Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
GuidoSarducci

What OPS+ > 200 means

Recommended Posts

In the other thread trying to compare current vs. past Os lineups, the issue of OPS+ was brought up.  That got me to thinking, what does OPS+ mean (aside from the statistical definition)?  Well the mlb.com explanation (http://m.mlb.com/glossary/advanced-stats/on-base-plus-slugging-plus) basically says that if your OPS+ is x, that means you were better (or worse) than league average by x - 100.  So if your OPS+ is 150, that means you were better 50% better than league average.   So I'm wondering if your OPS+ is > 200, which a few players have achieved in a single season, such as Ruth, Gehrig, Mantle, etc (https://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/onbase_plus_slugging_plus_season.shtml), that means you were 100% better than league average. 

Does that mean you basically had the productivity of more than two average players?  If so, in terms of the lineup, theoretically if you had the option of replacing the OPS+ > 200 player with two league average OPS+ 100 players(and have ten people batting, though still only nine still playing the field, kind of like little league),  would it make sense to do it.  Of course the answer, is an obvious "no".

But what if, instead of just their at bats, those two players actually gave you an additional "outs".  In other words, you replace that one HoF player who had the ridiculous OPS+ > 200 season, with two OPS+ 100 players consecutive in the batting order.  I'm not quite sure how this would work, maybe instead of having 27 outs, the other team would have to record 30, like maybe four outs in the second, fifth and eighth inning.  Or maybe whenever the first of those two players came to bat, their team would get an out subtracted from their total (going negative if no outs, though maybe limit this once an inning in the case of a bat around)

So even in that situation, does it still make sense to keep the OPS+ > 200 player, as opposed to having two league average players (OPS+ 100), if you got additional outs somehow? 

Edited by GuidoSarducci

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

Orioles Information


Orioles News and Information

Daily Organizational Boxscores
News

Tony's Takes

Orioles Roster Resource

Orioles Prospect Information

2018 End of Season Top 30 Prospects List

Prospect Scouting Reports

Statistics

2019 Orioles Stats

2019 Orioles Minor League Stats

Baseball Savant Stats






  • Posts

    • Seems just like the old SG to take a few quotes and then start bashing our FO and ownership for "dumb" things. IMO, the most telling quote in the link was also the one ME explained.  The revenue situation is uncertain.  ME is quoted as saying, "We can't estimate our revenue, our attendance ....  We can't estimate various things that we look at when we look at a player or roster budget."  In light of such uncertainty, it is quite a leap to say the FO is dumb for not pursuing a particular player - in this case, Stroman.  Most prudent, well-run businesses would operate in such as manner given the uncertainty. There are multiple ways to save $ with Chris Davis including his negotiating a settlement for possible retirement, a shortened season, etc.  All of these things are more important today than opening up Davis' roster spot.  Let's see what happens.  
    • Also, if we keep Cobb through the winter, we will need the spot for rule 5 protection.
    • It is a happy fact that I think the Orioles will be good enough next year that they won’t need him. They need good infield defense and he doesn’t provide that.
    • Some final defensive numbers: Rtot: +15 (6th in MLB) Rdrs: -3 (19th in MLB)  UZR: -5.4 (21st in MLB) Fangraphs defense: -4.4 (21st in MLB)  Fielding %: .980 (27th in MLB) Overall, a bit better than last year but below average unless you want to believe Rtot.   
    • o   GAME ONE )))))) (First Round)   CHICAGO WHITE S OX Some Guy - CF Some Guy - LF Some Guy - RF Some Guy - DH Some Guy - 3B Some Guy - 2B Some Guy - SS Some Guy - 1B Some Guy - C Lucas Frost Giolito - RHP )) (4-3, 3.48 ERA)   OAKLAND A THLETICS Some Guy - CF Some Guy - LF Some Guy - RF Some Guy - DH Some Guy - 3B Some Guy - 2B Some Guy - SS Some Guy - 1B Some Guy - C Jesus G. Luzardo - LHP )) (3-2, 4.12 ERA)   https://www.mlb.com/starting-lineups   o
    • The first tiebreaker was division record, even though they played in different divisions.  I guess since all games were East vs East, Central vs Central, West vs West... Division record = league record. If that was tied then it was record in final 20 division (league) games. If that was tied then record in final 21 div games, the. 22, the n23, and so on. Kind of silly but those are the rules.  
    • The mound is 66’ 9” from second base.  
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...