aren't these inherently based on terrible small samples themselves, defeating your own argument that we have no idea what kind of hitter he is? I never stated they weren't small samples~. They are also stats that become meaningful much faster than something like OPS. http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/fantasy/article/when-do-stats-become-meaningful/ That study chose a very small level of confidence. If you look at one that picks a higher level of confidence you'll find something like ERA isn't a really useful stat until almost 500 innings. 300 PA is a spit in the wind for a sample size for OPS though, you give me 300 PA of OPS and I can't begin to tell you if a player is good or bad. Just think about how players vary in OPS from 1 half to another of a season and it should follow logically.