Originally Posted by forfreelin04
Certainly batting average is not a good stat to critque a hitter like Dunn. However, it is a good stat to critique a singles hitter like a Sean Casey. I would prefer to critique Dunn by OPS rather than OBP. Since it combines both his ability to get on base with his ability to hit for extra bases. However, it's sad that this board has become a OBP/OPS/Sabermetrics gala while traditonalist are docked reputation points for leaning towards AVG and RBI's. I've seen both arguements and tried to argue for the traditionalist POV but came up with a clearer picture. They both are important. One is not necessarily better than the other. A person who is big into stats may not watch the game as closely as a traditonalist, but a traditinalist might not pay attention to the new stats that can prove beneficial in critiquing a player. Both are necessary IMO
I agree that both are necessary, but there is more to the entire picture than batting average. And if you're talking about production, batting average does not tell you how much you've produced does it? It just tells you how many times you've averaged a hit in how many AB's. Not whether the run socred, someone got on base, if there was an extra base hit.. etc.
But I do agree that avg and RBI's are important. You need to take the whole picture in, but have try to have an understanding of what everything means.