I tried my hand at this in THIS thread and picciolo and end warned me of my mistakes then. After doing my best to learn some things abut statistics I've learned that I have a lot more to learn. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif The fact that OBP and SLG aren't independent probably makes the excercise doomed at the start. For what it's worth, this was the equation: Runs = (1444 x OBP) + (898 x SLG) - 443 I now understand making a blanket statement like, "OBP is more important than SLG" and supporting it by comparing ratios is clearly wrong. Would it be incorrect to say it like this, however: In the current environment, an increase in OBP of one point has the same effect on a team's runs scored as an increase in SLG of 1.6 points. According to the equation, this is a fact: OBP SLG Runs 0.300 0.450 394.3 0.310 0.450 408.7 0.300 0.466 408.7 Provided that we relate the ratio back to a "per unit" of the variable, it seems to keep us out of trouble, no? Since I did that mini-study, I've read a million studies taking different approaches to compare the relative value of OBP and SLG. One study took the very straight forward approach of using linear weights to estimate what a team with a particular kind of OBP and SLG would score (think it was in the last "By The Numbers"). They would add or subtract various baseball events until they would get the OBP and SLG they wanted, then look at the estimated sun scored. It came up with a 1.3 OBP/SLG ratio, if I recall correctly.