An RBI is really good at telling me what players drove in the most runners for a given year. I'd actually say that RBI's are THE BEST stat for telling me that information.
Printable View
An RBI is really good at telling me what players drove in the most runners for a given year. I'd actually say that RBI's are THE BEST stat for telling me that information.
Actually, no, you're wrong, and that is completely without context and that is the problem with RBI. IF a guy hits .300/.400/.500 and never drives in a run, that likely means that he never had guys on base for him, which is NOT due to him.Quote:
Originally Posted by metsguy234
Yes, but they are useless for evaluating a player's ability. They tell you one very specific thing that is highly dependent on things outside of the player himself.Quote:
Originally Posted by filihok
Oh, and, on top of that, even in that situation, chances are he's SCORED runs, and therefore was not "worthless." If he scored no runs, that means the teammates behind him sucked and he never hit home runs (and thus would have had to hit a boatload of doubles and triples to get a .500 SLG :rolleyes:), but was still not worthless.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
That has absolutely nothing to do with what I said.Quote:
Originally Posted by metsguy234
If a player hits that and doesn't drive in a run, well for one that's virtually impossible. For two, that would be because no one was ever on base in front of him.
There is also very little year-to-year correlation with the ability to hit with RISP above or below the baseline rate.
Touche.Quote:
Originally Posted by filihok
He was pretty worthless if he wasn't involved in any runs being scored.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
He probably wouldn't be worthless in future years.
Well then why would I give a damn about how "worthless" he was that one time? It would be completely irrelevant to the whole "building a baseball team" thing, which is kind of the point.Quote:
Originally Posted by metsguy234
No, his teammates behind him and in front of him were worthless. There is only one thing for a player to do to directly produce a run by himself and that is a home run (okay, and steal home). If he doesn't hit home runs and only gets on base but never scores or drives in runs, that's because the teammates ahead and behind of him aren't doing their job.Quote:
Originally Posted by metsguy234
You're right, and this is why RBI's are useless at evaluating A PLAYER'S ABILITY.Quote:
Originally Posted by metsguy234
We're not GMs.Quote:
Originally Posted by haveacigar
So we should act stupid when evaluating players because we're not actually making any decisions?Quote:
Originally Posted by metsguy234
:rolleyes:
christ even my god dammned older brother CJ knows that.Quote:
Originally Posted by metsguy234
Are you mentaly chalenged?
Quote:
Originally Posted by metsguy234
lol OWNED!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Billy Ripken
Yea and you are much smarter!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by TheNamelessPoet
wtfQuote:
Originally Posted by Billy Ripken
TNP stop making alts
yea its me... I am the one who always said ban all altsQuote:
Originally Posted by metsguy234
Look, if you want to jack off to a player's RBI totals, be my guest. But when talking about analyzing players and rosters, they are meaningless. And since this thread is about someone criticizing a GM's ability to do just that, that's the relevant focus.Quote:
Originally Posted by metsguy234
*beat beat beat*Quote:
Originally Posted by haveacigar
Sorry for the confusion - TNP thought 'RBI' meant 'Really Bald Intellectuals'
he's in love with men lately
I think you mean "Ridiculously Burly Irishmen".Quote:
Originally Posted by Alloutwar
ooh much better
hat tip to YD
Sounds like TNP to me.
You down with TNP?
Yeah you gay me!!
I admit to being in love with the 'old school' stats because i understand them better. To me it seems a bases loaded double has more value than a double with a runner on first. If no one wants to take the time to show me why RBI's are a useless stat could you at least direct me to a site/article that illustrates this point?
No one would ever say that 1-on doubles are better than bases loaded doubles. That's not the point.Quote:
Originally Posted by acetoolguy
The point is, whats the difference between a 1-on double and a bases loaded double? The other people in the lineup. So what does that have to do with the player being discussed?
RBI totals are simply a function of a player's hitting ability (measured in ways like HRs and OPS) and the ability of the surrounding lineup to get on base. Because the latter part is irrelevant to that player's ability, you just isolate the former when talking about a player's hitting ability. And since we already have the measures to measure the hitting ability, the RBI stat simply adds a factor which is not relevant to that player's ability, and is thus useless.
Yep. That a bases loaded double has more value than a double with a runner on first is absolutely true, but that value is being generated from multiple players - the players that got on base and the player that hit the double - and thus, shouldn't be fully attributed to the hitter. That the hitter happened to be up with the bases loaded is a function of circumstance, not the hitter's ability.
That part I get, its the 'useless' part mentioned earlier that I don't. Through the course of a season all hitters are going to be faced with the opportunity to drive in runs, some are going to better than others at it. Which measuerment to you feels best reflects that skill?Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
OBPwRISP?Quote:
Originally Posted by acetoolguy
I don't think "driving in runs" is a skill in and of itself. A good hitter will drive in more runs given the same number of opportunities as a worse hitter.Quote:
Originally Posted by acetoolguy
The "catch" here is that given two hitters of similar overall offensive value, the one that gets more of his value from extra base hits will drive in more runs than a similar overall hitter that gets more of his value from singles/walks - for example, Ichiro and Bobby Abreu (at this stage of his career) are similar in terms of their overall offensive value, but Abreu is probably "better at driving in runs" because a lot of Ichiro's value comes from infield singles, whereas Abreu gets more extra base hits. So, the best hitters at "driving in runs" will be the best all-around hitters that derive a good amount of value from extra base hits.
I don't think it's necessary to measure that though, since it's already accounted for if you simply evaluate a player based on his offensive skills.
the claim is that hitting with the opportunity to drive in runners is exactly the same as hitting without the opportunity to drive in runners.Quote:
Originally Posted by acetoolguy
A bases loaded double takes the same skill as a bases empty double
Yeah, 'skill' was a poor choise of words. I get what your saying, thanks for taking the time.
I still like RBI's.....lol.
Well, that gets into the tricky question of whether there are hitters that are better at hitting with runners on than not. Any data I've seen would say that hitting with RISP isn't a repeatable skill, and that there isn't a repeated ability to hit with RISP better than that player's normal offensive baseline.Quote:
Originally Posted by acetoolguy
However, whether or not that's true, RBI is still is a bad stat because it doesn't actually say whether the hitter has more RBIs because he's better or because he has more opportunities. There's just nothing useful to be gained from it
xRBI
TNP, I believe the term you're looking for is "FAP".Quote:
Originally Posted by TheNamelessPoet
As in: *FAP FAP FAP*
:D
Where I come from FAP means Fingers A** P****Quote:
Originally Posted by StreetMedic
Who'da thought there were different dialects of this sort of thing? ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by filihok
That's called the shocker round here.Quote:
Originally Posted by filihok
It's called just another Wednesday afternoon around hereQuote:
Originally Posted by OregonDuck1989
Wow.Quote:
Originally Posted by etothep
LMFAO