Players have the same OPS but have diffrent OBP/SLG. Defense and BA aside, which .900 OPS player bring more value to team?

.600/.300
.500/.400
.450/.450
.400/.500
.300/.600

Are we talking a lineup comprised entirely of one type vs. another type?
Because I think there's a golden combination of those that beats any one type.
If it's a lineup of all one type, I'd go with the middle ground.

That's just a guess though, something else could be a no-brainer.

If you had the choice to take any of those players and slot them into your team.

Yeah, it would depend on the team, totally.
If I have sluggers, I want the OBP guy.
If I have OBP guys, I want the slugger.

Adding SLG and OBP makes no sense at all. I wonder who came up with it.

Multiplying them comes much closer to capturing the value of a player... Bill James' "Runs Created" can essentially be reduced to TB*OBP, and SLG is TB/AB, so using SLG*OBP is like saying "Runs Created Per At-Bat."

The highest product of any two numbers that add up to a given quantity (in your case, 900) is the result of squaring half the total. So 450/450 is the best choice, by this calculation.

Also, a .600/.300 player would be enormously more valuable than a .300/.600 player, right? A player who gets on base 6 out of 10 times, that's basically the all-time single season record for OBP. Versus a player with a SLG that wouldn't even be top 10 in the majors in some recent years. I guess if that's the question, then the 1st player wins hands down. That's not even factoring in how many points OBP is worth more intrinsically. But if you made the splits different for the 5th player, like say, .300/.800 or something that might be a more level comparison.

Too me a .600/.300 player would seems like someone who would create more runs than a .450/.450 player. I agree with 4B that getting on base 6/10 times would be the greatest assest to a team (though he's only getting singles and walking a hell of a lot). I also would wonder if an .300/.800 guy would better.

The OBP guy is by far, 4B is right. That's why BP's formula uses SLG + (OBP x 3) or something like that...

I think it's just that adding them is a simple back of the envelope calc that is readily available, easy to compute and understand and better than AVG, OBP or SLG on their own.

There are better sabermetrics out there, but they are difficult to calculate and to find.

Well, I faced this problem with my "Joe Hurler" thread. Let's move past the problematic details in RSF2's scenario if you recognize any and re-formulate his question as you think he probably should ask it, and then answer it? I'm know I'm hardly the best at that, so how about we hear from the real saberdudes.

Not making an out is a more important component of run-scoring than hitting for extra bases. Pretty much every study of this type of thing has shown a stronger correlation between OBP and runs scored than between SLG and runs scored (on a point-for-point basis). Most of the data shows that one point of OBP is somewhere between 1.5 and 3 times as valuable as one point of slugging.

Baseball Prospectus, as alskor said, uses 1.8*OBP as part of their formula for Equivalent Average, which is an attempt to measure a player's total offensive value to his team.

The OBP machines: .600/.300 or .500/.400 would be the most valuable. One problem though.

There probably can't ever be such a player in MLB. Major league pitchers just wouldn't throw a guy like that anything outside the strike zone, and I think those stat lines imply Bondsian walk rates. The implied walk rate there just isn't possible with such a low slug.

If a player's OBP is 1.000 he might never score (though exceedingly improbable) and might not ever get a hit even (even more improbable). If a players's SLG is 4.000 at least one run is guaranteed in every at bat, and all the 1.000 OBP guys on base get to score. Isn't there an actual dynamic in between the absolute extremes (that I'm too dense to articulate) in which SLG is more important than or at least as important as OBP?

Re: "importance" I'm not talking about a higher statistical correlation between teams with overall higher OBP and runs produced, I'm talking about the tendency in individual games for a hit (especially an extra base hit) and not a walk to produce runs. The vast majority of runs are scored on hits not bases loaded walks. What percentage of the hits that actually score runs are singles vs. doubles/triples/home runs? Throw sacrifices in there too I guess. Is this already computed somewhere?

If a guy's slug is 4.000, then, by definition, his OBP is gonna be 1.000.

What you're getting at is that 1.8*OBP type-stuff that goes into the BP stats. You could determine how relatively important OBP and ISO are to run scoring by doing some simple regression analysis. If you actually sit down and complete the above-mentioned regression analysis, you find that OBP contributes to run scoring more than SLG does in a MLB-type offensive environment

What it sounds like you want are linear weights on 1b, 2b, 3b, HR, BB, HBP, etc. I'm pretty sure these linear weights are used to computer comprehensive stats like BP's EQA.

I'm saying a player could have a OBP of 1.000 and not score.
Not all imaginary players with an OBP of 1.000 would have a SLG of 4.000.

And I'm not talking about deep statistical analysis. I'm talking about counting -- the actual runs scored in actual games via walks vs. singles vs. doubles vs. triples, etc. What events immediately lead to a real run, not just a potential run.

Thanks, I knew it was something like that, but I was firing off that post on my way out the door or to bed, cant remember which. Either way I didnt feel like looking it up at the time and was coming back to look at it now. In either case, I know the fact that BP says something isnt really conclusive evidence for many, but the fact is a good deal of research/thinking has been done about this subject and its clear the on base component is more important, b/c as Harry says not making outs is more valuable than hitting for extra bases. Its intuitive, really.

I'm not a big fan of SLG in general. Two players, one with a .200 BA and one with a .300 BA could both have a .500 SLG. Obviously, the .200 hitter is hitting for more power as the .300 hitter has a SLG inflated from BA. I think there should be another stat to depict power rather than total bases.
I have another question. Which player is more valuable?
.200BA/.500SLG
.250BA/.500SLG
.300BA/.500SLG
.350BA/.500SLG

I would say its likely, although not certain, that it is the one with the highest BA. I cant say for certain b/c of a lack of information.

BA is the major component of OBP, remember, so the one with the highest BA is still making the least outs - as far as we can tell without their walk/HBP/etc totals.

Also, the more hits a guy is getting, the more that SLG component is worth, as it means more extra base hits came as well. That's what its telling us, really.