thehockeysong
Registered User
- Nov 1, 2009
- 1,373
- 369
Hard to decipher meaningful information from it. More specific stats tend to be more helpful and leave the user with less work to figure out what's actually happening.
Blue Jays Discussion: Everyone's hurt, but some are starting to make returns
- Thread starter The Nemesis
- Start date
- Status
Hard to decipher meaningful information from it. More specific stats tend to be more helpful and leave the user with less work to figure out what's actually happening.
Bluelines
Python FTW!
- Nov 17, 2013
- 12,349
- 4,559
I've never heard anyone ever say that before, It's kinda a straight forward high level stat, base runner on base (or HR), batter did something to get him home. It's no different than an assist in hockey.
The problem, like any other stat, is in how people use it. Historically, people use RBI to express who the best hitters are, and it's not accurate for that because there are too many factors involved beyond just hitting ability.
So it's not a garbage stat... it's just been used poorly for the last 100+ years.
Bluelines
Python FTW!
- Nov 17, 2013
- 12,349
- 4,559
OK, you really can't control how people interpret stats, RBIs are basic. I do agree with people that say Wins/Loss for a pitcher are junks stats. RBI's are basic, not really a hitters stat, really just an indication of a guy who took advantage of a situation to knock a guy in. A guy who hits 40hr, 125 RBI's but barely hits .200 is not really a good hitter per se but is good at production. there was a guy in Tampa a few years ago was all or nothing he struck out a lot but he could hit dingers and knock people in, not a good hitter at all but was productive. I want to say his last name was Cruz? I cant remember though.
Clark4Ever
What we do in hockey echoes in eternity...
It looks like we may have dodged a bullet with Ryu's injury.
I don't how much more adversity this roster can withstand.
I don't how much more adversity this roster can withstand.
Sounds like Carlos Pena, but he walked a lot too, which made him a really good overall hitter.
Bluelines
Python FTW!
- Nov 17, 2013
- 12,349
- 4,559
BertCorbeau
F*ck cancer - RIP Fugu and Buffaloed
CatchyTune
JOHN TAVARES IS A MAPLE LEAF
TheMadHatTrick
Registered User
- Nov 2, 2008
- 7,162
- 3,353
Former projected top 10 pick Matt McLain seems to be falling down draft boards. If he makes it to our pick I wonder if Atkins will pounce. Advanced college hitter with middle infield profile. Started off slow this year but numbers are back to expectation now.
.326/.416/.580 8hr 7(2b) 22bb 23so
.326/.416/.580 8hr 7(2b) 22bb 23so
CatchyTune
JOHN TAVARES IS A MAPLE LEAF
There's really not that much that RBIs can tell you that OPS can't. Although some players have more ribbies because they're more clutch, RBIs are mostly a product of things outside the hitter's control. I.e lineup placement and the team they're on.
thehockeysong
Registered User
- Nov 1, 2009
- 1,373
- 369
What's the scenario where RBI is the best and most informative stat to use? Looking at their performance with runnerson base for instance might be more what you're actually looking for. I'm not sure I've ever had to use RBIs to gauge how someone is doing
thehockeysong
Registered User
- Nov 1, 2009
- 1,373
- 369
An RBI example of noise could be a slow runner above you in the lineup. Seeing how the batter actually hits through another stat is more informative. That's presuming someone isn't trying to use RBIs to actually see if a runner is fast above another player in the lineup. I think that's a fair presumption
Bluelines
Python FTW!
- Nov 17, 2013
- 12,349
- 4,559
Pretty sure I said it was a basic stat (multiple times), basic by definition should imply to you that its not the most comprehensive stat, but to call it a junk stat is dumb.
thehockeysong
Registered User
- Nov 1, 2009
- 1,373
- 369
Other stats that haven't been around as long are just as easy to use and tell you more. That's why he called it a garbage stat.
Bluelines
Python FTW!
- Nov 17, 2013
- 12,349
- 4,559
He would be wrong, it's a stat, just a stat, not good, not bad, just a stat. Just because other stats have been around as long and tell you more does not make it a garbage stat, its just stupid to disqualify a stat using that criteria.
Let me try it, HRs is junk stat, it does not tell you if it was hit off a slider, fastball or knuckle, it does not tell you if the pitcher was tipping his pitches, it does not tell you if it was hit into the wind or against the wind, it does not tell you if it was with base runners on or bags empty. It does not tell you the Humidity level in the Air. It does not tell you if it was a short porch or straight away. It does not tell you the count.
I've been playing or coaching ball for over 45 years. Never , have I ever heard a person call RBI's a garbage stat until today. I've played with and against players who went to the MLB, I've had beers with former MLBers and never ever has anyone after knocking in a few RBI's say yeah I might have had a few RBI's but its a junk stat.
thehockeysong
Registered User
- Nov 1, 2009
- 1,373
- 369
And IMO he is right. If there's never a reason that it's the most useful stat, it sounds pretty bad to me. I'll leave it here, but the 45 years in baseball thing might have more to do with why RBIs can't be a bad stat here, as opposed to the actual usefulness of the stat.
The Nemesis
Semper Tyrannus
RBIs are a bad stat because they have little evaluative or predictive value. They don't truly tell you much about what the player did considering there's little that separates a hit that garners RBIs vs one that doesn't other than things outside the batter's control. On a game-by-game basis you're better off just qualitatively evaluating someone's plate appearances or using straight up hits or walks or whatnot. On a seasonal basis you're going to get more out of HR, OBP/OPS, wRC+ or the like.
Small sample issues, but let's just look at the year-to-date league results.
Mike Trout is... Mike Trout. The best hitter in baseball. Vlad is in or near the top 5 in most decent broadly evaluative offensive stats at the moment.
Where are they on the RBI leaderboard? In the 40s, tied with several other players with 12 apiece. Kyle Tucker in Houston, who's currently batting a sterling .181 has more RBIs than either of them. Travis Shaw has more. Trey Mancini has more and he's struggling to stay above the Mendoza line and is overall hitting like a below-average player.
They also don't really tell you anything about a player that is concretely useful moving forward. Sure, most of the time high RBI totals correlate to "good player". But they can also go way out of whack with little surface explanation. It's how you get Joe Carter topping 100 RBI in 1997 while also being pretty much the worst regular hitter on the team outside of Benito "I'm a catcher so I don't really count" Santiago. Or 100+ RBI seasons from luminaries like Adam Lind, and Tony Batista.
I think people say RBIs are a junk stat because if you're less strident about it, that becomes an invitation to 'yeah but' excuse its shortcomings. The reality of RBIs is that while having racked up a lot of RBIs in a season is cool, there are better stats to look at when you want to answer the question of how well a guy did in a season. And yes, HRs might be one of them if we're presuming that the choice is "you get one stat and that's it." It's obviously not a great stat for overall offensive prowess, but it's more likely to be a reliable one than RBIs. It's easy to get into whatabout arguments like "well HRs are junk if you don't filter for pitch type or park dimensions or opposing pitcher fly ball rates or whatever" but the point isn't that RBIs have potentially obscuring drill-down splits and quirks. It's that holding all other things equal they're more likely to be faulty than another stat like HRs.
If you can acknowledge that pitcher wins are too noisy and messy to be useful as an evaluative tool for pitchers, the case against RBIs is largely the same when it comes to hitters.
Kurtz
Registered User
- Jul 17, 2005
- 10,550
- 7,828
- Status
