Jul
15
2013

Know Your Stats: Weighted On Base Average (wOBA)

For the next few days, I will be highlighting some of the most popular sabermetric stats available to the public. Earlier today, we began the series with OPS/OPS+. Now we continue with wOBA…

Batting Average, On-Base Percentage, and Slugging Percentage are all incomplete. Batting average doesn’t account for what type of hits a batter has. It also doesn’t account for walks. On-Base Percentage is better because it accounts for walks, but it doesn’t weigh how a runner gets on base correctly. Slugging Percentage attempts to weigh hits, but fails. A triple isn’t three times as valuable as a single. The reason we know that is because of linear weights, which is a very important sabermetric concept that weighs every action in a baseball game. Everything has a run value. We use the decades upon decades of baseball history to determine how valuable a certain action is.

Before we get to wOBA, it’s important to understand one very important thing about linear weights, which will clear up the somewhat confusing formula. Take a look at this excerpt from Fangraphs’ library:

There is nothing arbitrary in the exact weighting we have of a home run relative to a triple, or a ground ball to a line drive. Years upon years of data allow us to convert back and forth, or up and down with ease. A common complaint with modern sabremetrics is the bewildering array of fractional coefficients that dot the scene, but if you look at a formula that’s based on linear weight, don’t see them as confusing numbers. Instead, look at them as relative values, derived through years of baseball being played.

The goal of a team on offense is to score as many runs as possible and therefore make outs as infrequently as possible, so linear weights is put in terms of how it affects a team’s likelihood of scoring, and how many runs you can expect them to score.

When you look at the weights, they make sense without seeing how the run expectancy plays out. A walk is worth slightly less than a single because runners on second tend to score on a single, but they don’t move on a walk, making a single slightly better. However, just as eras change, the weights in wOBA vary slightly from year to year as well. Certain factors can make a single more or less valuable than it was thirty years earlier. Essentially, it adjusts for the run environment of the league, which was vastly different in 1900 than in 2000. Here is the formula from 2012:

wOBA = (0.691×uBB + 0.722×HBP + 0.884×1B + 1.257×2B + 1.593×3B +
2.058×HR) / (AB + BB – IBB + SF + HBP)

In Context

I'm a 16 year-old blogger, high school student, and lifelong Mets fan. I've been blogging about the Mets in some form or another for about four years. I embrace the new age, sabermetric way of thinking, but also recognize the importance of scouting and player devlopment. Follow me on Twitter @UpAlongFirst

• You’re trying to blow up the server, aren’t you

• Did Bill James die today or something?

• “A walk is worth slightly more than a single because runners on second tend to score on a single, but they don’t move on a walk, making a single slightly better. ”

I think you mean a walk is worth less…

• Connor, question for you. Why do you think sites like baseball reference do not show wOBA. Is it proprietary to fangraphs or is there more to it.

• I think Tom Tango owns it because it was in his book and licenses it out to Fangraphs.

• Quick question. What team did Tom Tango play for when he first came up? I want to see if I can get his rookie card for my nephew to show his team at little league.

• who cares? what team did YOU play for?

• Calm down boy. I didn’t ask you for your soul or you firstborn child. I figured my nephew would enjoy a Tommy Tango rookie card. No big deal, I’ll check on eBay. Geesh lol

• You’d think that in all that gobblygook, the writer, Conner O’Brien, would actually explain the purpose and use of that stat in practical terms. I’m still waiting.

• I mean, if you can’t figure out what it’s used for…

It’s used to evaluate offensive production.

• Connor please show how this applies toa GM’s eva;uation of a player. Give an example why one individual was signed but not another.

Why would a guy DH if the parameters are higher for that position and he tens not to be a contact hitter but just a high Slugging Percentage.

On-Base Percentage, and Slugging Percentage are all incomplete why are they gospel of sabermetrics.

If you can’t explain then why should I believe it. Please do not FIP over Hefner as your support because that was desperation.

I’ll be frank you have an agenda to push sabermetrics which is your right. However I never seen any stat I could believe in except WHIP, BABIP and QS. Even there it is imperfect and should be used along with traditional scounting methods.

• “On-Base Percentage, and Slugging Percentage are all incomplete why are they gospel of sabermetrics.”

They aren’t. And that is why posts like this are needed. Because there is a lot of misinformation out there and maybe some people would like it cleared up so the conversation can actually progress.

• SO MUCH misinformation even though Google is right at everyone’s fingertips…

• I can tell you why they are the Gospel….

For the same reasons Matthew and Paul are part of the Christian Gospel.

Both are about the same guy but have very different approaches.

In the case of OBP and SLG they are the gospel because the RELIGION is about BASES npot HITS or PLAYERS or EARNED performance….

OBP on it’s own failed so they invented SLG, SLG was easy to argue against and didn’t work all that much better to explain winners than OBP did so they mashed two gospels together to come up with OPS which has NOTHING to do with something that can actually happen on the fields and doesn’t tell you what MIGHT happen if you get it!
Other than they will get on base and if it’s high enough they MIGHT (not WILL mind you MIGHT) score more runs!

Where if they went for the guy who has high RBI they WOULD score more runs with an average team than if they would with someone who has LOWER RBI!

• Paul didn’t write a Gospel. At least, not a recognized one. Your analogy proves something, but not what you intended.

• yeah Whatever….By the way there is this new thing out there called GOOGLE…
It was invented so that people like you would not have to suffer from foot in mouth disease…

http://jesuspuzzle.humanists.net/supp06.htm

• Paul did not write a recognized Gospel. There is no grey area here.

Mathew Mark Luke and John are credited for writing the 4 Gospels. The Gospels were accounts of the life and acts of Jesus.

Paul wrote some of the Epistles and is referenced extensively in Acts.

http://www.catholic.org/saints/saint.php?saint_id=91

But hey, an anonymous blog post probably knows more about the Gospels than the Catholic Church.

• You go right on pretending you know what your talking about…

One day you will actually FOOL someone!

The epistles you speak of are COMMONLY REFERRED TO AS the Gospel ACCORDING to Paul!

And truth is the gospels that are CALLED Gospels were edited and changed by Paul since he was the guy spreading them!

• “The epistles you speak of are COMMONLY REFERRED TO AS the Gospel ACCORDING to Paul!”

Which means what? That you know a lot of people who are wrong?

Paul didn’t write a Gospel. If you think otherwise, you’re more than welcome to take it up with the Vatican.

Deal with it!

• I think this is more about a young, intelligent kid trying to primarily flex his intelligence muscles, trying to impress but failing to recognize he totally omitted the most important part of this article – The stat’s use and purpose.

• You might have something here….

It appears he seems more interested in showing people HE understands a the Metrics when he should be writing an article that talks to if it is actually worth understanding at all and does it serve any purpose other than to compare players who no longer are playing with each other.

Truth is though he is trying to promote these metrics not really explain them….He thinks if he just regurgitates what sold him he might sell someone else.
And not truly interested in how VALID the metric is and what could be done to come up with a better one….

• If you don’t understand the stat’s use and purpose from the article…

• YOU think it shows a player’s production but your metric includes things he didn’t earn and were GIFTED to him.

So YOU don’t really understand your metric if your understanding is what is in that article!

It should also bepointed out that there is a BIG DIVIDE between the definition of UNDERSTANDING vs the DEFINITION of BELIEF!

We UNDERSTAND the metric and know it’s weaknesses and problems…

You THINK you UNDERSTAND but really what you mean to say is you BELIEVE it….Which suggest you really don’t UNDERSTAND it at all!

• You’re just wrong. You’re so past wrong. There’s nothing I can do. Go ahead, reply to every one of my posts with the same regurgitated response about a subject you clearly don’t know much about.

• Yes Connor I’m Wrong you must be HIGHLY SKILLED to get hit by a pitch!

I mean that kind of SKILL and TALENT just doesn’t grow on trees…

I hear you can grow the knowledge that thinks that in poppy fields though!

• Call me when HBP isn’t productive, whether you think it is the hitter or not.

• We call them HITTERS in the Batters box for a REASON!
We give them BATS for a REASON!

If we adopt your view of baseball they will not be HITTERS anymore they will be called BASERS!

Cause thats all you care about and we have proved here that you care about getting on base even MORE than scoring a run!

Otherwise you would have admitted the SF was a GREAT PA not the negative all your Sabers make them out to be!

• When I get in the car, it doesn’t tell me why it is shows me my speed, MPG, or the temp outside. I know why.

• I am pushing sabermetrics because there is validity to them.

• And IMO, to have a complete view on the game of baseball, you need to understand sabermetrics.

• Absolutely Not.

Everyone had a complete view of the game if they chose to the first 150 years. People have won World Series’ led dynasties and so. Everybody who had success in baseball before you were born had a complete view.

You want a complete view for yourself? Learn the game by playing it. I’m serious. Play the game with friends in a local league. If not organized then your city hall should have information about joining leagues.

Experience the things you are attempting to analyze so that this way you may have a better understanding of what you are talking about. Because right now you lack that.

You lack a LOT. Gain some years in life’s experiences and trying learning the game from a physical standpoint. Play it. Learn it. How to hit, how to field, how to make throws from the OF. And that’s just basics.

• Well duh. Sabermetrics didn’t exist in 1950, so they DID have a complete view. And the playing field was even because NO ONE had sabermetrics. So to point to them and say “they had dynasties then” is ridiculous. The game has changed. Every team uses sabermetrics. Not using them makes your job a lot harder.

And thanks for telling ME I’ve never played baseball. I played up until high school when I discovered my future i a lot brighter in another sport.

• And thanks for telling ME I’ve never played baseball. I played up until high school when I discovered my future i a lot brighter in another sport.”

Meaning:”I suck at it and/or was never picked, so i said, fu** it, let me go to the basement and play baseball in my computer to come up with numbers”

• LMFAOOO!!

If that’s what you want to think Alex, go ahead. Keep telling yourself this crap. I don’t really care.

• Connor, i like you and read your stuff all the time (rarely post)
that being said, the level of detail in the article is lacking, to simply say one should be able to infer use without giving an example is a bit lazy.
keep up the good work, give me details and examples.

• Just Google it if you want to know something about it. Find a trusted source on sabermetrics and read about it. I’m not going to sit here and spend hours on it when you have the internet at your fingertips.

• before the CORE has a heart attack you might want to go back and change the typo where it says a walk is more valuable than a single. I know you meant single is more valuable than a walk, so you might want to change that as they will exploit your typo to no end.

• You sure thats a typo and that he didn’t mean it?

Cause after the Conversation I had with him regarding Barry Bonds yesterday I sure could see him arguing that a Walk is better because it wears out the Pitcher more than a Single does because it makes him throw more pitches which HELPS YOUR TEAM MORE because the next guy faces a more tired pitcher…

Don’t put anything PAST a saberrattler when trying to sell you on OBP as a Hitting Metric.

• because I always read the whole article before commenting. The words following said “but they (unforced baserunners) don’t move on a walk, making a single slightly better.

So i knew it was a typo…

• I agree with your position on that entirely Oleo…

And I’m sure Connor and Jessup will SAY your correct…I just question sometimes that they really BELIEVE what they are saying and merely saying it because they know if the don’t acknowledge that it is better they lose credibility and the OBP metric takes another hit!

The whole issue with OBP is that not all of it is earned where in BA it is ALL earned! It doesn’t count unless you EARN the base in BA!

Even if you want to give PARTIAL credit for a walk at best the batter should get .5 of it not the .7 or .9 they give him!

But they aren’t really concerned with what the batter did just the base!
Which is why looking at OBP (and OPS which is driven by OBP) their merit system says a Walk is as good as a hit!
Since they mash disparate PA stat with a AB stat they are actually ELEVATING and FAVORING the walk artist because his LOW SLG is being mashed into his high OPB.

If they really wanted to make a true OPS or Metric that says how god a hitter is they would combine the SLG with the BA (both AB metrics) and make OPS a HITTING metric as opposed to a BASE metric (and it really not even that!)

The goal of most sabermetricians is to get rid of BA entirely. Make the offensive game about bases not hits.

• It was a typo. I had to have someone else fi it because I didn’t have access to a computer today.

• As someone who is not very learned in SABR, but is skeptical about some things, I have two basic questions that came up after reading this article.

1) Why is the coefficient for a HBP not the same as a walk. They are essentially the same thing no?

2) Why are productive outs penalized? If there is a runner on 3B with less than 2 outs, depending on the game situation, a SF is better than a walk or HBP.

• All Excellent Questions Oleo…

But whenever asked you either get a sloppy answer or in FEW cases they will ADMIT they are only included because OBP based on just hits alone doesn’t work for them in regards to REPLACING BA and their ability to IGNORE IT!

They want to count the BASE but we keep bringing up EARNING that base so they reduce it as far as credit is concerned but it’s still too much.

Another question to ask is why if they could HBP don’tthey count RBOE in OBP as well?
It’s about as earned as getting plunked is!

• Because by preserving the out, you increase your team’s chances of scoring more runs. Moving a runner one base, even if he scores, at the expense of an out, ends up hurting your chances long term.

I agree that IBB and sac bunts shouldn’t be included, though.

• The “problem” with that rationale is what happens when the following hitters don’t get the job done…

Let’s take a look at what happened in yesterday’s game.

Josh Satin came to plate in the 1st inning with runners on 2nd and 3rd and 1 out. He had a 3-1 count and took a hittable fastball (to which Keith gave his disapproval) and eventually walked leaving the bases full. Kirk then struck out and John Buck wound up hitting a single to get the two runs in. No harm done.

But what happens if John Buck didn’t get the job done. Wouldn’t a Sac Fly have been a better result than a walk there?

• This is like saying it was a good idea to play Russian roulette because you survived. You should understand the odds regardless of the results.

• No it’s not but leave it to a guy who watches in a spreadsheet not on a field to determine what happened that day for trying to change the subject from the truth that you guys can’t seem to answer for.

The walk set up a DP!
If Buck hits into it NO RUN SCORES!

• A double play isn’t Satin’s fault.

And in reality, from watching the game, it looks like Satin’s walk set up Satin scoring.

• Reducing the CHANCES the original run is…
Because he didn’t REALLY preserve the out you think he did…Just delayed it and reduced it to one that DOES NOT SCORE THE RUN when a Fly ball out WOULD HAVE!

• “Reducing the CHANCES the original run is…”

Except he didn’t.

“Because he didn’t REALLY preserve the out you think he did”

” DOES NOT SCORE THE RUN when a Fly ball out WOULD HAVE!”

Satin himself never comes around if he flies out.

• but his team scores a run from Satin’s SF, instead of not scoring one because Buck grounded into a DP.

In that scenario a SF would have been better than drawing a walk, yet his wOBA suffers…

• They scored 2 runs because he didn’t make the out.

• No they scored two runs because Buck drove them in where Satin did not and in the end Satin did NOT SCORE so he contributed nothing to the teams score

• Metsie we are not just making this up. Read a book. There are people that calculate this sort of stuff, and consider the possibilities and the fact is the walk increases the odds of scoring.

Again, read a book, you ignorance is not our problem.

• Yes lord of the rings is a book and I suppose HOBBITS EXIST TOO!

Yes people have written (made up for a book) that they have done calculations…. That YOU assume they did.. …
Have you done them yourself or do you just take their word for it?
Cause everytime they say they calculated something and I look their calculations dont add up.
Such as your OBP mantra regarding higher OBPthat team with higher RBI and less OBP score more runs than.

Just because your gullible and foolish doesn’t mean we are wrong especially when everything you say can be so easily showdd to NOT WORK!

• Metsie. Pay attention. Team RBI is not the same thing as individual RBI. Team RBI will correlate really closely with runs scored. But it is basically useless as an individual stat. If I have a team of high obp guys, they will,score a lot. If u have a team of high RBI guys they could be awful because there are plenty of absolutely awful players with lots of RBI because they play a lot on a good team. But they hurt the team even as they knock in RBI.

I dunno how many times I will have to explain this.

Repeat after me, RBI is not useful as an individual stat. A team composed of obp guys will score lots of runs because hih obp indicates individual skil. RBI indicates a player on a team that plays a lot with men on base and hits some of them in, perhaps way too few of them.

• Also metsie, with regard to books, if you ever made the slightest effort to educate yourself you would see that everything I say is overwhelmingly supported by facts and data readily available that you refuse to read, a you prefer aggressive ignorance.

They were good for nothing but KINDLING!
all assumptions and a CAVEMAN like attempt to CONDENSE the game of baseball into the PRIMITIVE

All BASES ARE GOOD and ALL OUTS ARE BAD!
THE REST (of the Nuance) IS IGNORED BECAUSE THE MATH IS TOO HARD FOR YOU!

• No whats worse Oleo is what happens and who scores if Buck hits into a DP because the guy before him set it up by walking?

The Sac Fly would have made two outs yes but it also would have moved that runner on 2nd to third which means even a passed ball would allow him to score as opposed to just a hit that Buck HAD to get or nothing scores! at all Especially if he hits into that DP!

• “The “problem” with that rationale is what happens when the following hitters don’t get the job done…”

That isn’t a problem with the stats, that is problem with your hitters.

What is Satin supposed to do? He is one guy. If he had gotten a hit, that would have been a lot better than the walk, which was better than the out.

But Satin did his part to keep the inning going and actually increased their chances of scoring runs. Which is exactly what happened.

• No it’s a problem with your PHILOSOPHY!

You like the Walk and pass the buck to those players without ever considering if they had what it takes to get the run in.

You KNEW the other guy did and had MORE chances to do it than he has now that he is on first base!
Because he removed the FC from the options that could have scored that run!

• Nope, it’s with the other hitters.

No one advocates a guy standing up there with the bat glued to his shoulder, but as so many people love to yell around here “it is a team game”.

• Merely contradicting without any evidence to support is just the sign of a defeated mind ready to say anything just to get the last word in.

And Satin is the guy who hits the SF so your obviously not paying attention at all just baiting and wasting peoples time with your post

• But that’s the reality of the situation which is why many people have a problem with SABR.

In many instances a walk will be better than a SF, however that is not always the case. This formula is effectively saying that a walk is and always is better than a sac fly and that is an incorrect assumption.

Trading an out for a run and lowering your chances of having a big inning is sometimes the better option and this formula essentially discounts this strategy.

Most of this formula makes perfect sense. A HR is always better than a triple. A triple is always better than a double, a double is always better than a single and a single is always better than a walk. Those statements are 100% true in every single aspect of the game and those coefficients I will simply defer as accurate.

The statement that a BB is better than a SF is not true 100% of the time. It might be true 65% of the time or even 90% of the time, but because a SF can be the preferred result depending on the circumstance and this the formula is flawed.

• “But that’s the reality of the situation which is why many people have a problem with SABR.”

Because the human instinct is to look at small isolated instances instead of the big picture? Again, not a problem with stats.

“In many instances a walk will be better than a SF, however that is not always the case.”

The only instance I can think of is in the bottom of the 9th of a time game with a runner on 3rd and less than 2 out.

“This formula is effectively saying that a walk is and always is better than a sac fly and that is an incorrect assumption.”

Not an assumption. There is plenty of evidence to back it up.

“Trading an out for a run and lowering your chances of having a big inning is sometimes the better option and this formula essentially discounts this strategy.”

Only in the very specific instance I detailed above.

“The statement that a BB is better than a SF is not true 100% of the time. It might be true 65% of the time or even 90% of the time, but because a SF can be the preferred result depending on the circumstance and this the formula is flawed.”

So, because it doesn’t apply 100% means it is totally wrong? Again, one very specific instance favors the sac fly (which is a lucky accident) over not making the out.

• “The only instance I can think of is in the bottom of the 9th of a time game with a runner on 3rd and less than 2 out.”

Any situation where the events following the walk do not lead to anymore runs being scored makes the SF a preferable outcome. Scoring one run is and ALWAYS is better than scoring 0 runs.

(0.691×uBB + 0.884×1B + 1.257×2B + 1.593×3B +2.058×HR) / (AB + uBB) is a much better formula as it does not penalize a batter for increasing his teams score just because he hurts his teams chances of having a bigger inning.

• “Any situation where the events following the walk do not lead to anymore runs being scored makes the SF a preferable outcome. ”

That simply is not how it works. You don’t’ retroactively make something more or less productive. Otherwise, we can look at every instance that is not a home run and say “well, if the guy behind him didn’t do x, he would have never scored”. Why can’t we apply this same line of thinking in the other direction? “If player x wasn’t on 3rd with less than 2 out, then player y’s fly ball is just an out”

” is a much better formula as it does not penalize a batter for increasing his teams score just because he hurts his teams chances of having a bigger inning.”

The point of an offense is to score as many runs as possible. Anything that decreases your chance to score more runs is hurting the team.

• Retroactively.?

Apparently its ok though to take a Productive act and call it a total failure. That good.
If you really want help the guys who like sabers can I suggest you stay out of their arguments and stop saying you agree with them because your HURTING THEIR CASE… Not helping them.

• It’s already taken into account. There are specific situations where a sac fly is more valuable than a walk but overall a walk is on average more valuable.

Remember the formula is not arbitrary. It is derived from looking at all the results and what events led to those results.

• I understand that it’s arbitrary, but it’s still flawed in the sense that it completely discounts the SF.

A double is and always will be better than a single. There is no scenario in a game where the reverse is true.

A walk is not always better than a SF. The reverse can be true in certain circumstances such as a 1 run game late and close or where you are in the batting can mean everything. If David Wright is on deck, the walk is going to better, but if you have a LH SP and John Buck is at the plate with Kirk on deck with the pitcher to follow, a walk is not the preferred result.

wOBA penalizes a hitter for driving in a run with a productive out despite but rewards them for taking instead when in that situation the productive out was the better result.

Again, it doesn’t happen very often, but I would like to see what results the formula would yield should it be amended to no longer penalize the S…

• It does not discount it. It puts it in perspective. wOBA is not about the specific scenarios. IT is about what player A does. That is all. It doesn’t care in players X, Y, and Z are on base in front of him.

What does Player A do? If he hits a fly ball out, it hurts his team.

• *not arbitrary

• No A walk IS better THAN A sacrifice fly, because THE next hitter still HAS THE same possibility OF THE sf and has AN additional man ON first base IN THE event OF A hit.

• No A walk IS better THAN A sacrifice fly”

Bill James

• Glad you stopped reading there, AND didn’t comment ON THE validity OF THE explanation, or ARE you just trying to bait.

• BEcause that is a joke, how can you say a walk is better? Only the new breed of calculating fans who live in fantasy baseball island believe this. the risk of a DP is on play as well… if you walk, the next hitter might hit into a DP, chances are he might strike out and become the 2nd out leaving up to yet another hitter, who at this point who knows, might be the pitcher. Give me a run scored ahead of a threat any day of the week. From batter to batter, the game changes, if you got a chance to score a run, guess what, you take that…. SMH

• Watchdog

Sure if Daniel Murphy is up with Marlon Byrd on deck, but what if Marlon Byrd is up and the next hitter is Kirk and there is a LHP on the mound. Are the odds still the same then?

Aren’t you better off giving up the out to get that one run since odds are that run wont score anyway?

• Oleo,

Yes, there are certain circumstances where the sf is preferable, the most obvious being a game ending sf. But wOBA (which by the way, I don’t use) just like any stat used to judge a player as a whole has to smooth over some situations which RARELY HAPPEN to give you an accurate view of a player over the long term.

• Sorry for this post, just saw this discussion has already happened upstream.

• guys, keep something in mind
capt kirk came up after satin and made a terrible out
then buck got the 2 out hit.

if satin hits a sf, then one run scores because kirk makes the next out and buck leads off the next inning.
because of the walk, the inning was extended, allowed the buck at bat to happen leading to 2 runs.

no judgement here, just fact.

• I love the mindset that says increasing the chances of scoring runs is better than ACTUALLY SCORING THEM!

I just think it is Hilarious in it’s construct of logic….

And whats worse is by going for that you actually DECREASE the chances of the original run scoring!

The problem is you THINK by walking you have PRESERVED an OUT but the truth is that guy on first is still VERY CAPABLE of being one and the fact that with a runner on 3rd with 1 out you could have GOTTEN the run with a sac fly or GBFC, but once that guy walks the double play is set up and there are FEWER options to get the run in!

You then need a hit or the same Sac Fly but you lost the GBFC option from the table!

In a Situation with No outs what happens if that guy walks is they intentionally walk the next guy and set up a force at the plate!

So this idea that your chances of scoring the ORIGINAL run has decreased in favor of a MAYBE in the future provided that OUT you think he didn’t get isn’t gotten by a GB to the IF by the next batter!

Funny that Forget what is RIGHT THERE for MORE that s later seems to permeate your every being and posting.

• Metsie I think your mindset is simply the result of ignorance. You can solve this at your local library.

You should read “baseball between the numbers, everything you know about the game is wrong.” By baseball prospectus

Those guys are not freak weirdos making stuff up they have evidence and yunno, science.

• No Martin the ignorance is all on your part.
Thats why you believe in metrical system that has tried to make the COMPLEX GAME OF BASEBALL into this simpleton view of get on base good make outs bad (rather neanderthal if you ask me) when the game is RICH with strategy and NUANCES you metric never take into account due to their Caveman simplicity.. …
BASES GOOD
ME NO CARE about anything else… that too hard for math!

• When looking at the values assigned to each outcome, you have to understand that they were assigned objectively, not subjectively. It’s not like a braniac somewhere decided that an intentional walk is better than an unintentional walk.

100+ years of data show that a batter who is hit by a pitch scores more often than one who is unintentionally walked. That’s why it’s weighed heavier, not because of a theory that it’s more important.

• This is what the anti-sabr crowd REFUSES to acknowledge. They are not subjective or arbitrary values. If it was arbitrary it wouldn’t be sabermetrics!

• 1) Why is the coefficient for a HBP not the same as a walk. They are essentially the same thing no?

Because the results ie runs scored are less after a HBP. Also since wOBA attempts to limit the measurement to what’s under the hitters control, since HBP are partially the result of a pitcher then they’re worth ever so slightly less.

• Isn’t that just a mere coincidence though?

I understand historically that a HBP, but it just doesn’t logically follow that a HBP somehow creates more runs than a walk. Seems to be more a result of smaller sample size that would normalize if strung out.

The result of a HBP and a BB are exactly the same and should be measured exactly the same way.

• Not really. HBP is simply a less repeatable skill and leads to slightly less runs than BB’s. Also remember at the rate it actually happens even if a HBP were to be valued exactly the same as a BB it would be a rounding error.

• But what is the correlation?

Let’s say David Wright, instead of drawing a walk is plunked by a fastball that missed the inside corner? In both situations David Wright goes to first base and any forced runner advances.

So why is it that David is more likely to score on a HBP than a BB? Again seems like a total coincidence to me…

• Because that’s what happens. Because when one looks at every run scoring event then all the events that led to the run scored, those that involved HBP led to more runs on average than those that involved a BB.

Now why does that happen? There no way to draw a provable conclusion, it happens because it happens. A few theories are that a pitcher who hits a batter is on average more wild and thus more likely to walk others regardless of the players strike zone judgement, is more likely to get behind hitters and have to groove a fastball, or any number of factors. There will always be exceptions which is why one can never look at singular situations and extrapolate them. Sample size is the key.

• Given how close the numbers are and how much smaller the sample size for HBP are, a coincidence is much more likely. It will likely have no impact on a player, but when you have someone with tons of HBP (Future Mets Shin Soo Choo has a whopping 20 already) you might have inflated results.

• I say it is simply not true Oleo….
There is nothing about HOW you got on base that influences your ability or chances to score.
Your on first and your chances of scoring are the same no matter if it was a single walk or HBP.
It all depends on what the NEXT guy does not what you did.

• Vig if you cant show why it happened then how in the hell can you say it DOES HAPPEN?
I mean there is an awful lot of assumption going on that these metrics require or they fall apart.
Perhaps an article about these 100 years of research would enlighten and expose why these metric are the way they are but these are always hidden abd unpublished

• Vig if you cant show why it happened then how in the hell can you say it DOES HAPPEN?

Amazingly enough there are these magical things called results which are records of what actually happened. That’s kinda how we know it actually happened because every single recorded event is looked at.

I mean there is an awful lot of assumption going on that these metrics require or they fall apart.

There’s actually very little assumption when it comes to wOBA. The value of it’s individucal components and the formula itself is derived from actual events. There is some assumptions when it comes to a few other stats, mostly in terms of relating to the average ie xFIP which is FIP but with homerun rate regressed to league average.

Perhaps an article about these 100 years of research would enlighten and expose why these metric are the way they are but these are always hidden abd unpublished

Most aren’t hidden. You can find the formulas fairly easy for the vast majority of advanced stats fairly easily, there’s also a bunch in Tom Tango’s book. There are only a couple that I know of that are proprietary, mostly the ones that involve ‘zones’ because that data is proprietary and has to licensed.

• Yes EXPLAIN why a HBP will score more often than a guy who walked or Hit then…

What is it about getting a base THAT way that makes it any different and more likely to score than if you actually got to first via a HIT!

You say you tested results but I call bull on that because there is no calculation you can make to discern that without going through 16200 Play By Plays and figuring out what happened!

Which I guarantee you didn’t happen it was just some PROBABILITY or GUESS that fit the numbers they wanted to use at the time!

You then say
“You can find the formulas fairly easy for the vast majority of advanced stats”
Show me the formula used to determine your more likely to score from first if you gpt plunked than if you got there from a single…

Would LOVE to see that formula!

• 1. I did explain it. Look for it in the comments. Not sure where it is, but it’s there.
2. You’re just making assumptions about how the weights are calculated. Look up LINEAR WEIGHTS. Read about it. Get to know it. That’s how these weights are calculated. Not subjective, arbitrary, or random. They ARE based off the history of baseball.

• You mean you wrote an article to explain a stat and I have to troll the Comments to get it?

GREAT WRITING my young Friend! You’ll go far!

• You’re right. When I go to college, I bet the first class requirement for my journalism major will be “comment section etiquette”

• No it will be about CHECKING FACTS and having TWO CONFIRMED SOURCES before you call something one…

• A lot of times pitchers pitch around hitters, knowing there is a strong possibility of them being walked. A lot of the walks come from that, whereas most HBP are accidental, and come when the pitcher isn’t trying to do that, like when you have the bases loaded.

• A wild pitch or a walk is more likely with bases loaded than a HBP. A HBPis usually bases empty otherwise pitcher would be more careful. I admit some guys with bases loaded do not try to get out of the way but its not that common.

• Thanks for explaining wOBA Connor. I have one question: why are SF counted against the batter in this formula? I could understand if they were dropped from the formula completely.. Also, I could understand an argument for saying: they don’t contribute to the batter’s likelihood of scoring a run – but if that’s the case, then why are intentional walks NOT counted?? For that matter, if that was the argument, how could anything be counted as more than 1?

• Because BASE is the only GOOD and OUTs are Evil Incarnate even if they score a run or gain an extra base the guys they WANT to credit couldn’t get on thier own.

• Weighting a home run as simply an extra base more than a triple is problematic. So, finding a way to set a proper value on that hitting event is interesting.

I have a couple of issues with the formula for wOBA like the focus on non-intentional walks. A lot of times a non-intentional walk is actually an intentional walk as when a star is hitting with two outs and a player in scoring position. A pitcher often prefers to throw pitches way out of the zone to see if the batter will go out of the zone to chase an rbi.

• I am intrigued by Connor’s statement that he is going to explain Stats Available to the Public (SAP, I presume). Does this mean there are Secret Stats as well? Must one pass an initiation hazing of alphabetizing and acronym testing b4 being privy to the inner sanctum of Saber?
I know, I know, you can’t reveal any of this to we the Public, the Common baseball fans. But I have a feeling Lord SA himself presides over the clandestine weekly meetings. Maybe someday there will be a defector, a Snowden of the Saber world, who will blow the whistle and expose all the dirty little numerical secrets…I will keep hoping….

• I could be mistaken bu I believe vorp is available to baseball prospectus subscribers and is in that sense a secret stat

• alwaysamazin: Comments like these that bring nothing to the table are why http://metsmerizedonline.com/2013/07/mets-at-pirates-recker-now-hefners-personal-catcher-kirk-in-center-field.html things like that thread usually occur which you were not a fan of the behavior right?

If you’re going to demand people be respectful (as you should) then perhaps adding to the conversation and not hindering it is the best? Just my 2 cents

• cleanup, there was nothing disrespectful in my lighthearted take on the public vs private statistics. i did not call anyone ignorant or a fool. connor can take it, he is a very bright, well spoken person. i swore i wouldn’t interact with you but please…don’t make my post into something it wasn’t.
is the code word nanoo nanoo or should i just wave a calculator at the pc? lol joke!!! relax man

• HAHAHA It’s kind of like Scientology Amazin….
You have to buy into the lower level teachings/doctines and prove your loyalty before they drop the bit about ALIENS on you!

• Front offices have their own statistics, which are not available to the public…

• how could statistics not be available to the public? aren’t all the games public? do you mean they use metric formulas which are not shared and no one else has invented?

• Correct. Certain front offices use metrics that they don’t reveal. They often create their own. The basic ones like OPS+, wOBA and stuff still have the same weights and remain unchanged, but I think a lot of the more advanced stuff is different than the advanced stuff available to us.

• But YOURs are so GREAT and VALID and SCIENTIFICALLY ACCURATE then why don’t the teams use them Connor?
Because they AREN’T thats why!

• Why do you HIDE things?

SO people won’t be able to SEE THEM!

If they did they might pick them apart and ruin their fancy BOOK DEAL!

• WTH are you talking about? Front offices hide formulas because they all think theirs is the best and don’t want anyone else to get a hold of them…

• Connor, i have all the confidence in the world that, if you devoted yourself to metrics and not wasting your time here, you could find the holy grail of metrics and be rich and famous and i will say i knew you when.

• Mike Trout was discovered by TY Cobb’s secret formula. It measure taste before Pepsie did and the formula is secret locked up in a fault in Georgia.

• hi hotstreak, ty cobb would care about stats for a second> i bet he would say it takes heart, the will to win at all costs, sharpen those cleats!

• No Connor your just naive…

They hide it because they think they MIGHT have the RIGHT Answer to Metrics and leave it to folks like you to rely on and spout the WRONG ones posted on FanGraphs!

• You can’t believe the numbers, dang it. Francouer tried hard and was a gritty leader. Same thing with tebow.

“When you look at wOBA numbers throughout the book, just think OBP, and you’ll be fine. In other words, an average hitter is around 0.340 or so, a great hitter is 0.400 or higher, and a poor hitter would be under 0.300.” — http://www.insidethebook.com/woba.shtml

Basically, it’s OBP except it fills in missing pieces. And if this is the reaction to wOBA, wait until the wRC+ article…

• Basically, it’s OBP except it fills in missing pieces. And if this is the reaction to wOBA, wait until the wRC+ article…

I’m picturing the MMO equivalent to the reaction to Frankenstein’s monster with at least 8 posts saying ‘yeah but rbi’.

• To the points about Sac Fly’s –

When you look at linear weights and values of outcomes, think about a rope. You want the rope to be as long as possible, let’s say that’s the best outcome. More rope is better. So, you want to avoid tangles and crimps in the rope. Those things prevent the rope from reaching its full length.

Stay with me here. Now, let’s say that that rope represents the chances for a baseball team to score runs. You want the most runs just like you want the most out of your rope.

In a situation where there is a runner on 3rd and 1 out, it is still better for the batter at home to walk instead of hit a sac fly. Yes, you will score a run. But that will be at the cost of an out, or a chance to score runs. I understand this sounds counterintuitive, but keep with me, this is like the rope. A sac fly is a crimp in the rope. You score a run, but you lose a chance.

If the batter had walked instead, now you do not lose an out AND the runner can still score from third on a sac fly. Most importantly though, a double, triple, or home run will score an additional run. Thus, by walking instead of hitting a sac fly, you’ve extended the rope – your chances of scoring runs.

TL;DR – Making less outs means more chances of scoring more runs.

• That’s a great analogy. Thanks!

Any insight on why intentional walks aren’t considered to increase the chances of a team scoring runs (i.e. lengthen the rope)? On the one hand, the fact that these are totally out of the batter’s control, makes me understand why you wouldn’t count them. On the other hand, many a feared slugger gets intentionally walked more than other players, and it seems to me, that by removing the IBBs from the formula, the most feared sluggers in the game aren’t represented properly. Of course, there are plenty of IBBs to 8-place hitters too, to get to the pitcher, so maybe they just decided it best to remove the IBB completely from the formula due to the inconsistency of that particular metric.

• From an article on Fangraphs about the MVP race between Cabrera and Hamilton a couple of years ago:

Because there’s a dirty little secret about Cabrera’s walk rate – 30 of the 84 walks he’s been issued this year have been intentional, and intentional walks simply are not as valuable as non-intentional walks.

“This is actually an intuitive conclusion, even though it might seem a little bit strange at first. Intentional walks are issued in situations where the opposing team believes it is more valuable to have the batter on first base than at the plate. It is a strategic move, based on the situation at hand, that is aimed at reducing the offense’s chance of scoring a run, or multiple runs, in a given inning.”

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/miguel-cabrera-and-intentional-walks/

You’re right, not including intentional walks can skew wOBA, and as shown in that article, can skew it significantly. However, It is rare that a player is intentionally walked so often that it creates such a large discrepancy – where almost 50% of his walks are intentional, something like that.

For reasons like these, even wOBA is incomplete. There is no perfect “catch-all” statistic. But when they are used in unison with other statistics, notably batted-ball statistics and in this case intentional walks, they create a clearer picture of how valuable a player is.

• Unintentional walks indicate the pitcher is lacking control, also unintentional walks tax the pitcher arm more, with more and harder pitches thrown, which helps the offense.

Making pitchers throw more pitches is huge, wearing out the opposing staff works.

• Well that’s not necessarily true. There’s a difference between lacking control and just missing your spots. You also have to allow for the possibility that the umpire is missing calls. Just because you’re walking guys doesn’t mean that you’re missing by a couple of feet.

Also, as far as skewing data, I would say that an intentional walk which counts towards wOBA would skew the data just as much as not counting it. If intentional walks were counted, there would just be problem with inflated wOBA’s instead of deflated ones.

• Missing your spots and lacking control are the same thing.

• Again, that’s not true. It could also be that you’re trying to throw balls to get a hitter to chase.

• If you are doing it on purpose it isn’t a lack of control. A lack of control explicitly means you can’t hit your spots, it’s how control is defined. What are you talking about.

• So you punish the guy for getting the results you want for the HOPE of getting the result and reducing the chance to get One run in favor of getting more.
That rope is called greed and with enough of it you HANG YOURSELF and get nothing but a dead inning and zero runs.

If you ignore the situation involved your ignoring the truth of what is the best play.

• Metsie the sac fly is great if it wins the game, but most of the rest of the time it simply isn’t.

• The SAC Fly beats the strikeout and double play by a million miles and also leaves the chance of the ball falling in for a single, double or even leaving the stadium and most importantly puts a run on the board.

I’m not against SABR but I do find their are way too many generalities and situational hitting is one of the big ones. Moving a runner from 2nd to 3rd with a GB to the right side is another category in which SABR blows it because in general slow rollers to the right side aren’t very useful but in specific situations can actually be the key AB in the run scoring sequence

Another part of the game that SABR cannot measure is the effect of not doing the same thing all the time. I’m not a big fan of the SAC bunt but I think everyone would agree that there are specific situations in which it does make sense, obviously some more than others but how about the value of changing it up on occasion?

What if you never SAC bunt unless the pitcher is up, then you’ll never catch the corners attacking the plate or see the wheel play when you do hit away. They’ll always play you straight up and you’ll never have all those holes to hit through.

Generalities should be avoided because somethings that go against the general rule are appropriate at different times and can pay benefits later on too and those can’t be quantified.

• Walks can be just as bad which is why pitchers intentionally walk batters all the time.

• Situations are e exact things our metrics do not ignore.

• Which metric takes into account Man on 3rd 1 Out Tied game in the ninth?

And says WALK DON’T HIT A FLY BALL TO WIN THE GAME! HMMM?

Show me the Variables in this metric that account for that situation!

• Metsie,
WPA and RE24

• Again you post labels not calculations….

It would appear you have to calculate 500 items before you can get the result of ONE Metric!

And all the errors in calculating in every metric leads to an AMPLIFIED error in the end result!

If you knew anything about statistical analysis you would know that it is considered POOR WORK to make calculations based on calculations instead of ONE CALCULATION that represents EVERY NUMBER AND VARIABLE used!

• It’s not a matter of punishment nor reward. It’s simply a factual reflection of what a player has accomplished. A sac fly means you score a run while making an out. Baseball statistics have a lot to do with probability. Not so much in their designs, but in the way they’re used.

A baseball team will have a greater chance of scoring runs when it has more outs to work with, wouldn’t you agree? More outs equal less chances. If you have a runner on 3rd with 1 or 0 outs, he is a potential run. A walk means another baserunner and another potential run. Another walk means another baserunner. You can draw walks until you score 100,200…1,000,000 runs. That can continue to infinity. Is it likely? Of course not. But the chance is still there.

A sac fly reduces that chance because now you have one less out to work with.

I’m not preaching that a walk is better in every circumstance. When you only need to win by one run in the bottom of the 9th, then a sac fly is better than a walk. But that’s only because you need to score one run.

Interesting side note – that last point is basically why “Moneyball” doesn’t work in the postseason. The sample size is too small.

• Oh please what did a batter acomplish by getting plunked?

• I’m not sure what further explanation I can give you if the ones I’ve already presented are not enough. Do you disagree that reaching base is strictly a good thing?

• Imgoing to turn that on you….
Do you disagree then that scoring arun is better in EVERY SITUATION than getting on base?
Cause THAT IS THE GOAL.
Teamwith most RUNS wins not the one with the best OBP after 9 innings.

Your denying the goal to increase a meaningless stat and passing the buck to the next batter hoping he is better than the last guy and get the job done

• Imgoing to turn that on you….
Do you disagree then that scoring arun is better in EVERY SITUATION than getting on base?
Cause THAT IS THE GOAL.
Teamwith most RUNS wins not the one with the best OBP after 9 innings.

Your denying the goal to increase a meaningless stat and passing the buck to the next batter hoping he is better than the last guy and get the job done

I guess you won’t be answering my question. But I’ll do the courteous thing and answer yours.

First, “scoring a run” is not the same as “scoring a run at the expense of an out”. If I had the option of scoring a run with no penalty and the option of getting on base, I’m choosing scoring a run with no penalty. However, sac fly’s come with penalties.

I asked you another question before which you also failed to answer or even consider. Do you agree that a baseball team will be more likely to score runs when it makes fewer outs?

You are also not differentiating between the individual statistic (wOBA) and the next batter.

• You answer was within… . I answerred no a run scored is better than a walk in EVERY situation even when it costs you an out.

now if it was a hit thst scored a run thats better but since the run didnt score on the walk no it is not better than than the out that did.
You get three outs an inning and if one scores a run its better than ANY act that fails to
score a run.

And your assertion that a walk in the 6th that fails to score a run and risks not s coring one makes a 3run HR in the 7th inning better is just ridiculous truth be told. Might look good in wOBA but not onthe scoreboard
The SF however gets you that 4th run a point seemingly lost on you walkers whi h is what they call the zombies on that show on AMC

• “In a situation where there is a runner on 3rd and 1 out, it is still better for the batter at home to walk instead of hit a sac fly.”

Why would a manager particularly late in a close game with a good batter who is a slow runner intentionally walk the batter. Because that sets up a DP.

• You’re assuming that the double play is guaranteed to happen though. What if the next batter hits a home run? Then you score an additional run due to the walk. If you assume the worst case scenario, you also have to assume the best case scenario.

• Please do not say I am assuming: I said “Why would a manager” assume. This assumption is called smart baseball. If the assumption is always the worst case scnario ( a homer) why pitch at all. Just walk everybody. This is a stratedy specifically to negate the possibility of a SF particarly late in a close game. It has been used for years before SABERMETRICS. Common sense shows a groundball is more probable than a hit alone, not to mention a home run.

• I guess I just don’t understand what you’re trying to say. You should be clearer. Are you disagreeing with my point that in every situation other than a tied game, walk-off situation, a walk is better than a sac fly?

• A common tactic with a weak argument is “are you saying in every situation”. We are talking the law of averages in managerial decisions. I will take a SF everytime EXCEPT when I am trailing by three or more runs and there is two inning or less to catch up. Does that clarify it for you. Your senario of a walk is better than a SF is very limited. But you make a general statement accusing me of saying “everytime”. Your a poor debator and may fool some but very few.

• “A common tactic with a weak argument is “are you saying in every situation”. We are talking the law of averages in managerial decisions. I will take a SF everytime EXCEPT when I am trailing by three or more runs and there is two inning or less to catch up. Does that clarify it for you. Your senario of a walk is better than a SF is very limited. But you make a general statement accusing me of saying “everytime”. Your a poor debator and may fool some but very few.”

You seem to be getting worked up.

I merely asked you to clarify your position. You haven’t done a very good job of it, but I’ll try and decipher what you’ve posted. You’d only accept a walk in a sac fly situation when your team is down by three or more runs with two or fewer innings to play. OK.

Let me ask you why you would only accept a walk in that situation. I’m a poor debator, especially when compared with you, who I assume to be a master debator. If I lose you, please berate me some more until I figure it out.

Would you only accept the walk because your team is down by three or more runs? I’m going to say yes, that that is the case. So you agree that drawing a walk – even in the fabled sac fly situation – is a good way to score a run. OK. Let me ask you something else.

Barring a tied game, walk-off situation, why would you wait until your team is down several runs before employing a strategy which, as you seem to suggest, can score you a several runs?

• He is not assuming anymore than you are that the next guy is going to get even one run in as opposed to these EXTRAS you say you are going for

• Let me be clear. There is a difference between in-game strategy and wOBA. Your point is one against SABRmetrics in general, or so it seems. wOBA is a statistic which highlights the production of a single player. It has nothing to do with managerial decisions which may or may not win baseball games.

Saying that wOBA is faulty because it does not include the next batter is problematic. That’s like saying, “why get a base hit as the number 8 hitter if there are 1 or 2 outs”. The chances the pitcher will strike out or hit into a double play are large enough that a hit by the number 8 guy may well be meaningless.

• Sorry but all these metrics are meant to guide strategy so your point is moot.
The reasons pitchers intentionally walk is to set up an out or DP because the odds say it works.
Your playing against the odds hoping for a bigger score you may not get because to get it you forsaken what was easy in favor of what is MUCH HARDER

• Actually wOBA and wRC+ are meant to compare players, not create strategy. If anything, they’d be used to generate a batting order. When managers make in-game decisions, they use batted ball data (GB rates, LD rates, vs. LHP, vs. RHP, swinging strike %, etc.)

Show me the data which supports your claim that intentionally walking a batter is successful in a majority of the time. If you can produce it and prove me wrong, I’ll thank you for it because I’ll have learned something new today.

• Really? To make a batting order?

OK
Player A wOBA of .350
Player B wOBA of .360
Player C wOBA of ..300

• had to scroll up a bit to rep;y, but metsie et al
connor claimed today that mlb teams have secret metrics they use. all the acronyms we see are just common metrics, the teams actually use more advanced ones. that actually makes sense.

• What they have AA is THEIR OWN (as they believe a BETTER more PERFECT) VERSION of the same TYPES of Metrics.

What the Mets may do to calculate wOBA or WAR is VERY VERY DIFFERENT than what you see on FanGraphs and also VERY VERY Different than how the Red Sox may calculate what they call the same metric.

Some may correct the issues expressed here with the SF being counted as all bad. Or the Bunt that the Manager calls for.May even not include HBP at all!

They may even dispense with the ridiculous notion of using 2012 results to calculate weights on 2013 events as if 2012 is really any different or has any BARLINE that influences 2013 that didn’t also apply to 2010.

WHy did they pick the weights they did?
Because they want OB to be more important or ALMOST as important as better things!

And since OBs are more common than better things they find a statistical way to give them an edge based on WHAT MIGHT HAPPEN AFTERWARDS!

Yet a weight of .92 for a hit lets say seems to suggest EVERY hit will get you one run.
Or close to it.
and a HR being only a 2 When FOR SURE it gets one and can get you as many as 4 is penalized to make it easier for the high OB player to catch up to the RARE HR hitter.

They are so interested in reading books they should read the one entitled Lies, Damn Lies and Statistics!

Every trick in that book is used in Sabermetrics!

• You don’t know because you have to look at many stats to know what type of player they each are. But Player 2 (.360) is most likely the best hitter.

• AHHHHH But there is the rub isn’t it?

You DID look at all the stats you say you need when you calculated the wOBA but now have to go back, RE-REVIEW, and look at the TRADITIONALS that made up the wOBA AGAIN to find out what it was you said Sabers are designed to tell you and help you do!

SO basically you say the Sabers make it easier to judge players than Traditionals because you think it is harder to look at the 5 or 6 metrics they contain before calculated, Went through the entire process of calculating them and even Calculating all the WEIGHTS that are needed to make it and in the end you wound up RIGHT BACK AT SQUARE ONE looking at the individual Metrics anyway because the one you came up with didn’t tell you anything about WHY that player was worth having and where he is best used in the lineup!

And you call that USELESS exercise the BEST WAY to judge despite the fact that the second the calculations are done your right back where WE are looking at the Individual Traditional Metrics and making a decision based on that!

• I’d look at OBP, SLG, as well as walk rate, k-rate, BABIP, HR/FB. None of those are in wOBA.

• You looked at all of them when you created wOBA…
SO your going to look at all the different METRIC SOUPS you have created before you can give an answer I can give you without MAKING SOUP!

• Thank you for your response and that is a very fair reason, but what happens when the next hitter is less likely than the current batter to drive in those runs? Or what if Matt Harvey is on the mound and he’s got his good stuff?

Is the walk still better than giving up an out to get a run?

• Thanks for being so measured and thoughtful in this discussion. I see your concern with this aspect of the formula (which again, I don’t really use), I think the point is the situation where the sf is actually more valuable than the walk happens so rarely and can’t be accounted for when trying to look at the big picture it has to be overlooked.

Not exactly the same deal, but a bloop hit is better for your avg than a line drive out, but over the long haul we assume someone who hits the ball hard consistently will have a better avg than someone who doesn’t make good contact.

• Now my initial inclination is that my concerns have little impact on most players, but I would have to see on guys I perceive are “overrated” or “underrated by SABR.

In order to criticize something you have to first understand what it is you’re criticizing which is something many posters don’t really get.

There is nothing wrong with seeing something differently, but I’ve read some criticisms of SABR where its plainly obvious the poster has not even tried to understand what it is they are complaining about.

Our SABR crew should also understand that not everyone is college educated and a lot of this stuff is simply over their head…

• Well put.

• Look Saber to the NON-Believers, in not over their head its just beneith their dignity.

This is for Connor; last call or forever hold your piece (really peace). Give me an example where a smart GM looked into any SABER tool and signed the guy. OK, I buy BABIP, WHIP, and QS. Any other metric that traditional stats (triple crown Hr., BA, RBI’s) failed where using (OBP, Slug PCT, OPS) was more meaningful to evaluate performance and contract signings and amount offered. name teams and players and what year. You can’t do it.

• I have never been inside an MLB front office and I doubt you have either, so neither of us have any idea. But every team (I think the Phillies still don’t have an analytics department, but I’m not sure) uses sabermetrics in every decision they make. Most teams use it as their primary statistics.

And it’s unfair to say “tell me a player predicted to be good by sabermetrics.” You expect that to mean good in terms of traditional stats, which never tell the whole story of how valuable a player is.

Traditional stats will tell you that 2011 Mike Napoli was as good as Mike Trout, but obviously that’s not the case, and sabermetrics prove that.

• No you never been in one….
But you have seen who they sign and for how much and the bottomline is the SABER GOOD guys get paid a lot less than the Guys with good traditionals!

A guy with 40HRs and 100+RBI gets paid more than any OBP or wOBA darling!

And the Pros don’t use the same WAR you do! They are the ones who say they aren’t reliable!

• Sandy Alderson a Money Ball and SABER guy who did he sign based on use of saber metrics. Who in his experience as a GM. Follow up did this guy if you can name just one guy have a good Money Ball season because he found a steal based on advanced stats.

• Hefner? Capuano? Harriston? Young Jr. so far? How many more examples do you want before you stop making this wrong claim?

• Give the the saber stat or shut the f** up.

• If you think that one sabr stat is going to tell you which player to get, or that teams make decisions based on one stat, you are our of your mind.

• Connor you refuse to be pinned down. If you were in a court of law being cross examined and you made that remark, I would say to the judge or jury I rest my case. This young man the so called expert witness for SABER metrics says all teams use it but can’t show me how.

Sure I repeat,I believe WHIP, BABIP,and QS all have validity for use tempered with other non SABER consideration. You say there are many SABER factors used which is possible. But you can’t be specific on one player the non SABER fan did not see that a so called SABER guy saw and it paid big dividends. What should I buy into it. If it works and your marketing it show it or shut (expletive deleted) up..

• You mention Hefner. I told you I believe in BABIP (my favorite SABER stat). I got news for you.
Hefner’s BABIP for 2013 is .257. He is way below ,290 /.300 range which is normal. He is due to falter. So the irony is I am using SABER to prove you wrong.

Oh I guess FIP (xFIP) is better than BABIP.

• Funny he asks you to name JUST ONE (you could name as many as you like if you wanted) that said EYJ was a good player yet you run from it as usual and instead trot out of some semantical attempt at changing the subject.

• Give the the saber stat or shut the f** up.

Someone’s getting a little ornery, anyway.

Hairston was coming off a career worst BABIP but had proved that his was able to retain his power even playing in a cavernous stadium. Hefner lost his future in San Diego as his traditional stats ballooned in the PCL. A quick look at his secondary stats showed that his poor play was because of the PCL which was confirmed once he was picked up and put in a more neutral area. Young was more a product of bad luck so with a regression to the mean and with good secondary skills like base-running he was a fine roll of the dice. Capuano’s a different case he was more of a moneyball pickup, a guy who consistently pitch well but coming of tj surgery and losing a starting spot in the rotation.

Here’s the stats in question, BABIP, Park Factors, K/BB, and ISO% to name a few.

• First off a SF is not as rare as a HBP yet you count those as a plus.
And thos HBP have the same affect in regards to the DP which clearly is NOT rare which is why pitchers intentionally walk batters all the time!

• Yes it is. a HBP is much more common…

• Not true for Murphy and Byrd haven’t looked at the others yet as I’m on my Tablet.

• http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=1989&position=P

Metsie, excuse me this meant for Connor.

• hotstreak, this is a test. the screen is gray and i wonder if that means i’m in moderation?

• guess not. sorry to bother.

• Forgive me Metsie:

Hey Vig. If you read what I wrote I whole hardly endorse BABIP. You forgot I said that. I believe in K to walk ratios too to some extent although (NOT SABR). I believe in ball park factors too (I am not sure if SABR). But why then was D’naud top rated prospect if he played in Vegas. You struck out pinch hitting for Connor.

Oh on Hefner his BABIP right now is a warning sign. However you proved my point that BABIP is one if not the only valuable SABR stat. WAR is nebulous limited but some value.

• Nothing to forgive at all Hotstreak…

No one has ever said ALL advanced Metrics are useless nor have we even claimed wOBA (which i find quite ridiculous in it’s weighting system) can not have a place in a player’s conversation.

The issue is more in HOW PEOPLE ARE USING THEM as opposed to the Metrics themselves…
wOBA. OPB and OPS are all BASE METRICS that the Saber kiddies use as a Hitting Metric!

Why because they DO NOT HAVE A HITTING METRIC!
They say BA is imperfect but NOT as far as HITTING is concerned!
No more IMPERFECT than OBP, OPS and wOBA as far as telling you how well a Batter HITS a BASEBALL!

I don’t need to know a players OBP, OPS or wOBA to know he is going to help my team!
If he has a high BA then all of those are likely going to be good as well!
Because the MAJORITY driver of those stats are from the HITS that player recorded!

I don’t need SLG to tell me if the guy is a power hitter all I need to do is look at the SAME 2B, 3B and HRs they look at to put into their wOBA and SLG to know if that average is a power hitter or slap single guy!

And I look at RBI because that tells me he drives runs in when he hits.
They say it is team related but the truth is you put David Wright (or any near 100 RBI player) on ANY team and if his RBI goes down it won’t be because of a problem with David Wright but the team construction of where he moved to!

SO this Dismissal of RBI in favor of getting the guys those RBI drives in I find completely ridiculous!

Metrics that TARGET SPECIFIC ACTS are all well and good with me.
Some could use tweaking, Others are coming from such a poorly designed assumption they are better off not being used at all!

I judge the Metrics on their CONSTRUCT and USAGE…

Not by the fact of WHEN they were invented!

It’s the ones who seem to be all about CHANGING the point of the game from getting a hit to getting on base that I have the most problem with…

Because lots of guys get on base who DID NOT EARN that base!

And that means some players can look more valuable than players who DID earn that base!

• Metsie you are an intelligent guy. When I said forgive me I meant I could not reply directly to Vig. Therefore I had to reply to you. SABR lovers like too paint us as at of date with the current way of doing things. I knew you did not hate ALL SABR stuff. I really like BABIP. Vig never read my prior posts where I always said I liked BABIP. Then he throws stats out and the only SABR stat was BABIP which I use alot. As previously stated all those on the Hefner bandwagon better be prepared for a less than stellar Hefner. His current BABIP is something like .256 when .290 to .300 based on position (catcher closer to .290 and !B closer to .300 or more). All the other stats he mentioned were non SABR and useful. That is our whole point.

• They read it Hotstreak..They just choose to ignore what they say in favor of their Dogma and then try to paint us as IGNORANT despite the fact when we see a GOOD Metric we do not complain…

I personally like ZSwing and OSwing…Those are not traditional metrics but they do tell a very PRECISE story!

I don’t need to add it 14 other things before I can use it.
Just as I don’t need to INVENT a point system for singles doubles triples and HR just to decide if a player is good!

What takes a Saber guy 5 hours to figure out I can tell you with a simple glance at his traditional statline.

High Average (meaning good OBP), Line Drive Gap hitter with enough Pop to get you 25+ HRs in most years.
Will drive in runs when given the opportunity and is solid with the glove!

I didn’t need to calculate what an AVERAGE player is then Calculate 10 Stats into a Metric Soup that I can then compare to some other player!
Only to have to GO BACK and Undo the soup to see HOW MUCH of each ingredient I had in the recipe to figure out WHAT KIND OF PLAYER he is!

They think they are being SMART…No they are being DUMB, INEFFICIENT and doing Twice the work anyone who knows what is important in baseball can tell you without the need for a Calculator and Lookup chart!

• http://www.ehow.com/how_2065802_deal-analysis-paralysis.html

http://www.4syllables.com.au resources quotations simplicity mowers

Metsie: These two links say it all: You are right on target if something is simple why make it complicated.

• Keep it Simple, Stupid

• They think it is us who doesn’t understand…

But we don’t need to look at what happened in 2012 to know how good a HR and Double is…
They need to figure that out before they can tell you what a HR is worth as if it changes from year to year…

Just dumb!

• What is a homer worth?

A homer is worth 500 K. A 40 hr guy is worth a 20 M contract per year. A 20 hr. guy is worth 10 M contract per year.

\$500,000 40 HRS per year equals \$20,000,000 per year

\$500,000 20 HRS per year equals \$10,000,000 per year

Note I did not factor number of men on base or RBI’s. I guess I am a SABR nut then.

But I kept it simple.

• I think the key to deciding whether you like wOBA or not is your appreciation of RBI. If you think RBI is an important individual statistic, you won’t like wOBA because it neglects sac fly’s. If you believe that RBI is more of a team and even an opportunistic stat, then you may like wOBA better.

I say that because if wOBA did include sac fly’s as a good thing, it would be accepting RBI as an individual stat. It would say that Player X is better than Player Y because Player X drove in more runs. Some of you may agree with that. I find it problematic to compare players based on their respective teams. But that’s just me.

• No it depends on if you think an ACT that GUARANTEES a run scores is more important than an act that MIGHT but didn’t…

We tend to like the acts that DO score runs over those that only MIGHT!
Because they MIGHT NOT SCORE that run!

• Thank you for your response and that is a very fair reason, but what happens when the next hitter is less likely than the current batter to drive in those runs? Or what if Matt Harvey is on the mound and he’s got his good stuff?

Is the walk still better than giving up an out to get a run?

• In a run limited situation, ie vs a great pitching staff, the run is better. Versus the average pitcher, no.

• which is why I simply don’t like the concept of including SF.

I replaced the formula used for wOBA with a formula that does not include SF and very little changes for most players, however there is a noticeable difference on players like Marlon Byrd who have low walk rates, but high RBI.

For example Lucas Duda and Marlon Byrd have the same wOBA, but Marlon has 5 more SF. Take those out of the equation and his wOBA jumps 6 points whereas Duda only jumps 1 point.

• I get that you don’t like the fact that sacrifices don’t count the way you think they should count but that’s not what wOBA is designed to do. It’s designed to measure the hitting contribution a player makes in regards to what is under their control, its context neutral by design. If you want a stat that takes into productive outs you can look at RE24 which uses all 24 possible combinations of runners and outs that a hitter faces and measures how many runs above average that player is.

• It’s designed to measure the hitting contribution a player makes

NO it’s not designed to measure hitting it is designed to measure Bases!!!!

BEING PLUNKED AND WALKED IS NOT A HIT!
If it was about Hitting those things would not be incorporated into the Metric!

• NO it’s not designed to measure hitting it is designed to measure Bases!!!!

BEING PLUNKED AND WALKED IS NOT A HIT!
If it was about Hitting those things would not be incorporated into the Metric

Why are you always so obtuse? You do realize that when a person goes up to the plate is called a hitter regardless of the outcome of the at bat? It must really piss you off when an announcer says the ball got past the fielder for a single.

• OK so are those two different situations accounted for in the equation? The times when its a good idea and the times when it’s not? Can the effect of having gotten in the run Vs.not having gotten it in or having gotten in 2 or more be properly valued knowing that the game will be managed differently from here on out?

For example down one bottom 8th, Verlander on the mound up 1-0 tying run on 3rd, go ahead run on 1st infield at DP depth do you want the SAC fly there? I do. Probably gets Verlander out of the game and ties the score.

Or for example 1-0 zip game, Yankees lead, Mariano warming up 1 out bottom 8th Cano AB, Gardiner on 3rd infield in, IMO Cano should try to deliver the SAC fly. to get a 2 run lead for Rivera.

I don’t think any runs can be considered not important because you never know, you could get a 3 run HR next inning and that run you didn’t get could make all the difference in score and strategy.

The average score of a game in MLB history is about 5-3 (how’s that for generalizing?) so in that context would the run not driven in with one out runner on 3rd not be important?

True you still need another one quickly and at least another one soon but how does that alter things like the other team bringing in the IF with a one run lead an inning later? How much of a better BA do hitters have with the IF in? How much better a chance to get that tying run is there because you had a SAC fly the prior inning?

Changes the whole game if you ask me because no one even cares if the leadoff man gets on and scores with a 5-3 lead but at 5-4 there are all sorts of possibilities including pinch runner, SB, bunt, H+R, wild pitch/pass ball, balk, missed pick off attempt, double down the line or in the gap that can help tie up the game.

I’m just not sure that all of the potential ramifications of getting that run in when it is available can be properly weighted because you change one thing and everything else afterward changes too.

• “I don’t think any runs can be considered not important because you never know, you could get a 3 run HR next inning and that run you didn’t get could make all the difference in score and strategy.”

This is EXACTLY why you take the walk instead of settling for that one run on the sac fly.

• You never addressed my 4:34 PM post to clarify my point. Apparently you are the only one who has the a license to make assumptions. A run on the board thru SF in most cases (assumping a close game in late innings is worth more than a bunch of POSSIBLE RUNS the opponent could get later in the game. Even early in the game its good if not trailing by alot to put a run on the board. Productive outs are usually good. However there is a slight probability that the SF fly in the making becomes an OF assist or the runner left too soon. Also another runner can be put out before the runner crosses the plate. Hey you never mentioned that. But then again you are the only one who can make assumptions. I hope I was specific enough because you are definately not.

• You mean this response?

You seem to be getting worked up.

I merely asked you to clarify your position. You haven’t done a very good job of it, but I’ll try and decipher what you’ve posted. You’d only accept a walk in a sac fly situation when your team is down by three or more runs with two or fewer innings to play. OK.

Let me ask you why you would only accept a walk in that situation. I’m a poor debator, especially when compared with you, who I assume to be a master debator. If I lose you, please berate me some more until I figure it out.

Would you only accept the walk because your team is down by three or more runs? I’m going to say yes, that that is the case. So you agree that drawing a walk – even in the fabled sac fly situation – is a good way to score a run. OK. Let me ask you something else.

Barring a tied game, walk-off situation, why would you wait until your team is down several runs before employing a strategy which, as you seem to suggest, can score you a several runs?

• With a good starter and/ good bullpen one run can hold up and be the winning run or tying run instead of stike out (non productive out). K’s are non-productive outs are rally killers. Don’t forgot a batter is trying for a fly ball and may just hit a homer (at least two runs). A SF is not a bunt who some, Earl Weaver called a rally killer. That is a different debate. Again a SF and a home run are NOT mutually exclusive. A walk which manager do intentionally or pitch around is there for a reason. It sets up a force play. You face a weaker batter (reason for intentional walk besides force play).

• OK so are those two different situations accounted for in the equation? The times when its a good idea and the times when it’s not? Can the effect of having gotten in the run Vs.not having gotten it in or having gotten in 2 or more be properly valued knowing that the game will be managed differently from here on out?

They are accounted for, it’s called sample size.

For example down one bottom 8th, Verlander on the mound up 1-0 tying run on 3rd, go ahead run on 1st infield at DP depth do you want the SAC fly there? I do. Probably gets Verlander out of the game and ties the score.

Or for example 1-0 zip game, Yankees lead, Mariano warming up 1 out bottom 8th Cano AB, Gardiner on 3rd infield in, IMO Cano should try to deliver the SAC fly. to get a 2 run lead for Rivera.

There are stats that measure win probability. But you have to remember wOBA is not designed to measure for singular plays or situations. You can point to a 9th inning sac fly to tie the game but that’s no more likely than a 2nd inning sac fly that moves a runner to third with two outs.

I don’t think any runs can be considered not important because you never know, you could get a 3 run HR next inning and that run you didn’t get could make all the difference in score and strategy.

The average score of a game in MLB history is about 5-3 (how’s that for generalizing?) so in that context would the run not driven in with one out runner on 3rd not be important?

True you still need another one quickly and at least another one soon but how does that alter things like the other team bringing in the IF with a one run lead an inning later? How much of a better BA do hitters have with the IF in? How much better a chance to get that tying run is there because you had a SAC fly the prior inning?

Changes the whole game if you ask me because no one even cares if the leadoff man gets on and scores with a 5-3 lead but at 5-4 there are all sorts of possibilities including pinch runner, SB, bunt, H+R, wild pitch/pass ball, balk, missed pick off attempt, double down the line or in the gap that can help tie up the game.

I’m just not sure that all of the potential ramifications of getting that run in when it is available can be properly weighted because you change one thing and everything else afterward changes too.

Again it’s not about the individual play but about the totality of plays. Why should something count more because there are situations where it could, but most likely won’t, be worth more?

For every bad run scoring environment where outs are worth less, there’s a good run scoring environment where outs are worth more.

• Is this AmazinAvenue.com? I thought I logged onto metsmerizedonline.com for a second

• For those talking about SF, we’ll be talking about them later in the series with win probability added and so forth.

• Traditional stats will tell you that 2011 Mike Napoli was as good as Mike Trout, but obviously that’s not the case, and sabermetrics prove that.”

113 GMS 320 BA 30 HR 75 RBI 118 HITS 1046 OPS
140 GMS 326 BA 30 HR 83 RBI 182 HITS 129 RUNS 963 OPS 49 SB

Lmao, this kid’s stubborness with that sabercrap and Joe D continuing to allow him with this garbage will ruin thi site…. What an Idiotic comment…

• The Tripe Crown stats tell you they’re similar players. Of course now is the time you decide to use OPS…

Smaller sample size for Napoli, but if you stretch out his traditional stats to Mike Trout’s 139 games, you wouldn’t have a clue other than the stolen bases that trout was a vastly better player.

• http://www.fangraphs.com/fanpdetails.aspx?playerid=1926&position=OF

wOBA Bill James predicted Scott Hairston .323 for 2013. He should have had a better than average year with the Cubs. With BABIP I proved you wrong with Hefner.

I make a motion to summarily dismiss SABER metrics.

• Hotstreak, i wish it was that easy to summarily dismiss the metricks. they are ingrained in this site now.
the best defense is a good offense. Maniac, Joey D, Metsie, for examples give long winded responses. submit them as posts guys!

• alwayamazin: I hope you seen my SABER analysis of EYJ which is the prima facie (second dfefinition ) self evident or obvious proof that SABER in many situation does not predict well. Note I am not saying BABIP, WHIP or QS are not valid to a certain extent. Are tradition stats more reliable, I leave that up to the jury but I think I proved my case.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/prima+facie

• hotstreak, i am not a numbers person, but i understand your argument. in ey’s case, there is some element that the numbers do not take into accoumt, that has made him successful here. beware my 60 day expiration date on mets newbies, hudgens will do his damage.\but you should make your case as an article here… the reality is what most of us care about.

• Thanks for the encouraging words. Believe it or not I use BABIP, WHIP and QS. I am not per se anti SABER. But Connor carries it like I said that it’s gospel and its not. Have an amazing night. Oh if I am a writer I get attacked, its easier to be a critic. I know particular writers will agree with me.

• i know what those stats mean from fantasy baseball. i look at the mets, my real life team, as whole entity because they are more than a sum of their numbers. that is where i would like someone to step up and make a counter post to the constant diet of saber. i just don’t have enough knowledge, but you do as well as others.

• So you don’t know enough about saber except that it’s wrong and you want someone to prove it wrong?

I can understand not wanting experience it, it is a change and believe me I fully understand the reluctance to change, but your position of “I don’t like it, it’s wrong and needs to be destroyed” is sort of silly. Plus I hate to break it to you, but it’s not going away. It’s not a fad like pet rocks, razor scooters, or Freddie Prinze Jr as a competent leading male.

• This response from you is why we have the arguments we have around here that cause bad behavior and eventual bannings and moderation Vig….

If you want to debate you have to stop with this attitude that WE DON”T KNOW, WE DIDN”T LOOK, WE DIDN’T READ, WE DON’T UNDERSTAND, WE ARE DUMB, WE ARE STUBBORN in your replies because the folks opposed Have read, Have calculated, DO understand, are NOT DUMB, and the only STUBBORN folks around here are the ones who think Sabers are PURE GOLD!

I am STILL waiting for an answer to a Question I asked since the LAST Saber Propaganda piece posted where Connor claimed Sabers tell a better story than ALL traditionals.

I asked him to name the Sabermetric that judges HITTERS, Not WALKERS but HITTERS!

(Chirp….Chirp, Chirp, Ribbit, Chip)

That was my response!

Yesterday YOU tried to claim that wOBA is a HITTERS Metric and when I point out to you that it includes things that are not HIT your response being typical for a Saber Rattler “Well we call him a hitter while he is in the Batter box”

Nevermind the reason we call him hat is because MOST PEOPLE, PLAYERS, MANAGERS, GMs all WANT THAT GUY TO GET A HIT!
If we were to adopt you entire Saber Philosophy and throw the traditionals like BA to the wayside you know what those guys in the batters box would then be called?

BASERS not HITTERS!
Because you CHANGE THE ENTIRE GOALS of the game from getting a HIT to getting a BASE!

The entire problem with Sabers is they do NOT describe who is good at things deemed IMPORTANT in baseball because you have by nature of your metric construct REMOVED all the important acts, DOWNGRADED them and ELEVATED BASE ABOVE every OTHER ACT!

• Sorry I was not done yet….

Just Yesterday you guys even put GETTING ON BASE ahead of SCORING A RUN!

The Metrics may be good for what you think they tell you…
The issue with them is theat YOU think what they tell you is MORE IMPORTANT than everything else and there are those of us who have studied the game who know YOUR WRONG!

The Game of Baseball is MUCH MORE COMPLEX than just BASES GOOD, OUTS BAD!

That might seem good idea to someone who IS IGNORANT and can’t grasp or calculate the NUANCES of the game and create Metrics to quantify them…

ut for those of us that can we find your SIMPLISTIC and OVERLY REGRESSIVE view of how to play the game of baseball REPULSIVE!

It diminishes the game from our perspective!

And that is why you can’t convince us to buy this neanderthal approach to what you want Baseball to be about and it is ALSO why you can’t come up with one decent METRIC for Defense under Sabers because you guys can’t apply the same SIMPLISTIC PHILOSOPHY you use on Offense to the defensive side!

There is no OB or Shades of OB to measure success or fail And have to GUESTIMATE as best as you can because the NUANCE is jst too dificult to put into a sreadsheet!

• Yep I can vouch for that…
I have done my own posts on the subject and all we get in response is the same Runaround, Dogma and Excuses for why their way is better and never a meaningfull Discussion…

Like I said earlier AA we are pretty much dealing with the same mentality that brings us Scientology..

If you bring up problems with the dogma then your said to NOT UNDERSTAND in hopes of avoiding the problem that has been presented to them that they can’t explain without mentioning A BOOK they read.

They have never (ANY OF THEM) done the full calculation from START TO FINISH that is required to prove or disprove what we are saying…

Their response always is SOMEONE ELSE DID IT!
And they bought into it without checking…
Those that DID are the ones who are talking against the metrics they love!

They say we don’t understand the Metric but the REAL problem is we understand them just a bit better than THEY do and we QUESTION them as fact…
They WORSHIP them as GOSPEL because they are too lazy to do the real work!

Baseball is too complex to make a perfect metric they say!
So SIMPLETONS have turned a nuanced game of baseball into an easilly digestible nugget…
All BASES are GOOD All OUTS are BAD the rest is UNIMPORTANT!

• thanks metsie, you always have such well thought out responses but from what you say, i wouldn’t bother either. others that fought the good fight apparently are in perpetual moderation.

• http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=7158&position=OF

Take a look at EYJ saber stats for 2013

WAR -.03
wOBA .308
OBP .327
SLG .371

He should be having a below average season based on those SABER stats. The Rockies DFA him maybe based on those stats YET he has helped the Mets. The stats lied.

• Look at 2012.

And OBP/SLG ARE NOT Sabr stats.

• EYJ

Year wOBA
2011 .296
2012 .362
2013 .308

This is a scatter gram with no correlation and you rely on it.

If you say: Well he had a good wOBA in 2012 it nothing more than saying he had a good BA in 2012.

• Damn you are really obsessed with Connor aren’t you?

On to your example. You do realize you’re proving the value of sabermetrics right?

Someone who takes advanced stats into consideration would look at Napoli’s 2011 and Trout’s 2012 and see this:

Trout: war 9.9
Napoli: war 5.4

Now I realize I’m using fancy math skills but in a stat that’s designed to take into consideration playing time, position, league, field, hitting, running, and defense, I believe that 9.9 is significantly bigger than 5.4.

• Which part (variable) of wOBA notes playing time, position, field running and defense?

• Who said wOBA did that? You may want to talk to Alex who made the ridiculous claim that people who used sabermetrics would argue that Mike Napoli in 2011 was as good as Mike Trout in 2012. It’s obviously nonsense because anyone who would ever dream about using an advanced metric would take one look at the differences in WAR and would conclude without a doubt that Mike Trout’s year was better.

• OK tell us the variables in WAR that do that….

• Do they not have search engines where you are? Here

• Quite clear from your response that you can’t answer and hope I will find one on my own….

Funny but a guy who claims to understand the Metric but can’t answer a simple question regarding it’s makeup and has to resort to games in order to avoid answering…

• I don’t see why he needs to type out a 500 word response FOR YOU when you can just Google it.

• I asked for the VARIABLES not some SPIEL on why they weighted matrics which can’t be proven without seeing the MATH THAT PRODUCED THEM!

• wRAA, UBR, wSB, and UZR are the main components in fWAR.

• hahahaha Thats like saying NUMBERS are part of the Equation!

Metrics inside metrics inside metric and when you go deep enough there is a little piece of chocolate Taffy in the middle of that lolipop!

• wRAA + UBR + wSB + UZR + positional adjustment + adjusting to replacement player = fWAR

• WAR is cumulative but does include baserunning and defense.

• Ok Metsie, why is wOBA a bad/pointless stat?

• Read the entire commentary and when you catch up let us all know so we can give you your Lolipop for catching up!

• Just to be clear, you are the guy who can’t stop complaining when people won’t explain the nuances different statistics to you.

• No I’m the one who complains when they SAY their Metrics show the Nuance and then when asked for the Variables they used that represent gets told to look it up on Google because they don’t really KNOW the answer and get caught LYING about their Metrics incorporating them!

Most who spout Sabers don’t have a CLUE as to what and HOW they are made!

They just look them up and then regurgitate whatever they were told it is SUPPOSED to tell them without knowing if the metric actually DOES THAT!

• “Most who spout Sabers don’t have a CLUE as to what and HOW they are made!”
That’s simply not true.

• Good lets prove it…

Post the formula used to create the weights in wOBA.
MATH not WORDS Actual Calculations!

Can you do it without looking it up on Fangraphs?

Or do you just look it up off a chart like most Saber Rattlers do and call it VALID?

• wOBA (Weighted On-Base Average)
What you need to know: OPS was the “it” advanced stat of the turn of the 21st Century. It simply combined on-base percentage with slugging percentage to give one percentage geared to quantify a player’s overall offensive game. OPS-plus came along shortly thereafter to try and remove variables by adjusting for ballpark and league factors.
How to calculate: The actual formula looks something like this: (0.72 x non-intentional walks) + (0.75 x hit by pitch) + (0.90 x singles) + (0.92 x reached on error) + (1.24 x doubles) + (1.56 x triples) + (1.95 x homer) / plate appearances.
The percentage will resemble something on the scale of on-base percentage, with which most fans are familiar. A .400 wOBA, just like a .400 OBP, is considered outstanding; .340 is slightly above average; .320 average and anything below .300 is poor.

Flaws: According to the website bigleaguestew.com: “WOBA is a good way to analyze an individual hitter, but it isn’t a sufficient tool to analyze how much a player contributed to his team’s wins. It evaluates outcomes, but not situational outcomes — it doesn’t care who’s on base, or how many outs there are, or what the score is, or what inning it is.”

Team
wOBA
Joey Votto Cin.438
Mguel Cabrera Det.417
Ryan Braun Mil .413
Mike Trout LAA.409
Buster Posey SF.406

Write For Metsmerized Online

Hey Mets fans, want to share your opinions with over 22,000 different readers daily?

Mets Merized Online is reloading and looking for new writers to help cover the Hot Stove Season. We're also looking for passionate writers who would like to contribute new and original features.

Check Out These Great MLB Links!

Check out these great deals on New York Mets gifts, apparel and equipment!
Mets Autograph Signings
Mets Fan Apparel
Mets Autographed Baseballs
Baseball Card Supplies
Baseball Equipment
For the best seats and lowest MLB ticket prices, go to PurchaseSeats.com. Get your Mets Tickets now and follow them on the road with Yankees Tickets, Phillies Tickets, Nationals Tickets and Braves Tickets!