02-20-2009, 09:52 AM
<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->No. Wrong. When the other 50% of a stat is diluted because it's not part of a player's game (ie. does not hit for power), you cannot use it as a blanket comparison. OPS only works when you are comparing similar players to each other. When you use OPS, you can use it to compare Lee to Ramirez or Soriano to Bradley. However, it makes no sense to use it to compare Bradley to Theriot or Soriano to Miles. If you want to use it to compare Theriot to Miles, then go ahead. However, using it to compare players that have vastly different skill sets is not using the stat the way it should be used.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
exactly. ops is flawed. it overvalues guys who hit for power and do little else and it undervalues singles hitter who get on base but can't hit for power. if the hall of fame was based solely on ops, guys like rod carew and the waner brothers wouldn't be there and thats just ridiculous.
if a player bats .320 and walks 70 times times but only hits one home run, does he suck?
exactly. ops is flawed. it overvalues guys who hit for power and do little else and it undervalues singles hitter who get on base but can't hit for power. if the hall of fame was based solely on ops, guys like rod carew and the waner brothers wouldn't be there and thats just ridiculous.
if a player bats .320 and walks 70 times times but only hits one home run, does he suck?
Wang.