Well, the OBP discussion I thought was fairly disconnected from Nola. We're on a tangent and I'm not really talking about Nola. This isn't a point about him, really. This is a point about getting on base.

My math is right from the post you cited. Nola does sacrific 5 times in 80 PA's. That's an absurd rate. I don't know what's wrong about that. Well, actually, since they don't count as PA's, he 5 sacs in 75 PA's. an even more absurd rate.

Exactly - OBP measures the value of getting on base. Deleting a sacrifice gives value to failing to get on base. If Hanover had swung away instead of the 4 times he bunted, maybe he would have gotten on base 4 times. Maybe he would have gotten out 4 times. Maybe he would have gotten on at .343 rate like in his other PA's. the thing is: I don't care what MIGHT have ahppened. I care what did. He got out four times. He didn't get on base.

Look at some of our starters who don't have a sac hit all season: Mahtook, Ochinko, Dean, Landry, and Gibbs. LeMaheiu only has one (Mitchell, strangely enough, has 3, that's a lot for a hitter of his caliber). Our top hitters don't really sacrifice. The sac hit IS a commentary on the quality of a hitter, and we're missing a picture of a hitter if we simply ignore them. It's not a positive. Getting out is bad.

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by moneyg

Member since Jun 2006

56921 posts

Posted on 5/23/09 at 10:09 am to Baloo

quote:
Well, the OBP discussion I thought was fairly disconnected from Nola. We're on a tangent and I'm not really talking about Nola. This isn't a point about him, really. This is a point about getting on base.

You brought it up specificallly to point out that Nola's OBP was incorrect on LSUSports.net and that his OBP should actually be lower. You brought this up. As you continue to argue with how OBP should be calculated, I think it's pertanent to point out that you didn't know how it was calculated in the first place.

quote:
My math is right from the post you cited

No, it's not. We are talking about OBP. Sac bunts don't affect OBP positively or negatively. They are excluded from consideration.

quote:
Exactly - OBP measures the value of getting on base. Deleting a sacrifice gives value to failing to get on base. If Hanover had swung away instead of the 4 times he bunted, maybe he would have gotten on base 4 times. Maybe he would have gotten out 4 times. Maybe he would have gotten on at .343 rate like in his other PA's. the thing is: I don't care what MIGHT have ahppened. I care what did. He got out four times. He didn't get on base.

So, you want to include errors and fielders' choice in the numerator too? Hell, by that logic, you probabl want to include sac bunts as an AB for the purpose of calculating batting average as well? Anything else you want to change?

The fact is that a sac bunt is not an attempt to reach base. Everyone but you seems to know that. And if you included it in the OBP, then the OBP would be less reflective of a player's ability to get on base.

This is common sense.

This post was edited on 5/23/09 at 10:11 am

1 ...

Report Post

Tiger Rant - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board