PDA

View Full Version : Question on OPS



tommycash
06-26-2008, 12:17 AM
When looking at the overall value of Adam Dunn, among others when it comes to OPS, do you look at OPS or Adjusted OPS? I am just asking because those that defend Dunn will say he is 64th all time in career OPS, but those with an Adjusted OPS he falls to 150th. Now it still puts his with Roberto Clemente and Dave Winfield (that is not bad company at all). It also messes with Barry Bonds in OPS as well. Bonds is 4 on the all time OPS list, but is 3rd in the all time adjusted OPS list. I like the adjusted list better because it takes other factors into play (it takes park and leagues that players play in). I am not knocking Dunn in this thread, I am just wondering what most stat guys use when measuring a player. Do you use Adjusted OPS or just OPS? Why?

Blue
06-26-2008, 12:24 AM
I'm no expert, but adjusted is probably better. Most people cite regular old OPS because its easier to figure and understand.

kpresidente
06-26-2008, 09:51 PM
The first problem with OPS is it gives too much credit to SLG as opposed to OBP, because SLG percentages are higher by nature. You should use "runs created" (OBP*SLG*ABs) to accurately judge a player overall.


The second problem with OPS is really a problem with SLG percentage in general as a measure of run production. SLG gives to much credit to home runs/triples and not enough credit to singles and doubles.

For a real world example, if you have a man on second base, a single scores one run. A home run scores two. Yet you get 4 times as much credit toward your SLG for the home run as opposed to the single. That's an inaccurate measure.

What somebody needs to do is come up with a stat that measures how many bases each type of hit moves a runner up on average. Call it "Moved Runner Percentage" or MRP.

Something like...

Walk - 0.5........(runner moves one base unless first base is empty)
Sacrifice - 1
Single - 1.5.........(runner on 1B moves one base, runner on 2B moves two bases)
Double - 2.5.........(fast runners can score from first, slow runners end up at 3rd)
Triple - 3
Home Run - 4

Then divide the total by PA. There's an easy stat that would more accurately measure a batters ability to drive in runs than SLG.


Thus, you give more credit to singles and doubles hitters as run producers. Guys like Keppinger would (rightfully) rank higher than they do in SLG, while purely HR hitters like Dunn would rank lower (also rightfully).

FlightRick
06-26-2008, 10:23 PM
What you've described is kind of a crude version of something I just came across called "Weighted Means Batting Runs" (except you start with the assumption that there is/are runner(s) on base).

"Batting Runs" is a counting stat where each type of outcome of a plate appearance has been given a number value, and you add them up over the course of a season. The stat isn't meant to be predictive or anything (I don't think), but is just calculated so that a league average batter (there is no regard for positional averages, either) would score 0. In most years, the league leader will have between 55-75 "Batting Runs" (on Baseball Reference, the stat is also adjusted for park effects), though there were some total Freak Years with Bonds in the late 90s/early 2000s scoring over 120.

I've been screwing around with Batting Runs lately, as part of my interest in the idea of consistency versus feast-or-famine, since it's a measure that gave specific, well-documented values for each general outcome (and thus, the standard deviation among a series of outcomes might be meaningful). [As such, I'm more interested in Batting Runs per Plate Appearance, and it seems that if you have a score of 0.050, you're an elite Top 5 in the League type hitter; 0.040 is probably a Top 20, all-star type; and 0.030 is a serviceable middle-of-the-line-up/Top 50 guy, with things getting more crowded the closer you get to 0.000 and "league average.]

If you're interested, the version of the stat I found says that the values for outcomes are as such:

- 0.72 for Ground into Double Play
- 0.29 for Strike Out
- 0.26 for Most Batted Outs (the number you get from: AB minus Hits/Ks/GiDPs)
0.00 for Unaccounted for contingincies (Reaching on Error, Sac, Catcher Interference, etc. to make sure you get ALL PLATE APPEARANCES)
+0.33 for Walks or Hit By Pitch
+0.47 for a single
+0.78 for a double
+1.09 for a triple
+1.40 for a home run

There is also an "add-on" used in many versions of the stat to consider baserunning (+0.30 for a SB, -0.52 for a CS), but I haven't been using it.

FYI: Dunn is, by far, the Reds 2008 leader in Batting Runs, though he is down about 10% versus career averages. Also, if you only count BtRuns PER PLATE APPEARANCE, Dunn (0.0455-ish) is second on the team to... Jerry Hairston Jr. (0.0486-ish)! Viva la small sample sizes?



Rick

kpresidente
06-26-2008, 10:37 PM
FYI: Dunn is, by far, the Reds 2008 leader in Batting Runs, though he is down about 10% versus career averages. Also, if you only count BtRuns PER PLATE APPEARANCE, Dunn (0.0455-ish) is second on the team to... Jerry Hairston Jr. (0.0486-ish)! Viva la small sample sizes?

Oh, I think my crude stat would also show Dunn as the 2nd most productive hitter to Hairston (who doesn't really exist and is a figment of our imaginations, I think :D).

The question is though, how productive is Dunn relative to other players we could sign to play his position?

Take Pat Burrell, for example. Not looking it up, I'd guess their OPS this season is about the same as Dunn's. But I'd also guess that using either of our methods, Burrell would come out on top significantly (although I could be way off on all of that.)

INOW, I think Dunn is our best hitter, but I don't think he's as good as his OPS says he is, because his SLG is driven by HRs, not singles and doubles.

FlightRick
06-26-2008, 11:16 PM
Interesting you bring up Burrell... as I've just started messing around with this stat (and since it's a pain in the ass to collect all the data into Excel for each individual player), I've only done the 2008 Reds, and then a very small handful of Career Numbers for a few "benchmark" players to help me gain some sense of context.

One of them was Burrell, for precisely the reason that he's often discussed as a replacement for Dunn. Not so. According to Batting Runs Per Plate Appearance, in their careers Dunn's average is 0.0507 while Burrell's is 0.0345. Burrell was actually the second-lowest-scoring among the hodge podge group of players I selected (Andruw Jones comes in with a career average of 0.0241, and is another guy I put on the list because sometimes he and Dunn are equated, though they clearly shouldn't be).

On the other side of the coin: there was wild speculation a while back that the Rockies might be looking to move Matt Holliday, and maybe the Reds could consider him an adequate replacement for Dunn. A lot of Dunn fans were deeply offended by this, but lookit: Holliday's career BtRun/PA is 0.0576.


Rick

HalMorrisRules
06-27-2008, 08:48 AM
For a real world example, if you have a man on second base, a single scores one run. A home run scores two. Yet you get 4 times as much credit toward your SLG for the home run as opposed to the single. That's an inaccurate measure.

Not trying to argue your point but if you are going to say that it is "an innacurate measure," then so is your premise. Slugging is not meant to be an indicator of runs driven in. It is a representation of how many bases a player averages each at bat. It has nothing to do with runs that are driven in but is simply just an indication of "power."

Slugging Percentage (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slugging_percentage)

But even if we accepted your premise, it too is flawed. The reason why a home run would get 4 times as much credit as a single is because it is guaranteed to score a run every time. Every time a single occurs there isnt going to be a man on second base so it shouldn't hold the same value. A single occurs many times with no one scoring. Is it an exact 4-1 ratio? Not sure, but I would bet it wasnt too far off.

bounty37h
06-27-2008, 08:58 AM
Duh, regular OPS, it is easier to manipulate to make your case/side of the arguement seem more valid ;)