PDA

View Full Version : Ops?


ChiSoxFan7
07-29-2006, 12:40 PM
it's a stat i found. I have 2 simple questions about it? What in the world is it and what's a good "ops"?:redface:

I figured I'd ask here among the top minds of unofficial baseball:bandance:

thanks all.

FielderJones
07-29-2006, 12:44 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baseball_statistics/OPS

fquaye149
07-29-2006, 12:56 PM
cliff's notes version:

OPS purports to tell how often a player puts himself in scoring position (or something along those lines). What it stands for is O.nbase P.lus S.lugging.

Onbase in this case is OBP or onbase percentage. It's calculated as follows: (walks+hits)/AB+walks(also known as plate appearances). It tells you what pct of plate appearances result in a player reaching base safely (but not by fielder's choice or error)

Slugging in this case is SLG or slugging percentage. If I understand it correctly, it's total bases (i.e. a single=one, double=two, triple=three, hr=four) divided by atbats. It literally describes how many bases a player gets per at bat...but what it practically describes when compared to BA or other people's SLG is what proportion of a player's hits go for extra bases.

When you add OBP and SLG you get a number that reflects what many fans consider the two most important components of hitting: getting on base and getting into scoring position. It's hard to describe what OPS measures much more specifically than that.

As far as good OPS? For any given hitter anything about 850 is very good. You would want your middle of the order hitters to be above 900 generally. Obviously an OPS above 1.000 is excellent and only the best performers of all time have put up those kinds of numbers (Babe Ruth, Ted Williams, Barry Bonds, recently Pujols)

chaerulez
07-29-2006, 01:02 PM
OPS is basically what it stats it is on base plus slugging. How often they get on base combined with how much power they have.

ChiSoxFan7
07-29-2006, 03:35 PM
seems a lil.....complicated/pointless?



But thank you all very much

here's to you guys!:gulp::gulp::gulp:

"wrong" sox fan
07-29-2006, 03:49 PM
seems a lil.....complicated/pointless?



But thank you all very much

here's to you guys!:gulp::gulp::gulp:


OPS and OPS+ may be the most important stats to look at when looking for a down and dirty short view of how much value a hitter has.

Babe Ruth, Ted Williams, Barry Bonds all rank very high on this stat for their careers.

As for Today

Pujols, Manny Ramirez, Jim Thome, A-Rod, Todd Helton, David Ortiz and Frank Thomas all are usually among the best of the best with the stat. See a pattern?

jabrch
07-29-2006, 06:54 PM
OPS is a mathematical summation of the decimals converted fractions with two different denominators.

3 Bannanas + 2 apples is not equal to 5 banapples. OPS is the Banapple.

fquaye149
07-29-2006, 09:54 PM
OPS is a mathematical summation of the decimals converted fractions with two different denominators.

3 Bannanas + 2 apples is not equal to 5 banapples. OPS is the Banapple.

OPS doesn't really claim to be a mathematical value.

It's the addition of the two most important stats, (in their opinion) of hitters.

It's hard to quantify by comparison...but it seems to bear out in pointing out the best hitters in baseball, and until it doesn'tt.....give it the benefit of the doubt.

voodoochile
07-29-2006, 10:00 PM
OPS is a mathematical summation of the decimals converted fractions with two different denominators.

3 Bannanas + 2 apples is not equal to 5 banapples. OPS is the Banapple.

Yeah, look at all those banapples with career OPS over .950 in the HOF...

RadioheadRocks
07-29-2006, 10:02 PM
http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/P/B00004SCX6.01._AA240_SCLZZZZZZZ_.jpg (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/images/B00004SCX6/ref=dp_image_0/002-2676940-0694405?ie=UTF8&n=5174&s=music)

"OPS I did it again..."


sorry, couldn't resist!

ChiSoxFan7
07-30-2006, 11:08 AM
http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/P/B00004SCX6.01._AA240_SCLZZZZZZZ_.jpg (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/images/B00004SCX6/ref=dp_image_0/002-2676940-0694405?ie=UTF8&n=5174&s=music)

"OPS I did it again..."


sorry, couldn't resist!



:roflmao::rolling:

no joke im laughing pretty hard at that one...

jabrch
07-30-2006, 05:54 PM
Yeah, look at all those banapples with career OPS over .950 in the HOF...

No doubt - it's good to have a high avg and a high slg. Adding them up - it's better to be high than low - no doubt. But OPS isn't what tells me Aaron, Ruth, Foxx, etc. are great players. It doesn't take a mathematically insignificant number for me to figure that one out.

"wrong" sox fan
07-30-2006, 06:53 PM
No doubt - it's good to have a high avg and a high slg. Adding them up - it's better to be high than low - no doubt. But OPS isn't what tells me Aaron, Ruth, Foxx, etc. are great players. It doesn't take a mathematically insignificant number for me to figure that one out.


first it's OBP and slugging...


second, for the most part the two most important things a hitter can do is get on base and create chances to score through extra base hits. Stats like RBI's and runs while valuable don't tell the whole story due in part to them being so reliant on how well a players team produces beyond their own efforts. Claiming that OPS is the be all and end all of finding the value of players would of course be wrong but OPS is a nice neat way to figure how well someone gets on base and slugs.... it's very useful.


Even more usefull is OPS+ this measures how good productive a player is compared to the league. Look at what it tells us about Konerko last season.


OPS: 909
OPS+: 136

If 100 is average we can see that Konerko is about 36% better than the average major league hitter. (this stat also takes ball park into adjustment)


This is of course, very useful.

fquaye149
07-30-2006, 06:55 PM
No doubt - it's good to have a high avg and a high slg. Adding them up - it's better to be high than low - no doubt. But OPS isn't what tells me Aaron, Ruth, Foxx, etc. are great players. It doesn't take a mathematically insignificant number for me to figure that one out.

Sure, but little summarizes it the way OPS does. You look at the leaderboards for OPS this year and it basically tells you who the best hitters are. You can do that for all time as well.

I mean, otherwise you need to look at BA and OBP and power numbers (aka slugging pct) seperately to make your decision. Why not combine them?

Like I said, I think it's flawed in that it undervalues leadoff hitters and doesn't take the personal and tangible aspects of the game into consideration. However, it's not nonsense as you would make it out to be.

Yes the denominators are different, but that doesn't matter. Why? you ask? Well...for instance, let's say we wanted to create a category called "extra base hits". We would add doubles, triple, and home runs together. A player might have 7 doubles, 8 triples, and 15 home runs. He would have 30 extra base hits. However the units are incompatible. So? We still know what it means. We're not differentiating equations or conserving energy.

Like a wise man said: it's not rocket surgery.

miker
07-31-2006, 10:08 AM
OPS is a good indication of a great individual player...but last time I checked, it was a team game.

fquaye149
07-31-2006, 10:18 AM
OPS is a good indication of a great individual player...but last time I checked, it was a team game.

so what's your point? every statistic but wins is an individual statistic. you can substitute: ERA, BA, OBP, HR, RBI, R's for OPS in your statement and your statement would be no more or less true.

miker
07-31-2006, 10:20 AM
so what's your point? every statistic but wins is an individual statistic. you can substitute: ERA, BA, OBP, HR, RBI, R's for OPS in your statement and your statement would be no more or less true.
I like interesting stats as much as next guy...but ultimately the only one that matters is "team wins". In the era of fantasy leagues, it's a point that seems to get lost.

That's all. Put down your weapon...