The last notable disadvantage of OBP is that it is not park or league adjusted. It is easier for players to post a higher OBP in parks such as Fenway Park or Coors Field than the Oakland Coliseum or Petco Park. Likewise, OBP has fluctuated throughout time. Carl Yastrzemski led the American League with an OBP of .395 in 1965. However, in 2001, Jason Giambi put up the highest mark at .477. There are ways to adjust numbers for park and league context, but we'll save that topic for a later date.
His batting average is .370. His on-base percentage is .367. My understanding of the stats suggests that every time a hitter gets on base, his on-base percentage goes up. This should mean that if you get on base via a hit, both AVG and OBP rise. If you get on base via a walk or getting hit by a pitch, your OBP goes up but your AVG is unchanged. Ergo, your OBP must always be higher than your AVG.

Recall that we can use the batter's OBP, the pitcher's OBP, and the league OBP to find an expected OBP for a given matchup using the odds ratio. Since gOBP is still a proportion, we can use it to perform the same analysis. To determine which is more accurate, we first group the batters and pitchers into bins with width five points (.005). We then find an expected OBP for all pitchers and batters in that bin, and compare this to the actual results of those matchups. As an example, consider the first pair in our database: David Aardsma and Bobby Abreu, who faced each other once in 2010.

# In the final iteration of the "MLB's Worst Tools" awards, today we will discuss hitting for average. Right off the bat I have a problem with describing "hitting for average" as a tool because batting average is a statistic not an innate ability. Additionally, at a blog that champions sabermetrics it probably isn't worth talking about batting average a great deal. In fact, I'm pretty sure the higher ups wouldn't let me. [Editor's Note: He's right] I know that if I mention RBI's in a non satirical way I will be shot on sight. Partly because of my personal distaste for describing the fifth tool in this series as "hitting for average" and partly because I fear the violent wrath of Beyond the Box Score's cruel overlords, from this point on the tool discussed today will be referred to as "hitting for contact".

[box]About the source, Pro Scout Jim Thrift.  Jim’s 28 year career in baseball includes 4 years scouting for the Baltimore Orioles in the amateur, pro and international divisions, 15 years with the Cincinatti Reds as a Major League scout, amateur scout and National Cross Checker, triple A hitting coach, and a long list of other impressive experience in professional baseball. [/box]
Every baseball player would love to be able to hit for power, but not every baseball player is a natural like Bryce Harper. There are a lot of things that go into a powerful baseball swing, and no one swing method or form is the right fit for all hitters. However, there are some "Cream and Clear"-free ways that can help all players add power. With the strategy and preparation, you can develop both your mind and body for power hitting as well as improve your form regardless of your preferred stance or swing.
Hitting a baseball is one of the toughest skills in all of sport. The entire sequence, from the pitcher's release of the ball to the contact with the bat, happens in the blink of an eye. This quick series of events combines two of the most important skills for a baseball player: hand-eye coordination and power development. Hand-eye coordination helps the batter locate the ball during its flight and appropriately maneuver the bat. The power element is crucial for adding distance to hits and building a well-rounded batter.

An example is the Internet Archive, which uses the term in ranking downloads. Its "batting average" indicates the correlation between views of a description page of a downloadable item, and the number of actual downloads of the item. This avoids the effect of popular downloads by volume swamping potentially more focused and useful downloads, producing an arguably more useful ranking.