armchairgm
all sports, all you
+ Add Friends
You are not logged-in.
Sign Up - Log In
Main Page
Sports
Write
Articles
Hot Links
Images
Meet People
Fun
Explore
MLB - NFL - NBA - NHL - College Basketball - College Football - Soccer - Nascar - Other
Article - Locker Room Discussion
All Articles - New Articles - Today's Articles
Submit a Link - Approve Links
Picture Game - Ratings - Polls - Pick Game - Quiz Game - Spring Silliness
Random Page - Random Image - Random Fan

About the Author

AKittell
I'm a lifelong Packer season ticket holder, with passion for baseball, football and college basketball. Most recently became 20 game ticket holder for the Milwaukee Brewers, since I live about five minutes from Miller Park.

More By AKittell

Mets Prove Defense Matters
1 vote, 0 comments
8/7 Brewers Reds Series Recap
3 votes, 0 comments
6/6 Brewers Reds Game Two Recap
2 votes, 0 comments
View All

Other recent voters

If you like the article, vote for it.
Edit
Page history Discuss pageWhat links here

Why OBP Matters

by AKittell
created June 18, 2008, last edited February 10, 2009
12
Vote

After reading a number of comments and doing some serious thinking, I've realized that my rant an obsession with OBP has not really been proven or even looked at as a valid theory, in my blog anyways. The theory is simply, OBP and good pitching wins baseball games and makes championship teams. So today I've got a bit of time, so I'll go through the last 3-4 years or so, since this is the so-called 'modern era of baseball' and see where the playoff teams and WS champs stand.

Let's start with 2007. We're looking at ascending order of OBP in the regular season. The star indicates division champion.

1. New York Yankees (94-68): .290/.366/.463
2. Boston Red Sox (96-66): .279/.362/.444 *
3. Colorado Rockies (90-73): .280/.354/.437
4. Philadelphia Phillies (89-73): .274/.354/.458 *
5. Detroit Tigers (88-74): .287/.345/.417
6. Los Angeles Angels (94-68): .284/.345/.417 *
7. Cleveland Indians (96-66): .268/.343/.428 *
18. Chicago Cubs (85-77): .271/.333/.422 *
21. Milwaukee Brewers (83-79): .262/.329/.456
29. Arizona Diamondbacks (90-72): .250/.321/.413*

Interestingly, six of the top seven teams made the playoffs and two of top three went to the World Series. The Cubs were in an extremely week division and got bounced in the first round. The Diamondbacks were quite the anomaly though, but they had the 7th best ERA in baseball at the time.

2006 Numbers

1. New York Yankees (97-65): .290/.366/.463 *
2. Boston Red Sox (86-76) .279/.362/.444
3. Cleveland Indians (78-84): .280/.354/.437
4. Los Angeles Dodgers (88-74): .274/.354/.458 *
5. Toronto Blue Jays (87-75): .287/.345/.417
6. Minnesota Twins (96-66): .284/.345/.417 *
7. Philadelphia Phillies (85-77): .268/.343/.428
10. Oakland Athletics (93-69): .250/.340/.412 *
15. St. Louis Cardinals (83-78): .269/.337/.431 *
18. New York Mets (97-65): .264/.334/.445 *
24. Detroit Tigers (95-67): .274/.329/.449
25. Milwaukee Brewers (75-87): .258/.327/.420

This one isn't as apparent as 2007. Nevertheless, all but two of divisional champions fall in the top ten. The Cardinals are a big time change-up considering they had a team ERA of 4.51, but you can see their division was weak once again considering 83 wins took it and they carried the best on-base in th division. The Mets carried a 4.15 ERA, which was 6th best in the league but their slugging paid off. Then they ran into the Cardinals, who beat the Tigers, who had the league's best ERA. But that pitching failed in the end.

2005 Numbers.

1. Boston Red Sox (95-67): .281/.357/.454 *
2. New York Yankees (95-67): .276/.355/.450
3. Philadelphia Phillies (88-74): .270/.348/.423
4. Cincinnati Reds (73-89): .261/.339/.446
5. Florida Marlins (83-79): .272/.339/.409
6. St. Louis Cardinals (100-62): .270/.339/.423 *
7. Cleveland Indians (93-69): .271/.334/.453
8. Atlanta Braves (90-72): .265/.333/435 *
10. San Diego Padres (82-80): 257/.333/.391 *
12. Milwaukee Brewers (81-81) : .259/331/.423
19. Los Angeles Angels (95-67): .270/.325/.409 *
22. Chicago White Sox (99-63): .262/.322/.425 *
23. Houston Astros (89-73): .256/.322/.408

2005 was an interesting year of baseball with the arrival of Jose Guillen. I don't remember if it was his first year but he definitely made a splash. While the White Sox only managed a .322 OBP, they did manage a 3.61 ERA, tied for best in the AL. Houston looks like they kill the OBP theory too, but then you look at their 3.51 ERA and an 89 win season. That's not exactly what you expect from a NL Champion. The Angels? Fifth in pitching with a 3.68 ERA. But why in the world are the Reds there with their 73 win season? How about a 5.15 ERA, which was worst in the NL?

So what did we learn? OBP isn't everything, but it's half of everything. It's pretty clear that the other half is pitching. If you look at 20065 you'll see that the Cardinals carried the 6th best OBP and the best ERA in baseball. As a result, they took home a 100 win season, even though they fumbled against the Astros in the NL Championship. The numbers are sort of up there, but it's pretty clear that slugging doesn't matter all that much. In fact, NL teams easily made the playoffs with slugging under .420.

The Brewers haven't been able to put together high on-base numbers for a very long time. When you combine that with poor pitching, you've got a really bad couple of decades of teams. Their pitching has improved quite a bit the last two years, though, even if their OBP hasn't. This year they're carrying a 4.16 ERA, but a sub .320 OBP and a .426 slugging has put them well below teams with much higher OBPs. If the Brewers found some more guys who weren't just homerun hitters, but rather are disciplined hitters who go gap to gap, they might be able to get over that hump. It looks like the pitching is there and likely there into the future, so where will they find the final ingredient in their recipe?


Enable Comment Auto-Refresher
KelsdadAll-Star
511 days ago
Score 2+-
Whaddya know, getting on base and keeping the other team off wins baseball games.
Permalink | Reply
AKittellVarsity
511 days ago
Score 2+-
I know. I never would have guessed.
Permalink
JuTMSY4Legend
511 days ago
Score 3+-
OBP is just a fancy way of accepting the old baseball addage; "A walks as good as a hit"
Permalink
KelsdadAll-Star
511 days ago
Score 2+-
And after having that theory driven into our heads by countless Little League coaches, we grow up to realize they were all morons. A walk is better than an out, because the key obviously is to get on base, but since in a walk you don't actually hit the ball...
Permalink
KelsdadAll-Star
511 days ago
Score 5+-
A better measuring stick is OPS, (OBP+SLG). This averages the playing field, so to speak. It puts weak hitting singles hitters, or guys who draw an inordinate number of walks, and the guys with the lower average but big power numbers, all on a somewhat equal playing field.
Permalink | Reply
JuTMSY4Legend
511 days ago
Score 1+-
I gotta agree with OPS...that 2006 phillies team had a fantastic OBP, especially some of their big performers...but they were plagued by lots of poor RISP performances... I think OPS compensates for both the ability to get on base and subsequently drive 'em in
Permalink
Manny StilesMajor Leaguer
511 days ago
Score 1+-
But SLG can be skewed by speed and/or hustle. Or a lack there of...


Example - An aggressive baserunner that is actual a singles hitter might earn everyone of his doubles, but a slugger who is slow afoot but hits wallbangers actually affords any baserunners a better opporunity to advance.

Plus neither measures sacs or Sac Flies, which do indeed lead to something more important than getting on base, and that is SCORING. Productive outs can mean more than extra base hits depoending on when they occur.


AFTER ALL - Getting on base isn't as important as getting home after you do.

You can have a player on your team with 1.000 OBP that hits triples EVERY at bat = an OPS of 4.000 and still get shutout every game.

SLG can also be skewed by a ball park - see:Fenway/Green Monster and doubles that are outs in other parks. Or domes and triples.

No matter how you slice it, there is only one "perfect stat" to measure - the Standings.


It's who gets the W, not how they get it.
Permalink
Davis21wylieMVP
511 days ago
Score 0+-
If your entire team had an OBP of 1.000, though...
Permalink
AKittellVarsity
510 days ago
Score 0+-
If your entire team had an OBP of 1.000, the only outs would be sac bunts and sac flys. Now that's exciting baseball.
Permalink
Davis21wylieMVP
510 days ago
Score 0+-
I'm guessing you would never sac bunt if every player in your lineup had a 100% probability of getting on base...
Permalink
KelsdadAll-Star
510 days ago
Score 0+-
what about caught stealings, pickoffs, interference...
Permalink
Davis21wylieMVP
510 days ago
Score 0+-
I'm guessing you would never steal, either (or even take a lead off of a base) if you knew the guy at the plate was guaranteed to get on. Then again, our 1.000 OBP robo-lineup would never make an out, and would technically never win a game because the first inning would never end. So maybe Robo-Lineup® intentionally commits outs in innings 1-8, knowing that in the 9th they could score as many runs as they needed to win. But if you were on the road, you could still lose...
Permalink
AKittellVarsity
510 days ago
Score 0+-
And outs on th bases...
Permalink
FarneyPee Wee
510 days ago
Score 0+-
If a team had an OBP of 1.000 the games would never end.
Permalink
AKittellVarsity
511 days ago
Score 0+-
I failed to bring up one thing. How skewed will the numbers be when looking at the NL versus the AL considering pitchers will get about 360-380 ABs in a season? Looking at total PAs over over 6300, it's only a half percent, so my educated guess is not much, but it's something to think about.
Permalink | Reply
DNLLegend
510 days ago
Score 1+-
Sorry to jump in late here.

"Outs" is baseball-speak for "time." Most sports -- basketball, football, hockey, soccer -- have their games end when there is no time left and one team is ahead. Baseball games end when there are no OUTS left and one team is ahead.

Each team has their own allotment of time in a baseball game -- 27 outs per. When your OBP goes up, you don't cost your team an out, and therefore, it costs no time.

That is why OBP is important.
Permalink | Reply
KelsdadAll-Star
510 days ago
Score 1+-
Jump in anytime Dan, let's us all know you're still alive.
Permalink | Reply
Add your Comment
ArmchairGM welcomes all comments. If you don't want to be anonymous, Register or Login. It's free
Categories: Opinions | Opinions by User AKittell | June 18, 2008 | June 2008 | MLB Opinions | Milwaukee Brewers Opinions | OBP Opinions

Don't Miss

Phillies World Series 2009: A Year Later, and They Still Don't Want Us
Sorry, But I'm Not Sorry
2009 NHL Preview
In Which Ricketts Wins World Series
2009 Week 3: Let’s Talk About Your Favorite NFL Team

In the News

The Boston Celtics defeated the New Jersey Nets, 86-76 on Saturday. The Nets are now 0-7 - their worst start in franchise history.

Comments of the Day

0 why join in sports
0 Because snooker is a sport... And sports are facking AWESOM...
0 i personally think this list has no validity. it does...
0 I don"t think money is the object here. Even if he...

Take a Poll

Worst 2009 NFL team
Chiefs Lions Cleveland Jacksonville St Louis

New Articles

Baseball & Basketball losing it!
Whether James will leave the Cleveland Cavaliers or not?
Bad Flashbacks: An Analysis of USC v ASU
What If Brad Lidge Had Started Game One?
Week 9 Postgame: Trick or Treat?

Retrieved from "http://armchairgm.wikia.com/Article:Why_OBP_Matters"

This page was last modified 18:20, 18 June 2008. Content is available under the GFDL.

Main Page About Special Pages Help Terms of Use Advertise