from Amazon
Monday, April 18, 2011
wOBA v OPS
OPS is fine, if that’s all you have. But, don’t be too serious about it. Think of OPS as your f-buddy.
Nothing new for the regulars here, but, it seems there’s always some fresh blood, so, a little update is always good. My comments:
1. The coefficients for SB and CS are roughly 0.25 and -0.50. You use them if you need them.
2. The data for all the events through 2008 is here:
http://tangotiger.net/bdb/lwts_woba_for_bdb.txtThe blog post that describes the details of wOBA, including SQL, is here:
http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/index.php/site/article/woba_year_by_year_calculations/3. Hit batters are mostly random, regular walks are somewhat random, and intentional walks are not random. Hence, HBP are more likely to happen with a runner on 1B, a regular walk might happen with a runner on 1B, and IBB almost never occurs with a runner on 1B.
4. When you reach base on error, you can reach 2B, 3B, or even home plate. A single where you stretch to 2B is actually a double (d’uh). And we don’t care about who was responsible. We are just counting “what happened”. Otherwise, we’ll be talking about a batter being very responsible for a K, mostly responsible for a BB, alot responsible for a HR, somewhat responsible for a 2B, and flip of the coin on 1B.
That’s not the discussion wOBA is having, any more than OBP or SLG is having that discussion either. wOBA simply represents WHAT happened, without asking WHY.
5. 1.7*OBP + SLG is going to be very close to wOBA.
6. Correlation? Well, if most players are around average, then all correlation is going to do is tell you that, yup, a good wOBA means a good OPS. Again, d’uh. But, what does it mean for players at the extreme, with a lopsided OBP/SLG view? Nothing, because you can’t extrapolate.
Recent comments
Older comments
Page 1 of 344 pages 1 2 3 > Last »Complete Archive – By Category
Complete Archive – By Date