re: MLB batting avg .242

quote:

---

but batting average is an antiquated stat in 2024

---

The new wave of sabermatric geeks agree with you and front offices are leaning heavily toward that model and pushing emphasis on slug and OPS over batting average.

I've used Schwarber as an example before, dude typically hovers barely over the .200 mark most years but he homers and walks alot and is considered a valuable commodity.

If Schwarbs goes 1-4 with a solo homer, and another guy goes 3-4 with 3 singles and a RBI, the value provided is the same. One run.

It's akin to basketball going to the just shoot 3's and layups because statistically the mid-range jumper is just not as efficient.

Now to say there is NO value in a high batting average I think is a bit dramatic, I think if you are on a team that has slug surrounding a high average guy the value is he should score a lot.

Notice I said that BA was antiquated and SA and OBP were better.

I didn’t say BA was worthless.

But people who have been conditioned to prioritize BA for 50 years stop there and don’t want to hear anything different.

Saber people don’t stop anywhere. They’re always looking beyond the conventional wisdom.

quote:

---

But people who have been conditioned to prioritize BA for 50 years stop there and don’t want to hear anything different.

---

I gotta admit, when I see a guy hitting .230 and folks are talking about what a good season he's having, I still have a hard time wrapping my head around that. Especially when he's on my team and I see him whiffing and leaving guys on base a lot during a long season. So in that respect yeah I'm still a bit conditioned. But I get what you are saying.

I wonder how Dave Kingman would be thought of in today's game? .236 career average but in his prime years from 77-80 his OPS average was over .900. Yet he was not very well respected by baseball purists even in that prime due to his high K rate and low BA, and maybe more to the point he was not very likeable.

I’m limited with space by most employers. I’ve never thought about including slugging. I’m a creature of habit.

quote:

---

If Schwarbs goes 1-4 with a solo homer, and another guy goes 3-4 with 3 singles and a RBI, the value provided is the same. One run. It's akin to basketball going to the just shoot 3's and layups because statistically the mid-range jumper is just not as efficient.

---

What basketball is forgetting is that made 2 point shots are more efficient than missed 3 point shots… same thing with baseball… Schwarber with one solo HR drives in and scores himself… the guy with three singles and an RBI has more chances to come around and score himself

quote:

---

If Schwarbs goes 1-4 with a solo homer, and another guy goes 3-4 with 3 singles and a RBI, the value provided is the same. One run.

---

I'll take 3-4 every time.

While I agree that pitching strategeries have elevated the art, I do have one reservation. When you depend on 5-6 guys a night to win you the game, if just one of those pitchers are "off" it can flush your other guys' efforts down the drain.

One other thing I've wondered, in this walk/HR station-to-station meta, is what if someone built their team to go completely against the grain. Think the 80s Herzog Cardinals. If you had 4 or 5 Vince Coleman or Rickey types in the lineup with high OBPs that could steal 65+ bases (with one of them at Vince and Rickey's level of 100+), would they wreak havoc. I know the stats purists devalue SBs , but I think speed on the base paths puts stress on pitchers and defenses. If one team "swam against the stream" it would be an entertaining test case.

Also, with saber and stats types quantifying everything, it'd be interesting to see if they could go back and actually measure if the Vinces, Rickeys and Lou Brocks really did change defensive performance. Is there an "adjusted defensive performance rating" when baserunning threats are on base or at bat?

Also, the sabermetrics purists … and I am not one, I absolutely believe in analytics but as a tool and no tool is gospel … don’t totally discount stolen bases, they just discount stolen bases for the sheer hell of it or “to put pressure on the defense” because that can’t be quantified. They prioritize stealing bases when the analytics say it gives you the greatest mathematical probability of a successful outcome; i.e., a run scoring.

Again that is the whole point of analytics, to guarantee the greatest mathematical probability of a successful outcome. But the downside is that it does not take entertaining the paying customers into consideration whatsoever.

quote:

---

What basketball is forgetting is that made 2 point shots are more efficient than missed 3 point shots…

---

But if you shoot 33% from 3 it's just as efficient as shooting 50% from 2. The same logic applied to .200 with 40 homers versus .300 with 5 if you really dig into it I bet.