Originally Posted by GAC
My point is that every time a player is mentioned, OPS is immediately utilized to quantify whether the player is worth it, or simply fodder.
I'm not disagreeing that OPS isn't a "quick reference" to give a basic feel about a player. Only that when evaluating a player, looking at OB% and SLG% only
is not giving a complete picture when evaluating a player and/or what they might contribute.
What about defense? If this guy can bring a solid upgrade, at a reasonable price, to this middle INF, is that of any value and/or should be considered?
Concepcion played 19 season with a sub-700 OPS.
How many games did our defense lose for us last year? Would Gonzalez possibly help to improve on that?
And what other viable alternatives are out there and available right now as far as SS/2B?
Good courage GAC. We can only hope that you would not be attacked if you didn't put a smiley next to the Concepcion sentencen about OPS, but I'm not sure that would soften the Maoist wrath of those who bring their sliderules to the ballpark. The answer is, OPS can describe, at most, 1/3 of a players value--another 1/3 being defense, and the other 1/3 being intangibles. But, of course, anything being intangible in the game is an enormous threat to those who think the game is wholly definable in numbers.