Originally Posted by AtomicDumpling
The Reds were very slightly below league average in BA (9th in the 16-team NL), but well below average in OBP (12th in the NL). Votto had a historically high OBP -- a truly remarkable OBP way, way better than anybody else in the league. His batting average was good too, but not to the extent that his OBP was.
Batting average has been proven to be not much of a factor in run scoring. Talking and worrying about batting average is a waste of time. The Reds need to improve their OBP and their SLG if they want to score more runs. Chasing batting average is just as likely to lead you astray as help you. Batting average has two huge flaws (counts all hits the same, ignores BBs and HBPs) that make it pretty much a worthless statistic, especially when you consider there are vastly superior statistics readily available (wOBA being the best and OPS second best).
The Reds can't afford to trade any of their power to improve contact. That would be a losing proposition. The Reds have a little better than average power (SLG 6th in NL), but their power is not good enough to be a top offense. The Reds need a huge boost in OBP and a big boost in SLG if they want to come close to leading the league in runs scored.
The only reason I even mentioned batting average in the earlier post was because people were saying the playoffs exposed an alleged Reds' batting average problem -- even though the Reds had the highest batting average in the playoffs.
I won't go along with AVG being worthless
, but do agree there are some fundamental problems with trading slugging for average, a la Henry R. for Ludwick. That won't help much of anything.
That said, Frazier for Rolen is a good start to improving the offense.
Hamilton for Stubbs could improve a lot if Billy can OBP .340. Stubbs' slugging % is what I feel the Reds have always been chasing after. This would have to be a wash at best if these two were swapped. Heisey, as always could provide insurance. If Ludwick goes, I think they hesitate to trade Stubbs.