Yes, well I think OBP is a more relevant value than BA. And equations would have to change or we would use OBP rather than BA. But thats not my question...
Question is.. why isn't a the physical act of walking not considered an at-bat? You could be 0-0 for a game and been to the plate 5 times, scored 5 runs, had a few RBIs, etc. Walking affects the game, you were at the plate holding a bat 5 times, hence at-bat.
The only thing I see it doing these days is artificially inflating BAs. With pitchers not giving certain players any pitches to hit, the likes of Barry Bonds, Frank Thomas, etc will be going into the HOF with helium-like numbers.
I dont pay any attention to batting average...heres my secret stat I pay attention to...runs plus rbi divided by 2...it gives you a good approximation of offensive value and 100 is the benchmark of greatness..
5 comments:
Figure out how to calculate a batting average by including a walk as an at-bat, & I owe you a coke.
Isn't that the reason they have BA and OBP?
I think because if you counted walks it throws off your VORP calculation
Yes, well I think OBP is a more relevant value than BA. And equations would have to change or we would use OBP rather than BA. But thats not my question...
Question is.. why isn't a the physical act of walking not considered an at-bat? You could be 0-0 for a game and been to the plate 5 times, scored 5 runs, had a few RBIs, etc. Walking affects the game, you were at the plate holding a bat 5 times, hence at-bat.
The only thing I see it doing these days is artificially inflating BAs. With pitchers not giving certain players any pitches to hit, the likes of Barry Bonds, Frank Thomas, etc will be going into the HOF with helium-like numbers.
I dont pay any attention to batting average...heres my secret stat I pay attention to...runs plus rbi divided by 2...it gives you a good approximation of offensive value and 100 is the benchmark of greatness..
Post a Comment