Originally Posted by AtomicDumpling
However, that is not what has been going on in this thread. People in this discussion have been advocating using batting average as an important tool in measuring the production of players and are arguing that the Reds need to bring in high batting average hitters to improve the offense. Only after that strategy was debunked did they try to salvage batting average as merely a "learn more about a player" stat.
Debunked is a strong word. I still believe that just because OPS correlates more strongly with runs scored doesn't mean we can ignore batting average. Hits are more valuable than walks and putting the ball in play is more valuable than a strikeout. All else being equal, a .220 hitter is not the same as a .320 hitter.