Wednesday, November 17, 2004 |
Treating Junk Stat Pollution
Stat r ============= OBP .800 Avg .735 TPA/R -.115
Smith later brings up dat ol' debbil Productive Outs, introduced earlier this year in a Buster Olney ESPN column, to back up his claims. I won't bother flaying the value of this statistic, as it's already been ably done by Larry Mahnken at Hardball Times. Mahnken's comment about Productive Outs seems equally apropos of Smith's treatment of the subject, namely, that "making productive outs is not an important part of winning ballgames" and that nobody -- neither Olney nor Smith -- have shown otherwise. If indeed this is what the Angels are teaching their prospects in the minors, the club is systematically wrecking the careers of the "waves of talent" from a farm system David Cameron labeled "the best in the game".
Update: Apparently the boys over at Baseball Think Factory have glommed onto this. Some good reading there; one reader asserts Smith's strikeout calculations are wrong, and also notices that
David Pinto also shares his thoughts:Simply looking at who scored the most runs is misleading, because one team could have sent many more players to the plate than the other. So let's find a common denominator.But's that's exactly it! High OBP teams strive to send more players to the plate because they makes outs at a slower rate! The ratio of runs to plate appearances is irrelevant.Since he missed this obvious fact at the beginning, the rest of the column is dangles on a broken branch.
The point of Mr. Smith's article is one Bill James made 20 years ago. Given two teams with the same OBA, the team with the higher batting average will have the better offense. Hits are simply more valuable than walks in advancing baserunners.
Newer› ‹Older
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.