Whenever I see MLB on the television, I always get a little angst over the fact that they keep showing the slugging percentage as the definitive power statistic instead of other metrics that measure what SLG does much better (such as ISO). The reason why SLG is not the definitive power statistic is that it misplaces the value of certain hits. For example, Slugging Percentage assumes that a double is twice as valuable as a single in its equation (.500 vs .250). However, when considering something like wOBA, doubles are actually 43% better than singles, not 100%. Equations like wOBA consider data used from previous MLB seasons rather than an arbitrary number, so the newer equations would be more reliable in that sense.

However, despite the faults associated with SLG, I do think that SLG is good enough just to see whether the player does get a lot of extra-base hits and drive in runs. In situations where there is a clear difference between the SLG of two players (.334 vs. .556), slugging percentage can be useful.