to get more of an edge out of your OBP points. But I'm not sure that logically holds together.

Comparatively to the league, though, assuming either the 1.8x or 1.53x number and the estimates I made, then moving from the 10th percentile in SLG to the 90th percentile (.200 improvement) has a better offensive impact than 10th to 90th in OBP (.100 improvement). In other words, no one's going to say that .370 SLG is better than .370 OBP, but you can make the argument for a .470 SLG.

Rocinante2: you know Rocinante2: its easy to dismiss the orioles as a bad team ofanrex: go on Rocinante2: i'm done Rocinante2: lmao

kab21 wrote:Doesn't look like much of an effect at all imo (I expected more). But both of them still favor SB's too much imo if you're trying to measure real-life value. .. ..Or if a site had it use something like wOBA for the rate stat since I like it better than OBP or OPS.

ya it didnt have that big of an impact. most players moved around a few spots but nothing drastic. and sb's will inherently be de-valued as more hitting categories are added. for the most part all the speedy, low power guys were higher on list B than on A (likewise, ichirio was less valuable in the OBP + H than the standard 5x5)

wOBA is probably the best measure of a hitters talent, but for fantasy it kinda kills the fun. i mean in the league im in with all my friends most of the guys would see woba and just think it was a measure pitchers the yankees drafted who will soon flame out and be relegated to the bullpen