A Question for Salb and other statistical types

by MrIncognito on Jul 26, 2007 10:55 PM PDT Comment 18 comments

It seems that recently there has been a fair amount of discussion about the need to acquire someone who hits for high average to drive runners in. The implication in this line of thinking is that a base runner is significantly more valuable in front of Hitter A with a .300/.350/.450 line than hitter B at .250/.350/.450. Is it possible that, by emphasizing OBP over everything, the A's have actually reached a point where a high OBP is no longer providing the expected marginal benefit due to their lineup construction? Is it possible we really do miss Jay Payton's .270 average more than we're happy to be rid of his .700 OPS?

I wish I could work this out for myself, but I have a much greater ability to interpret statistics than actually devise them. Thanks.

0 recs | Comment 18 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Power

Personally, I think our problem is a power shortage.
Thomas supplied us with a steady supply of extra base hits last year. That kept us competitive. Piazza, who was expected to help reproduce some of that power, has been injured most of the year. Swisher hasn't been mashing at the pace we expected. Bradley is gone...

It's not batting average we need so much as slugging.

by atomopawn on Jul 26, 2007 11:11 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Thing is...

The A's don't have a high OBP. Their .330 OBP is good for 10th out of 14 in the AL. Nevertheless, they're second in the league in walks but the thing you have to remember is that high number of walks does not necessary = high OBP (weird but true, especially for the 2007 A's). Combine that with an abysmal .395 SLG and well, you get a crappy offense.

A high OPS pretty much always equals a high number of runs scored. 9 Jack Custs (or nine .900 OPS hitters) will score a lot more runs than 9 Jay Paytons (nine high BA but .750 OPS hitters). Problem is, the A's only have one Jack Cust and the majority of the rest of the lineup can't even maintain Jay Payton-esque productions.

"We were s--, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."

by lenscrafters on Jul 26, 2007 11:22 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I follow what you're saying

but I don't think Jay Payton's .270 average should be the goal. .270 in most people's books isn't a high batting average. You have to get over .300 before you get into the "high" range, IMO. The question I'd be more interested in is would 9 Placido Polanco's score more than 9 Jack Custs?

by IndianaAsfan on Jul 28, 2007 7:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

only if...

the 9 polancos had a higher OPS than the Custs

by Alon on Jul 29, 2007 10:43 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

A hit is indeed better than a walk

and adjusting OPS slightly downward for a walk and upward for a hit would provide a more accurate statistic; I don't doubt that some of the more exact hitting measurements like VORP do this. Of course, with every added layer of nuance comes a conjoined layer of complexity (I can't calculate VORP myself).

Basically, the problem with the A's has been their atrocious slugging percentage. You can increase SLG by increasing the number of bases per hit or increasing the number of hits. It really doesn't matter too much which of the two you improve on.

by PaulThomas on Jul 26, 2007 11:48 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I believe OPS already does this...

Being that it combines On Base + Slugging. So a single will get you the same On Base percentage as a walk - but also adds to the sluuging percentage to where a Walk wouldn't - therefore raising the Cumulative OPS.

I might be mistaken - but that's how I interpret it.

by SD Erik on Jul 27, 2007 10:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'd like to see a new stat

if it doesn't exist already called total bases created

where you count the bases of runners in front of you as bases. For instance a hit with a runner on first and he goes to third = 3 bases, a base hit with bases empty = 1 base, a grand slam = 10 bases. A walk would be one base, unless there are runners in front and then the count towards the total too. I think that may account for some of the difference between BA and OBP and show how much more valuable a hit is compared to a walk

Let's have our Piazza and eat the Cust too - SPWC

by closetasfan on Jul 27, 2007 6:12 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

This would be a good retrospective stat

in that it would tell you pretty completely how often a team was moving runners forward. It's not a good PROspective stat though, because there's a lot of luck involved. (Ex.: I hit a single with two outs. If there's a runner on third, I get 2 TBC. If he's on second, most likely I'll get 3 TBC.)

by PaulThomas on Jul 27, 2007 9:53 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Something like

this?

by Danny on Jul 27, 2007 5:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

MrI

It's a very good question.

Let's start with your example: hitter A is is definitely more valuable than hitter B. The most important offensive value calculators employ some kind of linear weights system. Linear weights is a method by which we can estimate the number of runs certain offensive elements translate to. One common implementation is:

Runs = .47*(1B)+.78*(2B)+1.09*(3B)+1.4*(HR)+.33*(BB+HBP)+.3*(SB)-.6*(CS)-.25*(AB-H)-.5*(baserunning outs)

In this equation, the number next to each offensive element (the coefficient) is called the "weight." The weight is a way of assigning importance. The typical single, for example, is worth .47 runs. You'll notice that the weight for the single (.47) is greater than the weight for the BB or HBP (.33). This is because a single allows runners to advance farther and more frequently than a walk.

In that light, let's compare Jay Payton 2006 (.296/.325/.418 (.743 OPS)) with Marco Scutaro 2006 (.266/.350/.397 (.747 OPS)), ignoring for a moment defense and positional scarcity. The Hardball Times computes runs created per 27 outs, and in 06, Payton ranks ahead of Scutaro 5.1 to 4.6. A large reason is because Payton has a higher batting average, so when he got on base he tended to advance baserunners.

Baseball offenses tend to be linear, so you should not be concerned that the A's are not getting the expected marginal benefit of additional OBP. In particular, the A's offense has a middling OBP, and we would expect to seem differences to marginal benefit at very high or very low team OBP.

In the same vein, if you had the choice between two guys with the same runs created per 27 outs and one had the higher batting average and the other had the higher OBP, both would probably help the offense the same amount. A stat like runs created corrects for distortions caused by high/low average, patience, or power.

The secret to the problem with the A's offense is that it's just not very good. It has little to do with whether we value OBP or SLG incorrectly.

If I have time this weekend I'll try to run some simulations to illustrate the point further.

Stat Wonk Futurist

by salb918 on Jul 27, 2007 9:27 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I should also point out that

offense is one of the areas of baseball that sabermetrics has almost completely solved in that there is a rigorous, generalized, robust, and validated framework for analysis. The creation or tracking of new offensive stats is typically not required because of the success of the past research.

Stat Wonk Futurist

by salb918 on Jul 27, 2007 9:30 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

make a DLD

"San Jose A's of Fremont" is pretty bad; "Silicon Valley A's of Fremont" is worse

by ArakSOT on Jul 27, 2007 9:37 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Question

hitter A is is definitely more valuable than hitter B.

I thought Tango had shown the player with the lower BA, given an equal OPS, was more valuable in most run environments. OPS Begone! Is that not kosher?

Hitter A is more valuable with a runner on 2nd or 3rd because he's more likely to get a hit, but Hitter B is more likely to drive in a runner from 1B with an extra base hit.

by Danny on Jul 27, 2007 5:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

The plot thickens!

by mikeA on Jul 27, 2007 7:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

And by "equal OPS,"

I mean the same OBP and SLG.

by Danny on Jul 27, 2007 7:17 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hmmm...

In Tango's analysis, he's decreasing batting average by eliminating hits, which is fine. He's adding OBP by adding walks, which is fine. But he's adding SLG by adding HR, which is questionable to me. A better way to do it would be to change all extra base hits while keeping the 2B/3B/HR profile the same. That may not change the analysis, but that's how I would do it. But that is a curious result and not one I would have expected.

As you note, the "value" of the hitter depends on the situation, which is why Tango pushes custom linear weights by game state (essentially WPA/LI).

Stat Wonk Futurist

by salb918 on Jul 28, 2007 4:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs