The Rangers and The Field Part1: OBP vs. SLG

by RangerMad on Oct 14, 2009 8:42 PM CDT Comment 29 comments

This subject is something I originally investigated last winter. I finally had time thee last few weeks to continue the research and put together this fan post. Some may see this as Rudy bashing but it is just coincidence that I finished this on the day the news comes out that Rudy will not return next year.

I started with trying to answer a simple question. How do the Rangers OBP and SLG compare to playoff teams? Winning seasons are nice but a playoff season would be better. That question has morphed a bit as I got into the details. I am not a statistician nor a sabermatician. My idea was to use simple data and see through observation how the Rangers ranked against the AL in terms of OBP, SLG and wins. I used Baseball Reference to rank each team from 1996 to 2009. I omitted 1995 due to it being a strike year. The 14 year timeframe also covers 14 of the 15 wildcard years. (Before I get flogged, skewered and quartered, I know these numbers are not park adjusted and that wins are highly dependent on pitching and defense. Remember, simple data and observation.)

Top 4 vs. Bottom 4

Lets first look at the top 4 in OBP and SLG vs. the bottom 4. Why the top 4? Because the top 4 teams in wins usually qualifies for the playoffs. The exceptions are 2000, 2003, 2008 and 2009. It also made it easier for a spreadsheet novice like myself.

AL ………………………OBP…………………. SLG……

Avg Wins top 4.…………92.2.…………………..88.9.……

Avg Wins bot 4.…………70.4.…………………..68.7.……

Top 4 range………..….95.8 - 87.……………95.5 - 82.8.….

Bot 4 range………..….78 - 56.5.………………76 - 59.8.……

The top 4 OBP teams averaged 3.3 wins more then the top 4 SLG teams. At the bottom end, OBP teams averaged 1.7 more wins then SLG teams. What about the Rangers when they finish in the top/bot 4?

Rangers.……………..…OBP…………………SLG………….

Avg Wins top 4.…………83.8..(4yrs)………..81.8..(11yrs)…

Avg Wins bot 4.…………83.7..(3yrs)………..***.……

*** The Rangers have not finished in the bottom 4 in SLG since 1995. The 3 years they didn’t finish in the top 4 in SLG they averaged 75.3 wins.

Winning teams

Jon Daniels has said in interviews that he wants to build a consistent winning ML team. First, if you are expecting 17 years of consecutive winning seasons like the Yankees, don’t hold you breath. How about 3 consecutive winning seasons? From 1996 on there has been 10 teams (9 franchises) that have met the criteria. Texas hasn’t had 3 consecutive winning seasons but, I fudged a little and included there 96, 98-99 teams.

Team…………avg wins………………avg OBP rank……………..avg SLG rank…..

NY 96-09.…….97.5.……………………2.2.…………….……………4.1

Bos 98-09.……92.2.……………………3.8.………………………….4.6

Min 01-06.……90.………………………7.…………….……………..8.5

Sea 00-03.…….98.3.……………………2.3.…………………………7.8

Oak 99-06.……93.9.……………………5.3.………………………….8

Ana 04-09.…….94.5.……………………6.8.…………………………8.2

Cle 96-01.……..92.……………………..1.8.………………….………2.8

CHW 03-06.……89.5.……………………8.………….……….……..4.3

Tor 06-08.…….85.3.……………………8.7.…………………………9.3

Tor 98-00.…….85.………………………7.7.…………………...…….4

Tex 96,98-99.…91.……………………..3.7.………………….……..2.7

Tex last 14 yrs….80.7.………………….6.8.………………….…….3.1

All of the winning teams above made the playoffs at some point in their streak except… Toronto. That is life in the AL East.

OBP vs. SLG Rankings

Some quick hit observations when comparing a team’s OBP ranking vs. their SLG ranking.

Percentage of teams that OBP ranked higher or equal to SLG from 1996 - 2009.

All teams: 63%
Winning teams: 76%
Playoff teams: 80%
Texas Rangers: 14%

Some quick Rudy/pre-Rudy numbers from 1984 - 1993 for the Rangers.

Avg # wins: 80.7 / 77.7

Avg OBP ranking: 6.8 / 8.2

Avg SLG ranking: 3.1 / 7.3

OBP >= SLG: 2 / 3

Also, not sure it is fair to gripe about the Rangers’ OBP under Rudy when they have never been a high OBP team. At least not since 1984.

Conclusions:

I report…. you decide. Like I said, I am not a statistician.

2 recs | Comment 29 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Good work

tough to say what it shows, if you ask me

by BuckyB on Oct 14, 2009 9:24 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

My intial reaction to this

Granted it’s impossible to give a hitting coach credit/blame, bc it’s impossible to know what exactly they cause, but…

It seems to me that the data doesn’t slant significantly enough towards one direction to know what Rudy has done. It seems to me that this data would more appropriately relate the player personnel this team has fielded.

Off the top of my head, the most stand-out Rangers offensively,
JuanGon
Pudge
Rafy
Arod
Tex
Greer
Palmer
… … …

These players, save Tex, are players that aren’t patient hitters, but made a living on pounding the shit out of the ball…

This is just my hunch… who knows

by BuckyB on Oct 14, 2009 9:29 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

You're pointing out Tex as the only patient bat in that group?

Palmeiro had a career walk rate of over 11% with a K rate under 13%.
Greer was similar with an 11.9% BB rate and a 14.5% K rate.
Arod strikes out more than those two but also has a good walk rate.

G G G E-flat_______ F F F D__________....

by t ball on Oct 14, 2009 11:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I said it was off the top of my head...

what do you want from me? :)

by BuckyB on Oct 15, 2009 3:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Making it an OBP versus Slugging thing

misses the point.

What you want to do is be both. Like NYY this year (1st in AL in both OBP and Slugging) or Boston (2nd this year in both OBP and Slugging) or the Angels (3 in OBP, 4th in Slugging).

From this post, an your HR/SB post, you seem to think the two are mutually exclusive, and they really aren’t. The best offenses usually top both charts. 2008’s best offense was the Rangers, and they were 2nd in OBP and 1st in Slugging.

It’s not OBP Vs SLG, its OBP and SLG. You really need both.

"I don't condone steroids or any other type of growth hormones or anything else, but I could care less, and, for the most part, I don't think the fans give a (bleep). The people that care about it are the people that probably don't like baseball," - Jim Leyland

by DJCahill on Oct 15, 2009 7:35 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Yep, but this year

they had the SLG (3rd) and not the OBP (12th).

G G G E-flat_______ F F F D__________....

by t ball on Oct 15, 2009 7:57 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don't know if that changes

that you’d like to be near the top in both categories.

From the Rangers standpoint, I think all it means is you should be looking for a MBradley or NJohnson type, and maybe you should be shopping Chris Davis around, and if you ever get a good bite and a good return you should move him, because he has zero chance of ever being a decent OBP guy.

by DJCahill on Oct 15, 2009 8:07 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Didn't mean to say

it changes anything, just saying that this year they succeeded in one category and failed miserably in the other. I agree that a high OBP guy should be their top target for the offense this winter, maybe their top priority overall.

G G G E-flat_______ F F F D__________....

by t ball on Oct 15, 2009 9:57 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

OBP and SLG

Which is more important? And how does that compare with the Rangers’ rankings for the last 14 years?

|Space for Rent|

by RangerMad on Oct 15, 2009 8:11 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well

this team had the lowest OBP the Rangers have had in the decade and the second highest win total. I’m not sure what that means in terms of your variables of Wins and OBP rank.

OBP is important. So is Slugging. So is Run Prevention which you completely left off your table.

by DJCahill on Oct 15, 2009 8:26 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

run prevention

Did you read the 2nd paragraph?

|Space for Rent|

by RangerMad on Oct 15, 2009 8:30 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Your disclaimer

still doesn’t cover for the fact that it is a fairly ridiculous study.

by DJCahill on Oct 15, 2009 8:51 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yup.

There is a correlation. In other words, it’s hard to hit a home run off a pitch outside the strike zone.

If Brad Pitt is playing Beane who do you want playing you?
JD: Eddie Guardado.

by GhettoBear04 on Oct 15, 2009 8:25 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Did you miss this?

Percentage of teams that OBP ranked higher or equal to SLG from 1996 – 2009.

All teams: 63%
Winning teams: 76%
Playoff teams: 80%
Texas Rangers: 14%

|Space for Rent|

by RangerMad on Oct 15, 2009 8:33 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I like that you're trying..

…to address the OBP vs SLG issue. I’m working on something for it, too. It just seems like an incredibly relevant question for Rangers fans.

If Brad Pitt is playing Beane who do you want playing you?
JD: Eddie Guardado.

by GhettoBear04 on Oct 15, 2009 8:26 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I really don't understand

why it is phrased as an OBP vs SLG issue.

The Issue is just OBP deficiency, pure and simple, and SLG really has very little to do with the problem.

by DJCahill on Oct 15, 2009 8:28 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

well

if you assume OBP and SLG are independent areas of improvement (obviously a flawed assumption, but a decent initial working point), you can choose to invest $$$ into improving one or the other. They get picked because they are the OPS components, and people treat them as independent in decision making.

This argument suggests that an improvement (relative to the league) in OBP goes further than the same improvement (relative in the league) in SLG. Now, I also imagine improving OBP costs more. But whatever, it is a starting point, and I think he does a good job summarizing some of the data out there.

Go Rice Owls!

by JBImaknee on Oct 15, 2009 11:07 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think his data choices

were crazy. If you compare slg and OBP to runs, instead of wins, you might have something. When you compare them to wins, without including runs prevented, you have an absolute garbage study.

by DJCahill on Oct 15, 2009 11:11 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'd say if you get a big enough sample size

run prevention should average itself out among all of the teams. I think the point is made; i.e. OBP is more important than slugging. I recall someone mentioning the fact that SLG is overrepresented in OPS because it is a 1:1 with OBP.

It breaks your heart. It is designed to break your heart. The game begins in the spring, when everything else begins again, and it blossoms in the summer, filling the afternoons and evenings, and then as soon as the chill rains come, it stops and leaves you to face the fall alone. You count on it, rely on it to buffer the passage of time, to keep the memory of sunshine and high skies alive, and then just when the days are all twilight, when you need it most, it stops.

by WyoRanger on Oct 15, 2009 11:50 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I can't remember

the ratio preferred these days by sabre types, but I think it’s something in the 1.5-1.75/1 OBP/SLG ratio would better represent their correlation to run scoring.

G G G E-flat_______ F F F D__________....

by t ball on Oct 15, 2009 11:59 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

If you wanted to do that

and that might at least be useful, you’d do a regression and a curve fit.

You’d assume something like

Total Runs= A*(OBP)+B*(SLG), or some other curve fitting equation, then you’d use a least squares fit to find the value of the A and B constant, then you could say 1 point of OBP is worth 1.5 of SLG or whatever.

You just are never going to get there correlating to wins of playoffs team.

by DJCahill on Oct 15, 2009 11:16 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

well, that would definitely be a strong approach

but I think people trying to discuss the ideas quantitatively, even if non-parametrically like he does, is good. And I think there is some value to non-parametric approaches, even if they aren’t quite as statistically pretty as the linear model you are suggesting

Go Rice Owls!

by JBImaknee on Oct 15, 2009 11:20 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

put another way

I assure you that I’m as quantitative as it gets on this board. But I’m not a quantitative snob; I encourage people to come up with their own models, eventually they’ll figure out if another component (runs allowed, ballpark, etc) is needed.

Go Rice Owls!

by JBImaknee on Oct 15, 2009 11:23 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs