What are the best/most useful baseball stats

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,376
The opposite of the other one. Someone raised the point of which stats are the best and suggested another thread. So if you have ideas on this topic, put them here please, and don't clutter up the other thread.

One for me is traditional ERA. I think it's really helpful. Because it's easy to understand, and we've been using it forever, we all have a pretty good idea of what constitutes a good ERA and a bad one. I like too that it considers poor fielding. Yes, giving up 5 runs is giving up 5 runs, but if 3 of them are unearned, it gives you a decent indication of what part of those 5 runs the pitcher is responsible for.

I especially like ERA for starters; less so for relievers who have smaller sample sizes and who have to deal with inherited runners. FIP is probably a good stat too, but I have no idea how it's calculated and so it's confusing for me. ERA is pretty simple and straightforward.
 

luckiestman

Son of the Harpy
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
32,620
Back in the day when I was playing fantasy I had a decent way for finding relievers, I think I would sort by WHIP and then K/9
 

mikeford

woolwich!
SoSH Member
Aug 6, 2006
29,517
St John's, NL
One for me is traditional ERA. I think it's really helpful. Because it's easy to understand, and we've been using it forever, we all have a pretty good idea of what constitutes a good ERA and a bad one. I like too that it considers poor fielding. Yes, giving up 5 runs is giving up 5 runs, but if 3 of them are unearned, it gives you a decent indication of what part of those 5 runs the pitcher is responsible for.
Wouldn't FIP be a better indicator of what you're looking for here though? I mean if you truly want to consider poor fielding, FIP would take this a step further and balance for having Derek Jeter behind you vs prime Ozzie Smith or just an average SS.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,376
To me, there are only two currencies in baseball: bases and outs. The game can be boiled down to those two. Not even runs, because runs can only come when a player (or team) has made 4 bases in a row. In other words, you need a player to accumulate 4 bases in order to get 1 run. Of course, those bases might not happen in the same plate appearance. A player might get a walk in the first inning and be eliminated on a double play, a double in the fourth inning and be stranded, and then a single in the 8th inning and not score, thus accumulating 4 bases in the game but have no run to show of it. But you cannot get a run without a player (or that player's spot) accumulating 4 bases. I guess the new extra inning rule kind of throws a wrench into this but I'll still work with it.

So bases are really the offensive currency. Doesn't matter if you get four bases via four straight singles in an inning, or with one swing of the bat giving you four bases at once. Aside from the extra inning rule, you can't get a run with fewer than four bases.

So what we need to do is look at how many bases a player is worth. Hits, walks, HBP, stolen bases, extra bases taken (like going from 1st to 3rd on a single, advancing from 2nd to 3rd on a fly ball to right, etc.), etc. And then outs - outs at the plate and outs on the bases.

So here are a few players to consider:

59436

The final columns are the interesting ones to me. 2018 Betts had 469 total bases (at the plate and on the base paths). He made 360 total outs. So his bases-out ratio was 1.303. 2001 Barry Bonds had 619 total bases and 331 total outs for a bases-out ratio of 1.870, which is astronomical.

Conversely, 2015 Pablo (too soon?) had 217 total bases, made 376 outs, and had a bases-out ratio of 0.577, which is dreadful.

You can see how different kinds of players got their numbers. 1988 Boggs was an OBP machine, but didn't do much on the base paths, and ended up with 440 total bases (1.076 bases-out). Meanwhile, 1982 Henderson got tons of bases on the base paths, and finished with 439 total bases (0.978 bases-out).

Long story short: Mookie Betts' 2018 season was AMAZING from an offensive standpoint. Look at his total bases and bases-out ratio. Fewer total bases than 2022 Judge, but also a lot fewer outs, and therefore a better bases-out ratio, which by my measure, means he actually had a better offensive season than Judge.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,376
Wouldn't FIP be a better indicator of what you're looking for here though? I mean if you truly want to consider poor fielding, FIP would take this a step further and balance for having Derek Jeter behind you vs prime Ozzie Smith or just an average SS.
Probably, but I said that I don't know how they calculate FIP, and it's mysterious to me and therefore not as helpful for me. I can understand ERA much better.
 

Sandy Leon Trotsky

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2007
6,348
Wouldn't FIP be a better indicator of what you're looking for here though? I mean if you truly want to consider poor fielding, FIP would take this a step further and balance for having Derek Jeter behind you vs prime Ozzie Smith or just an average SS.
It might be but I’m still confused how it’s calculated and how they come to decide on defense involvement
 

simplicio

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 11, 2012
4,723
To me, there are only two currencies in baseball: bases and outs. The game can be boiled down to those two. Not even runs, because runs can only come when a player (or team) has made 4 bases in a row. In other words, you need a player to accumulate 4 bases in order to get 1 run. Of course, those bases might not happen in the same plate appearance. A player might get a walk in the first inning and be eliminated on a double play, a double in the fourth inning and be stranded, and then a single in the 8th inning and not score, thus accumulating 4 bases in the game but have no run to show of it. But you cannot get a run without a player (or that player's spot) accumulating 4 bases. I guess the new extra inning rule kind of throws a wrench into this but I'll still work with it.

So bases are really the offensive currency. Doesn't matter if you get four bases via four straight singles in an inning, or with one swing of the bat giving you four bases at once. Aside from the extra inning rule, you can't get a run with fewer than four bases.

So what we need to do is look at how many bases a player is worth. Hits, walks, HBP, stolen bases, extra bases taken (like going from 1st to 3rd on a single, advancing from 2nd to 3rd on a fly ball to right, etc.), etc. And then outs - outs at the plate and outs on the bases.

So here are a few players to consider:

View attachment 59436

The final columns are the interesting ones to me. 2018 Betts had 469 total bases (at the plate and on the base paths). He made 360 total outs. So his bases-out ratio was 1.303. 2001 Barry Bonds had 619 total bases and 331 total outs for a bases-out ratio of 1.870, which is astronomical.

Conversely, 2015 Pablo (too soon?) had 217 total bases, made 376 outs, and had a bases-out ratio of 0.577, which is dreadful.

You can see how different kinds of players got their numbers. 1988 Boggs was an OBP machine, but didn't do much on the base paths, and ended up with 440 total bases (1.076 bases-out). Meanwhile, 1982 Henderson got tons of bases on the base paths, and finished with 439 total bases (0.978 bases-out).

Long story short: Mookie Betts' 2018 season was AMAZING from an offensive standpoint. Look at his total bases and bases-out ratio. Fewer total bases than 2022 Judge, but also a lot fewer outs, and therefore a better bases-out ratio, which by my measure, means he actually had a better offensive season than Judge.
I think you'd find very very VERY few people that would agree with your conclusion.
 

LogansDad

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
29,060
Alamogordo
It might be but I’m still confused how it’s calculated and how they come to decide on defense involvement
FIP sort of considers defensive play, because it starts with league wide ERA and then subtracts the FIP stats from it, so it ends up being (League ERA-(((13*HR)+(3*(BB+HBP))-(2*K))/IP)). This generally ends up with a league modifier somewhere in the vicinity of 3.15.

You then add the individual's pitch stats (the same as the 2nd half of the league modifier) to the modifier to get the player's FIP. You can calculate it without using the league modifier, but one thing most of these new statisticians try to do is give us stats in a format we are used to seeing, and good pitchers end up with a personal FIP stat that is less than 0, which confuses people.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,376
I think you'd find very very VERY few people that would agree with your conclusion.
The conclusion about Betts vs. Judge? Or the premise that bases and outs are the only real currency in baseball?

If it's the former, "they" might be right. I am not 100% sure that bases to out ratio is the best measure here. It might simply be total bases minus total outs. In which case, it would be this:

Betts: 469 bases - 360 outs = 109 TOTAL BASES
Judge: 534 bases - 420 outs = 114 TOTAL BASES

Which would mean that Judge's season was a little better offensively.

But that being said... baseball-reference has this:

Betts: 8.7 oWAR
Judge: 10.4 oWAR

Which would back up the idea that bases minus outs may be better than bases-to-out ratio.

And it certainly shows the relative value of a home run, because a home run immediately counts for four consecutive bases, and thus, a run, while four singles is the same number of bases, but may not account for any runs.

I still think that bases and outs are the only real currency in baseball. Just have to think a little harder on how to put together the right metric using those two stats.
 

Big Papi's Mango Salsa

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2022
1,175
Cool thread idea. I know I’ll catch some heat for this but…

At bats (plate appearances) for hitters, games started / ip for starters and appearances for relief pitchers. People talk all the time about baseball the marathon, game of attrition, etc etc that is a baseball season that we all hope goes from March to November.

I don’t think its the be all / end all, but I think these are as valid as any other statistic.

(But I too like ERA and RBI, so…)
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,376
If I take those 9 players I listed and just did bases minus outs, here's how they stack up:

Year Player: TotB
2001 Bonds: +288
2022 Judge: +114
2018 Betts: +109
1988 Boggs: +31
1978 Rice: +8
1982 Henderson: -10
2019 Bradley: -99
2022 Verdugo: -152
2015 Sandoval: -159

So 2001 Bonds was worth 447 more TotB than 2015 Sandoval. That number, 447, is just a tick more than the total bases (not taking into account outs made) for 1988 Wade Boggs (440).

So 2001 Barry Bonds was more than a whole 1988 Wade Boggs better than 2015 Pablo Sandoval. And just to give you a sense of how good 1988 Wade Boggs was: All-Star, 6th in MVP voting, .366/.476/.490/.965, 45 doubles, 6 triples, 5 homers, 128 runs scored.
 

Murderer's Crow

Dragon Wangler 216
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
23,479
Garden City
I tend to think there is no single statistic that can tell you anything too useful about the value of a player but from an offensive standpoint I think the most telling is on base. I've also found that OPS and WAR really surprise me often. I might watch a player striking out in a third of their ABs and seeing their 780ops does nothing to tell me they should still be hitting early in the lineup. There are also so many players who go on these massive streaks that inflate their OPS or WAR but then are completely useless for extended periods of time (Gleyber Torres says hello). I think Devers falls into that category too, but you guys can keep me honest.
 

NorthwestSoxGuy

New Member
Oct 15, 2022
155
Woops, I posted a thread similar to this in the Red Sox Forum, but I was completely unaware that this topic was already posted. I apologize. I'm still new here, and have a bad habit of not checking the Forums page first before posting a thread.

To answer the question, I like OPS+, ERA+, TB (total bases), WAR, and WHIP.
 

LoweTek

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
May 30, 2005
2,183
Central Florida
When I was coaching kids, during one of the first practices I would ask, "What is the most valuable measure in baseball regardless of whether you are fielding or hitting?"

Nobody ever got it.

Outs.

Then they get it.
 

luckiestman

Son of the Harpy
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
32,620
When I was coaching kids, during one of the first practices I would ask, "What is the most valuable measure in baseball regardless of whether you are fielding or hitting?"

Nobody ever got it.

Outs.

Then they get it.
Are outs a measure?
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
70,716
Wouldn't it be runs? I get that you're trying to make a point but still, I'm going with runs.
 

luckiestman

Son of the Harpy
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
32,620
Wouldn't it be runs? I get that you're trying to make a point but still, I'm going with runs.
I think so, I teach basic regression to absolute novices using these toy models:

wins= a+bRS
wins= a+bRA
wins= a+b1RS+b2RA

And then show how those models do against the actual season results
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,676
Maine
Wouldn't it be runs? I get that you're trying to make a point but still, I'm going with runs.
Outs are the clock in baseball. As long as you avoid making outs, you can still score runs. The best hitters in the game are ones who avoid making outs the most. The best pitchers in the game are the ones who record outs most efficiently.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,376
In MLB this year, counting hits, walks, HBP, CI, SB, and bases taken (advancing on a ground out, fly out, etc.) there were 94,517 total bases, 129,226 total outs, and 20,817 total runs scored.

That means that on average, each run required 4.54 bases. Now we know that's not totally right because the stats from b-ref don't tell us how many times if you have a runner on third he advances on a hit. So we know there were SOME of those. So we maybe can safely estimate that there were roughly 4.60 bases per run scored.

If we ignore the normal (you should move one base on a single and you should move two bases on a double) stuff, and just work with what you do at the plate (including reaching base on error) plus stolen bases and bases taken (advancing on a ground out or fly out etc), then there were 4053 bases taken, 2486 stolen bases, 64546 bases on hits, 14853 bases on walks, 2046 bases on HBP, and 1146 bases taken on an error. That means there were 89,131 bases taken. So it would mean 4.28 bases per run.

But when it comes to bases per out, the ratio is 89,131 to 129,226, or 1.45 outs per base. Or, reversing it, .690 bases per out.

Let's see how it looks in a real game. Second game of the season, Yankees-Red Sox. Yanks win 4-2, not needing to bat in the 9th. (Booooooooooo!)

Top 1: 3 outs, 0 bases, 0 runs
Bot 1: 3 outs, 0 bases, 0 runs
Top 2: JD single (1 base), Verdugo homer (4 bases + 3 for JD), Story double (2 bases), JBJ groundout, Story to 3rd (1 base)
- 3 outs, 11 bases, 2 runs
Bot 2: Gallo single, thrown out at 2nd (1 base)
- 3 outs, 1 base, 0 runs
Top 3: Devers double (2 bases)
- 3 outs, 2 bases, 0 runs
Bot 3: 3 outs, 0 bases, 0 runs
Top 4: Verdugo single (1 base), Story walk (1 base + 1 for Verdugo), JBJ fielders choice, runners advance (1 base)
- 3 outs, 4 bases, 0 runs
Bot 4: Donaldson single (1 base), Judge fly out, Donaldson advances (1 base), Rizzo homer (4 bases + 2 for Donaldson), DJ walk (1 base), Gallo walk (1 base + 1 for DJ)
- 3 outs, 11 bases, 2 runs
Top 5: Bogaerts walk (1 base)
- 3 outs, 1 base, 0 runs
Bot 5: 3 outs, 0 bases, 0 runs
Top 6: Dalbec walk (1 base)
- 3 outs, 1 base, 0 runs
Bot 6: Judge walk (1 base), Stanton homer (4 bases + 3 for Judge)
- 3 outs, 8 bases, 2 runs
Top 7: 3 outs, 0 bases, 0 runs
Bot 7: 3 outs, 0 bases, 0 runs
Top 8: Verdugo walk (1 base)
- 3 outs, 1 base, 0 runs
Bot 8: 3 outs, 0 bases, 0 runs
Top 9: Arroyo reached on error (1 base)
- 3 outs, 1 base, 0 runs

BOSTON: 27 outs, 21 bases, 2 runs
NEW YORK: 24 outs, 20 bases, 4 runs

BOSTON: 1.29 outs per base; 0.78 bases per out; 10.50 bases per run; 0.09 runs per base
NEW YORK: 1.20 outs per base; 0.83 bases per out; 5.00 bases per run; 0.20 runs per base

Clearly NY was far more efficient, needing a lot fewer bases to score a run than did Boston. And their out:base ratio was much better too.

In terms of currency (bases and outs), the Yankees "spent" their outs much better than the Sox did.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
70,716
Outs are the clock in baseball. As long as you avoid making outs, you can still score runs. The best hitters in the game are ones who avoid making outs the most. The best pitchers in the game are the ones who record outs most efficiently.
As long as you score runs, it doesn’t matter if you make outs. If you don’t score runs, it doesn’t matter much how efficient your pitchers are.

Anyway it’s just semantics, we all know how baseball works.
 

luckiestman

Son of the Harpy
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
32,620
Outs are the clock in baseball. As long as you avoid making outs, you can still score runs. The best hitters in the game are ones who avoid making outs the most. The best pitchers in the game are the ones who record outs most efficiently.
Sure, but are outs a measure? Outs are a given. Isn’t the early Bill James stuff about how runs are what matter and that is why OBP is more important than batting average (obp more correlated with RS)? Haven’t thought about this stuff in a long time so could be misremembering.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
37,059
Hingham, MA
For a team, runs are obviously the be all end all. But on the offensive side of things, they are contingent upon more than one person unless you are talking about a home run. So for an offensive player, not making outs is the single most important thing you can do, aside from hitting a homer.

And again on defense, runs are contingent upon multiple events and people. But the better you are at getting outs, the fewer runs you'll give up.
 

luckiestman

Son of the Harpy
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
32,620
In a way, assuming you're counting them.. I used "measure" because "things" didn't look right. Quibble as it is, you are correct, it is not technically a "measure." I stand firmly by my statement of their value.
you are correct about their value, that is why OBP is so important. It’s the best measure of not making an out.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,376
This is why I use the word "currency" for outs. You only get 27 of them in a standard 9-inning game. You'd better spend them wisely. This is why the sacrifice bunt is a bad strategy most of the time (not all the time, but most of the time). It's actually a poor expenditure of an out in the vast majority of situations.

It's also why strikeouts are actually very bad. Yes a strikeout is the same as a pop out. But thinking of them all as outs is a mistake. Strikeouts are when you don't put the ball in play.

In 2022 across all of MLB, there were 182,502 PA

In 57,711 PA the ball wasn't put in play (not including CI, which I can't find):
- 40,812 k
- 14,853 bb
- 2,046 HBP

That's 70.7% outs and 29.3% one base. So you get ONE base 29.3% of the time.

But if you put the ball in play:

163,465 events (can't call them all "plate appearances" because that's a specific term that includes walks)
123,790 outs - zero bases, one out
25,877 1b - one base, no outs (=25,877 bases)
7,940 2b - two bases, no outs (=15,880 bases)
643 3b - three bases, no outs (=1,929 bases)
5,215 HR - four bases, no outs (=20,860 bases)
3,393 DP - zero bases, two outs - you have to factor in DP because one swing of the bat could cost you two outs; at times it's a risk putting the ball in play
390 SH - one base, one out (= 390 bases)
1,224 SF - one base, one out (=1,224 bases)

So in all these scenarios, out of 163,465 batting events, you're looking at 132,190 outs (80.9%), but ALSO 66,160 bases (40.5%).

So looking at it from the perspective of "expected outs" and "expected bases"...

Not putting the ball in play:
- Expected outs: .707
- Expected bases: .293

Putting the ball in play:
- Expected outs: .809
- Expected bases: .405

And of course, if there are runners on, a walk advances them just one base, but a single could advance them TWO, and a double advances them two or THREE, and a triple and HR advances the runners THREE.
 

GrandSlamPozo

New Member
May 16, 2017
105
I think you'd find very very VERY few people that would agree with your conclusion.
You mean about Mookie 2018 having a better offensive season than Judge 2022? Not sure why you would think that, anybody who looks at their batting and baserunning stats will probably reach the same conclusion. Judge had a slight lead in OPS (1.111 vs 1.078) but Betts had 14 more stolen bases than Judge (albeit with a slightly lower SB%), and he also hit into 9 fewer double plays, which can easily be argued to make up for Judge's slightly higher OPS. BBref's offensive WAR model also has Betts slightly ahead of Judge in RAA per plate appearance after removing the positional adjustment ((Rbat + Rbaser + Rdp) / PA), as well.
 

simplicio

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 11, 2012
4,723
Judge just had the best WRC+ season by anybody not named Barry Bonds since baseball was integrated. Mookie's 2018 is 35th on that list.
 

GrandSlamPozo

New Member
May 16, 2017
105
Judge just had the best WRC+ season by anybody not named Barry Bonds since baseball was integrated. Mookie's 2018 is 35th on that list.
Fair enough... offense was down in MLB in 2022 compared to 2018 so Judge will have the advantage in stats that adjust for run-scoring environment, even though Betts' raw numbers were slightly better .
 

Sad Sam Jones

Member
SoSH Member
May 5, 2017
2,494
I mentioned this in the other thread, but I've always thought WHIP is kind of a simpleton measurement since it only covers batters reaching base and ignores any difference in value from a walk to a home run. It occurs to me that my solution for this (TB+BB+HBP) would also work for hitters. It would be like an adjusted slugging percentage or a true "OPS" (which is kind of a bastard stat that we've all come to accept despite the fact it has redundancies and in the end doesn't really measure any exact thing).

Anyway, I'm no mathlete and don't know how to crunch bulk numbers, but I think (TB+BB+HBP)/PA would make an interesting measure of how many bases a batter gains per plate appearance (B/PA?). For 2001 Barry Bonds it was .899.