On-Base Percentage vs. Batting Average

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Wed Nov 10, 2004 10:19 am

This is not a rules proposal for the NFBC in 2005, but I'm starting this thread to get some feedback on the debate about batting average vs. on-base percentage. It's a shame that the current 5x5 Rotisserie scoring setup doesn't reward walks because as the old saying goes, "a walk is as good as a hit." Then when you look at Barry Bonds' 232 walks from 2004 and realize that our current scoring setup doesn't reward him at all for those walks (okay, he gains a little in runs scored) it really makes you wonder if the setup is as good as it could be.

One way to reward players with good plate discipline is to change the batting average category to on-base percentage. I know that's not a standard Rotisserie category, but more leagues are using that category than ever before and it's certainly a more acceptable stat today. I'm wondering if our current NFBC guys would be against that change in the future or if they felt it would better represent baseball on the field.

So here's the poll question:

Would you be in favor of changing the batting average category to on-base percentage in the NFBC after the 2005 season? I'm interested in hearing your thoughts for the future.

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Wed Nov 10, 2004 12:13 pm

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

So here's the poll question:

Would you be in favor of changing the batting average category to on-base percentage in the NFBC after the 2005 season? I'm interested in hearing your thoughts for the future. interesting idea. if it looks like the NFFC will adopt this change next year, you might as well go for it this year.

my vote = go for it

751542 · Post by **751542** » Wed Nov 10, 2004 5:25 pm

i think it would be a excellent move to go to obp. get'er done!!

viper · Post by **viper** » Thu Nov 11, 2004 3:00 am

I am a proponent of OBP over BA. The only problem is that many players use fantays site supplied player lists based on the more standard categories. As much as I prefer OBP over BA, I think it would be best to have a full 300-team field before tinkering with the more "normal" 10 categories. Now if frequently played leagues like ESPN starting offering that variation as an option, I may reconsider my opinion.

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Thu Nov 11, 2004 9:47 am

We're not in the business of being GM's. Okay, maybe GM's of a fantasy team but it's a different sport altogether. You'd be starting a slippery slope where we decide we have to include defense and take away stolen bases and wins and saves. I wouldn't choose the same players as a real GM as I do as a fantasy GM.

It's easy to say let's make it as real as possible, but I agree with viper. It is the fantasy baseball championship and not the sabermetric championship for a reason. If we play a different game than the big boys, then we're no longer the most intense of those games, we're just the most intense of our own.

Still, it is rewarding to draft OBP players. Look at the runs Bellhorn racked up while spending time on the dl and hitting for a relatively low average. Also, his average was higher than it used to be because he had better discipline this past year. At the same time, you have to figure that sooner or later the league will realize that if you throw Vlad nothing but garbage (especially on the first pitch), you can get him out every time.

The NFBC *should* consider having less active players per team. It's frustrating that almost every everyday outfielder is playing on one of 15 teams. If we are concerned about realism, isn't it far more realistic to have 9 hitters on a team. Plus, it would resemble a standard Yahoo league.

Leaderboard Sports · Post by **Leaderboard Sports** » Thu Nov 11, 2004 5:07 pm

I agree with Viper, I think it would scare away the casual entrant who relies on magazines and standardised 5X5 draft lists. The closer we stay to the standard Yahoo, ESPN, and Sportsline style of game play, the better chance we have of expanding and growing. I'd have to vote no

Joe Sambito · Post by **Joe Sambito** » Fri Nov 12, 2004 2:13 am

My vote would be to stick with batting average. Guys win batting titles, not OBP titles. I am a bit old school, but I like batting average. Swing the bat, dammit.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Fri Nov 12, 2004 4:00 am

Just a reminder guys, this is not a rules proposal for 2005. I'm just interested in hearing everyone's views on OBP vs. BA. I agree that OBP is unconventional and you can't find that number every day in the box score. That fact alone makes it difficult to track, although STATS would easily be able to have that within our live scoring on the NFBC game site. Our contest will definitely remain BA for 2005, but the fact that walks aren't included in our scoring still bothers me. We don't need a 6x6 league, so don't expect that. But keep the thoughts coming on OBP vs. BA as I appreciate your opinions on this subject.

Just a few nuggets to nibble on, nonetheless:

** Barry Bonds: .362 BA, .609 OBP. He walked 232 times last year, with 120 intentional walks.

** Mark Bellhorn: .264 BA, .373 OBP

** Carlos Beltran: .267 BA, .367 OBP

** Jorge Posada: .272 BA, .400 OBP

** Lance Berkman: .316 BA, .450 OBP

** J.D. Drew: .305 BA, .436 OBP

** Bobby Abreu: .301 BA, .428 OBP

** Eric Chavez: .276 BA, .397 OBP

** Jim Thome: .274 BA, .396 OBP

** Gary Sheffield: .290 BA, .393 OBP

** Adam Dunn: .266 BA, .388 OBP

Okay, now I'm done. Keep the thoughts coming.

triple a · Post by **triple a** » Fri Nov 12, 2004 9:33 am

id say stay with batting average. you already get rewarded for a walk with more runs scored and a chance to pick up a steal. its not worthless if your player walks. triple a

seefer · Post by **seefer** » Sat Nov 13, 2004 5:44 am

I've never been a big fan of OBP for fantasy baseball. Too many high strikeout guys become valuable via the BB (Dunn, Bellhorn, Thome, etc.) and a guy like Ichiro who rarely walks, takes a big hit in value.

In terms of real life baseball, OBP is quite often undervalued by GMs and managers alike. Put a guy like Bellhorn in the 2 spot of Boston's batting order and he should score a ton of runs based on his ability to get on base ahead of a couple of serious hitters.

KJ Duke · Post by **KJ Duke** » Mon Nov 15, 2004 12:42 pm

I would stick with BA.

We all know that BA is imperfect when it comes to actual player value; but its no worse than SB which doesn't incorporate CS, or R/RBI which don't incorporate team-dependent opportunities.

BA is easier to deal with, and unless you attempt to look at real value across all categories I'd keep it simple and stick with BA.

Might be interesting to have an experimental side league that incorporates "true" player value with more robust stats that correct for situations like BB, CS, E's, extra base hits, and run prodcn opportunities.

Kimo · Post by **Kimo** » Mon Nov 15, 2004 5:39 pm

I'm a OBP guy. Batting Average has been around since the time Stats were done manually by some guy in the league. Since we have stat services that provide OBP for us, why not change to a better overall category. Change is sometimes difficult for people. Sometimes the game needs a change. We do have World Series games played at night now. There is light at Wrigley. And we did get rid of the DH. Well, 2 out of 3. Like I said, I do like OBP. It is a bit more entertaining when your league is using OBP. At least when your player gets hit by a pitch or walked, you start to accumulate stats immediately.