Originally Posted by Brutus
I don't see how you could possibly argue that.
Compare two players:
One gets 10 hits in 30 plate appearances with nine singles and a double, walking zero times.
The other gets 5 hits in 30 plate appearances, seven of which are walks.
The second guy will have a better on-base percentage, but factor in the double and the extra bases taken by base runners on account of the hits (advancing first to third, second to home, etc.), and the first player is going to be more valuable. Especially since the slugging will be better. In fact, in the above example, the first player has created four runs hypothetically. The second has created two.
Sacrificing OBP for average can indeed be a good thing sometimes.
I don't think you understood my post. Both players had the same SLG.
In your example it is different because their SLGs are not the same. The 1st player is better because his SLG is higher not because his AVG is higher. OBP and SLG are what matter. AVG is irrelevant. It is a horrifically misleading statistic with two huge flaws that render it untenable as a useful metric.