Graham's Cracker wrote:Can I ask why? I'm not very well-versed in advanced stats. I always thought the combination of on base plus slugging would be a reasonable measure of a player's value. Is it because it is a strictly offensive measure? Is WAR better because of the defence and base-running factors?flatjacket1 wrote:Holmes wrote:It be nice if he gets out of the sub .700 OPS though...
OPS is a terrible stat.
Curious
Under OPS, the OBP is still a part of the equation (where a walk is equal value to a triple) and the SLG is still a partially flawed aspect of calculation (For example, if 1 player at 2 at-bats has a HR and an out while another player at 2 at-bats has 2 doubles... which player would've added more runs to the team's offense based on expected values?). It does not assign linear weights to each outcome and it assumes static contribution for each base.
wOBA is a much better stat because it assigns linear weight formulas based on historic trends on expected value.
OPS is a good simple stat much like how you would tell someone how far away something is by telling them the amount of blocks. It gives a ballpark estimate for an offensive production but it's not really anything too precise. wOBA is more akin to telling someone that something is 1.2KMs away - much more precise.
