BA or OBP?

[Mike90]

In your opinion, is on-base percentage or batting average a better measure of a player's value?

Also, is on-base percentage or batting average a better measure of a player's skill level?

[Senor Octobre]

Personally, over a player's career I'll take OBP. To me its pretty self-explanatory, it represents a player's ability to get on base in ways other than just hits.

[philkid3]

OBP all around. Not really much of a reason to think otherwise.

[mwiggins]

In your opinion, is on-base percentage or batting average a better measure of a player's value?

Also, is on-base percentage or batting average a better measure of a player's skill level?

OBP is normally a better measure of value. It's limited, but not as limited as BA.

What skill are you trying to evaluate? BA and OBP are representative of different skill sets. Or more accurately, OBP includes the skills that BA "measures" as well as others.

[Matthew C.]

Oops - meant to vote for the one everybody else has so far. Don'y know what happened!

[csh19792001]

In your opinion, is on-base percentage or batting average a better measure of a player's value?

Also, is on-base percentage or batting average a better measure of a player's skill level?

Generally speaking, batting average is a better measure of skill.

Generally speaking, OBP is a better measure of value.

[mwiggins]

Regarding value...using the league leading numbers from the 2008 AL, which player would you rather have if you knew nothing else about the player:

a) the player with a .328 batting average

or

b) the player with the .436 OBP


Almost without exception, that OBP tells you player B is probably a good offensive player. At the very least an average offensive player, and most likely much better than average.

While player A, despite the league leading batting average, could still be no better than average offensive player. He could even be below average if he's a singles hitter who rarely walks. Or he could be the most dominant offensive force the game has ever seen. You just don't know from BA alone.

[philkid3]

Generally speaking, batting average is a better measure of skill.

How do you figure?

If anything I would think they're both similar measures of skill, just different skills.

[mwiggins]

Generally speaking, batting average is a better measure of skill.

BA is better measure of the player skill at actually hitting a baseball, their "contact hitting" ability. But I wouldn't say it's a better measure of other skills like strike zone judgement and plate discipline. And OBP is probably a better representative of the players ability to hit for power, since power hitters are usually going to be pitched around more often.

[brett]

Anyone want to list the top 25 players in BA and OB%?

[philkid3]

BA is better measure of the player skill at actually hitting a baseball, their "contact hitting" ability. But I wouldn't say it's a better measure of other skills like strike zone judgement and plate discipline.

Or, simply put, avoiding getting out.

[CTaka]

I would take OBP over BA any day of the week. People who get too enthralled with BA tend to undervalue players such as Mantle, Schmidt, Bresnahan, Santo and even Rickey Henderson among many others because they hit less than .300 for their careers.

[Mike90]

OBP is normally a better measure of value. It's limited, but not as limited as BA.

What skill are you trying to evaluate? BA and OBP are representative of different skill sets. Or more accurately, OBP includes the skills that BA "measures" as well as others.

Generally speaking, batting average is a better measure of skill.

Generally speaking, OBP is a better measure of value.

I wanted to do this thread after the Raines vs. Tony Gwynn poll. CSH voted for Gwynn over Raines because he thought BA was a better measure of skill than OBP, which I didn't really understand because, as mwiggins pointed out, OBP includes the skills that BA measures as well as plate discipline and strike zone judgement. I wanted to see whether others agreed with CSH that a high BA requires more skill than a high OBP.

[mwiggins]

I wanted to do this thread after the Raines vs. Tony Gwynn poll. CSH voted for Gwynn over Raines because he thought BA was a better measure of skill than OBP, which I didn't really understand because, as mwiggins pointed out, OBP includes the skills that BA measures as well as plate discipline and strike zone judgement. I wanted to see whether others agreed with CSH that a high BA requires more skill than a high OBP.

I would say that having a high BA requires a more difficult skill, that of making solid and consistent contact. But I think generally a high OBP is a better indication that the player has a broader set of skills than just a high BA would.

Take Pie Traynor and Joe Morgan. A classic high average player vs. a classic low average/high OBP player. Pie has a much higher BA, and a better realtive BA. But I'd say that Morgan was the more "skilled" hitter. He had an all-around skillset at the plate that Traynor either didn't have, or didn't use. Morgan was a better than average contact hitter, better than average at hitting for power, and much better than average at drawing walks. He was also fairly difficult to strike out. And during his peak, he was even a well above average contact hitter. During his peak he litterally had no weakness as a hitter, which I would take to be evidence of a highly skilled hitter.


Whereas Traynor showed excellent contact hitting skill, as evidenced by his high BA's and his tremendous AB/K numbers. But he was below average at drawing walks. He was below average at hitting for power. He was a fairly one-dimensional hitter, but because the skill that he excelled at is probably the most difficult thing to do in sports, he's traditionally considered a highly skilled hitter. But to me, Morgan had the better overall skillset as a hitter, and OBP indicates that better than BA in this case.

But really, trying to say either one is a good measure of a player's skills by itself is probably pushing it. Both can be pretty misleading.

And btw, I do agree with Chris that Gwynn was a more skilled hitter than Raines.

[jaxxr]

Among the 20 all time best OBP guys are,
Ferris Fain and Max Bishop, hardly ever mentioned as great hitters.

A bit different for the top BA guys.

OBP, if made up of lots of walks and HBP, is not nearly as valuable as the same exact OBP, if made up with lots of base hits.
BA is more consistent, not always better, measures the percentage of potential runner advancing, base hits.

Neither takes into account the power of a batter, always wondered why no one ever promoted the use of BA + SLG, as an additional measure, much like OBP + SLG is a measure csalled OPS

[mwiggins]

Neither takes into account the power of a batter, always wondered why no one ever promoted the use of BA + SLG, as an additional measure, much like OBP + SLG is a measure csalled OPS

Because SLG already includes BA. SLG is already essentially a rough measure of batting average plus power.

OBP, if made up of lots of walks and HBP, is not nearly as valuable as the same exact OBP, if made up with lots of base hits.

And by the same measure BA, if made up of a bunch of singles, isn't nearly as valuable as the exact same BA filled with a lot of extra basehits. Both stats are of limited use on their own since they can be misleading.

BA is more consistent, not always better, measures the percentage of potential runner advancing, base hits.

And OBP is a better measure of how often pitchers got the hitter out, which is a bigger deal than how often the hitter got a base hit. Both are good for measuring certain things, it's just that OBP measures a more valuable skill than does BA.

[RuthMayBond]

Among the 20 all time best OBP guys are,
Ferris Fain and Max Bishop, hardly ever mentioned as great hitters.

A bit different for the top BA guys.

True, but the top 40 best BA guys include Jake Stenzel, Riggs Stephenson, Bill Lange, and Bob Fothergill

[mwiggins]

Among the 20 all time best OBP guys are,
Ferris Fain and Max Bishop, hardly ever mentioned as great hitters.

A bit different for the top BA guys.

The top 20 BA list contains a few who weren't great hitters either. Bill Terry and Willie Keeler, to name two. Plus, that's raw OBP and BA, not relative, so it's going to be misleading, esp with all the guys like Dave Orr and Bill Joyce that occupy top spots on those lists.

Plus, the best two hitters in history - Williams and Ruth - occupy the top two spots on the OBP career list. On the BA list they're 7th and 10th.

[mwiggins]

True, but the top 40 best BA guys include Jake Stenzel, Riggs Stephenson, Bill Lange, and Bob Fothergill

Are you saying Riggs Stehpenson wasn't a great hitter!?!? He hit .336 for his career! You try doing that sometime and tell me how easy it is.

[RuthMayBond]

Are you saying Riggs Stehpenson wasn't a great hitter!?!? He hit .336 for his career! You try doing that sometime and tell me how easy it is.

I'd rather see you have Fain's .424 OBP, over almost 5000 plate apps

[RuthMayBond]

Among the 20 all time best OBP guys are,
Ferris Fain and Max Bishop, hardly ever mentioned as great hitters.

A bit different for the top BA guys.

My info shows that Ruth isn't even in the top THIRTY in relative BA, Bonds, Mantle, Aaron, Mays aren't anywhere near (Ichiro is).
Except for Roy Thomas, the top relative OBP guys are Ted Williams, Ruth, Bonds, Brouthers, Mantle, Browning, BHamilton, Hornsby, Cobb, Gehrig, EMartinez, Pujols, FThomas, Collins, JJackson, RHenderson, Speaker, Boggs. That's some beasts.

[mwiggins]

I'd rather see you have Fain's .424 OBP, over almost 5000 plate apps

True. And Fain wasn't a scrub when he played. He got MVP votes multiple times (two 6th place finishes) and was a 5 time all-star. Even the traditionalists back then who didn't care about OBP knew he was a very good player.

Though aren't walks just on the pitcher? There's no skill involved in taking pitches.

[RuthMayBond]

True. And Fain wasn't a scrub when he played. He got MVP votes multiple times (two 6th place finishes) and was a 5 time all-star. Even the traditionalists back then who didn't care about OBP knew he was a very good player.

Yeah, well he was no Fothergill

<Though aren't walks just on the pitcher? There's no skill involved in taking pitches. >

But all "just on the pitchers" aren't created equal So pitchers were more afraid of Fain than Dawson

[cardsfanatic]

Though aren't walks just on the pitcher? There's no skill involved in taking pitches.

There is a _ton_ of skill involved in taking pitches. While standing there doesn't take skill, it takes immense skill to figure out ball placement in relation to the strikezone and if you should swing or not. Some guys like Alfonso Soriano for instance, swing at the crappiest pitches I've ever seen in my life. While you have to throw the ball right down broadway to get someone like Pujols to swing.

There is a skill to that. And more often than not, it's that skill that determines if you are a successful hitter or not. There are some exceptions to the rule (Soriano for instance) but more guys that don't have plate discipline and can't decipher balls from strikes don't last long.

[Captain Cold Nose]

Notice the wink. Notice the wink. Notice the wink.