- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Nola
Posted on 5/23/09 at 9:36 am to Baloo
Posted on 5/23/09 at 9:36 am to Baloo
I'm sorry, but this argument is ridiculous, even though it sounds good at first glance.
The basic fact is that a sacrifice bunt is not an attempt to get on base. OBP is designed to measure how often a player gets on base when he is trying to get on base.
No, by your own logic, those players look pretty bad because they have poor batting averages. They already look like the bad hitters they are. Your plan would punish them doubly, counting plate appearances against them when they aren't even trying to get on base. In the case of a sacrifice bunt, the player does not normally have the opportunity to get on base.
The basic fact is that a sacrifice bunt is not an attempt to get on base. OBP is designed to measure how often a player gets on base when he is trying to get on base.
quote:
Players with an extreme number of bunts look like a much better hitter than they really are by deleting sacrifices.
No, by your own logic, those players look pretty bad because they have poor batting averages. They already look like the bad hitters they are. Your plan would punish them doubly, counting plate appearances against them when they aren't even trying to get on base. In the case of a sacrifice bunt, the player does not normally have the opportunity to get on base.
Posted on 5/23/09 at 9:39 am to GOP_Tiger
quote:
The basic fact is that a sacrifice bunt is not an attempt to get on base. OBP is designed to measure how often a player gets on base when he is trying to get on base.
No, it's not. It's a measure of how often a guy reaches base. If a guy is trying to NOT reach base, that's bad. Outs are bad. And I'm yet to see a guy lay down a bunt and then walk to the dugout. He's still trying to reach base. Adding the "trying" definition is ridiculous. an out is an out. All outs are bad. Some just aren't as bad as others.
Popular
Back to top
![logo](https://images.tigerdroppings.com/images/layout/TDIcon.jpg)