OBP over AVE

Cooperstown · Post by **Cooperstown** » Tue Apr 18, 2006 7:09 am

I don't know about anyone else, but I'm getting tired of watching my hitters walk when facing my pitchers.

It seems to me that if an owner of a pitcher that gives up a walk gets dinged the same as a hit, then the owner of the batter should get a reward for that walk.

I would think that most websites and other projections services include OBP in their reports. All the ones I use do.

Count me in as someone in favor of changing the AVE category to OBP next season.

viper · Post by **viper** » Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:49 am

My guess is that a majority of the NFBC players use lists and dollar amounts from sites. These almost always assume AVE and not OBP. Far too many would not be for the change.

That should not stop a Satellite League next year from using OBP for all those that wanted it that way

Spyhunter · Post by **Spyhunter** » Tue Apr 18, 2006 11:44 am

Great idea - Greg also seems supportive!

sportsbettingman · Post by **sportsbettingman** » Tue Apr 18, 2006 3:29 pm

My guess would be...that if a competition as big as the NFBC decided to go with OBP over AVG...the magazines would change to add another stat.

Most of the best mags and online sites already do...it's a stat rewarding baseball effort/success...getting on base!

GIDP...hey...at least I got on base! (ha!)

~Lance

[ April 18, 2006, 09:30 PM: Message edited by: sportsbettingman ]

triple a · Post by **triple a** » Wed Apr 19, 2006 9:29 am

not a big fan of percentage cats. hits + walks as a cumulative stat is much better than obp. id rather stick with avg. but we change we should get rid of the percentage category. here is the reason why: teams that do not have players that get many at bats remain high in the percentage category, especially at the end of the year when the teams who are out of the running do not pay as close attention to their roster. The teams who do not have players playing remain high in that category standing taking away points from the teams who actually have a good team. obp would be similar to avg like that. why not award the teams who actually have players playing in the lineup throughout the whole season. i think its fine the way it is now, but if you want to get walks in the picture h + bb would be better or anything thats not a percentage. triple a

Spyhunter · Post by **Spyhunter** » Wed Apr 19, 2006 9:57 am

Even though presented as a percentage, ba and obp are always created from total cumulative hits, walks, and ab. You have a more valide point around whip and era which is why the minimum innings rule was put in place. as far as I am aware no one has ever 'thrown' hitting to try and preseve ba, unless a very bizarre situation would happen like you were way way ahead in rbi, runs, hr, and steals and want to preseve a slight ba lead but I have never ever seen that....

Spyhunter · Post by **Spyhunter** » Wed Apr 19, 2006 9:57 am

Even though presented as a percentage, ba and obp are always created from total cumulative hits, walks, and ab. You have a more valide point around whip and era which is why the minimum innings rule was put in place. as far as I am aware no one has ever 'thrown' hitting to try and preseve ba, unless a very bizarre situation would happen like you were way way ahead in rbi, runs, hr, and steals and want to preseve a slight ba lead but I have never ever seen that....

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Wed Apr 19, 2006 1:38 pm

ba and avg mean average while ave means avenue, just so you know.

The Lollygaggers · Post by **The Lollygaggers** » Wed Apr 19, 2006 1:55 pm

Originally posted by bjoak:

ba and avg mean average while ave means avenue, just so you know. Thank you, Cliff Claven.

Cooperstown · Post by **Cooperstown** » Wed Apr 19, 2006 3:29 pm

Originally posted by Spyhunter:

Even though presented as a percentage, ba and obp are always created from total cumulative hits, walks, and ab. You have a more valide point around whip and era which is why the minimum innings rule was put in place. as far as I am aware no one has ever 'thrown' hitting to try and preseve ba, unless a very bizarre situation would happen like you were way way ahead in rbi, runs, hr, and steals and want to preseve a slight ba lead but I have never ever seen that.... Exactly.

And, as the season drags on, even with a full contingent of batters it's difficult to make any major move up, or down, in ave. So putting in DL batters really doesn't help at all when you consider there are 4 other categories you will lose ground in.

The only way I can conceive this being beneficial is very late in the season, maybe 1 or 2 weeks left. And frankly, at that point, anything goes.

8 walks so far tonight and 21 so far this scoring period.

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Wed Apr 19, 2006 8:20 pm

Originally posted by The Lollygaggers:

quote:Originally posted by bjoak:

ba and avg mean average while ave means avenue, just so you know. Thank you, Cliff Claven. [/QUOTE]Touche.

Edwards Kings · Post by **Edwards Kings** » Thu Apr 20, 2006 12:42 am

I am not so sure about this. I know I am swimming upstream on convential wisdom, but I am not sure OBP percentage is necessarily a "better" stat for fantasy use than AVG or is it just different. Here is what I mean.

In primarily adding BB to the calculation all boats will necessarily rise(I know SAC and HPB also enters into it, but the raw numbers on these are not, in my opinion, large enough to materially influence decision making). But how much?

In 2005, there were 144 players who had 40 or more walks during the year. Assuming for the sake of arguement that these are the players whose raw BB numbers would most impact a fantasy season. The difference between the cumulative AVG of these 144 players and the rough cumulative OBP of these same players is that OBP is approx. 27% higher. Also for the sake of arguement, let's say that the OBP "Winners" and OBP "Losers" in this group of 144 would have to be higher or lower than the average 27% by +/- 5% to have a real impact. That leaves us with a group of OPB "Winners" whose OBP is higher than AVG by 32% and "Losers" whose OBP is higher than AVG by only 22% (remember, all or mostly all boats rise when including BB to the equation).

The "Winners" amoung the 144 players who had more than 40 BB using 2005 numbers constitute a group of 48 players. Twelve to fifteen are in the very early (first five rounds) class of players (such as Manny/Hafner/Abreu/Berkman/Dunn) anyway so I am not sure how much OBP would improve their value as their skills are such that they would be valued very highly anyway.

Using this line of thought, that leave maybe three dozen players that could really see their value increase due to change from OBP to AVG and whose raw numbers (40+ BB) would potentially impact fantasy results over the long season.

Sorry to be so wordy, but is it worth a change to the rules to impact such a small population?

Spyhunter · Post by **Spyhunter** » Thu Apr 20, 2006 4:45 am

great question. my guess is that it will reward most superstars and punish the francuers of the world (as it should). in particular it should help ensure that lone stars like jason bay who are pitched abound get atleast some recognition of that. I will go play with spreadsheets this pm or tomorrow as work is very very sloooowww.....

nydownunder · Post by **nydownunder** » Thu Apr 20, 2006 4:54 am

This idea is just not sexy enough for me.

It may not seem like a whole lot more work, but I think it is in both time and acceptance (mentally). The latter being a deterent for new comers. I think most people will avoid dealing with the new approach if you ask me. Why complicate things? If we were adding 2 or 3 cats for both Batting and Pitching, then sure go for it...but taking AVG out is kinda Un-American IMHO.

To me it's our Apple Pie of Fantasy baseball. When you were 7 yrs old, and continually taking change out of you mother's purse in order to go buy a pack of baseball cards at the corner shop (lol), what category did you most look at on the back of the cards? I'd venture to say AVG first, and either HR or RBI's next.

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Thu Apr 20, 2006 5:12 am

Originally posted by nydownunder:

This idea is just not sexy enough for me.

It may not seem like a whole lot more work, but I think it is in both time and acceptance (mentally). The latter being a deterent for new comers. I think most people will avoid dealing with the new approach if you ask me. Why complicate things? If we were adding 2 or 3 cats for both Batting and Pitching, then sure go for it...but taking AVG out is kinda Un-American IMHO.

Well said. I've just been messing around on this board because it's a retarded idea that should never happen, at least not until ESPN or someone pushes for it first.

Spyhunter · Post by **Spyhunter** » Thu Apr 20, 2006 6:59 am

well I can see you guys are reading the thread carefully... BUT since you managed to miss a key point let me restate it! no one is suggesting the main event (or the side events for that matter) be changed. The idea would be to have a Satellite that would use this approach....

and as for people being interested in this even ESPN offers fantasy leagues an option to score by sabermetrics....

spy

Cooperstown · Post by **Cooperstown** » Thu Apr 20, 2006 8:56 am

Well, actually in a fit of rage I was suggesting this for the main event. But Ave is a lot like those old bluejeans in the closet. You know you should replace them, but you just can't throw them away.

Excuse the metaphore, but I guess until OBP becomes more comfortable it will just have to stay hung up in the back of the closet.

Paperboys · Post by **Paperboys** » Thu Apr 20, 2006 10:20 am

Batting Average is a completely outdated tool for measuring the effectiveness of a hitter. There is nothing more frustrating than watching Pujols go 0-1 with 3 BB's. A standard 5x5 offers you a .000 at BA for this performance, whereas the OBP category would accurately credit you with .750. As they say, a walk IS as good as a hit.

It is beyond me how people can be okay with counting a walk AGAINST a pitcher (WHIP), but be against giving a hitter credit for drawing a walk.

You would think that the NFBC would be a leader in the OBP revolution. Lots of good baseball minds with enough common sense to know that OBP is a much more accurate tool by which to measure a hitter's effectiveness at the plate.

Paperboys · Post by **Paperboys** » Thu Apr 20, 2006 10:21 am

PS- I am suggesting that the NFBC consider a change for the main event.

eddiejag · Post by **eddiejag** » Thu Apr 20, 2006 11:01 am

Paperboys makes a good point,how a walk goes to the pitchers whip , yet a hitter gets nothing for a walk.Can you imagine what bonds would have been worth with those 200 walks. Maybe it's time for aleague with obp.

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Thu Apr 20, 2006 12:04 pm

Originally posted by Spyhunter:

well I can see you guys are reading the thread carefully... BUT since you managed to miss a key point let me restate it! no one is suggesting the main event (or the side events for that matter) be changed. The idea would be to have a Satellite that would use this approach....

and as for people being interested in this even ESPN offers fantasy leagues an option to score by sabermetrics....

spy As coops already explained, you were the one not reading carefully.

On the second point, OBP is not exactly a big advanced sabermetric revolutionary idea at this point; it's a more advaced category, sure, but it might be time for you to take a 90's course on contemporary sabermetrics. Moreover, you can pick OBP, balks, or whatever as a cat on Yahoo--that's not the point. I believe I said 'pushes for it' indicating that they make OBP rather than Avg their default setting or offer their projections in OBP, whatever. Pushes for it.

The Sensei · Post by **The Sensei** » Thu Apr 20, 2006 1:37 pm

I'd actually like to see it be OPS instead of OBP or BA. OPS (on base + slugging % for the true neophytes out there) is actually the true measure of a hitter's value IMO.

Walla Walla · Post by **Walla Walla** » Thu Apr 20, 2006 1:41 pm

Let Greg do a poll. The fourty or so who always back him will decide.

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Thu Apr 20, 2006 3:36 pm

Originally posted by The Sensei:

I'd actually like to see it be OPS instead of OBP or BA. OPS (on base + slugging % for the true neophytes out there) is actually the true measure of a hitter's value IMO. Wrong! Besides, even if you're right--and for starters you're wrong because walks, hits, and points of slugging all have different real value and 2 guys with a .1000 OPS will have different proportions of each--but even if you're right, you'd have one category that is the true value of a hitter and then, what, 4 other categories to muddy up your real results--or are you advocating that we just have one category for hitters?

The Sensei · Post by **The Sensei** » Thu Apr 20, 2006 3:51 pm

Originally posted by bjoak:

quote:Originally posted by The Sensei:

I'd actually like to see it be OPS instead of OBP or BA. OPS (on base + slugging % for the true neophytes out there) is actually the true measure of a hitter's value IMO. Wrong! Besides, even if you're right--and for starters you're wrong because walks, hits, and points of slugging all have different real value and 2 guys with a .1000 OPS will have different proportions of each--but even if you're right, you'd have one category that is the true value of a hitter and then, what, 4 other categories to muddy up your real results--or are you advocating that we just have one category for hitters? [/QUOTE]No, obviously we'd have to keep the other categories but it really would put a focus on accumulating the best true hitters you can and would maybe downsize the emphasis on speed a little. I do see your point but for real baseball I'd much rather have a Nick Swisher (good OBP, just OK BA, but can change the game with one swing) than a Willy Taveras/Dave Roberts type. In fantasy though, Taveras/Roberts are going to be drafted before a Swisher. Would just make it a bit more realistic is all.