Fri Feb 10, 2017 1:30 am
Mark,
Just so we understand each other, I do recognize the role of OBP in run scoring. I even understand the value of ISO.
We do have to be careful of small sample sizes also, but I'll counter your examples with the three tour semis leagues.
League 1:
BA .245 (hi-lo range was -17 to +20)
OBP .312 (-21 to +17)
SLG .402 (-32 to +39)
Note: SLG had a 71 point range, and hi SLG team was first in runs scored.
League 2:
BA .250 (-20 to +15)
OBP .318 (-16 to +15)
SLG .420 (-45 to +35)
Note: SLG had an 80 point range.
League 3:
BA .250 (-24 to +25)
OBP .314 (-19 to +12)
SLG .403 (-52 to +58)
Note: SLG had an enormous 110 point range and the hi SLG team was first in runs scored.
Now, my argument isn't that SLG is necessarily more important than OBP. Obviously, a well structured high run scoring team can be favorably tilted to OBP. The formula is still OBPxSLG, so I'm not trying to argue that OBP is irrelevant.
What I am saying, is that in league after league, just like in the three examples above, the BAs and OBPs could be nearly identical in the high run scoring team and the low run scoring team in any given league. The only thing that was noticeably different was the SLG. So I began to win more when I started targeting high SLG low dollar players in my team make-up.
If every single team is plus or minus 20 league avg in BA and OBP time after time, but plus or minus 40 in SLG, I want to be as close to that +40 as I can get. That's where I see the separation in teams generating the most runs.
And if it's unclear, this is a macro generalization, and not intended as a slight on your pricing model. To buy wins you buy runs. To buy runs you buy OPS. If OBP appears to be being held constant, that is, you're unlikely to massively outperform the league average in OBP, then the only thing left is to add more SLG. If you outperform the league average in SLG in 2016, you have a very good chance of finishing well in runs scored, IMO.