Speed, Power and Contribution to the Offense

[NorthSideSox72]

There has been a lot of discussion here about Owens' nearly complete lack of power, and how important that is or isn't for a leadoff hitter. I do think that OBP is a better measure than AVG or SLG or even OPS when looking at a leadoff guy, because their purpose is to get on base for the heart of the order (and maybe get on base and steal). So that got me thinking...

 

How about a measurement that really does account for the bases provided by power AND those provided by speed, in addition to reaching base? Maybe something like this:

 

(TB + BB + HBP + SB) - (CS + GIDP) / Total PA

 

Look familiar? Its somewhat akin to Total Average, which was sort of in vogue for a while some years ago. Its a real measure of the total bases contributable to a player per plate appearance. I would like to have also included XBOH in the numerator as a positive related to speed, but, I can't find those numbers. Here are the 2007 values for the players on the Sox currently with a significant number of plate appearances, in order from best to worst:

 

Thome: .595

Konerko: .518

Dye: .496

Terrero: .474

Fields: .468

Richar: .448

Owens: .435

Uribe: .409

Pierzynski: .393

Podsednik: .384

Erstad: .379

Cintron: .338

Gonzalez: .301

Hall: .248

 

A few surprises here. Terrero did surprisingly well - he's been hit by pitch 9 times in 133 PA's though, so that's probably not sustainable. AJ was killed by 21 GIDP and a lack of walks - he actually falls below Uribe. Fields doing well, helped out by power and a recent surge in walks. Thome is amazing, but no surprise there. Owens is not spectacular, but he is actually pretty close to Richar, and certainly well above his CF/LF cohorts Erstad and Pods.

 

And here are some of the players people have discussed bringing in as potential leadoff hitters and/or CF's instead of Owens:

 

Rowand: .545

Hunter: .542

Renteria: .516

DeJesus: .448

Furcal: .420

Eckstein: .407

 

Now those are interesting. Rowand and Hunter would both be the second best performers on the current team. Renteria is very appealing at SS. DeJesus isn't bad, but he is only a sliver better than Owens. Furcal is way lower than I would have thought - I am now starting to think he may not be worth the $13M for one year. And then there is Eckstein, who is below Uribe with worse defense - no thank you.

 

I am sure some people will poke holes and say this or that number should or should not be part of the calculation. You can certainly tweak it and re-compute as you'd like. But I think this measure gets a lot closer to total offensive contribution than OPS, OBP or AVG do.

 

[kapkomet]

We luuuuuv it when you analyze.

 

On the surface, I think this is a good "guide" to at least get a measuring stick of how a player produces offensively. I wonder, though, if some way to incorporate runs scored would matter here? Ultimately, that's what matters - if a guy walks, did he get home? Does it matter, or does it make it so convoluded that it doesn't matter?

 

[NorthSideSox72]

We luuuuuv it when you analyze.

 

On the surface, I think this is a good "guide" to at least get a measuring stick of how a player produces offensively. I wonder, though, if some way to incorporate runs scored would matter here? Ultimately, that's what matters - if a guy walks, did he get home? Does it matter, or does it make it so convoluded that it doesn't matter?

I was thinking about that. Problem with runs scored is its too dependent, I think, on other players. A player can only control getting on base, and how many bases they take on steals or extra bases hits. Beyond that, they are kind of at the mercy of the rest of the team.

 

[Balta1701]

Now those are interesting. Rowand and Hunter would both be the second best performers on the current team. Renteria is very appealing at SS. DeJesus isn't bad, but he is only a sliver better than Owens. Furcal is way lower than I would have thought - I am now starting to think he may not be worth the $13M for one year. And then there is Eckstein, who is below Uribe with worse defense - no thank you.

 

I am sure some people will poke holes and say this or that number should or should not be part of the calculation. You can certainly tweak it and re-compute as you'd like. But I think this measure gets a lot closer to total offensive contribution than OPS, OBP or AVG do.

Well, there's one little detail you're not thinking about...career best/worst years. For example...Rowand is clearly having one of the best years of his career. I'm still amazed that I'm the only one @ this site who remembers that he was our favorite guy for the "4th OF" label before Jerry Owens came around and started earning a starting job. Hunter is probably having a career year as well...convenient for another FA to be. Furcal on the other hand is having his worst year in the last 5...and is a Free Agent after 08 (And thus, might have that "have a career year next year" motivation).

 

And Eckstein is still grindy.

[chiguy79]

KW- please absolve us of dealing with these players next year...thank you....AJ can stay if he stops GDP and popping up and actually hits to the opposite field. Damn how can you have this many terrible players on one team getting so many at bats.

 

Uribe: .409

Pierzynski: .393

Podsednik: .384

Erstad: .379

Cintron: .338

Gonzalez: .301

Hall: .248

 

[Gregory Pratt]

OPS works just fine for me.

[NorthSideSox72]

Well, there's one little detail you're not thinking about...career best/worst years. For example...Rowand is clearly having one of the best years of his career. I'm still amazed that I'm the only one @ this site who remembers that he was our favorite guy for the "4th OF" label before Jerry Owens came around and started earning a starting job. Hunter is probably having a career year as well...convenient for another FA to be. Furcal on the other hand is having his worst year in the last 5...and is a Free Agent after 08 (And thus, might have that "have a career year next year" motivation).

 

And Eckstein is still grindy.

Very true. So here are the values for the prospective players over the last 3 seasons, averaged (with 2005/2006/2007 in parens):

 

Hunter: .523 (.519/.507/.542) Age: 32

Furcal: .483 (.511/.519/.420) Age: 30

Rowand: .479 (.441/.452/.545) Age: 30

Renteria: .469 (.416/.475/.516) Age: 32

DeJesus: .462 (.453/.484/.448) Age: 27

Eckstein: .409 (.435/.384/.407) Age: 32

 

That definitely changes the order around. Hunter out on top, Furcal looking a lot better, and younger. Rowand pretty good still. Renteria not as spectacular. Eckstein still sucks.

 

[Controlled Chaos]

We luuuuuv it when you analyze.

 

On the surface, I think this is a good "guide" to at least get a measuring stick of how a player produces offensively. I wonder, though, if some way to incorporate runs scored would matter here? Ultimately, that's what matters - if a guy walks, did he get home? Does it matter, or does it make it so convoluded that it doesn't matter?

Yeah, I don't know if the guy scoring, is of any value in what Northside is trying to accomplish.

Well done NS.

[NorthSideSox72]

OPS works just fine for me.

OPS doesn't include stolen bases, thus diminishing or removing the importance of speed. That's why its flawed, just like OBP removes power from the equation and is flawed. This takes those two and SB's into account.

 

[Controlled Chaos]

Very true. So here are the values for the prospective players over the last 3 seasons, averaged (with 2005/2006/2007 in parens):

 

Hunter: .523 (.519/.507/.542) Age: 32

Furcal: .483 (.511/.519/.420) Age: 30

Rowand: .479 (.441/.452/.545) Age: 30

Renteria: .469 (.416/.475/.516) Age: 32

DeJesus: .462 (.453/.484/.448) Age: 27

Eckstein: .409 (.435/.384/.407) Age: 32

 

That definitely changes the order around. Hunter out on top, Furcal looking a lot better, and younger. Rowand pretty good still. Renteria not as spectacular. Eckstein still sucks.

Fields at .468 falls right in the middle of the pack so that's promising. Especially considering this is his first year and will hardly be his best year.

[Controlled Chaos]

OPS works just fine for me.

BAH

[Balta1701]

That definitely changes the order around. Hunter out on top, Furcal looking a lot better, and younger. Rowand pretty good still. Renteria not as spectacular. Eckstein still sucks.

And on this one, I'm going to chime in and actually defend Renteria...because when you only go to 3 years, you're actually depressing his value by including his Godawful 2005 season in Boston. His 2004 and 2006-2007 campaigns in Atlanta have been dominant. If you went to 4 years, he'd look better, if you went with 2 years he'd look better. But then again, that's the game we all play...who's to guarantee that he wasn't just overmatched by AL pitching when he was here, and he wouldn't have the same problem if he came back over.

[Vance Law]

OPS works just fine for me.

 

Right here, and in general, I'll go with the opposite of what this guy says.

Edited September 21, 2007 by Vance Law

[Gene Honda Civic]

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/glossary....php?search=EQA

[CWSGuy406]

OPS doesn't include stolen bases, thus diminishing or removing the importance of speed. That's why its flawed, just like OBP removes power from the equation and is flawed. This takes those two and SB's into account.

 

Your "stat" is similarly flawed because you're measuring a SB on the same 'plane' as a CS which isn't true. If you get caught stealing you completely eliminate the possibility of your scoring. If you just sit still on first you don't eliminate that chance of scoring. That's where that ~75% number comes from, IIRC.

 

OBP and SLG% are fine. The reason people are worried about Owens SLG% is because if you don't hit for power, you're not going to continue to get on base for a very long time. Find me a guy who maintained a .350+ OBP for a prolonged period of time (multiple seasons) while slugging under .330. I'd say those guys -- if there are any -- are the exceptions, not the rules.

[Vance Law]

There has been a lot of discussion here about Owens' nearly complete lack of power, and how important that is or isn't for a leadoff hitter. I do think that OBP is a better measure than AVG or SLG or even OPS when looking at a leadoff guy, because their purpose is to get on base for the heart of the order (and maybe get on base and steal). So that got me thinking...

 

How about a measurement that really does account for the bases provided by power AND those provided by speed, in addition to reaching base? Maybe something like this:

 

(TB + BB + HBP + SB) - (CS + GIDP) / Total PA

 

Look familiar? Its somewhat akin to Total Average, which was sort of in vogue for a while some years ago.

 

Good stuff, NorthSide. I've made some posts about this subject previously. Just curious, what is the difference between this and Total Average? How is TA calculated?

 

[NorthSideSox72]

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/glossary....php?search=EQA

Yeah, except that actually halves the value of SB and CS, and double the value of hits, so I would say its less valid in those ways. On a positive note though, it does include SF and SH, which I didn't include, and that is certainly of some value.

 

[Gene Honda Civic]

Yeah, except that actually halves the value of SB and CS, and double the value of hits, so I would say its less valid in those ways. On a positive note though, it does include SF and SH, which I didn't include, and that is certainly of some value.

How many runs are driven in each year by a SB?

[NorthSideSox72]

Good stuff, NorthSide. I've made some posts about this subject previously. Just curious, what is the difference between this and Total Average? How is TA calculated?

Total Average = [(Total Bases + Hit By Pitch + Walks + Stolen Bases) -­ Caught Stealing]/[(At Bats - Hits) + Caught Stealing + Grounded Into Double Play]

 

It includes all the same stuff I did except for GIDP, but because the denominator is built to be something like total outs (instead of total PA), its more of an oppositional ratio measure (good versus bad) than a success ration (good out of total) like I made it. But I'd bet that you'd get, on a relative basis, very similar results between players.

 

[NorthSideSox72]

How many runs are driven in each year by a SB?

How many runner score from 2nd or 3rd because they stole 2nd or 3rd?

 

[Vance Law]

How many runs are driven in each year by a SB?

 

How many runs are not scored in each year by guys who couldn't outrun a telephone pole.

[Harry Chappas]

The point to each side of the argument here is that the players behind a given hitter dicate to a degree that hitters performance. Fields sees better pitches when Owens is on base with Thome behind him. If nobody is on base for Owens (which is hte case this year), a double is the same as a hit and SB. If your OBP is high at the top of the line-up that is fine as compared to the 6,7 or 8 guy in the line-up. Owens with a .350 OBP and .350 SLG is servicable if the guys behind him do their job.

[Gene Honda Civic]

How many runner score from 2nd or 3rd because they stole 2nd or 3rd?

You're giving the same value for a BB and a SB, as you would for a 2B, when they're clearly not equal.

[NorthSideSox72]

How many runs are not scored in each year by guys who couldn't outrun a telephone pole.

Yeah, like I said, I'd really like to have added extra-base-on-hit to the numerator (i.e. takes 3rd from 1st on a single, or scores from 2nd), which is an aspect of speed that can be a positive. But I didn't see that stat anywhere. I am sure someone probably has it somewhere.

 

[NorthSideSox72]

You're giving the same value for a BB and a SB, as you would for a 2B, when they're clearly not equal.

Why are they not equal? If you are talking about CS, those are negatives in the numerator, so they are accounted for.

 

If you mean because BB + SB doesn't move runners over, that is a good point. That, plus the lack of XBOH I mentioned earlier, would make the measure more complete. But here is the thing - a BB + SB is the same as a 2B if no one is on base. Therefore, probably 3/4 of the time, they are the same.

 

Let me play with the math and see if I can use an adjustor of that sort to it.