3
2011
Does OPS Correlate Better To Runs Scored Than RBI?
An article by 
I’m sure regular readers here are familiar with the debate between XtreemIcon and me regarding the relevance of On-Base Percentage (OBP) and Slugging Percentage (SLG) compared to Runs Batted In (RBI) as it correlates to Runs Scored (RS).
Now that the season is done I thought it was worth looking at the actual data to see what really correlates better to scoring runs: OBP, SLG, OPS(OBP+SLG) or RBI.
2011
(Click to enlarge)
The above chart shows the average differential in correlation between OBP, SLG OPS (OBP+SLG) and RBI.
RBI on average will correlate to RS ranking within plus or minus 0.800 of actual RS rank. It was never off by more than 4 for any team.
OBP will, on average, correlate to RS rank within plus or minus 2.600 of actual RS rank and was off by 12 in its worst prediction.
SLG was a bit better only missing by 2.467 on average with its worst prediction off by 6.
OPS (Which is a combo of OBP and SLG) fared not much better still missing by 1.600 on average but did not miss more than 5 to SLGs 6! Still worse than RBI did on prediction.
Neither OBP, SLG or OPS could predict who would be in the top 10 of RS but RBI was PERFECT as it predicted all of the top 10 teams.
What is significant though is the margin of error for any given team.
The Toronto Blue Jays and the Cincinnati Reds have no business being 6th and 7th in RS if OBP and SLG are the key. They should be much lower. Out of the top 10 for sure. But they are not and why is that? Their 7th and 9th ranked RBI of course.
XtreemIcon would like to limit the proof to the top 5 teams, I wonder why? Could it be that #6 team the Toronto Blue Jays, Whose RBI predicted would be there but his OBP and SLG said they had no business being in the top 10 at all?
He tries to argue against this by demanding a bottom 5 team in OBP has to be in the Top 5 to prove OBP wrong. If a bottom 5 team was top 5 in RBI then it would! Unfortunately most bottom 5 teams suck at everything including OBP and RBI.
In the end OPS predicted 9 out of 10 of the top 10 teams while RBI predicted them all.
2010
RBI on average will correlate to RS ranking within plus or minus 0.800 of actual RS rank. It was never off by more than 4 for any team.
OBP will on average correlate to RS rank within plus or minus 3.600 of actual RS rank and was off by 17 in its worst prediction.
SLG was a bit better than OBP but worse compared to 2011 missing by 2.933 on average with its worst prediction off by 11.
OPS fared better still missing by 2.600 on average but whose worse prediction was off by 11.
Neither OBP, SLG nor OPS could accurately predict who would show up in the top 10 of RS yet RBI was PERFECT.
If what XtreemIcon says is true then Tampa Toronto and the Phillies should not be in the top 10 under any circumstances. The Tigers and Brewers should be instead. They fall just short but where their RBI says they should pretty much be.
The Toronto Blue jays again throw a wicked wrench into the OBP/SLG theory of correlation. It also pretty much dowses the defended notion that OBP and SLG produce High RBI and not the fact that High RBi is merely recorded as an OB and in many cases is a hit that contains a heavier SLG as well but the SLG and the OB itself is not required for a high RBI result to occur.
Toronto was high in SLG low in OBP which tends to suggest they hit a lot of Solo HRs which is the one stat they lead the league in. And as I have proposed many times what gets you that HR happens LONG before any base is touched, No base is in play when he whacked the ball over the fence and the fact of the TIMING that the RBI was BUREAUCRATICALLY recorded after the OB is inconsequential. The act that CAUSED the RBI was done in the batter’s box not after he touched a base.
The Phillies shouldn’t have been in the top 10 at all if OBP and SLG is significant but the RBI being key relates their ranking quite well.
And Tampa should be no better than 10th in RS as their OPS is 14th and pretty much would predict them OUT of the top ten… Again it is the RBI that is the key and it really doesn’t seem to matter what your OBP, SLG or OPS is in regards to getting those RBIs.
2009
Hmm… 2009 doesn’t seem to disprove any of the above points I made. In fact it shows RBI is even better this year with a 0.400 differential its worst prediction was off by 2.
OBP correlated to RS rank within plus or minus 3.933 of actual RS rank (Its worst year) and was off by 14 in its worst prediction.
SLG was a bit worse this year missing by 2.533 on average with its worst prediction off by 11.
OPS came closer to average still missing by 1.533 on average with a miss of 6 as its worst prediction.
OPS and SLG could tell you who were going to be in the top 10 this year, but not what order, RBI was near perfect and only missed because it swapped the Rockies with the Blue Jays in the rankings.
OBP failed miserably in predicting the list of top 10 teams on its own.
Site Note: Charts were also created for 2008, 2007 and 2006, but not included so that the page will load for our dial-up friends. Email the site if you would like them.
2008
Again RBI predicts plus or minus 0 .667 on average the correct ranking of RS compared to 3.900, 3.100, and 2.167 of OBP, SLG and OPS.
OBP worst prediction off by 11, SLG off by 16, OPS off by 13, RBI only 3.
Twins should not be in the top 5 if you read the OBP/SLG/OPS but RBI predicts precise placement.
Mets shouldn’t be there either if RS needs OBP and SLG to be produced.
St Louis did everything you claimed was important to scoring runs and increasing RS yet wasn’t even in the top 10 of Runs Scored. WHAT HAPPENED?
2007
Again RBI predicts plus or minus 1.133 on average the correct ranking of RS compared to 3.833, 3.300, and 2.300 of OBP, SLG and OPS.
OBP worst prediction off by 15, SLG off by 11, OPS off by 9, RBI only off by 3.
Only case where OBP/SLG/OPS come up with the correct answer when RBI does not is Atlanta.
But it also says Angels Rangers and Indians should not be there yet they are. RBI predicts them accurately as top 10 teams in RS
One more year just for good measure.
2006
RBI predicts plus or minus 1 .033 on average the correct ranking of RS compared to 4.800, 3.600, and 2.333 of OBP, SLG and OPS.
OBP worst prediction off by 16, SLG off by 11, OPS off by 10, and yet again RBI only off by 3 at most.
Damn those pesky Toronto Blue Jays who have in most years screwed up your assertion regarding OBP/SLG/OPS as in this year they should have been right at the top of RS yet only wound up 12th.
Now with all that data displayed and seeing how much of a crap shoot OBP/SLG/OPS is at predicting who is going to score the most runs does it really make using those crap-shoots as a good judge of who will help you score those runs?
Or is as the data clearly shows, that if you target players who consistently drive in runs, it will translate FAR BETTER in increasing Runs Scored than using OBP/SLG or OPS?
I think this should finally put to rest this supposed 30 years of research no one has ever seen that says OBP+SLG is the great prerequisite to Runs Scored when clearly it doesn’t correlate at all.
Good teams who score a lot of runs will in MANY cases have good numbers in OBP and SLG as well. And saying that higher OBP+SLG will result in higher Runs Scored is Simply Not True.
In the charts shown there are a ton of teams with higher OBP and SLG than so many other teams and yet they still did not score more runs.
I was challenged to name one team with a low ranked OBP that finished the season ranked high in runs scored. The Detroit Tigers had the sixth worse OBP in 2006 and they were eighth in runs scored. So much for the OBP.
This Fan Shot was submitted by Mike (Metsie). Have something you want to say about the Mets? Share your opinions with over eleven-thousand Mets fans who read this site daily. Send your Fan Shot to GetMetsmerized@aol.com.
About the Author: Fan Shot
To share your opinions with over 11,000 different readers each day, simply email us at GetMetsmerized@aol.com. Thanks for supporting MMO, the #1 Mets Fan Site on the web. Lets Go Mets!
327 Comments + Add Comment
NL East Standings
| Team | W | L | Pct. | GB |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Braves | 26 | 17 | .605 | - |
| Nationals | 25 | 17 | .595 | 0.5 |
| Marlins | 23 | 19 | .548 | 2.5 |
| Mets | 22 | 20 | .524 | 3.5 |
| Phillies | 21 | 22 | .488 | 5.0 |
Last updated: 05/22/2012
Recent Comments
- Russell Zanca: on Arr, Dickey Stifles The Pirates In A Swashbucklin’ 3-2 Victory Over The Pirates: Apparently, TC and Warthen discussed removing R.A....
- Nathan: on On The Road With Petey Pete: Wet & Soggy In New Britain: I am seriously jealous. Work has always...
- Nathan: on 2012 MLB Draft: OF David Dahl, SS Carlos Correa, C Stryker Trahan: I love draft time. It's like the...
- Joey D.: on Morning Grind: We Sure Could Use Someone Like Angel Pagan In Centerfield Right Now: Fonzi, Forgot to add to my assessment that...
- Joey D.: on Morning Grind: We Sure Could Use Someone Like Angel Pagan In Centerfield Right Now: Hi Fonzie, Oh, I agree that anyone who...
MMO Live Chat
Write Your Own Mets Post
Your comparing two things that are part and parcel of the same thing.
99% of the time you cannot have a RS without an RBI. 100% of the time one cannot have an RBI without a RS. How is it even remotely possible that this combination could not correlate the best? Of course it does. It’s the same damn thing, just separated into individual columns.
Take a teams RBI total and multiply by 1.01 and you should have the run scored total (with in a few) every single time, for every single team in every single season simply because 99% of the time a run scores, an RBI is awarded.
Since RS and RBI are basically the same thing wouldn’t it make more sense to see which factors affect a teams run scored totals the most?
For instance we scored 718 runs this year and 656 last year. What caused the difference? We had a better BA (.264-.249) better OB (.335-.314) better SLG (.391-.383) More doubles (309-266) same 3B (39-40) and less HR’s (108-128)
We not only scored 62 more runs this year than last, we did it while actually hitting 20 less HR’s. HR’s are by definition a run scoring event(s) so just to be even in RS we must have been doing something else better to make up for the loss of those 20 HR’s. What could it have been? Well we did have 43 more doubles, that helps. We also had 116 more hits and 71 more walks both of which are by definition OB positive. I assume we probably made roughly the same number of outs in 2010 as 2011 even with the 20 inning game in 2010 so that’s a constant.
Looking at the thing that way you would really have to say that the extra hits and the extra walks were the difference. Even the increase in doubles probably isn’t a wash with the loss of 20 HR’s since Hr’s are automatically at least one run and sometimes two or three and doubles could be but frequently aren’t.
I submit that we scored 62 more runs because we had 187 more base runners.
An interesting case study the opposite way would be Atlanta. They scored 641 runs this year and 738 last season.
What could account for THAT difference? They had a worse BA (.243-.258) Worse OB (.308-.339) Worse SLG (.387-.401) less 2B’s (244-312) less 3B (16-25) and MORE HR’s (173-139)
They not only scored 97 less runs than last year, they actually did it while hitting 34 MORE HR’s. Again HR’s are by definition a run scoring event(s) and yet by hitting 34 more of them, they actually wound up scoring 97 less runs. What could account for this seeming contradiction?
68 less doubles and 34 more HR’s could be a wash but I tend to think that two doubles do not equal one HR but that alone couldn’t account for 97 less runs being scored and either could the loss of 9 triples effect the runs scored so greatly. There just has to be something else.
How about hits? 66 less hits. Walks? 130 less walks. 197 less base runners.
I submit that Atlanta lost 97 runs because they lost 196 base runners even though and despite the fact they hit 34 more HR’s.
You make too much sense. Therefore, you must be witch. Am I far off here?
See if he weighs more than a duck.
I’m glad someone got the reference.
They scored less runs because they did everything worse including getting on base, slugging and driving in runs (RBI!)
fewer runs, not less runs.
I submit that Atlanta lost 97 runs because they lost 196 base runners even though and despite the fact they hit 34 more HR’s.”
always keeping track eh??!??
Does RS = RBI?
NO!
SO I guess the statement they are the same thing has been disproven hasn’t it?
Go back and log every single time the Mets were credited with an RBI. When they were, did a run score? I’ll bet they did, every single time. Can’t have an RBI without a run scored. They are the same thing, just awarded to two different people. It’s just baseball. You need to give it up.
Yes because RBIs score runs, OBs don’t without something else happening!
If you want to prove otherwise then go back and show how every OB scored an RS!
Or is this whole line of questioning an attempt to get away from the subject about how badly OBP/SLG/OPS does in generating more runs than teams with lesser numbers in those categories!
No, runs create RBIs.
Yeah what does a runner on 2nd do to force a guy at the plate to hit a double that scores that runner?
Cross the plate?
What did the hitter do to put that guy on 2nd?
Ah so you think he crossed the plate and THEN the guy hit the double?
This is why everyone thinks your a dolt!
reality does not exist in your world!
Only your fantasy!
The guy on 2nd does NOTHING and can do NOTHING until the batter hits the ball!
“Ah so you think he crossed the plate and THEN the guy hit the double?”
Does the batter get an RBI if the runner doesn’t cross the plate?
“The guy on 2nd does NOTHING and can do NOTHING until the batter hits the ball!”
How did he get there to begin with?
What if he steals 3rd? That makes the batter’s job a lot easier.
More circle jerking from you?
Does the runner score if the batter doesn’t do something to allow him to score?
the RBI means the batter did something to score the run.
Not the runner!
Runs do not always create RBI’s. You can score a run on a wild pitch, double play, balk, passed ball, interference. There is no RBI credited. The RBI is a guaranteed RUN SCORED by way of walk, out, hit.
No they are not. One is a stat given to a guy who crosses home plat and the other is a stat that is given to the guy who makes that crossing possible!
TWO different things!
Are they related? YES! THATS MY POINT OB and SLG are NOT related yet they keep being put forth as BEING CO-RELATED and co-relating better than anything when I have shown they are not related in any way shape or form!
Then proceeded to show something that ACTUALLY rrelates better!
OB and SLG are NOT RELATED to RS! RBI is! I don’t see what point your getting at other than agreeing with me that RBI RELATES,CO-RELATES and PREDUCTS relative RS rank placement better than something that has NOTHING TO DO with RS as was proposed by X with his OBP+SLG claim!
I think any said best. You cannot prove that a dependent variable correlates, you can only prove that an independent variable correlates.
RS and RBI ARE DEPENDENT VARIABLES. Dependent on each other.
So only UNRELATED stats can corelate…Look up correlate in the dictionary dude really!
Thats your idea of debunking this then you are clearly blind to the charts I just showed you!
No, related things correlate all the time, they just don’t prove anything.
Your basically a very thin fine hair away from saying “if you want more runs scored you have to score more runs.”
What kind of sense does that make? In essence your simply restating the goal, not providing a solution.
No what I’m saying is if you want MORE RS then look at the stats that produce them! Not the stats that are co-incidental in producing them and HOPING for the best!
You think because all red apples are apples incresing apples gets you more red ones!
I say get red apples not just apples so you don’t wind up just increasing the green apples you can’t use!
Your hoping by getting more apples that it will increase you chance of finding red apples!
I’m going directly to the stat that tells me how many red apples I will increase if I get that player!
Oh so you admit OBP/SLG/OPS is not related then?
Thank you for coming around and agreeing with me!
No? no rely on this? Nothing to say?
Sweeping your conceeding the point under the rug here hoping it goes away?
Metsie, unless I am mistaken you can’t have an rbi without awarding also a run scored but you can have a run scored without awarding an rbi. At best the way I have understood it is that a general rule of thumb is that usually in each respective league teams with a high obp usually also have a high runs scored but like all numbers in baseball there are exceptions to the rule.
Well MNJ I showed clearly there is no correlation to OBP and RS at all.
none, not even close it is a NON FACTOR in RS! Slg is a little better than OBP and using OBP+SLG (OPS) gets you closer but you can have a low OBP (
2011 – Blue Jays.
2010 – BlueJays again 6th Worse,
2009 – Phillies BlueJays Rangers
2008 – White Sox Phillies
2007 – Rangers
2006 – Braves Rangers Tigers
And still wind up in the top 10 of teams scored.
HIGH OBP is a poor and a complete nonfactor to RS!
Those listed were the worst exceptions but look at the chart and the anomolies are clear it really doesn’t matter how much OBP you have it’s what you do with them that makes for good RS. Which is why SLG does a better job than OBP but still not enough to say it has any quatifiable affect on RS. RBI is the hit, the slg the ob AND EVEN THE OUT that scores those runs and if not that some ERROR or mitigating factor such as GIDP where no RBI is recorded.
In 2010 just look at Tampa. 10th in OBP, 14th in SLG 14th OPS. 3rd is RS ahead of everyone who had a greater performance in those areas! Better than Cincy 5th,4th and 3rd. Better than the twins, 2nd,7th and 5th…Whats the difference?
What they did to SCORE those runs in an AB noted an awarded by the RBI!
The RBI can be anything from a SacFly (no OB), to a HR (OB RS and SLG)!
All I can say then is speaking for myself I find more times than not that in their respective league teams that find themselves in the top say 6 in obp are similar to the same teams that find themselves in the top 6 in runs scored. Same goes for teams in say the bottom 6. Is it always the case across the board? No, but again in general I’ve noticed that it does happen to be the case often times. Still like I said there are exceptions to the rule.
that is why OPS is a good measure to use. Normally, the only way a low OBP team is going to be a high RS team is if they jack a lot of HRs (since there are fewer base runners overall, the batter will have to score more often).
So yes, you can find extremes both ways, but most teams have a relative balance and the top ones are going to be teams that get men on base, and hit for power to drive them in (with a reasonable number of HRs in that mix)
Yet teams with higher OBP and SLG (OPS) still score fewer runs than other teams with lower OBP/SLG/OPS
Until you can prove that increasing those stats guarantees yu MORE runs than someone else with less performance in that area your only guessing and have no proof for what your saying here!
Why didn’t the Blue Jays make the top 10 in 2006 doing what you claim was true?
Or is it that the teams with the highest RBI (which I showed MORE DIRECTLY relates to how much better than the competition is at scoring runs) has a high OBP and SLG due to those being recorded at the same time an RBI is recorded?
Look at eh #6 team in RS, is what you said true?
Or is it that they got the runs in without the need for high OBP!
I proved you can score more runs without high OBP so the height of the OBP is irrelevant!
And the teams that are good at RBI are also good at RBI too!
Does not mean the OBP which everyone has said here is NOT related is significant…It is increased as a coincidental act of the RBI in many cases!
Metsie I know I am repeating myself but like I said there are exceptions to the rule. Another thing is that I notice you combine the both leagues together as if they both play under the same rules and in my opinion since they don’t (Designated hitter) they should be viewed separately. If you look at them separately and look at what I said about the top 6 bottom 6 scenario you will see that what i mentioned earlier to be true more times than not.
I am not saying obp is more important than ba. They both have value and it is when any stat is used in combination with other stats that theose stats work best.
“Metsie I know I am repeating myself but like I said there are exceptions to the rule”
Is there ever any EXCEPTION for a HIT being better than anything else?
If not why not go for that and let the OBP happen at it’s normal occurrance while your in the proccess of going for the BETTER play?
Different leagues should not matter except in regards that AL has an advantage over NL.
But OBP is calculated the same for both leagues. So is SLG!
So since we are exanmining the STAT not the teams themselves it is totally reasonable that we show who put up the numbers regardless of situation and league to see if the STAT itself is valid in what it supposedly says.
What i was referring to when i said “here are exceptions to the rule” was when sometimes you find in the rankings a team in the top tier in obp but bottom tier in runs or vice versa. On the different leagues we will have to agree to disagree.
You don’t have to of course but if you do ever decide to look at what I was remarking to you about regarding the top 6 bottom 6 scenario you will see I believe that what i mentioned earlier to be true more times than not.
Yes MNJ and if it was just one anomoly it would be one thing to say it’s an outlier…
But the exceptions are not small, They are vast! Teams who do better do not score as much as teams who do worse in that metric!
As for the leagues like I said we are comparing a STAT’s viability. The stats may be easier to get for some than others but the bottomline remains that if OBP is significant it’s about the MATH not the league that created the variables!
we are testing variables here!
Not League comparisons!
6 of 10 of the top RS teams are AL.
would those NL teams compare better if they were in the AL?
Maybe! But the we are talking about statistical analysis here and if the stat is true it translates at the same rate regardless of league!
if OBP+SLG= +RS then it’s true no matter what league your in no?
“But the exceptions are not small, They are vast!”
I hear what your saying Metsie but I simply disagree because based on the scenario I referenced earlier the exceptions are indeed small.
If it was just one team that got in that shouldn’t it would be one thing…
But the rankings on OBP+SLG don’t jive in anyway shape or form even with teams that have good numbers.
It’s not just the Toronto example here, It’s the ones who did better than other good team yet STILL scored less runs!
The OBP+SLG model doesn’t even work for the t4eams that have it! Throw out the outliers like toronto and it still fails to show any correlation to who scored more runs!!
Understood Metsie but I was strictly discussing obp & runs rankings not obp+slg.
Having said that Metsie there is nothing more I can say without further repeating myself so if you like I can if you prefer try to show you in a chart what we have been discussing or you can at your convenience look into it yourself and see if that helps in showing what I been saying?
If OBP is a non factor in scoring runs, then how come the Red Sox had the highest OBP and most runs scored? How come the Yankees had the second highest OBP and second most runs scored?
in 2011, the top 5 teams in OBP also are top 5 in Runs.
Mariners were last in OBP and wouldn’t you know it, last in runs scored! The Giants were second to last in OBP and second to last in runs scored! The Padres were third to last in OBP and third to last in runs scored!
To say that on base percentage is a non factor is just ignorant.
I don’t understand how you can be smart enough to turn on a computer, but not smart enough to see that your argument is that RUNS is directly related to RUNS BATTED IN. Doesn’t it by definition have to be? You cant bat in a run unless you get a run.
I’m really looking to your follow up argument that explains how putouts can be directly correlated to outs by the opposition.
Lets continue to argue the Earth is flat.
“how come the Red Sox had the highest OBP and most runs scored?”
Because they also had the highest RBI as well?
Why? Cause they were a good team at EVERYTHING!
Now tell us why Toronto with 24th rank of OBP had more than all the teams that had more than then with the exception of the top 5 teams who were as good if not BETTER at RBI than Toronto?
No no answer?
and all the teams you mentioned what was their ranking in RBI?
The one CONSTANT between teams with high OBP and low OBP being at the top is the RBI not the OBP!
Do you not understand how ridiculously stupid this argument is?
RUNS=RBI.
THEY ARE THE SAME!!! CAN WE PLEASE HAVE SOME COMMON SENSE IN HERE?
Do teams have the same number of RS as RBI’s
Do you not realize how rediculously stupid you are for avoiding what the argument IS about?
How OBP doesn’t correelate to RS?
The flaw with OBS is simply that baseball game are won by the team that scores the most runs. But the team with the higher OBS in a game does not score the most runs as often as the team with the most RBIs in the game. OBS assumes that you don’t have to score more than your opponent to win a game.
OPS (or OBP) doesn’t assume anything. Years of stats show that overall, teams that put more men on base score more runs.
Yeah in all years except the years I showed apparently…
The charts are there dude!
It shows that the guys with the best OPS and SLG and OBP do not socre the most runs!
To say otherwise just goes to show your hoping toperpetuate the lie until it sticks!
If I had a dollar for every time the Mets lost a game in which they had the most hits+walks I could probably by myself a new iPad. That includes seven of the last 10 Mets losses.
The mere fact that you have more hits and walks is no guarantee of anything especially over a seven game period.
Check out the numbers in the 1960 World Series.
That’s one of the reasons we love the game so much.
Some of those hits and walks can be erased. GB double plays, lining into a double play, caught stealing, thrown out going 1st to 3rd or 2nd to home, where and when you get them for you and your opponent and random occurances like errors, ect.
Like being dealt two pair. Gives you a good chance but still…..
They give you a better chance but they are no guarantee in and of themselves.
“The mere fact that you have more hits and walks is no guarantee of anything especially over a seven game period.”
YES TAG! PRECISELY!
So picking players based on numbers that can not guarantee anything by themselves is a fools chase!
OBP and SLH does not guarantee a single run will be scored as it depends on the timing of the OB and the SLG and that the SLG isn’t just the only OB that happened!
So to pick players based on OBP does nothing for your ability to score runs!
Picking players who have a high number of ABs that drive those runs in is the way to go when judging players!
except for the fact that getting RBIs is highly dependent on having guys on base. which is why even big RBI guys can fluctuate quite a bit year to year.
To use an extreme example, if no one was ever on base in front of him, Luis castillo could not have more than 1 RBI per year. Even if he batted 1000.
Who is on base when the HR is hit?
What base is he on when the ball goes over the fence to allow him to touch a base?
sighhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh……………….
“…the better indicator/predictor of Runs Scored (RS).”
That’s your first and biggest mistake. RBI is not an “indicator” or “predictor” of runs scored. It’s the same thing. You ever hear of “garbage in, garbage out”? When your argument begins with a false thesis, everything else that follows is wrong, too. That’s what happened here.
If you began with RBI better correlates to runs scored than any other stat, there’d be no argument. But as far as “indicators” and “predictors” go, you opening statement negates everything after because you mis-represent what an RBI is, a result of the same play a run scored is the result of. You’ve been doing it for a long time. Sorry you wasted your time. Looks like you did a lot of research.
His original sentence didn’t read that way. It was my mistake in restructuring the sentence during editing. Here is exactly what he wrote.
I’m sure everyone is familiar with the debate between XtreemIcon and me regarding the relevance of OBP + SLG to RS compared to RBI.
I had no idea what his point was and was not following your debate. When I replaced the anagrams with what they stood for so readers would understand, the sentence seemed improperly worded so I changed to infer what I thought he meant. Clearly I messed it up.
Sorry, Mike.
I’ve corrected it. His point is exactly what he states in his title.
Thanks for clarifying. He still presents his argument in that way, though, which makes it an invalid argument.
You claim OBP is a PREDICTOR You say it co-relates to RS!
I just showed it does not relate at all!
Look at how well someone with a high OBP team did compared to teams that did not!
Arizona Diamondbacks did what you want and had higher OBP/SLG/OPS Why didn’t they score more runs than BlueJays?
Yes Garbage in Garbage out applies!
You looked for the garbage and tried to say it was the reason for higher RS!
But when used to judge the rest of the teams the Garbage didn’t get the job done, something else did!
You looked at the can of garbage, took a whiff and determined the Can itself must smell not the garbage inside the can!
You claimed OBP is an indicator of RS. I just showed how it indicated nothing not even WITH SLG and OPS used!
RBI did and got the answer you claimed they would provide!
just because there is not a 100% correlation does not mean it is not valid. you seem to have issues with that concept. That is why you need to look at a large enough sample size to be statistically relevant, and when you have one, the best predictors sort to the top.
Just because you can find an anomaly (like the blue jays) does not mean that the other 98% of the time don’t count, or are somehow invalid.
Actually the 2010 Blue jays are the perfect cross check to the whole argument. 755 runs scored and 257 HR’s with a .312 OB.
How many other teams in MLB could have scored ALL of their runs that they did score if every HR that they did hit was a Grand Slam? Answer, none. In fact the 2010 Twins would have had 200 runs left over if all their HR”s were grand slams.
The only thing that one can take from the 2010 Blue Jays is how many fewer runs they did score considering how many HR’s they hit and that can only be attributed to one thing…..they didn’t get enough guys OB.
Dude you have already admitted that they are unrelated!
It’s not cvalid! There are SCORES of anaomolies in your concept.
OPS is all over the place!
Meaning it really doesn’t matter what you do with OPS it does not guarantee anything regarding RS!
If it was the key you claim it is then none of the teams like Angels, Rangers in 2007 COULD have been in the top 10 of RS!
It’s not valid it misses the mark by 10 ranks at worst!
Metsie I am a big believer in OB for on the field reasons that I’ve explained to you in the past but my biggest gripe with “RBI correlates best with RS” nonsense is that 99% of the time a run scores and RBI is creited and 100% of the time an RBI is credited a run has scored. That right there invalidates the whole concept. Their two different cumulative totals of the same exact act. They may be different stats but they are born of same exact event. 99% one way, 100% the other. One is no more a predictor of the other than it is of itself.
That alone invalidates it’s use as for correlating to the other.
Yes and what percentage of OB is a run credited?
Do you know? Can you Say?
If not then how can you say getting more increases RS if you don’t have a solid number of what percentage are scored?
Red apples outnumber green apples by X%. How many apples do you need to get 1 green apple?
Can you answer that equation?
NO because you don’t know what the ratio is of red to green apples!
Could be they outnumber them by 0%! Then you might only need 1 apple!
Same thing for OBP.
Since you can’t be sure what the conversion rate of OB is to get one RS you can’t possibly increase RS looking for higher OBP. RBI is at least a 1:1 so if you increase the RBI you can be assured you will at least get that 1:1 conversion!
You can’t guarantee that by taking a player with high obp because OBP doesn’t tell ou if he does things that will score runs. Only that someone else MIGHT score him if he gets an RBI!
The fact that you’re on your own in this argument says it better than I can. People popped out of the woodwork to tell you how wrong you were. OBP is the best indicator of runs scored. Period. RBI is not an indicator. Period.
That said, no one ever said OBP was a perfect, 100% variable, just that it was the best one. Indicators include OBP, SLG%, BA, hit total, walk total…..anything that gets you on base and OBP is the best one. RBI is the best stat because it’s the same thing as runs scored.
No the fact that I’m on my own just proves that there are a lot of fools who believe in OBP/SLG /OPS even when the data and RESEARCH is put right before their eyes!
And so far the only thing most of you hae said is RBI is related to RS and that you need an UNRELATED stats (funny I agree it is totally unrelated) to CO-RELATE!
Bass Ackwards arguments from people desperate to diprove the proof laid in plain sight before them!
Runs scored and RBI correlate in exactly the same way that turning on the TV and watching the game do.
And why after a thousand times of using the word correlate in this argument including this particular article is it all of a sudden co-relate now?
NO because the game might not be on the channel you had on when you shut off the TV…
Yes it was a smart assed answer in reply to another attempt to change the subject!
PROVE OBP relates to RS and win the day!
If not stop trying to cloud the conversation away from the facts!
Runs and RBIs are just different components of scoring a run. of course there is a huge correlation between them. It doesn’t prove anything other than not being independant variables, which they would have to be if you want to prove correlation.
This is kind of like saying assists in Hockey are a predicter of goals, as opposed to just being a different counting stat related to a goal being scored.
First of all what is an RBI? Normally, like about 95% of the time an RBI is a base hit. Right? Base hits go in what bin? The BA bin and the OB bin. Therefore an RBI is actually a component of BA and OB 95% of the time.
Can be a sacfly, GO(Sac), FC, BB(OB),1B(OB+SLG), 2B(OB+SLG), 3B(OB+SLG) or HR(OB+SLG)
OBP does not take SacFly into account, Does not take GO to score a run either.
So no it’s not just BA and OB because they don’t count Sacs as an AB and it isn’t attributed to BA it also does not constitute an OB either…so your dead wrong!
Are you trying to say since RBI is related to RS it can’t be related? I mean really?
OBP is unreleated so it co-relates?
RBI and RS are ENTIRELY independent except in the case of the HR!
Where the RBI also gets recorded as an RS for the batter who hit it.
Other than that it is completely different in what it records.
Is it related to RS YES! Thats the point! It Releates!
OBP does not in any way relate to RS.
And what is the point of putting importance on an UNRELATED stats and saying it is the most important relation?
Putting aside the ridiculousness of the R/RBI thing, I like how he uses rank-RS rank, instead of just calculating the correlation. I think it takes all of four seconds to run a corr matrix in excel.
Do it Phil PLEASE!
And do the corr on OBP as well!
Would LOVE to see it!
I used rank to make a coefficient!
You can’t compare a NUMBER to a percentage can you?
So I used RANK wich is tantamount to a count of all factors that could then be acted on with the same comparator ie how far off the mark were they!
But feel free to show your corr matrix so you can make my point when you try to show the OBP coorr as well!
rank is actually a bad thing to use. You should use actual numbers.
you can easily have a bunch of teams within fractions of each other, so effectively tied, but still showing a spread in rank.
so if you are looking at RS, and teams 1-3 are 900,899,898, then team 4 is 825, you are treating the difference between 2-3 and 3-4 the same, when they are far from it.
Ok then you tell me what percentage of OBP is required for one RS and then I will have a formular to compare OBP ro RBI as RS production is concerned!
You guys say they will score MORE RUNS!
MORE runs will RANK one team HIGHER than a team with LESS runs!
You set the paramters by saying it does something MORE than someone else!
I used ranks as rank equates to MORE of some parameter to another.
Even in the case of counts vs percentages!
You got a better way to compare?
POST IT!
Um, OBP vs. runs scored?
Yea! Show us how many runs .400 OBP get you? Can you?
And if your suggesting I compare OBP vs RS then take a look at my charts again…You will see it in Rank form!
Teams with higher OBP rank had higher OBP!
Hey moron, its called a regression analysis. Learn some basic math principals before you publicly make a fool out of yourself.
Yeah I need to learn math because you can’t find the equation to prove your point!
Your right about the regression part…
Regressing on how to find the best players!
Wow. Logic, oh logic…where for art thou logic?
You can’t have an RBI without a run. Of course they will correlate better…THEY’RE THE SAME THING! A flawed premise will equal flawed results.
ahhh SO obp RELATES better because it’s not related!
Thats your logic?
Thats your argument?
RBI is horrible at correlating because everyone KNOWS it is related?
Is correlation defined as “FIND SOMETHING TOTALLY UNRELATED and make it relate?”
Could I offer you a dictionary perhaps?
What the heck are you talking about?
This a Comparison of RBI relating to RS compared to OBP/SLG/OPS which is claimed to be the BEST correlation to RS than any other stat!
Do you think that?
PROVE it and stop talking about the RBI which is only there to show just ONE example of something that correlates better than OBP/SLG/OPS!
Why is this aways an issue on this site? Put it to bed already,it’s a total waste of time.All you have to do is reasearch team statistics since the early days of baseball.Teams with the highest OPS usually have the best offense,not always but way more times than not the higher OPS the better the team offense.End of story case closed.Teams with the higher RS nd RBI totals usually have the highest OPS.You will never see teams among the leaders in OPS at the bottom in RS/RBI.
Yeah I didn’t go back to the beginning of time…
I just showed the last 5 years…
Funny what you said wasn’t true!
Fell free to show your data as I showed mine!
Then explain why the Blue Jays and Reds had a better offense with an OPS of 10th and 11th than the teams who had 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th and 9th OPS?
Hmmm?
Like I said USUALLY! There are exceptions at times but usually the best offenses have higher OPS.Usually.What don’t you get? Go back more than 5 years.The highest OB% gaurantees only more scoring opportunities,doesn’t gaurantee more runs.You still have to knock them in.And if you’re talking about Toronto and Cincy this year being 10th and 11th in OPS scoring more runs than teams 5 thru 9 it’s really not a big difference in runs except for TOR scoring 21 more than MILW.Could be a number of reasons.Scoring on Errors.TOR and CINCY both draw a lot more walks than MILW,teams 5-8 are seperated by a few runs.Do I need to post 50 years of stats for you or can you just look it up on your own.Teams with a low OPS are usually at the bottom and teams with the higher OPS are usually near the top in runs scored.This past season the top 5 OPS teams were top 5 in runs and the bottom 7-8 teams in OPS were bottom in runs.Some teams score a few more runs than teams with a higher OPS but it’s not a huge difference and it’s for the most part with the teams in the middle of the pack.What point are you trying to make already?
You go back and show the years before the 5 I showed if you wish to state that!
Last 5 years not the case!
Your statement wasn;’t true in the case of the teams I mentioned.
So the fact that good teams are good at most things doesn’t prove OPS has anything to do with high RS.
Because it doesn’t unless the RBi is there as well!
Thats the reason the teams with lower OPS are above teams with higher OPS!
Look it up! And seperate the 2 leagues.AL and NL.Comparing offenses from both leagues doesn’t make sense,since the AL has a DH.My statements are true.Of course the RBI has to be there as well.Thanks for enlightening.Still what is your point.I’ll say it again teams with the higher OPS USUALLY,not alwways USUALLY have the best offense.It’s a fact.You can’t disregard all the other accounts for one or two exceptions.
Does the AL record obp/slg differently in both leagues?
If not then there is no reason to seperate leagues!
This is silly. But, I’ll go back to my hockey analogy.
Just like RBIs and RS, hockey teams that have more assists have more goals scored.
so, all you need to score more is get mroe assists!
I’m sure that is much better indicator than some silly unrelated item like shots on goal.
AH HA!
Yes because remember where this all started?
PLAYER SELECTION!
Do you go after a guy who has more shots on goal (regardless if he was successful or not?)
Or do you go after the player who has more assists and makes all the OTHER players on your team better!
Thanks you for making my case!
In regards to team stats if you want to improve your team you look for the stats that LEAD to scores. Not the one that gets recorded no matter if it scores or not!
In your cases you would be using getting the buck into the blue zone! HAS to be out of your BlueZoe before you can take a shot or it’s icing!
Do you go for a guy who gets the puck out of your bluezone or for the one who ASSISTS another player plus has goals of his own?
Since increasing a team OBP is really a act of player acquisition, you look for the production that directly relates to making a score happen not the circumstatial stats around that score that includes numbers where no score was made!!
Metsie, go ahead and claim victory if you like but if your going to try to do it by attempting a correlation between baseball and hockey I really have to draw the line.
Whop brought Hockey into this Tag and why didn’t you say the same thing to him?
I would disagree there Metsie. Some GM’s may make it a priority but your best results are realized in improving OB among your current personal.
The grip it and rip it virus infects entire line ups. Plate discipline takes a lot longer to incubate but it also produces so much better results. Not only do guys get OB more, they hit for a higher average and get better pitches to crush and they get them in better counts. They also get more AB’s as the lineup gets turned over more frequently. All this leads to more runs, RBI, SLG and everything else.
I wouldn’t advocate going after the high OB guy just because he’s a high OB guy. The real benefit is when you can get a whole team buying in. Then you got something.
“I would disagree there Metsie. Some GM’s may make it a priority but your best results are realized in improving OB among your current personal.”
And they would be WRONG for doing so as I just proved!
Reds Rockies royals and the mets all did what you propose and Toronto still scored more runs than them!
Your premise is all wrong. You cannot compare RBI’s to RS because they are both counting stats that directly correlate to each other.
Another thing, OPS was the lazy mans way to consider OBA/SLG in a players value. But 1 point of OBA is not equal to 1 point of SLG, so it is a bit flawed.
Use the Runs Created Formula (the most basic version)
RC = ((Hits + Walks) X Total Bases) / (AB + BB)
And it will be between 5% of the actual runs scored.
2011 RC = 726 Runs = 717
“You cannot compare RBI’s to RS because they are both counting stats that directly correlate to each other.”
Exactly they CORRELATE!
OBP does not!
Neither does SLG
And Neither does OPS!
There are obviously MANY formulas to get a better correlation than OBP/SLG/OPS does!
That was the entire point of my post!
Not that RBI is the be all and end all stat to use, but that it at least RELATES to RS where OBP/SLG/OPS do not in any way get yo the right answer!
I showed the OBP+SLG in any combination you can think of will tell you if you will score more runs of not!
It’s useless!
RBI is better than it and it doesn’t even require any fancy math yet will come up with the right answer where the OBP/SLG method will not!
This is not about RBI it is about how BAD OBP and SLG is as it is not related at all to RS just a co-incidental recording made while scoring those RS!
Just as RBI is a coincidental recording made suring them!
But at least it relates to RS because you don’t get one unless you do something that drives in the run.
You get an OB if the damn pitcher hits you with a fastball in the head!
And since we are talking about using these stats for Player evaluatuion it makes no sense whatsoever to get a guy who has good numbers that might be the product on massive beaning!
Metsie, next time use this in your comparison it won’t interfere with the RBI column because RBI aren’t in it. Hits and walks though…….
Tag you know from the last time (you have been through the history here) that the only reason I used RBI at all is because in order to disprove OBP+SLG it was not enough to just show how teams with diparate and worse OPS scored more I had to show some other stat that correlated better as well.
Any good lawyer who makes a case not only has to disprove the argument made but put forth a more likely argument to replace it.
Could I have done it differently? Sure!
I even have other metrics I could have used but did not want the conversation to get sidetracked explaining them and taking the focus away from the FAILURE of OBP+SLG in regards to RS!
I may post some of those in a later piece…
I understand Metsie. I even told X you were messing around with him quite a while back (while you were trying to get OB at a super models convention)
Sorry about the hockey thing I thought that was you.
Not a biggie…I likie Xtreem and I at least can have a conversation with him.
I know it is widely accepted that OBP is the key to success.
I on the other hand think it is a problem of reverse causation.
getting HIGH OBP is an indicator of doing something well.
Not run scoring but in general your batters are doing something positive. I have issues with the fact that OBP includes things that the batter does not accomplish or is unrelated to the batter’s actual ability because it includes getting hit by a pitch and the intentional walk.
It doesn’t take great talent to get beaned!
So as an arbiter of who is good and who is better OBP fails because it equates NOT TALENT accomplishment into a stat being used to judge talent!
I don’t need OBP and SLG to tell if a guy is good.
BA will tell me what he hits, RBI will tell me what he drives in and really what kind of hit drives in those runs is not important! Because if it isn’t a HR then he is on base and the NEXT big RBI guy I have behind him should drive him in!
OBs don’t guarantee a score, Can be erased as easily as they get recorded and in some case what is counted an OB is less desirable (such as the case of runner on 2nd 1 out) that puts the force out at 3rd and the double play into the situation.)
If we want to improve on INDIVIDUAL players BA will tell me everything I need to know about his ability to not make an out in regards to scoring a run and his RBI will tell me how well he drives in the opportunities to drive in runs.
In the example given by someone for Giants. ZThe gy had 85 RBI. If they replaced him with someone who had 100 RBI you would have gotten all those runs they wanted but didn’t get from that player.
But getting someone who has a high OBP could have meant a drop in RBI and that would have made the situation worse not better!
If we are going to judge players then we need to use stats that are not accelerated by defensive indifference or pitcher poochscrewing!
OBP wil almost ALWAYS be higher than BA and in the few cases it isn’t is because the guy hit a bunch of Sac Flys’s which either scored a run or advanced a runner!
So I really don’t care that his OBP is lower or close to his BA if his BA is good!
At least I know the player gave me what I was looking at not the defense or the pitcher!
And for the record, Joe can back me up. I did offer Joe to give Xtreem a chance to look at this post to create a response that could be included in the piece.
May have posted this twice, but if OBP is a non factor in scoring runs, then how come the Red Sox had the highest OBP and most runs scored? How come the Yankees had the second highest OBP and second most runs scored?
in 2011, the top 5 teams in OBP also are top 5 in Runs.
Mariners were last in OBP and wouldn’t you know it, last in runs scored! The Giants were second to last in OBP and second to last in runs scored! The Padres were third to last in OBP and third to last in runs scored!
To say that on base percentage is a non factor is just ignorant.
I don’t understand how you can be smart enough to turn on a computer, but not smart enough to see that your argument is that RUNS is directly related to RUNS BATTED IN. Doesn’t it by definition have to be? You cant bat in a run unless you get a run.
I’m really looking to your follow up argument that explains how putouts can be directly correlated to outs by the opposition.
Lets continue to argue the Earth is flat.
I hope you realize that the rules of baseball state that an RBI will be recorded for ALL runs scored except a handful of situations.
examples include when a player hits into a double play and the defense chooses not to make a play on a runner scoring from third. Another would be a pass ball/wild pitch.
So it simple math where when one event occurs (a run scoring) is recorded as an RBI 99% of the time, probably means that they’re 99% correlated.
I can’t believe I’m even wasting my time explaining this. I’ll go explain this concept to my 3 year old nephew instead who is more likely to understand. Everyone’s argument isn’t that RBIs and Runs *aren’t* correlated, because they are. Duh. The discussion and goal of statistics in general is to find connections in things that aren’t exactly the same thing.
I award you no points, and may g-d have mercy on your soul.
And i hope you realize that an OB will be recorded even if it never leaves the base it got on!
OPB+ doesn’t equal RS+
RBI does at least do that!
Also, I think we can all agree that the most important offensive component that contributes to winning is runs, because without ever scoring, you can’t ever win.
That being said, in 2002 Reggie Sanders was third on the Giants with 85 RBI. 85 RBI is pretty good for third on the team. That actually would’ve been by 19 more than anybody on the 2011 New York Mets.
Then why were people pleading with the Giants to get somebody better to hit behind Barry Bonds so they had a chance? Oh maybe it was because Reggie Sanders sucks and had nearly half his at bats with somebody on base. He could only get 85 RBI, despite the fact that an amazing 436 people were on base when he batted!
RBI doesn’t measure anything. You can’t predict how many runs a team will score based on adding up the RBI’s of the guys from the year before, which is what you really should be looking at if you want to show how strong of a predictor it is.
Wrong, RBI’s does measure something – Wins.
i don’t care who drives them in, who’s on base and if it the guy getting the RBI’s really doesn’t deserve them.
As long as he get the big hit when we need it that’s all that matters. RBI’s = Wins. I could not care less if Reggie Sanders bought a cigar for every guy who got on base before him back in 2002 as long as he’s able to drive them in. And why use Reggie Sanders as an example? He had drivine 80 or 90+ RBIs several times in his career so him doing that is nothing unusual, you’re just trying to take credit away from what he normally does to support this stupid argument of rewarding men on base.
it’s like saying in football the guy scoring the touchdown means nothing and thank God he had good blockers to help him. you want to reward the blockers and not the guy scoring the touchdown. You want to reward athletes for doing what they’re supposed to do and take away the most important aspect of competition and that’s being able to deliver the HIT when you need it the most.
Oh….i forgot to mention something…Giants went to World Series in 2002.
Don’t waste your time with these guys, Bayonne. Look at this garbage:
http://www.amazinavenue.com/2011/10/3/2466491/rbi-the-mets#79193304
Could you imagine if this site did something like that to AA? Oh man, we’d never hear the end of it!
It’s because of posts like that on AA that there is such a divide lately. Instead of trying to bridge the gap posts like this just drive a deeper wedge. Needless to say this reaffirms why I don’t read AA.
Well it should be pointed out MNJ that the majority of people posting against this post of mine are not regulars and probably FROM AA which is just another OBP religionist site following the great prophet Tango Tiger who says an RBOE is more of a contribution of a batter than an actual hit is!
Ya, that’ll show’em
Thats the best you can do son?
Expected actually for you to snivel your way through this thread withot one meaningful contribution or nugget of wisdom!
Some blockers are better than other blockers in making blocks so that your hypothetical man can score his touchdowns. Maybe a fun comparison would be to look at RBI % (how many times a runner is driven in based on how many runners are on base) as it compares to wins. That could be fun.
“I could not care less if Reggie Sanders bought a cigar for every guy who got on base before him back in 2002 as long as he’s able to drive them in.”- magnificent point, I couldn’t agree more. Problem is, he wasn’t good at getting them in. He got 85 RBIs despite having more opportunities than every player in baseball to obtain RBIs.
I have a feeling many of you guys are big fans of Pitcher Wins too? Hey, a pitcher with 20 wins HAS to be better than a pitcher with 15 wins right? RIGHT?!@?#@!#
Look, you can’t, without hitting a home run, record an RBI without having a teammate on base. Therefore, you want your teammates on base lots and lots of times when you come up to the plate. You don’t bat 1.000, so the more chances you have with them on base, the better chance you have to rack up precious RBIs. If you hit .380 and your teammates in front of you were NEVER on base when you came up, your RBI total would equal your HR total. But if they got on base lots and lots, (like for example 58.2% of the time, like our good friend 2002 Barry Bonds) then I could get some RBIs without forcing myself to jack homer after homer to get em.
Make sense no? I’m not trying to be mean, just simply explain some simple concepts that shouldn’t be too difficult to comprehend as long as you open your mind a bit and avoid being too defensive about this. The concept is really easy. A classroom of 7th graders learning long division and algebra could figure this out… though this is Amurica, so maybe not.
yeah maybe if he drove all the runs he should have because so many men were on base the Giants win the Wild Card by 17 games instead of 10.
This is just a STUPID debate that has very little to do with what it takes to win games and more to do with how things look on paper.
Now go back to your arrogant, mean-spirited statistically driven site run by Neil Simon and Jakes Kaammaerkla..or however the hell you spell his name. Your Sandy Alderson statue needs some polishing and oh while your there kneel in front of it and hope for a better off season than:
Taylor Tankersley
Taylor Bucholz
Brad Emaus
Boof Bonser
Chin Lung Hu
Chris Young
DJ Carassco – for 2 years!!
Pedro Beato
And that’s all in one year!
Mean-spirited? Did somebody hurt your feelings?
No just frustrated with OBP guys constantly trying to change the subject when they can’t explain why what they hold as gospel truth fails when the numbers are looked at and tested with real season data!
Tag would you like to handle this one? He is using football not hockey!
Hey Capt while your so busy talking about football you still have avoided the main question you have problems with.
OBP is IRRELEVANT towards how much RS you have!
The chart proves it!
“RBI’s does measure something – Wins.”
This basically sums up this thread… and this website. I wont be back.
“He could only get 85 RBI, despite the fact that an amazing 436 people were on base when he batted!”
And if they went for someone with more RBI to replace him they would have solved their problem!
Would someone with a higher OBP done better than 85 RBI?
Please tell us how many more RBI they would have had for each percentage point of higher OBP!
And in other news when the Fed buys back bonds, interest rates go down and when a company earns more money, their stock price goes up.
This is a pointless, and quite frankly, idiotic piece. No shit RBIs and Runs have a near perfect correlation, they’re almost the same thing. The both measure when a run is scored, RBIs show who drove in the run, runs scored shows who crossed home. The question is how. How do we optimize the line up so we can increase our chances of scoring runs? Well, to get an RBI, you either have to hit a home run or drive in a runner. To drive in a runner, he has to be on base. So if Player A gets on base 30% of the time and Player B gets on 38% of the time, who is more likely to score more runs over the course of the season assuming he has the same lineup behind him?
And for you saying OBP “doesn’t correlate at all” with runs scored. Every single run that has scored in the history of baseball was a result of that player first getting on base. Not every run scored has resulted in another player getting an RBI.
Okay that’s good.
Now let’s talk about what it takes to win ballgames and btw tell you leader he better make some smart moves this winter that result in WINNING and not saving as much money as possible.
I hope he gets guys that can get on base a lot. That would help with the winning.
Nah, we’ve gone that route
We need people who can drive them in order to win.
Have we gone that route? Who have we ever signed with a high obp since John Olerud?
You mean the guy that hit .354? He probably always had a good eye, even as a kid.
i give you saber guys credit though. We have an entire new generation of baseball fans that haven’t a clue about what it takes to win.
But they all know it’s important to get on base. Something the rest of always had in the back of our minds growing up. Who knew that arrested development would be celebrated in 2011? But hey, it’s good for MLB because all money is equal whether the fans know the game or not. As for attendance it’s the quantity not the quality in this case. At least you guys are good for something
All you’ve told us is that it takes scoring runs to win. Great… how do you plan on scoring those runs? Do you want to hit homers, maybe a little small ball sac bunt wrapped up with a stolen base and a sac fly? There are many options, but all you’ve told us is that the guy who scores the most runs every day wins… well yea, that’s sort of how it works.
See, people who don’t accept Sabre think that the sabre guys are being mean and smug etc… but all they’re trying to do is find some explanations. We don’t think our analysis is end-all-be-all, but simply better than saying, “Hey Bob! We need to score more runs!”… ok well I need a plan to do that.
“Bob! We’ve figure out how to score more runs, but we’re giving up way too many runs! Give up less runs!”… ok, well how can I figure out what gives me the best chance to give up less runs?
It’s not an attempt to make you feel stupid, its an attempt to better explain the desires of the everyday sports fan, to score more runs, give up less runs, and win more games.
We’re not out to hurt you, just out to play the numbers. You can hit on 22 Black on a roulette wheel from time to time, but it’s not a good strategy. Over time, betting on the pass line at a craps table is a better bet. It’s just a game of numbers, the outcome isn’t always perfect.
No I’ve told you you don’t need high OBP/SLG/OPS to score those runs!
Did you even look at the charts or just jump to the OBP defense like it’s your girfriends honor being challenged by some guy?
You didn’t tell me that, all you told me was you need to score runs to score more runs. An RBI = Run always except for wild pitches, and double plays. It’s just in the rule book. That’s not a question of math, it’s a question of if you know the rules of how a game is scored by an official scorer. You’re not telling me anything at all. If you said, you need to wear green shoes to score more runs, and showed me numbers, that’d be telling me something.
All you’re saying is more runs equals more runs. I’m trying to explain runs with a metric that ISN’T runs. Please, go look up what the definition of a Run scored is, and what the definition of an RBI is. They are one and the same except for a few minor exceptions. When a run is scored an RBI is awarded almost every time.
How is this not making sense?!
Guess you didn’t read the chart just started flapping your lips without even looking at the data!
Did it help the Braves in 2008? They had the 5th most guys on base. were 16th in RS!
Did it help the Nationals in 2009? They were 12th in OBP and 21st (bottom10) in RS
Runs – runs score on double plays – runs score on wild pitches = RBI.
It took you 5 years of data to figure out that those numbers would be really close every year?
Hmm everytime I ask you to explain why OBP fails you go back to RBI…
Needed to change the subject to something you were not about to look dumb trying to answer?
Explain why a low OBP scored more runs if you think OBP is the reason people score more runs!
If not shut up and go back to AA where everyone is as clueless about OBP as you are!
I do this because the correlation between OBP and runs is relatively high, but it will never beat the correlation between runs and runs minus a few tiny instances. This isn’t rocket science. The fact that you can’t realize that runs and rbi’s are almost identical numbers is absurd.
Obp is a solid indicator of runs and years of information will tell you that. Just because it doesn’t work perfectly and you can find instances in which it differs from expectations doesn’t make it wrong. Your close minded attitude and miraculous ability to hold strong to an argument in which you are correlating 2 nearly identical numbers is hysterical. If a player gets 80 RBI’s, but only came to the plate 100 times with runners in scoring position would you rather have him on your team or a player who got 120 RBI’s, but came to the plate 500 times with runners in scoring position? Who’s better at driving in runs?
Under your logic, the man with 120 RBI is better. Under the logic of people with a brain, the man with an 80% RBI rate would be expected to drive in 400 runs if he were given the opportunities of the other example. You can’t control how often your teammates get on base, but if they do it more often, you’re more likely to drive them in. Fascinating how dumb some of you guys are. I guess that’s why you’re all Mets fans.
Well I just showed in the charts it isn’t relatively high at all…
Now you will have to prove otherwise (with stat charts) or your just yapping in the hopes the lie sticks!
RBI is not awarded to the player who socres so it is not the SAME as RS. yes they are related and OBP is not! Thank you for admitting my post was correct!
RBI is awarded to the player who made it possible for someone to score. It notes an act of SUCCESS from the player at bat!
If you want to increase RS on your team then you go for the guys who have the increased RBI not OB or RS because those OBP players by themselves will not have what it takes to increase the RS.
So if you are picking players with the goal of increasing RS then you go for high RBI guys not high OBP guys because the RBI is awarded to players who succeed in scoring runs where the OBP only gets you guys who may or may not have done something good to get on base (ie HBP IBB) abd thats it. They need someone to get an RBI to score them!
Captain: Runs – runs score on double plays – runs score on wild pitches = RBI. ”
Wrong AND wrong again… they’re not consider RBI’s
Alex… that little “-” sign mean minus. So Runs minus runs scored on double plays minus runs scored on wild pitch or passed balls are equal to runs batted in.
You’re a fu*king idiot.
what>??? you know is my fault for engaging wtih f’ing losers like you. keep posting all that garbage you posting.
“Wrong AND wrong again… they’re not consider RBI’s”. I know Alex! I agree! Nice work!
which is why I subtracted them from Runs to get RBI’s. I feel bad for your algebra teacher… or have you not gotten there yet?
It’s not Captain Obvious’ fault you don’t understand BASIC MATH. And then when he obviously catches you being wrong, I love how you resort to name calling and saying that he’s a “loser”. What a great attitude to have. The “I’m right, you’re wrong and a loser” argument is the sign of a petulant child.
What math no math has been presented yet by the OBP crowd despite numerous challenges to produce some!
Show us the math that is required to make OBP+SLG to produce a single run!
You seem to think you need to have lots of guys on base to score runs.
Tell us all how did the Blue Jays 17th in OBP outscore Mets (6th) Rockies (7th) KC (8th), Reds (9th)?
Can’t explain it?
Because the REASON is rediculous to you!
They drove in the runs without the need for MORE OB than someone else!
And since you can’t accept that and continue to say OB is important that makes YOU the one who is rediculous!
PROVE OBP scores more run!
I dare you!
“Because the REASON is rediculous to you!”
Maybe you’re right, the reason is once more diculous.
“Tell us all how did the Blue Jays 17th in OBP outscore Mets (6th) Rockies (7th) KC (8th), Reds (9th)?
Can’t explain it?”
A higher SLG than all of them except KC?
Toronto also had a far lower BA than all of them than they did OBP. Yet, you still go on about the merits of BA.
Also, look at the top 5 teams in RS. They are the top 5 in OBP. And SLG. And OPS. And OPS+.
They didn’t have a higher SLG or OBP than the reds rockies and diamondbacks did they?
POOF goes the idiots suggestion!
They had a higher slugging % than the Reds, Rockies and Mets.
I like how the Diamondbacks just got thrown in there. Keep moving them goal posts.
You found one anomaly and you’re trying to crash it in to fit your theory. Rather than adjust your theory to account for all the facts.
in 2011? Look again dummy!
Toronto .413
Cincinnati .408
Colorado .410
Mets .398
You disagree? Take it up with these guys
http://mlb.mlb.com/stats/sortable.jsp?c_id=mlb&tcid=mm_mlb_stats#sectionType=st&playerType=QUALIFIER&statType=hitting&page_type=SortablePlayer&season=2011&season_type=ANY&sportCode=%27mlb%27&league_code=%27MLB%27&split=&team_id=&active_sw=&game_type=%27R%27&position=&sortOrder=%27desc%27&sortColumn=slg&results=&page=1&perPage=50&timeframe=&extended=0&last_x_days=&ts=1317751383189&tab_level=child&click_text=Sortable+Team+hitting
Diamondbacks?
Royals?
Brewers?
RBIs = type of runs scored.
Yes, they are correlated, but not in the way you misrepresent them.
No RBI= ACT at the plate that allowed a run to score!
How many OBs are a type of RS? Can you say?
didn’t think so which is why your OBP/SLG model fails!
No, RBI= type of run
You can score runs without rBIs, but you can’t score without baserunners.
“How many OBs are a type of RS? Can you say?”
Why would anyone say that?
“didn’t think so which is why your OBP/SLG model fails!”
Why don’t you just admit you don’t understand it?
Sure you can there are no baserunners when a guy hits the HR!
Just another attempt to run this conversation into ciorcles since you know your wrong and need to deflect the conversation away from it!
“Sure you can there are no baserunners when a guy hits the HR!”
The hitter counts as a base runner. That’s why HR are part of OBP.
“Just another attempt to run this conversation into ciorcles since you know your wrong and need to deflect the conversation away from it!”
This conversation went into the crapper once you sent Joe the email. Don’t blame me for it.
AFTER the HR is hit!
The baserunner did not CAUSE the HR!
The base runner is the guy who hit the HR.
What base was he on when he hit it?
What base is anyone on as they are hitting?
But, he touches them all and counts as a base runner. Otherwise, there would be no Grand Slam Single.
‘What base is anyone on as they are hitting?’
precisely your problem! no one is onbase until after they did the thing that makes it all possible!
An OB is no different than an RBI, it is recorded AFTER the actual success act was made in the batter box!
And you should judge the guys based on what they do in the batters box and how well it was done to raise the awards that get recorded!
No, before the “HR” is hit. It doesn’t count as a home run or a run scored or an RBI until the batter-runner crosses home plate. Before that, he hits a single, double and a triple with each base he successfully touched.
Stop looking at the RECORDING of the accomplishment and start blooking at WHERE the accomplishment occurred!
By your reasoning the guy hitting the ball to the outfield is not rhe accomplishment the touching of the base is!
This is why you fail because your all about the beuracracy and not the ACTUAL ACT that allows things to occurr!
Can a guy touch any base without hitting the ball?
If not then the hitting of the ball is the KEY not the oprder in which it was recorded!
Perhaps the scorer recorded the RBI before he noted the OB!
Doesn’t matter either way! He records the RESULTS of the act but it is the act itself that decides what gets awarded!
“Can a guy touch any base without hitting the ball?”
Walk? HBP? On base percentage. Learn it. Shoot, he can even strike out and reach on a wild pitch. Doesn’t add to his OBP, but three strikes and YOU’RE out.
“Perhaps the scorer recorded the RBI before he noted the OB!”
He would never do that. A prerequisite of being an official scorer is knowing the rules of baseball. It’s apparently not a prerequisite to making absurd fan posts.
Oh can a batter step into a pitch and get a base? NO he gets a STRIKE!
Can a batter force a pitvcher to throw Ball 4?
NO!
LEARN IT! You have the rulebook!
He can’t force a pitcher to do anything, but he can demonstrate a good eye and plate discipline and not swing at a ball. A good eye and plate discipline are talents.
Exactly he can’t DO ANYTHING on his own!
he did not ACCOMPLISH it someone else failed yet you reward him as if he did something good!
Now lets talk HBP…Whats your excuse for rewarding that?
“Just another attempt to run this conversation into ciorcles since you know your wrong and need to deflect the conversation away from it!”
This is all you seem to ever do
Funny how so many without any proof to show all try to make the guy with data sound crazy!
Because your entire concept is based on a false premise.
yeah AND SO IS THE OBP/SLG because none of you have shown one shred of evidence to prove it!
Hey guys…I think you’ll enjoy reading about this, since it correlates so well with what you like to believe:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_Earth_Society
Yep the OBP guys believe in the same thing…
They believe it is generally understood that OBP + SLG increase means an increase in RS!
I played columbus and proved that wasn’t true!
You now need to show proof that it is!
Care to try?
Show us your statistical proof that it does!
Ands stop insiting the world is flat when I just showed you that it isn’t!
If what you claim is true then it should be easy to prove it so do so!
If not then just shut up with your meaningless rants about things you can’t prove!
No…you obviously don’t understand what the Flat Earth Society is. It’s a society that continues to believe the old thought that the Earth is flat, when there is in fact plenty of evidence that the Earth is round. By believing RBIs are of any importance, you are the equivalent of a member of the Flat Earth Society. What you say makes no sense because it isn’t backed by facts, but you continue to close your ears and spout of stuff that is rife with misinformation.
Your “fanpost” makes no sense. Runs=RUNS batted in. They’re the SAME THING. Duh, of course they’re going to correlate.
Guys guys guys! Quit arguing… I just did a regression that blows this out of the water!
So I ran some numbers, did some calculations on my TI-83+ and put it through the I-Don’t-Know-Math-5000 machine to come up with my awesome conclusion.
The amount of times you blink before a pitch is directly correlated with your batting average. This is a .999999 correlation factor here. I studied film of players hitting for nearly 5 years and just finished my research. Players who blink as the pitch is thrown are significantly less likely to hit it than those who keep their eyes open. Seeing the ball, certainly helps a player hit the ball. Please people, this is groundbreaking stuff here, try not to fall on the floor in amazement.
Prove it!
I understand and your the president of it!
You believe the world is flat despite proof otherwise.
“I understand and your the president of it!”
You are just a gold mine today.
Aside from when a HR is hit, how often can one get a run or RBI without a baserunner, without OBP? If the argument you are trying to prove is that OBP does not correlate to runs scored than you did nothing to prove it to me. All you have shown is that RBI’s are recorded almost as often as runs scored. That is nice for getting a rough idea of how many runs a player helped contribute in the past, but it is not a good predictor for future success. A high RBI total can be the result of anything from a bad hitter constantly coming up with people on base to a good hitter taking advantages of the fewer opportunities given to someone with a little luck suddenly providing them with a lot of baserunners and holes in the defense (think Justin Turner when he came up).
Let’s say player A had 100 RBIs for the Yankees batting 3/4 in the lineup (2nd in OBP), while player B ends up with 100 RBIs but while batting 3/4 in the Mariners lineup (last in OBP); now, let us switch the players and let them (and their new teammates) have the same season, performing at the same rates with runners on-base and such, and see who has more RBI’s. No guarantees what type of hitter these two were on their way to 100 RBIs, and we are ignoring any outside pressures of NY by giving them the same season they just had, but I think you have to agree it is more likely that player B improved his RBI total than player A, and it is more likely that player A lowered his RBI total than player B. Why do we think that? Because player B suddenly had many more opportunities to drive in runners and player A had a lot fewer. This is why someone might say that RBIs are contextual, and not a good predictor of future performance. If we were to swap the two best OBP-machines from each team, there is no reasoning to think their OBP performance would change from team to team.
Now you would like to see a correlation between OBP and RS? Go to fangraphs (or w/e) and sort the teams by OBP and compare that column to the runs scored column. Notice that, in general, the higher the OBP the more runs scored, and the lower the OBP the fewer runs scored. In between there is some fluctuations that look like weak correlation, but at the extremes the correlation is very strong. Now in the middle of the pack, where the fluctuations are, the OBPs are very bunched up and similar among teams, but there are other factors at work – baserunning, opponents fielding, lineup construction, field dimensions, BABIP, slugging…Luckily, we can add the SLG and OBP to get an OPS, and if you now go compare the OPS and RS columns you will see an even better correlation than with OBP. Is it perfect? No. Is there a trend? Obviously. In general, the higher the OBP, the more the runs scored. Now a double is a nice thing, but a double with a runner on base often leads to a run, so maybe you think that OBP is a little more important and want a formula that weighs OBP more than SLG – wOBA. Same thing as OBP and OPS, is it perfect? No. Is there a trend? Yes. Again, the outliers come mostly from the middle of the pack, where teams OBP results are very similar but runs aren’t so much, but over a 162 game schedule the results will spread. If a team has more baserunners, they are more probable to score more runs, but it is no guarantee every time.
Metsie, I am sure if you read all this, you will come up with some reply that harps on unintentional interpretations of what I am trying to say, accuse me of changing the topic or not understanding you, completely miss the point of what I am trying to say and go on thinking you are the only one who won’t drink the kool-aid, but I think you are just missing the point of these advanced statistics – given these counting stats (like runs, RBIs, hits, BBs…), what stats do players tend to consistently put up, which of those are park/league/team independent, and how can we combine them into a new stat that compares players on a relative scale. This way we can see how a player is doing compared to his career averages, the league average, historical averages…
Except hitting a HR does count as getting on base and contributes to OBP.
There it is, proof. You can’t score a run without a baserunner! I obviously mean to stop that sentence at ‘without a baserunner’, as that ‘without OBP’ part is misinterpreted
hitting a double also counts as a hit but touching first doesn’t cause it to happen.
Asidfe from a HR how many baserunners can cause themseleves to score?
Answer NONE!
they can steal home
Can they do that on their own or does it require a Defense to allow it?
They can score on an error and passed ball too!
Can the runner will that to happenas well?
Congratulations! You just wrote the most idiotic “analysis” of baseball statistics ever!
Newsflash: The stat that most correlates with Fielding percentage is errors.
I took the data from 2008-2011 (as one seasons data is just not enough) and looked at some graphs of runs vs. stat to see if there seems to be a consistent relationship, and I would say so…
This will link you to a graph of wRC+ vs runs, and one of OPS vs runs.
http://i1195.photobucket.com/albums/aa398/pcmets/runsvswRCOPS.png
That OPS graph couldn’t be any clearer, and an R^2 of 0.914 indicates an awesome correlation. QED
Facts! I can’t wait to read the response!
If you knew anything about reading the charts you would know if what you propose were true they would all fall onto the trend line and guys in the middle wouldn’t have be higher on the X as some team further down the Y axix of the trend line!
But I’m sure you failed math! And Graphing of data!
I didn’t fail math, quite the opposite in fact, but you sure as hell failed English.
And did you even look at the OPS chart?
Yes I did it showed nothing!
Note the third dot from the right…In fact look at all the dots UNDER your trend line!
It shows roughly 50/50 split of above OPS and below OPS scoring the same amount of runs!
Note first three dots from right…One above, one on trend, one below!
Then two above and two below…
But MOST important;y look at the team who scored bet 800-850 runs OPS .75
Your chart showed no relation of OPS towards prediction or relation to RS.
You want to prove something then show the relation of OPS and how much you need to increase it to create +1 RS!
And if you can’t say then you can’t possible prove OPS has anything to do with RS!
You guys keep flip flopping, in one minute trying to say RBI is a PRODUCT of RS despite the fact RS doesn’t CAUSE the RBI the RBI causes the RS!
Well OPS itself is merely a product of the same things that got you the RBI! The act of the batter in the batter’s box!
It is THAT act that causes the RS, the OB, the SLG and the RBI!
And the teams who have players who do that better (recorded in the RBIs)score more runs REGARDLESS of their OBP,SLG,OPS!
Your chart DOES seem to show that SOMETHING does allow lower OPS teams to score as many runs as higher OPS teams do on an almost 50/50 split!
Yeah, there is some fluctuation, that is why we use the R^2 value to judge how good the data correlates. The higher R^2, the better the correlation (notice how the wRC graph has more spread and thus a lower, though still pretty good, correlation), the higher the value. A perfect correlation thus has a R^2 of 1. Now trying to use counting stats to predict future success is far from a perfect science, it is a social science with complicated factors that no formula can predict – humans. Thus, we follow the Pearson rule for correlation in social sciences, which says an r-value greater than 0.37 is a strong correlation. The graph shows a (0.914)^0.5=0.956, which is to say that it is very very strong.
Is this a joke?
I hope you’re not serious with this.
Instead of learning about something, you’re going to be afraid of it and attack it, right? That’s the mark of a coward.
Hello Pot….This is the kettle calling!
You have done pretty much just what you claimed Bayonne did!
Only you attacked RBI in an attempt to deflect the research that showed OBP/SLG/OPS was off target more than the stat you have attacked!
Nice job.
Funny how you have refrained and let your AA buddies do all the work here…
Which isn’t helping you in the least because they aren’t even HALF as smart as you are!
LOL
“Yeah, there is some fluctuation”
A 50/50 fluctuation!
If all you use as variables in your chart is RS and OPS of course it’s going to look like it relates because you related them in the chart!
That doesn’t actually prove that one is based on the other!
If you make the same chart using RBI instead of OPS what is the spread on that?
You see what you fail to understand is I did much of the same thing you attempted to do on your chart only I did it for OBP,SLG,OPS AND RBI!
In a similar chart RBI would deviate from the trendline by the margin of error (ie:2011 RBI would deviate roughly .8 away from the trendlinewhile OPS would deviate 1.6 nearly twice as much error from trend as RBI)
As for taking into account the Human factor and unpredictable nature of Humans a good place to start would be NOT COUNTING acts that the batter can not accomplish without help from the Pitcher or Defense as accomplishments! (ie: HBP which requires no Batter talent whatsoever! The RBOE which also does not require anything more than a ball hitting a bat and a defender messing up, or an intentional walk which requires nothing of the batter but to have legs to stand in the batters box long enough for the pitcher to throw to the catcher 4 times!
When evaluating a player if you want to come up with the right answer it would improve accuracy if you only looked for events that the batter himself had something to do with creating!
Toronto scored a ton of runs with fewer OB than most.
So if you have a team with a better OBP already and go and get one of those teams YES your theory might work for you because you went and got the needed ingredient to drive that OBP in!
But if you go for the OBP you have no guarantee that they will be driven in.KC had more OBP, SLG and OPS than Toronto and scored fewer runs!
You want high OBP thats fine no one is saying it’s a BAD thing to have!
But it doesn’t guarantee more RS unless you have what Toronto had!
And what they had were BATTERS who drove in runs more efficiently and more frequently as reflected in the RBI!
They got more RS without the need for more OBP!
Do what THEY did with your own OBP and you beat Toronto AND KC!
No result can predict the future…
Especially when it is s stat that is comprised of events not of the players own making!
At least BA and RBI is about what the better CREATED with the opportunities he had!
OBP and OPS (which incorporates OBP) includes events the PITCHER and DEFENSE created and will only work if you face the same bad pitching and defense!
All your graph shows is good teams are good at OPS…it doesn’t say anything that the OPS is the reason they were good! or that higher OPS means more wins or runs!
If that were the case then the ranking of RS would coincide with the ranking of OPS which I showed it does not!
Do the same thing with RBI the graph will look even better!
Sure, because runs and RBI are the same stat.
Oh Really they why don’t they both have the same number recorded?
Sorry but this lie your trying to perpetrate isn’t flying X!
They are not the same but they ARE related and way more than your OBP and SLG as I have showed!
No, you’re completely wrong. They both start at the same number. Let’s say a team scores 100 runs. So to figure out RBIs we start with 100. Hang with me here, it’s like reconciling your check book, crazy complicated!
Runs = 100
Well, during the year this team stole home 1 time, scored on an error 3 times, and scored on double plays 3 times.
So we would take 100 – 1 – 3 – 3 = 93. So this team has 93 RBIs. Scored 100 runs, and were awarded with 93 RBIs.
RBIs and Runs are related because every time a run crosses the plate, the official scorer decided whether the rules allow him to also award an RBI to the batter. One doesn’t happen before or after another, they are decided together in one complete situation decided by the scorer based on the rules.
Make sense? Can you at least admit and agree that RBI is calculated as Runs minus runs scored during the specific events described above?
“Can you at least admit and agree that RBI is calculated as Runs minus runs scored during the specific events described above?”
Are you serious here? With a name like Capt Obvious you sure do obfuscate as much as possible!
RBI is not CALCULATED it is a simple COUNT awarded based on an event in an at bat that scores a run!
Now I see your problem…You don’t really know what the stats are or what they represent! All you know is someone told you OBP was the the greatest act since sliced bread and your sticking to it!
My above example is a reconciliation between runs and rbi’s to point out the differences between the two is only due to the ruling on specific plays. A reconciliation is a simple concept. You lack the acumen to realize when you’re using one item to describe its very closely related cousin. The reconciliation is how you can calculate RBI’s from Runs.
“My above example is a reconciliation between runs and rbi’s to point out the differences between the two is only due to the ruling on specific plays”
Well your WRONG on even on that point!
RBI gets awarded to the batter not the runner!
They are hardly the same thing!
You tried to make it some similar calculation. RS doesn’t have to be earned even…RBI does!
This is a discussion for team runs and team rbi’s, correct? So when a team scores a run, often the team obtains an RBI. So my reconciliation is correct. Read the example again, it’s completely correct with the facts provided. If a team scores 100 runs, but 1 was on a stolen base of home, 3 were “unearned” runs scored on errors, and 3 were scored as a result of defensive indifference (that’s in the rule book) upon completing a double play, then the team has 93 RBIs. From a team aspect, it shouldn’t matter who gets awarded the RBI and who gets the run (they only happen for the same person on a home run, no one is refuting that). But your discussion is regarding teams, and it is imperative that you understand that for a team, runs and rbi’s can be reconciled as I did so above. After you understand that, this discussion can move forward. Again, this isn’t an argument for OBP or any other “crazy voodoo” you think, this is simply showing you a reconciliation between team runs, and team rbis. Let’s get through this one step at a time.
My example is correct, whether you like it or not. You don’t always have to disagree with me, it’s not going to kill you. This isn’t even something to agree or disagree on, it’s just a simple reconciliation proof from one number to another. Does that make sense?
No they are NOT the same thing they are somewhat related. The Run goes to the team the RBI goes to the guy responsible for making it happen!
I know you WANT them to be the same thing so you can dismiss it but it is not the same stat!
Sorry you ploy and attempt to OBFUSCATE the issue has failed!
And since none of you genius’ from AA has been able to show HOW OB is actually related to RS in any relational numerical way you should just stop trying to play circle jerk hoping to confuse people who see the truth in the charts!
RBIs are NOT the same as RS! No more than a double is the SAME as an OB!
They record different acts!
They MIGHT be recorded in both stats for the SAME act but they do not tell the SAME story!
RBI are related to RS!
SLG and OPS (which uses SLG) is not!
OB is an incidental recording of a stat that is also something else!
It is the SOMETHING ELSE that is significant to RS not the OB that gets recorded at the same time!
Sorry charlie but you have to do better than what you have tried so far!
And by repeating that RBI’s are related better than OBP/SLG/OPS over and over again all your REALLY doing is making my point and agreeing with me!
OBP/SLG/OPS does NOT correlate better than something else!
First off, I have no idea who AA is, but whatever. And going on your choice of awarding an RBI to a player and not the team, I’m pretty sure Runs Scored is also an individual stat. And I’m pretty sure, that above your entire discussion is correlating runs to rbis, summed for the entire team. I don’t recall seeing you correlate individual player’s rbi’s to team runs. And I’m not trying bewilder you at all, just reach a consensus on at least one point. I don’t understand you inability to come to an agreement somewhere on something.
Its not that I WANT them to be the same stat, its that I’m showing you WHY they’re related. They’re related because the “count” addition occurs at the exact same moment a man crosses the plate, as long as he doesn’t do so as a result of an error, stolen base, or double play. As simple as that.
A RBI is always a run, always. It’s name is in fact, RUNS batted in. So you can’t have an RBI without a run, and you almost always get an RBI when your team scores a run (except the small occuring events I’ve pointed out 100 times).
If you think that I’m agreeing with you, then why won’t you say, “Thank you Captain Obvious for telling all these mean people on here how closely related RBIs and Runs are”?
Metsie their related like your left leg and right leg are related to walking.
Their separate ends of one event.
If your goal was to walk farther or faster you wouldn’t advocate just using your right leg more would you?
Besides, lets call a run batted in what it USUALLY is. It’s a hit (sure we can endlessly debate the 5-10% of the time it’s not a hit in order to obscure the issue but why bother?)
90% of the time a run batted in is a hit. Hits go into the BA bin as well as the OB bin so their almost as closely related to BA and OB as they are to the stat that was invented to count them in the first place.
“showing you WHY they’re related”
I KNOW why they are related! I’m not the one trying to say OBP/SLG/OPS is related better!
Thats the point!
Tag Yes they are:
“Their separate ends of one event.”
One is the CAUSE the other the RESULT!
One starts the proccess and the other ENDS it and records both!
But they are not the SAME act.
One is a cause one is a result!
OB does not CAUSE RS!
RBI does!
Going for OB does not mean you will drive in more runs!
Going for more RBI will!
You go for the CAUSE because it did the WORK!
You do the work you get the RESULT!
Don’t do the work and all you get is OB!
And OB can not make anything happen by itself! It requires something to CAUSE it to score hence the RBI stat!
Not only is a run scored by someone “getting on base” 100 % of the time (even if it’s an event that hurts in the OB calculation like an error for instance) but about 90% of runs batted in are also able to fit into the OB bin since they came from hits and or bases loaded walks.
In reality both ends of a single event (a run being scored) are OB positive events either 95% of the time or 90% of the time. Both ends, so accounting for SAC’s, double plays, errors ect it can be said that OB actually correlates OB to runs scored at about 92.5% of the time.
But what are runs batted in? Usually they are hits, right? Isn’t a hit getting OB?
The run that scored got on and so did the hit.
They BOTH got on base. BOTH of them.
That’s 200% correlation right there.
Sure subtract out the guy who got on by a fielders choice, error ect and also subtract out the guy that knocked in arun with a SAC fly or a 4-3 and every other combo and what are you left with?
Correlation of about 150%
See Metsie you are only crediting the hitter with an run batted in.
Why aren’t you also crediting him with getting OB? Most of the time a hitter gets an RBI, he also gets on base, right?
How many runs are scored on SAC flys? Double plays? Errors? GB’s to 2nd base? Some for sure but a far, far higher amount of runs score by a hit or a basses loaded walk. Why aren’t you crediting the hitter with getting OB? Why only credit him with an RBI?
I submit that BOTH ends. The cause AND the result come about by an OB positive or occassionaly an OB neutral event.
Tell me that’s not true.
Tag did that really require 5 replies?
Here it is and it’s quite simple…
All RS are OB…Are all OBs RS?
All RBI makes RS, Do all RS make RBI?
Are all RBI’s Hits? NO! Are all Hits RBI? NO
They are different!
An RBI is awarded to the batter an RS is awarded to a runner. Two different players but the RS did not happen due to the runner except in the case of the HR which is OB,RS AND RBI!
In the case of an RS being recorded but no RBi the cause was STILL not the runner but caused by the Defense ALLOWING it to score. Again not caused by the runner (OB) someone else.
And again we are looking at these stats for the purposes of getting players that will CAUSE more runs to score.
Since I just showed you that getting on base does not CAUSE more runs to score your not getting someone who will be able to CAUSE RS to go up. You ma have that guy who can already but if you truly want to get a NEW player to increase RS look for one who has a higher RBI and CAUSES runs to score not someone who just gets on base and needs SOMETHING ELSE to happen!
OB doesn’t relate to RS at all just look at the chart!
SLG is related to RBI because good RBI guys get multiple RBI with that slg. But it doesn’t really matter what the SLG is if the guy is getting 100 RBI and the guy he replaced was only getting 75!
Both ends of a single event may appear to be the same but they are not!
What is the single event though? the Play? The Hit? the RS? the OB?
The significant one was the HIT!
It ws done in the batters box it was the EVENT that put the ball into play and it was the EVENT that allowed an OB to score!
Even in the case of the HR!
It was the HIT that sent the ball over the fence, that allowed him to touch home, and 1st and 2nd and 3rdwhile he was getting what he EARNED in the batters box!
Hey Tag what is a sacrifice fly and OB?
Well you can’t really say that OB doesn’t count because not all base runners score and then not count all the times base runners don’t get knocked in against the hitter but that’s beside the point.
The real point is that the vast majority of the time an OB positive event occurs both with the runner getting on AND with the hitter knocking him in.
Your premise is that RBI are a better correlate of runs scored than OB but than your not counting any of the OB of the hitter. Only the RBI. That’s not fair. If you count the OB of the hitter as well as the RBI there is no way you can claim RBI is a better correlate.
Sure RBI beat OB by the hitter by about 99-90 because RBI go up on things like SAC flies or sacrifices where a run scores. Fair enough but 90% or there about BOTH are present.
On the run scoring end the only way a runner can get an RBI is when he hit a HR (on the 2011 Mets that was 15% of the time, maybe higher with other teams) so give the RBI to the runner 15% (or whatever actual percentage is appropriate) and dock the runner when he got OB in an OB negative way (fielders choice, error, ect) but what’s that percent? I don’t know but how many runs are actually scored by a guy who got on this way? We would have to figure that out but I think it’s safe to say that it wouldn’t be more than 15% so your talking 85% – 15% in favor of OB vs. RBI.
Add the two together and you have a clear and convincing victory for OB over RBI as a correlate to runs scored.
Metsie for the hitter in terms of collecting both RBI AND adding to his OB there are 3 possibilities. With a hit, bases loaded walk or HBP both go up. In the case of a SAC fly RBI goes up OB stays the same. In the case of a GB to 2B where the hitter is thrown out at 1st and the run scores, RBI goes up and OB goes down but these things do not occur in exact proportion.
I don’t know what the exact proportion is but the 2011 Mets for example had 48 SAC flies in 718 runs scored. What’s that? 7.5% and that’s in an instance where OB stays the same. Doesn’t go down. Obviously RBI do go up in that scenario so RBI get that win. RBI get a bigger win in the scenario of a GB to 2nd that scores a run while producing an out because RBI go up, OB goes down (unless a SAC is ruled) but clearly the hit, bases loaded walk or HBP in which the hitter improves both is so much more prevelant than the others that you have to score that fight 99-90 in favor of RBI.
The first part of the equation though is where RBI can only score off HR’s. Say 15% of the time though it could be higher. Subtract out those runs that got OB by an error or other OB negative event and there you go. Say 85% of runs that scored, got OB in a traditional OB positive way. OB wins 85% – 15%. Add the two together and it’s clear. 175-114.
True the numbers have to be boiled down but with a difference this large and only a few instances, and ones that don’t occur that often,in which to cut the lead down, there is no way RBI can catch OB. No way at all.
See you were counting just RBI from the hitter when most of the time the hitter gets an RBI, he also does something that increases his OB.
You didn’t fail to credit the run scored when it scored via a HR on the other end but if your comparing OB vs RBI you have to count them both, on both ends.
“Well you can’t really say that OB doesn’t count because not all base runners score and then not count all the times base runners don’t get knocked in against the hitter but that’s beside the point.”
Sure I can and you know why? I wasn’t REPLACING the guy who got OB. I was replacing the guys BEHIND THEM who had fewer RBI than the guy I intend to get by LOOKING for MORE RBI!
Getting another OB guy is pointless!
I could even get my team OBP as high as .500 and never score a run!
Because minimum OBP required to ensure a single run is .501
Did you know that? Did that get mentioned in any of the OBP Bibles?
Think about it for a second and you will see…
You can load the bases every inning and then make three outs. Your OBP will be .500 and your RS will be zero!
So will your RBI!
getting a guy with ONE RBI can get me one more run than a team full of .500 OBP!
Sure you can get to point B from point A via point C,D and E, (Kind of like how Capt Obvious does with figuring out RBI) but the straightest and most efficient route is the straight line RBI!
“Metsie for the hitter in terms of collecting both RBI AND adding to his OB there are 3 possibilities…”
Tag you are just going out of your way to credit an OB for something it didn’t create or cause!
You also forget that being OB doesn’t mean you did not make an out! Just means you didn’t make an out at the plate! So to say every OB is a positive result is really a matter of WHEN your talking. as is the case in the 1 out runner on 3rd situation a walk is FAR INFERIOR and HARDLY desirable compared to the many other things he could have done in the batters box!
He just set up the inning ending DP by walking!
Now he shouldn’t get penalized for walking, no one suggests that and if the DP happens it is more the fault of the batter behind him who hit into it. But in the end that OB was just as much a negative as a positive! In the end it is a wash and just a temporal shifting of the eventual out!
And as I said to you in the last discussion we had on this, If you wish to go and weight the RBIs to come to a better metric to determine actualy batter accomplishment feel free. I have no issues with weighting the acts that score the runs.
Maybe a metric like wRBI
wRBI=RBI+((OB/4)-(OutsMade/3)
Sac fly would calculate to be .66 with a runner on 3rd
Walk would calc to 1.25 with bases loaded
HR would be 5 with bases loaded.
Etc…
You could then count Runs scored on a DP correctly as you can weight them.
Runner on 1st and 3rd, no out.
GIDP = 1 run in but two outs.
wRBI=.44
And if you do that you should weight the RS too!
wRS=RS-(OB/4). The OB in this situation would be the total bases achieved while getting OB. A guy who hits a triple and scores would get .75 of an RS, Guy who hits a HR gets 1
In that way you are weighing how much easier that player made it for the next guy to score the run!
But you are counting ALL OB as the same accomplishment towards RS even if they never score and EVEN if they eventually become an out!
And by awarding credit where it is not deserved you will also be awarding and looking for accomplishments from a player you are evaluating that simply do not exist!
Your looking for GOLD and while OBP looks and feels like gold it is actually FOOLS GOLD!
less than a third of OB is actually RS!
ALL of RBI is!
RBI is the GOLD!
Look for Gold and you might find it.
Look for something else and you usually tend to find what your looking for, but it won’t be gold!
“Going for more RBI will!”
Ok, so here’s my challenge to you then sir. How can I “go” for more RBI? What kind of player would you choose for your team to “go” for more rbi?
For some reason I can’t click reply on yours…. but T Agee… making up numbers, regardless of your point, is likely to not help your cause. Jus sayin’
Well Captain I was just trying to generalize here and deal with just the meat rather than get bogged down in the gristle.
Still and all explain to me how two (for the vast majority of times) OB positive events could possible produce a result that more closely correlates to anything else but OB?
“What kind of player would you choose for your team to “go” for more rbi?”
Someone with more RBI than the guy I intend to replace!
Pretty much the same wy you go for a guy with higher OBP only I don’t look at the OBP I look at the RBI column!
I get 8 players with 100 RBI in my lineup I will most likely get 900 RS!
How much OBP or OPS do you need to get even 1?
That should read 800 RBI not 900
And while I realize RBI is a “count” stat, you can calculate it by subtracting the events specified in my example from runs. If you can’t admit that, you’re openly choosing not to admit truths.
Yeah you can count your fingers by adding your fingers and toes and dividing by two!
Doesn’t make toes and fingers the same thing either!
Metsie you still there? Where’d you go?
I was just wondering why you don’t credit the guy who knocked in the run with getting OB? Your quick to credit him with an RBI but not with getting OB? How come?
The way I see it is that even if your premise that RBI is the best correlation of runs scored were a fair premise I still think your wrong. Here’s why:
Guy who gets the RBI usually has gotten a hit or a basses loaded walk or HBP so right there RBI and OB are even. That has to represent the case 90% of the time or better. In the case of a double play OB would go down and RBI would stay the same. Sac fly or run scoring fielders choice OB stays the same while RBI goes up. Errors OB goes down, RBI stays the same. We already know where RBI stand on this issue. 99% of the time a run scores and RBI is awarded.
I’m not doing the research but I have to believe that it is fair to say that in the case of runs scored OB positive events account for at least 90% of runs scored. Maybe 7.5% on sacrifice flies and 2.5 % on GB fielders choices where RBI are credited but the hitters OB stays the same. GIDP doesn’t count for either so the only real disparity would be if the official scorer refused the hitter a SAC (GB to 2B)
So if you agree with my premise that hits and bases loaded walks and HBP account for 90% of RBI I suppose it would be fair to say that since RBI’s are awarded 99% of the time a run scores; then RBI lead OB 99-90 on the back end in terms of correlating to runs scored.
On the front end though someone who got OB, excepting a fielders choice or error had an OB positive event. A hit, a walk, HBP, Catchers interference, whatever and only those times when that guy hit a HR did he get also get an RBI so right away there your talking maybe 95% OB vs. about what? 2011 Mets had 718 runs and 108 HR’s What’s that about 15%? (just using rough generalities here)
So where are we RBI vs OB? On the back end (the RBI part) RBI leads 99% – 90%. On the front end (the run scored end) OB wins 95% – 15% for a total victory of 185% to 114% or if you prefer to average out the components 92.5% to 57%.
Of course you would have to boil down the amount of times the run scored reached on error or fielders choice ect to derive the exact correlation but you have to admit with a disparity as large as this one RBI aren’t closing a gap that large with such a small amount of ways to drive runs in with to play with or account for OB negative ways of reaching base.
Clear and convincing win for OB being WAY more a correlate for runs scored than RBI.
I’m sure you’ll agree.
“I was just wondering why you don’t credit the guy who knocked in the run with getting OB? ”
Possibly because it was a SacFly?
Is a Sac Fly and OB?
Your entire reply based of this misconception falls to pieces after that doesn’t it?
“I’m not doing the research but I have to believe that it is fair to say that in the case of runs scored OB positive events account for at least 90% of runs scored.”
I’ll say it again since you missed it…
Are all RS and OB? YES!
Are all OB an RS? NO
Are all doubles an OB? YES!
Are all ob Doubles? NO!
Are all RBI’s an RS? YES!
Are all RS RBIs? NO!
And again are all RBI’s OB? NO!
Are all OBs RBIs? NO!
100% of RBIs were an RS
.392% of OBs were RS for Boston this year as the RS leader!
.232% of RS were HRs in Boston
.962% of RS were RBI in Boston
Metsie your allowing a STAT to blindfold you. RBI is nothing but a STAT. It’s the base hit that causes the runs to cross home plate not the STAT.
What are you crazy! STAT’s don’t win games, base hits do.
Occasionally a run will score without the benefit of a base hit. For instance of the 718 runs scored last year we scored 48 of them by SAC fly. Roughly about half of one percent. Tell me you hold half of one percent above 99 1/2 percent? when you seek to measure something?
Really! Your hanging your hat on an event that occurs half of one percent of the time. The only time when when both an RBI and OB both do not go up together. RBI go up but OB stays the same. Half of one percent of the time!
The other 99 1/2 percent of the time either both RBI and OB go up together or neither does.
Thee fact is you have a vested interest in trying to prove that RBI is a better correlate to runs scored so you purposely don’t count OB. You only count RBI for the guy who knocked in the run but it’s so much more than that. It’s also a hit, maybe an extra base hit, AND it’s OB. That’s right Metsie, the base hit that drove in the runner from 2nd is every bit as much OB as it is RBI just as a bases loaded walk or HBP is.
First of all it’s not the STAT (RBI) that drove in the run, it’s the base hit that drove it in. The STAT is simply a way to count them.
The fact that one half a percent of the time a STAT can be added without OB going up doesn’t invalidate the 99 1/2 percent of the time BOTH GO UP.
The whole premise that more RBI = more runs scored is absurd. More base hits = more runs scored. More base hits with more base runners on actually and that comes down to more OB.
The idea that two things that can ALMOST never exist without the other being present can prove correlation in anything is truly hysterical in the first place but then to seek to “prove your point” by counting only one of the two things you are trying to show corelation to the base is beyond hysterical, and to then claim that 99.5% of the sample doesn’t count and only .05% does is simply beyond belief.
If you want more runs scored you need to get more base hits, preferably with more runners OB. Do that often enough and you’ll score more runs. Score more runs and you’ll get more RBI.
Very simple huh? RBI never plated a single run since the day it was invented. Base hits, bases loaded walks and HBP (and occasionally SAC flies about .05% of the time) knocked in all those runs. Base hits, walks and HBP are the things that comprise OB. Get more of that and you’ll score more runs.
Dude OB is a stat! And your allowing a stat that does NOT GUARANTEE SCORING to blindfold you!
“STAT’s don’t win games, base hits do”
No does a basehit (1B) score any runs by itself?
Does a double?
Does a Triple?
Just them by themself do they score a run if NOTHING ELSE happens?
NO!
So your stat does NOTHING for winning a game unless it ALSO is involved in scoring a run!
ONLY OBs who become RS are worth having!
The rest are all WASTES PRODUCT!
There is no WASTED RBI!
EVERY RBI counts as an RS!
Take off the damn blindfold!
And your hanging your hat on something that fails to score a run more than 80% of the time!
You have an 80% failure EVEN if you get what your looking for!
I get a 100% SUCCESS rate with what I Look for!
100% vs 20%
Metsie, the STAT (RBI) follows the base hit. It’s the base hit that drives in the run, not the STAT.
The base hit is itself, first a foremost associated with raising BA and OB and only those times when a runner is OB is it associated with an RBI.
Sure we can endlessly debate about runs that score on steals of home, SAC flies, GIDP’s, and ignore all of the runs that score on base hits if you like but that would be stupid.
Base hits drive in the most runs of any other method of scoring runs by FAR. What is a base hit?
is a base hit always an RBI? of course not.
It’s a hit that gets you OB. When there is already a runner OB, especially 2nd or 3rd base there is a great likely hood of scoring that run with a base hit. Not with an RBI, with a base hit. RBI don’t drive in runs they simply count runs driven in. It’s the base hit (95% of the time) that drives in the run.
If you want to score more runs the way to do it is get more base runners and more base hits and the result will be more runs and more RBI.
Your trying to wag the dog.
And purely from an on field perspective getting a guy OB who does not score is never a wasted product. Ever. For so many different reasons it would be impossible to examine each and every one.
Pitch counts, clearing the pitcher, opening a hole on the right side, stealing a base, ect but how about this?
How about your #7 hitter getting OB with 2 out in all three of his AB’s, (1 hit, 1 BB, 1 HBP) never advancing beyond 1st base but advancing the lineup so your #3, #4 and #5 hitters come up to bat in the 9th inning instead of #9, #1 and #2?
That alone doesn’t guarantee anything other than your best hitters getting 1 more AB then they would have gotten if your #7 hitter went 0-3 but is getting your 3 best hitters an extra AB worthless?
What base hit? there is NO BASE HIT recorded on a Sac Fly are you dense?
Does the base hit score without the SacFly?
it’s what happens at the plate that scores the run not what happened before it!
Your starting to circle jerk like the rest of them isnisting the base hit CAUSES something it most certainly does not!
UNLESS the Base hit is a HR! Which is also ACCOMPLISHED at the plate not the bases!
“And purely from an on field perspective getting a guy OB who does not score is never a wasted product. ”
Get back on topic, We aren’t talking about ON FIELD perspective we are talking about INCREASING RS!
The thing you guys are claiming is responsible for increasing RS despite all evidence to the contrary!
WHAT SCORES THE RUNS and WHO do you go after based on which stat that gets you that!
getting a guy with more OB does not GUARANTEE you get MORE RS!
Getting the guy with more RBI DOES!
Now either stop circle jerking like the rest of the OBP guys and stay on THAT point of RS or stop wasting my time!
this is kind of beyond ordinary stupidity. RBI is a team stat that is almost the same stat as team runs scored! you cant judge INDIVIDUAL PLAYERS on RBI! it has no value as a player evaluation tool because it is way too team influenced. OBP is something that is an individual stat. correlating team RBI with team runs scored is a tragically stupid thing to do. i can barely believe this is serious.
Sure you can each player has an RBi recorded for his individual at bats. And the guys who hit HRs don’t need any team mate to get them either!
You really are slow.
And you are stupid…
I personally would rather be slow!
So Metsie…for your next trick, I would like you to correlate:
Water to ocean
Fire to flames
Eyesight to vision
Trees to forest
Music to notes
I think those also may correlate best to each other, but I’m not really sure. Only you in your infinite wisdom can explain it to me.
At least those things are related!
Not the Apples and Oranges you are trying to relate with OBP/SLG/OPS to RS!
less than a third of all OBs actually turn into RS!
ALL RBIs turn into RS!
Unless your admitting here that the only way to correlate is to find two things that have absoloutly nothing to do with each other and try to make them relate!
Which none of you have done in the last three days!
RBIs make RS AND OB!
OBs CAN make an RS but not all do!
And the OB itself requires something else before it can score unless it’s a HR!
An RBi doesn’t require anything else to happen!
It ALREADY DID!
Just continue to close your ears, Metsie. That’s all you’re doing. People have shown you plenty of reasons as to why the garbage you’re spewing makes no sense but you continually stick your fingers in your ears.
And you keep right on relating things that have nothing to do with each other…
Like Sidewalks cause people to walk!
Or walking 5 miles causes you to walk 10 !
Or because you must be married to get divorced Marriages CAUSE divorce!
Who has the closed ears?
The ones who allowed Tango Tiger and Bill James to brainwash them!
Metsie Hits don’t always produce RBI. Sometimes they do, sometimes they don’t. RBI NEVER produce hits, just like sales reports don’t produce sales. They just count them.
If you were in charge of a group of salesmen and your goal was to increase sales you wouldn’t ask for more sales reports would you? Of course not, you would ask for more sales. RBI is just the way of counting the “sales.” The sale is actually the hit, so basically what you want is more hits, not more sales reports.
How do you go about getting those hits? Ask your manager to print up more copies of every sales report or do you ask your salesmen to make more appointments?
More appointments are what increases sales, not more counting of sales.
Still Circle jerking I see…
Not all RBIs are hit!
True or False?
Avoidance of the question is tantamount to taking the 5th on the grounds it incriminates you!
When you hire sales guys do you hire guys who make a lot of calls or guys who make a lot of sales?
My guess is you would hire the guy who makes the calls even if those calls are to companies who can’t use or buy your product, Just as long as more calls are made you think you have aucceeded!
You would just order more sales reports cause that’s all you need to get more sales.
Avoiding it and conceeding?
And no STUPID I would hire a salesguy who has more sales!
Not more reports!
But obviously if you had figured that out by now instead of circle jerking around the issue you had listed to what i said!
Only about 92.5 % of of runs are driven in with base hits or bases loaded walks or HBP.
92.5 %
Some where in the range of 90% of runs are scored by base runners who got OB by either a hit, walk or HBP.
If that isn’t correlation enough for you I have no idea what ever could be.
I know it can’t be be RBI because RBI only measures the act after the fact, it doesn’t cause the event, it simply counts it. Kind of like a newspaper chronicling an event. You wouldn’t say that a newspaper article robbed a bank would you? Wait don’t answer that! Then how can you say an RBI drove in a run? It was a hit (92.5%) of the time that drove in a run and the run it drove in was a hit (or BB or HBP) 90% of the time.
Clearly taking a measurement of something and then claiming that it correlates best to the very thing it is associated to (and derived from) is an exercise in something straight out of the planet of the apes.
If you prefer to hang your hat on the outside fringes of 7.5% or 10% while ignoring the VAST majority that comprise the very thing your attempting to measure all I can say is, you know where you want to be better than anyone else.
One request though. If you could present this information to Sandy and Terry in person (the Christmas party might be a good time) I would really appreciate it. Not only has it been a tough year with too many RBI counted on our opponents box score and not enough on ours but somehow I have a feeling that they would really appreciate it.
2.82% of OB becomes an RS!
2.03% of H becomes an RS
0.79% of HBP RBOE and Walks are an RS (all the other crap you count in OB except hits)
4.57% of RS is via HR itself (not counting ROB leading to RBI)
95% of RS is via RBI! (Hmm so much for the RBI and RS are the same bull!)
90.43% of RS is attributed to non HR acts (not counting the HRs but may be due to the HR being hit in many cases!)
Since you ignore the BA and RBI (which accounts for 95% of RS and go for the stat that includes and awards things that only get you .79% of RS
Who is the one going for Sales reports but not the sales here?
Yes OB is a part of RS! The OB that involves getting a HIT! The HIT that gets the RBI and includes the HR!
No you want to shoot for increasing that .79% act to increase by ignoring all the crap that actually scores runs!
And in conclusion I think it worth noting that NO ONE has yet created or defended the correlation of OBP/SLG/OPS here, All you have done was attack the RBI! Ignored the challenges to show data that relates DIRECTLY to RS for OBP/SLG/OPS!
You say RBI is directly related so it can’t be used!
Meaning your suggesting exactly what I have proposed.
OBP.SLG/OPS are NOT directly related!
The one chart showed actuallt proves my point as it was a scatter chart and showed that lower OPS teams were higher (right most) on the RS chart than a slew of teams above them on the OPS chart!
Everyything you have argued here actually made my pioint by either AGREEING RBI is directly and more related (therefore Co-Related) to RS than OBP/SLG/OPS! Or by failure to show any relation to OBP/SLG./OPS and trying to circle jerk the subject away from what you really know but refuse to admit!
That OBP/SLG/OPS is USELESS in judging or increasing RS since it includes things that don’t lead to runs being scored!
And I hope one day a team does what you think is true and when they don’t score any runs I will be back to have the last laugh!
Yes the top teams in OBP/SLG/OPS find their way to the top slot of RS…
But it isn’t the OBP/SLG/OPS that does it. Its that RBI they also have that teams with higher OBP/SLG/OPS didn’t get!
Which is why Toronto is the team you OBP guys never want to talk about!
They blow your theory out of the water!
The 2010 Blue Jays really support the argument. Why so relatively few runs scored with all those HR’s? Why indeed.
One guess….
Secondly your jerking the argument around. It’s not what percent of runners OB score vs. don’t score because someone doesn’t knock them in. It’s what percentage of the runs scored, are scored by guys who got OB by hit, walk, HBP or other OB positive events AND the percentage of runs driven in that were driven in by OB positive events like a hit, walk, HBP ect.
My best guess doing some quick, but rudimentary calculations came up with about 90% of base runners who scored got OB via the things that increase OB%.
My best guess about runs that were driven in is that about 92.5% of them are driven in by things that increase OB% (ie hit, walk, HBP ect)
RBI doesn’t cause the event, it just counts it in a cumulative method. No different than a crime statistic but saying all you have to do is lower that crime statistic and you’ll have less crimes is nothing more than restating the goal.
Saying you can score more runs if you just have more RBI is essentially saying the same thing. We’ll score more runs if we drive in more runs. Well duh.
How you go about scoring more runs is the question and the only reasonable answer is to get more hits, and get them with more runners on and both of those things go right to the heart of raising your OB%.
They were top 10 in RS! What the hell are you talking about?
In fact they were the 9th best Run Scorer despite the 6th WORSE OBP in the league!
In 2011 they were 6th in RS and 18th in OBP!
In 2009 they were 8th in RS and 15th in OBP!
In 2006 they were 5th in OBP and were 12th in RS!
Sounds to me like they abandoned the OBP approach that did not get them in the top 10 of RS and went for those RBIs and as a result scored more runs than 17 teams you said would score more runs because of their OBP!
I also not that you ignored the percentages I showed to counter yours…
And NO it’s not about how many OBs were involved!
It’s about PLAYER EVALUATION!
It’s about who EARNED the OB as opposed to those who needed a pitcher or defense to get them on!
Good Pitching defeats your method of team building.
My method doesn’t matter who is pitching!
Because the batter EARNS what he gets!
We didn’t need this excercise to know that good pitching trumps good hitting. Everyone already knew that and that’s not what your article was about anyway and it most definitely IS a skill set to not swing at pitches you cannot hit, or hit well whether you agree with that or not.
Lastly getting hits is clearly an earned event as well, and hitting makes up 85% of OB% so it is by far the most vital component.
I didn’t realize that player evaluation had anything to do with this but one need look no farther than the 2010 Mets and the 2011 Mets to realize that OBP was the biggest difference between the two teams offensively. True we hit less HR’s (20) but our batting average (.15) and OB% (.21) went up and consequently so did our RBI and runs scored.
More hits and especially more hits with runners on is the key to scoring more runs. Do that and you’ll score more and as a result of doing that wind up with more RBI.
Got it?
Well this is again you showing you missed the point!
Good Pitching does NOT trump GOOD HITTING!
It trumps good OBP but can do nothing about the Hitting!
A guy who hits .300 might hit a little less but will also walk more as well!
A guy who doesn’t hit and has OBP is trumped merely by not walking or hitting the batter with the ball!
But good hitters will hit those strikes at around the same average as his BA!
Good pitching shuts down good hitting almost every time. Everyone already knows that.
Who is a guy that doesn’t hit and only has good OB? You mean 2010′s Luis Castillo? He shouldn’t have been playing. Anyone could have had him for minimum and he’s home now.
Every lineup has guys you won’t let beat you and guys you absolutely have to go after and get out but if you think pitchers are robots out there who can deliver strike after strike at will your crazy.
Verifiably insane.
If you don’t think that pitchers purposely throw balls (on purpose) your even crazier than verifiably insane.
Hate to break it to you Metsie, lots of pitchers will only give you the illusion of the ball being a strike, much like a poker player will try to give off the illusion he has a winning hand when he has nothing, which seems to be the case here.
Got some proof of this?
Batters hit to their average, Good Hitters will hit to average no matter who is pitching because the Pitcher still has to throw strikes to get him out (or walk him and not get him out) and since the Batter is a good batter he is capable of hitting those strikes!
“More hits and especially more hits with runners on is the key to scoring more runs. Do that and you’ll score more and as a result of doing that wind up with more RBI.”
More Hits gets you more runners on doesn’t it?
OBP is not about hits though is it?
I have no problem increasing OBP just not going to go after players with OBP and no BA!
My way gets what you want, what I want AND RS!
Your way gets OBP and not much more!
Especially if the Pitcher decides not to walk the batters who need it to get that OBP!
I’m not sure if anyone has ever advocated getting guys with high OB and no BA. If some one has could you please provide an example?
Barring an example I don’t see why that would even come into this discussion. I mean if no one wants someone who can’t hit and who’s only offensive skill is walking why would it even come up?
Walks are just a by product of being a good hitter (or occasionally being a good hitter in a poor line up) anyway.
I really can’t think of even a single instance when anyone, here or elsewhere to my recollection has ever advocated getting a poor hitter who walks a lot.
In fact I can’t really think of too many poor hitters who walk a lot to begin with. Perhaps Castillo in his later years and maybe a guy here or there but their really a very rare commodity usually found in little league until they find something else to do.
Not too many guys like that in professional baseball.
No most advocate not looking at BA at all!
Just OBP! They assume good OBP means they are good hitters!
“Walks are just a by product of being a good hitter ”
No they are the product of a bad Pitcher!
“In fact I can’t really think of too many poor hitters who walk a lot to begin with.” There are a ton of Castillos in this league! You just don’t know because you look at OBP not BA!
Tell me this though since you admit it IS possible that they exist.
Ever see a good BA hitter with a bad OBP?
EVER?
If not then why look at OBP at all? just look at BA!
Metsie if you think pitchers can throw strikes at will, when ever they want, your crazy.
Pitchers also throw balls on purpose, all the time.
If ther were a ton of Castillo’s in the majors how come he’s not?
Not looking at BA is as stupid as not looking at OB. It is between the two that the story gets told.
Lance Johnson was a guy who often times had a good BA and a good OB because of the good BA but when he did hit in bad luck had a bad OB because his OB was so dependent on his BA.
Most hitters would raise their BA’s simply by taking more walks. They’d raise their OB for two reasons (better BA and OB) and they’d raise their BA because they weren’t swinging at as many pitches off the plate. Pitches which also are more difficult to drive.
Cue the odd example of a bad ball hitter but I’m talking about your average generic hitter.
Your average generic hitter will hit in better counts, get more good pitches to hit and be able to do more with them then your average grip it and rip it will any day of the week.
Hitting is all about getting your pitch. Being selective get you more of them. What’s wrong with that?
Hey your the one that says good pitching beats good hitting…
So which one is it?
can a batter make the pitcher throw him a ball?
No only the Pitcher can determine what it is based on his execution!
The batter can’t make a strike a ball or a ball a strike! Only the Pitcher and possibly the Umpire can do that!
But if there is a good hitter in the batter’s box then the Pitcher has fewer options!
He can throw the strikes the good hitter can hit or he can throw the balls and walk him!
But if the guy can’t hit the only way to walk is for the Pitvher to allow it!
And if the Pitcher throws three strikes before he throws three balls there is nothing the batter can do about it EXCEPT HIT IT!
And if he can’t hit it well he is out!
Good Hitters force the Pitcher to either get the OB you were looking for somewhere else, or throw strikes and get the Hits that are better!
Either way we BOTH get what we want with a good hitter.
By selecting OBP though if the Pitcher doesn’t walk him he could easily make an out becuase you picked him based on numbers that said nothing about his ability to hit strikes!
What are you talking about Metsie? OB is almost ALL about getting hits. Jeez.
Hits make up 80% of a players OB%. How the **** could it be about something else?
Sure it adds in a few other things but it is first and primarily about hits. Add in some other things that help you increase, rather than decrease your chances of scoring a run and VOILA!
Man you missed 80% of what the whole thing is about.
Ahh so Hits make up 80% of OBP eh?
Lets just say your right…
So you agree hits are better than walks,HBP and RBOE correct? At least from the AWARD THE BATTER POV?
Whats better to look at the OBP which is only right 80% of the time or the Hits/BA which is right 100%of the time regarding HITS?
Again you are collecting a BUNCH OF CRAP THAT IS NOT WHAT YOU ARE LOOKING FOR!
Because you didn’t Look for what you are looking for just something else that is counted up along with the result you want to get!
80% of Apples are RED!
100% of RED APPLES are RED!
Do you look for apples or just RED ones?
Who might select the WRONG COLOR APPLE based on his evaluation of what to look for to increase RED APPLES?
You are me?
Since I know your just going to change the subject yet again because you know what I’m saying is true and your too deep into it to admit your wrong publicly expect me to ignore you Circle Jerks from now on!
yes RBI’s are (Red Apples) are directly related to RS!
OBP (apples Generic) are not!
You keep looking for the stat that has all the NON RS GARBAGE included in it…
I’ll look for RBI which is PURE UNADULTERATED RS!
No IMPURITIES!
Well don’t go looking for RBI from a guy hitting in a high OB line up or you just might wind up with another Jason Bay.
I’ll go looking for hitters. Hitters who will take their walks when their offered and I’ll score a lot more runs than your SAC fly ball boys will because when they drive one in their OB for some one else to drive them in and that means one more runner AND one less out which equals a much better chance of getting another run.
To each their own I guess.
What difference does it make if your going to put him in a GOOD hitting lineup?
Since only 2+% of OB actually scores a run there is plenty of leftover OB for that RBI guy to drive in!
By going for the better hitter by looking for HITTING stats not BASE stats (Which is really what OBP and SLG are!)
I will get BOTH the base AND the HIT AND the RBI as well!
So even if he was from a high OBP team, As long as all the guys I take are good Hitters I will have the OB but more of it will be because of what the BATTER can do not what the Pitcher allowed!
All of my (maybe even more than 80%) OBP will be EARNED as Hits!
Hits that score runs where walk, HBP and RBOE do not!
OK Metsie,
I think you should publish your work and present it to a broader spectrum then just MMO.
Forward it on to Alderson, he likes statistical analysis and theories and stuff like that.
Let him get a look at it and the light just might go on.
“Hmmm, you mean to tell me Metsie all we need to do to score more runs is to just get more RBI? That’s brilliant, just brilliant. Hey Paul, JP, I think this Metsie guy has figured it out, He’s found the holy grail. Check this out.”
I can see it now. Your in the dugout, in uniform, assisting Hudgens in where and how you can pick up some more RBI. “hey there’s some right there go grab it.”
Just do me one favor. Make sure your work doesn’t fall into Beane’s hands or he’s liable to make a movie about it and then the cat will be out of the bag.
Funny that you mention Beane…
What has his OBP selection of players done for him?
Oakland was 20th In RS!
And all that OBP he selected evaporated and he now stads 20th in OBP.
Could it be because he picked players who Pitcher’s realized they could just throw strikes and take away the numbers Beane thought made them good players?
Speaking of Alderson, How did the OBP guy Emaus do?
What was Paulino’s OBP this year?
Speaking of bad hitting high OBP guys Paulino would seem to fit in there!
Or how about Willie Harris another High OBP low BA type guy…
Are they the keepers on this team?
You would have to talk to a Beane supporter. I’m not a Beanehead, not by any stretch of the imagination.
Harris was brought in for his versatility I believe. Can play just about anywhere if need be other than C and SS and God forbid, Emaus, Murphy, Turner, Hu and Castillo weren’t getting it done could at least be placed at 2B and signed a minor league contract which allowed us to keep an extra player on the roster until after most teams rosters were full so we kept a little depth because, hey you never know.
Paulino is anything but a high OB guy. Do you even watch the games Metsie? Do you even realize what your seeing? How in the world can you refer to Paulino as a high OB guy? Nothing could be farther from the truth.
Paulino a high OB guy. Man that’s a good one.
Paulino was brought in because A) he was available. You should be used to that theory of procuring players by now if you’ve watched this team for any length of time, and B) because offensively he’s a good match with Thole. He hits LHP well, something Thole doesn’t do well.
Emaus didn’t cost us anything to give a shot to and we dumped him, something we couldn’t do with Castillo because of his salary. No harm no foul.
Anything else I can help you with?
“You would have to talk to a Beane supporter”
I know your not, just pointing out that in your defense of OBP your definitly supporting his failed approach.
As for Harris and Paulino
They were mentioned in regards to you mention of Alderson whom you seemed to suggest was all about the OBP despite the fact none of the guys he brought in were based of that save Emaus (and even he is a maybe and not really an ALDERSON guy so to speak)
I for one don’t believe Alderson will go for players based on OBP!
I think he knows as much as I do that it is not the be all and end all Xtreem makes it out to be and doesn’t believe it actually leads to more RS.
We will see soon enough based on who he signs this year.
Reyes certainly fits the High OBP mold here.
It will be interesting to see if he Values OBP so much that he is willing to pay him!
If not it will be interesting to see if he pockets the money and goes the moneyball route. (I can hear the screams of FIRE HIM already if he does that!)
I personally haven’t decided WHAT Alderson plans to do. Many other like Jessup, Donal plus everyone who hates him have already decided he is going to play moneyball.
I am not so sure!
But so far he has been more moneyball than OBP selector!
So what is he going to believe is the undervalued stat?
Ever wonder if RBI is now the undervalued stat since Bill James and Billy Beane has everyone chasing that OBP liar ghost?
Metsie,
You know nobody gives up their trade secrets especially in a cutthroat business like baseball.
I believe that Beane dumped the info because the NYY and him were the only one’s playing that angle and after Giambi left for NYY $’s he realized he just couldn’t compete for the same players against the NYY so he dumped the info, raised the demand and moved onto something else and really hasn’t found it yet.
The last guy the NYY got that wasn’t a high OB guy was Mariano Duncan. Ever since then it’s about high OB, neutral platoon splits and HR potential.
I do believe very much that Alderson will not be signing anyone to any kind of a long term contract (Reyes excepted – hopefully) instead going year to year to get the best choices at the cheapest price and try to deal them mid season, pick up supplemental round picks if they become type B FA’s and just go with the cheapest team possible until Omar’s guys start getting up here.
If he does a good job in adding to them that will form the nucleus and then he’ll spend on quality, not like Minaya did but the reasonable 2-4 year type deals.
Holding pattern until 2014 at best.
Yeah let’s try and win with a dollar store mentality till the kids get here because when they are here we will be guaranteed a contending team
And don’t start with your “Well Omar……”
I’m gonna cut it off right there because we’re talking about Alderson’s methods, the MB belief and what it means to the Mets now. We are not talking about what the last regime did, which by the way I pray this regime can emulate the last one’s success in pennant races. But I don’t see that happening with a dollar store mentality.
Let’s spend as little as possible, get as lucky as possible, and find the needle in the haystack that nobody else is looking for even though everybody else is thinking that they can find players that nobody else is thinking about either.
Maybe we should get one of those Indian dollar store clerks to help Alderson out.
I donb’t know Tag you can’t call Granderson a high OBP guy…he’s only at .364!
Swisher is their highest OBP guy at .374
Top ten in OBP bottoms out at .389
And by 2014 Sandy will be fighting to keep his job if he hasn’t won anything!
That is if he didn’t get sent packing after the 2013 season!
So if you think he is going to just go year to year making cheap pickups he won’t be here to see the end result!
Metsie, those are very high OB %’s. Very high. They’d be 2nd and 3rd on the Mets just behind the batting title champ and you can’t turn those guys around either. They hit LHP as well as RHP.
Right now I think Wilpon needs Alderson a hell of a lot more than Alderson needs him.
Wilpon can’t buy his way into mediocrity right now and probably won’t be able to five years or more. Right now he needs performance out of each dollar he can stretch. Alderson will exact as much from each nickel as can be and it’ll just have to be enough.
Unless we can get him to sell.
Well I don’t see how thats such a high OBP…
Not when guys are in the .400s
And I think you need to rethink your Wilpon finances…
How much money has Wilpon lost from Madoff…
NEGATIVE 300 MIl which means he’s 300 Mil up on the deal!
He lost 70 Mil in Salary and that is gone off the books already!
And like I said you keep talking about buying into medicority but with all the rus we scored this year MINUS our two leading RBI guys from last year how many are we going to score if we just keep the players we have and keep them healthy?
About another 75 Runs!
That in itself puts us in the playoffs!
But it won’t happen if you lose Reyes and his 44 RBI and our leading Run Scorer!
And if Alderson doesn’t resign reyes he has a year to show or it’s adios Muchacho!
One of Seligs plants was sent packing, Wilpon will have no qualms getting rid of the 2nd if he tales a lot of heat for us not winning!
Especially if we are not winning because we didn’t spend!
You can correlate two related things very easily but you can’t prove it anything by it.
Living is related to breathing so if you want to increase living just breathe more right? The more breaths you take the longer you live right? or you could say it the other way. The less breaths you take the shorter you live but what does that prove? That breathing is related to living. OK so what.
Saying that you want to score more runs naturally begs the question of how are you going to do that? If your answer is to drive in more runs, that’s absurd because that stat is simply a byproduct of having scored more runs.
Hits are what you want. Hits with men on base. That’s what scores 90% or more of all the runs right now. Unless you can come up with a previously undiscovered method of scoring runs that’s what your stuck with.
I suppose you could if you wanted to insist that all of the runs above what you had previously been scoring all be delivered via the sacrifice fly in order to have OB not present in the extra runs scored but then your whole goal would have to change.
It would have to change from wanting to score more runs to wanting to score more runs via the sacrifice fly. If it’s simply runs that you want to increase then what you have to increase is hits and especially hits with men on. Do that and your runs and RBI will increase too, as a byproduct of the hits.
All of your analogies apply more to your OBP/SLG/OPS than my assertion that RBI is the thing to look for if you want more RS!
YOUR the one who insists that since breathing is required to live you must breath more to live more.
What is the purpose of breathing? To get Oxygen! Breathing more does not mean more oxygen because oxygen has a single absorbtion rate and by breathing more you take in less oxygen on each breath!
Breathe DEEPLY but fewer times takes in much more oxygen than btreathing more often!
I IMPROVE the RS by getting BETTER OB not MORE!
SO your analogy applies more to your theory than mine!
Just as your sales analogy works more as what you do than what I do!
I don’t care how many reports or phone calls he makes!
I only look at the number of sales COMPLETED regardless of Attempts!
I go for the 95% activity not the 2.82%
What is “better OB?” and your hanging your whole premise on the misconception that a stat that counts an occurrence is actually the cause of that occurrence.
That is lunacy pure and simple.
Did counting the votes cause Obama to get elected or was it because he got more of them?
Is counting your money the reason you have it?
Is counting the zits on a teenagers face the reason they have them?
Is counting the number of beers you drank the reason your drunk or is it the fact that you drank them?
Is counting the sales that you made the reason you got them?
Is counting the number of boards of sheetrock you humped up the fire escape the reason their in the 3rd floor apartment?
Is counting the number of fish you caught the reason you caught them?
Is counting how many games you won the reason you won them?
Scoring more runs than your opponent results in winning the game every single time, no different than run scored going up on the board everytime an RBI is awarded. They both correlate 100% of the time but would you say to Terry Collins, “hey Terry, all you need to do tonight is score more runs than the other team and you’re going to win I guarantee it.”
I think you got lost in the numbers Metsie. Happens to a lot of sabermetric dudes, looks like it got you too.
Better OBP? I need to explain that you and you call ME lunatic?
Pure lunacy is looking at a stat that only 2% of the time relates and saying it relates better than something that relates 100%
Lunacy is saying 80% of OBs are hits and you should look for more OB so you will get more hits when 20% of the time you will be wrong!
INSTEAD of looking at the Hits and getting the right answer 100% of the time!
This is the Lunacy you call Sanity!
Just because you use charts and big words doesn’t mean you know what you’re talking about. This is a bunch of nonsensical bullshit at best.
And your post still couldn’t show any data to disprove any of it though could you?
Okay obviously driving a runner in relates to runs.. Do you want to put up a chart to see the correlation between water and wetness?
Think of it this way. The “clock” in baseball is outs, you get 27 of them, so every time you make an out you make the clock go down. OBP is the percent of the time that the batter does not make the clock run. This is why in most situations a sacrifice bunt is not beneficial.
Obviously an RBI is a good thing no one is arguing that, but “RBI guys” may just benefit from circumstance sometimes. Whose gonna have more RBIs, the guy who bats leadoff with the pitcher and Ruben Tejada in front of him, or the guy with Jose Reyes and Daniel Murphy in front of him? A stat I would be interested in is Runner Batted In Percentage, as that would show the percentage of runners on base a batter could drive in, showcasing his skill for being a “RBI guy”.
Some hitters are better at driving runners in than others – It’s a skill, and it’s something that shouldn’t be ignored.
For example, a .300 hitter with a .330 OBP and a lot of power would probably drive in more runs than a .260 hitter with the same OB% and the same amount of power because the .300 hitter would get more hits than the .260 hitter, and more hits, would drive in more runs.
So, obviously, the .300 hitter is the better hitter than the .260 hitter because of his ability to drive in more runs….but if you don’t care about driving runners in, you would say that both hitters are equal, and you would be wrong.
That’s why I think it’s silly when people say the “RBI isn’t important” because some guys ARE better at it than others. Now, the ecxact number of RBI a player gets can be misleading at times because of the team he plays on, and where the batter hits in the order – everyone knows that. But If your smart, you can figure out when it’s not a good idea to use it, and when it is, and actually, a lot of it is just common sense – Like in your example, nobody is going to compare the RBI totals of a leadoff hitter with a #3 guy. Or a middle of the order hitter for the Yankees to a hitter on the Pirates…And a good time to use it would be, if your talking about two #3 hitters on similar offense, that’s a time where it’s very useful.
RBI isn’t perfect, but, it isn’t something that should be ignored, because some guys are better at it than others.
That’s why we look at slugging percentage. OBP shows frequency, Slug shows volume, a hitter who bats 290/330/380 isn’t as good as one who bats 270/410/510. Most cumulative stats aren’t worth much in terms of player evaluation.
I would rather walk with a runner on second than hit a sac-fly, gives a better chance for multiple runs.
And no ones arguing here that a hit isn’t better as a walk, but it isn’t by much. The Mets were bad this year cause they couldn’t hit for power, if they could they would’ve had a great offense.
What I said had nothing to do with power – In my example, both players had the same amount of power. The only difference between the two was average.
Well then you’re wrong.. Average is just OBP minus walks/hbp/ibb, it really isn’t important for judging a players value. Obviously hitting for average is a skill, but OBP and Slug correlate to runs more.
Well you need the skill first.
And without that skill you’re not gonna get to the majors let alone win games.
Batting Average and RBIs – the higher those numbers the better chance of winning games.
Remember when the Mets team OBP went up in a 10-2 loss towards the end of the year?
Well you can’t have RBIs without runners on base, both skills are equally valuable towards scoring runs, getting on base with runners on and without runners on. Its sort of a which came first the chicken or the egg type thing, but think about the 27 outs as the clock and OBP is the percentage you don’t make the clock go down. When I first got into advanced statistics that really helped explain to me why OBP was so important.
Well I don’t need advanced statistics to tell me RBIs are MORE important. And don’t give me “well u need guys on base” because that’s like saying you need good football players on the field to help support your quarterback.
Go ahead and leave the bases loaded 9 times in a game and have a tremendous team OBP for that day and get shut out.
This idea that We need people on base to score therefore it’s more important than driving them in is about as pedestrian and unintelligent as it gets. OF COURSE YOU DO otherwise there’s no such thing as baseball.
Are you jumping up and down watching the playoffs and going WOO HOO to the guys scoring? OR is the Albert Pujols double to LCF, are you celebrating the Nelson Cruz Grand Slam by honoring all those who scored?.
When Mike Piazza hit that post 9/11 HR to put Mets ahead of Braves did you fall to your knees and say THANK GOD somebody was on base?
You worried about walks and plate discipline? Then ask for a new batting coach and let HIM worry about it. Not you.
I’m not saying that HRs aren’t as good as walks, they’re the best possible outcome a hitter can get.
And no hitter has ever gotten an RBI that made his OBP go down, so you have to get on base to get an RBI, with the exception of a sac-fly.
Think of it like this, 27 outs, that’s your clock. Every time a batter gets out, the clock goes down, hurting your team, like holding the ball too long in basketball wasting the shot clock. OBP is the percentage that you will not make an out hurting your team.
I understand its difficult to rap your head around, I used to resent “statheads”, but we love baseball as much as you guys, we just break it down further and analyze it more.
So you’re gonna try and explain the game to me?
I don’t know who the hell you are, if you ever played or coached an inning in your life or if you’re a Jonah Hill clone but I assure you, you don’t have to explain ANYTHING about the game of baseball down to the slightest of fractions and percentages.
Think of it this way:
You worry about what it takes to build Meditteranean and Baltic avenues and leave the Boardwalk and Park Places to me.
You worry about what it takes to get the deal and I’ll be the one who closes the deal. The RBI guy CLOSES the deal.
All the OBP in the world is nothing….without the RBI.
“Well I don’t need advanced statistics to tell me RBIs are MORE important.”
No, you just need your head buried in your nether regions.
“And don’t give me “well u need guys on base” because that’s like saying you need good football players on the field to help support your quarterback”
Well, more like you need a good o-line. But ya, it is really elementary. It’s a shame you can’t grasp it.
“Go ahead and leave the bases loaded 9 times in a game and have a tremendous team OBP for that day and get shut out”
I have to admit, I’d actually like to see that. It would be a neat little freak occurrence.
“This idea that We need people on base to score therefore it’s more important than driving them in is about as pedestrian and unintelligent as it gets.”
Good thing no one is actually saying that. What we are saying is that RBI is a lousy statistic. See the difference?
“Are you jumping up and down watching the playoffs and going WOO HOO to the guys scoring?”
Yes, people cheer when their team scores a run.
“When Mike Piazza hit that post 9/11 HR to put Mets ahead of Braves did you fall to your knees and say THANK GOD somebody was on base?”
When Kight crossed home after the ball got through Buckner’s legs, were you crying that Mookie didn’t get the RBI?
I will tell you this, when Ventura put one over the wall in game 5 of the 1999 NLCS, we were all glad someone was on base.
You can’t bat a runner in that isn’t there…
And I’m not explaining the game I’m trying to show you my point of view so maybe you can see where I’m coming from here because you don’t seem to get it..
And yes I do play the game and I would be offended if you were to say that people who like to look at advanced statistics (which OBP/OPS aren’t even) can’t/haven’t played.
“You can’t bat a runner in that isn’t there”
Sure you can you can bat YOURSELF in!
What base would you have to be on to do that Spence?
Elementary Donal?
I suppose 1 corelates to 4 since you need to count to one before you can then count to 4!
So if you count to 1 more times then someone else in your warped world you will also count to 4 more times than anyone else!
And thats just a load of crap!
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL IS OVER!
“And no hitter has ever gotten an RBI that made his OBP go down”
No? sac Fly makes his OBP go up?
“Think of it like this, 27 outs, that’s your clock”
you can get MORE than 27 Outs in a game!
Ever hear of Extra Innings?
Metsie, time to up your lithium dose.
Sure you can!
There is no runner on base until AFTER the HR is hit!
You are doing the same thing Donal did…
You believe because you have to count to 1 before you can count to 4 that counting to 1 (the OB) is the most significant aspect and if you count to 1 more you will count to 4 more.
Like saying walking 5 Miles is the most important part of walking 10 miles!
Does walking 5 miles more othen mean you also will walk 10 miles more often?
NO it has no affect whatsoever!
It’s coincidental to the act!
You put toothpaste on your toothbrush on every cleaning!
Does putting on more tooth paste lead to cleaner teeth? More Brushing? NO!
It’s just incidental to the act of BRUSHING! Just because it happens on almost every instance does not make it an important part of the end result!
Merely a co-incidental happenstance that results because what is needed to get the end goal accomplishes the end goal and EVERYTHING in between!
You have to be married to get divorced, Does getting married CAUSE the divorce? Or is it an incidental fact that divorce REQUIRES someone to be married to be created?
And I notice all you guys defending OBP and claiming your worth in STATISTICAL ANALYSIS have yet to ANALYZE the stats in any meaningfull way…
You guys are using words not MATH to prove your point!
Statistical analysis is about taking numbers and finding relations of those NUMBER to other statistical NUMBERS!
It’s not a word problem it’s a MATH problem and the PROBLEM with your theory is it only wors if you IGNORE NUMBERS and use words to explain how some coincidental number is so important despite the fact when it is bery high for some teams other teams score MORE than them!
WHich disproves your theory completly!
My chart used NUMBERS to show that there was no relation to having a high OBP or an OBP higher to another in relation to scoring more runs than another!
Teams who got on base more and had higher SLG scored fewer runs than someone else with lower OBP and lower SLG!
USING NUMBERS!
Now if you really wish to prove your theory and show us all how great you are at statistical analysis then I suggest you actually start showing the MATH and FORMULA that relates both OBP/SLG/OPS to RS!
Saying 2+2=5 because you need to get to four before you can get to 5 is not statistical analysis!
This is what you guys are proposing here!
SHow us how much OBP and SLG is needed to create a run!
I have showed how much RBI is needed to creatre a run!
I know you think they are the same. But if they are then why do the RBI numbers look different than the RS numbers?
Why does the player who DROVE in the run get the RBI and not the guy OB!
WHY does the MLB pay guys who have a high RBI more than someone who has a high RS or OBP?
Is it beause the MLB recognizes that the guy who drives in the runs is more important to have than the guy who didn’t score without his help?
YES! THATS EXACTLY IT!
Now if you guys want to analyze stats I suggest you type less and calculate more otherwise your failing to prove a thing!
I don’t need lithium Donal!
I’m not an overactive child like you!
Fine, put down the crack pipe, whatever.
I tell you what!
You put the pacifier back in your mouth so I don’t have to hear your endless infantile crying and I will put the pipe down!
DEAL?
Well, at least you admitted to smoking crack.
Metsie won’t give it up.
He’s bound and determined to not recognize what an RBI actually is. Preferring instead treat an RBI as if it was a sacrosacent being who decended from the heavens in order to annoint someone with a run.
An RBI is nothing more than an ordinary hit, walk or HBP with the bases loaded, a SAC fly, or a fielders choice that scores a run. That’s it.
An RBI is produced by one of the above, not the other way around.
I have never seen someone so in love with a stat as Metsie is with RBI. So in love with the stat that he is blinded as to what the stat is all about. As if it were some mystical being of some sort.
90% of the time a run scores that run got OB by a hit or walk. 90% of the time that run was driven in by a hit or a walk.
What else do you need to know to prove correlation? The exceptions? The 7.5% of the time that a run is driven in by SAC fly? The 2.5% of the time a run scores on a fielders choice? The 15-20% of the time a runs scored is also an RBI for the same person (HR) Well guess what? That a hit too.
Ask anyone, would you rather score a run by a SAC fly, a ground out or a hit? Of course you would rather drive the run in with a hit. Why? Cause now you have another guy on and one less out. Much better situation by far.
Metsie would rather misconstrue the entire event by bowing at the alter of a false phrophet because 10% of runs are not driven in by a hit or walk. What a laugh.
Forget about the 90%, go concern yourself only with the 10%. That’ll answer all your questions.
OB is responsible for scoring the run and OB is responsible for driving in the run 90% of the time.
Case closed.
SHOW the MATH TAG!
Anything else is just hot air!
SHOW THE MATH!
And Donal you think whatever you want to think about me because NO ONE on this site respects your opinion or believes there is a shred of intelligence in anything you say other than WHO who is actually (I thought it quite impossible) dumber than you are!
Tag when you show that RS is awarded to the guy who drove it in then you will be able to prove they are the same!
WHEN RS=RBI you will prove they are the same!
SHOW US EXAMPLES where RBI = RS Exactly!
If not you didn’t prove a thing!
Yes they are RELATED!
Thats the POINT!
RBI RELATES TO RS!
OB DOES NOT!
If you think it does show us the math that proves their relation!
If you can’t you fail!
RS and RBI are the same thing when someone hits a solo HR. Right?
That HR is also a hit isn’t it?
Then why isn’t BA and OB credited with producing that RBI?
“RS and RBI are the same thing when someone hits a solo HR”
Yep are they same when the hit isn’t a HR?
a Double is the same as an OB. is every OB the same as a double?
Is every OB a HIT?
Every Hit is an OB!
Every red apple is an apple…But not every apple is red!
this is the problem you seem to have!
LUMPING a bunch of crap into a bin and calling it something doesn’t increase the importance or serve as a good baraometer of what is important to getting what your looking for…
You want a Porsche, will you get one if all you look for are CARS?
After all 10% of cars are porches!
While your busy looking at the 90% of crap you DO NOT WANT someone else who looked only at Porches got the best one out from under you!
“a Double is the same as an OB. is every OB the same as a double?
Is every OB a HIT?
Every Hit is an OB!”
Is every hit a double?
No but you sure treat them as the same!
No one is asserting that RS and RBI don’t correlate the best. What people are asserting is that nothing can be gleaned from that “wisdom.”
99% of the time a run scores and RBI is awarded. Did the RBI drive in the run? Of course not, it was the hit, the bases loaded walk, SAC fly or error.
100% of the time an RBI is awarded a run has scored. Did the RBI score the run? Of course not, the hit, walk, HBP or anything else that kept the inning alive scored the run.
RBI only count the number of times a hitter drives in the run. RBI doesn’t even measure what percentage of runs a hitter drives in. RBI doesn’t cause the run to score it just culmatively totals them.
If you had 10 warts on your arse would it be because you counted them?
Oh please Tag EVERYONE is who says OBp+SLG is the best CORELATOR to RS is doing prcisely that!
And whats worse they can’t even say what the correlation is!
Like saying running correlates to RS because you also have to run to score one!
But no RELATION is ever made!
Or better 300% correlates to 100 without ever saying how!
Well then the thing to do, if someone was so inclined is to find an independent variable that correlates better than OB + OPS. Not a dependent one.
Dependency?
Really?
OB is dependent on RBI is it not?
Can an OB score a run without an RBI?
NO!
Unless it is also a HR!
Again the guy who got the RBI did the work not the part that touched 1st base!
You keep ignoring WHO gets the stat is significant here!
RBI is awarded to the guy who got the job done not the guy who DEPENDED on him to get driven in!
He only got the RS!
RS is awarded to show something about his production led to him scoring!
RBI is to show that something about his production SCORED one of those guys!
You know you have to have a PA to score a run too!
Does PA Correlate to RS as well as OB does?
HAS to happen to score! You can not score without first getting into the batter box!
Is getting into the batters box more the KEY to scoring more runs?
What if the guy has a ton of PA and makes outs?
But yet it’s pretty much the same reasoning you use to say OB is significant…Because you HAVE to do it before the result can happen!
I suppose WAKING UP also correlateds well to RS!
The guy had to wake up in order to get to the park so he could score a run. How about getting to the park Correlates to scoring runs while we are at it! You can score a run unless you get to the park!
All of these things seem to have the SAME correlation as OBP does!
Are UNRELATED to scoring runs in any MEANINGFUL WAY
Related to RS as much as OB does because not all appearances at the park lead to an RS but it had to happen before an RS could be achieved!
So basically what you did was take an UNRELATED occurance that happens in EVERY RS Instance and made it significant without ever proving it’s actual significance to RS!
You have never showed the mathematical equation to prove OBP has ANYTHING to do with RS!
How mush OBP+SLG is required to score ONE RUN!
If you can’t say then you can’t prove ANY leads to RS!
All you have proved is that in the proccess of scoring runs you ALSO add to OB and SLG!
Just as you add to Park and plate appearances!
Huh? did you even read my comment? I don’t think you did, read it again.
You missed the point of my post.
Oh no it isn’t!
BA takes into account the runner moving accomplishment of the SacFly by not counting it as a minus to his average!
OBP takes SF and calls them FAILS!
BA does not count events that a Pitcher gave to the batter such as BB, IBB and HBP!
OBP does and credits the batter who did not need any skill to get them!
OBP and SLG does not correlate to RS!
Saying so does not make it true!
SHOW US THE MATH that shows the more OBP and SLG you get the more runs you will score than ANY other team with lower OBP and SLG!
And if you can’t to do that then you will have FAILED to MATHEMATICALLY prove any relation!
The truth is more likely to be if you score a lot of RS your likely (not proved) to have a higher OBP and SLG than someone else!
Because scoring runs will also get guys on base and involve EBH in every instance! Will OB and EBH score a run in every instance?
DO the MATH and show it if you wish to prove your relationship!
Show proportions or minimums needed to produce a single run using OBP and SLG!
Then show me one team who has ever achieved those numbers!
“I would rather walk with a runner on second than hit a sac-fly, gives a better chance for multiple runs. ” Also gives a better chance of a GIDP and FC at 3rd
You gained little or nothing if the next guy doesn’t get the RBI didn’t you?
“Do you want to put up a chart to see the correlation between water and wetness? ”
Would you like to see a chart on how many Obs actually scored?
somewhere in the 2% area!
How many outs are there in an extra inning game?
Only 27?
Would you also like to see a chart on how many married people get divorced?
You seem to think that the marriage causes the divorce! It doesnt’t it’s incidental!
SHOW THE MATH or you will failed to have proven your point!
Statistical analysis is about RELATING NUMBERS to each other not just slapping them together in a sentence and using words and semantics to prove your word because you can’t SHOW THE NUMBERS to do it properly!
marriage doesn’t cause divorce, but it is a necessarily step.
What you are trying to claim is that alimony causes divorce.
No dummy…SOMETHING ELSE is the neccesary step to causing divorce!
Not rhe marriage!
Something ELSE is the CAUSE of scoring runs!
Not the OB!
SHOW THE MATH OR YOU FAILED!
INGNORE ON (until some statistical analysis (numbers related to numbers is showed!) The rest is nothing more than chickens screeching before the slaughter!
I’m sure you think since all Chickens screech when their head gets cut off that screeching is what caused their head to come off too!
No, I’m pretty sure you have to marry someone before you can divorce them.
the problem isn’t the math (well, it is, but that is further down the line). the problem is your associations. You assume since 100% of RBIs go to runs scored that the RBIs caused the runs to score.
That’s like saying since 100% of alimony payments go to divorcees, alimony causes divorce.
I’m pretty sure you have to be breathing at the time as well!
I guess breathing causes Divorce too!
Do you pay people to write this gibberish you post or do you come up with new ways to look dumb all by yourself?
OMG, is this thread still alive and kicking? Wow Mike, I’m pretty sure this post is in the top 5 as far as hits and certainly comments. What will you do for an encore?
LOL I don’t know Joe but if I want to try topping this it would most certainly have to be about MONEYBALL!
LOL
OK guys I see the opposition using lots of words to make their point but have showed Little to NONE Statistical analysis (relating numbers to other numbers via mathematical proccess) to make your point!
Here is the challenge!
I used NUMBERS to show that teams who had lesser OBP and SLG to other scored more runs than them teams!
This means that OBP/SLG/OPS does not GUARANTEE more RS than another team since the other team DID score runs without doing what you say is the MOST IMPORTANT thing to do in relation to scoring runs!
Now if you can show a relational formula to show how much OBP/SLG you need to score a single run such as OB+SLG=RS then you will have succeeded in proving your point!
You may even ADD the missing stat you need to complete your goal if you like!
It will not prove OBP+SLG is the most important which is what you said, but I would gladly debate your equation as opposed to these dumb word games you have all been playing on a post about STATISTICAL ANALYSIS!
It’s about the MATH not the words, the SCORER and the rulebook!
It’s about CAUSE and EFFECT!
You need to show in a mathematical way how +OB and +SLG CREATES more RS!
If you can’t you will have failed and all you will have done is make up statements that can’t be proven since you didn’t show the math that gets you the result you say it brings you!
So until someone shows the MATH that proves OBP+SLG leads to high RS you have failed to disprove anything I have said and showed here!
Your just yapping then for the sake of yapping with no meaningful debate because you bring NO EVIDENCE to support your position!
RBI is not the same as RS! It rewards a different act and player. It rewards the guy who CAUSED the run to score!
RS is given to the OB because you need to have SOME WAY to reward an OB that actually was usefull! The vast majority of OBs are WASTED!
SHOW THE MATH!
If you can’t then your not doing statistical analysis!
Your just guessing without any proof at all to prove your guess is right!
If you can’t show the math you have FAILED!
I showed the math!
Only thing that has been shown by the opposition is their stubborness, closed mindedness, and their ignorance!
Hey Tag…Here is something for you….
Who would you rather have at the same price?
Matt Kemp .399 OBP, or Lance Berkman .412 OBP?
Who is going to give you more runs?
Who is going to create MORE RS?
WHO is the better player to have?
Tell me you want Berkman and why!
I’d want Kemp. Better overall player, better hitter, base runner and defender. More power, just all around better and the difference is OB is neglidgeble.
.13 points is OB equal about 10 extra times on OB for Berkman, extroperlated over a whole season but one of the reasons I would chose Kemp is his very high OB himself.
Poor example to try to “prove” what I think it is your trying to.
Don’t forget Metsie, OB is hits, 80% of it anyway.
So you took the guy with lesser OBP? What does that tell you?
If OBP is 80% Hits then why does the guy with FEWER hits have a higher OBP?
Why does the guy with Higher OBP have less RS? It’s ket to scoring runs no? Why didn’t it work?
Why does the guy with lower OBP have more RBI?
What is the stat that tells you Kemp was the right pick?
What are the TWO key stats that show the difference? SLG?
Or is it the RBI and the BA that shows without a doubt that the HIGHER ACCOMPLISHED (HITTER) produced more than the guy who got on base more?
The LOWER BA Higher OBP guy would have been the wrong answer!
So it is a PERFECT example to show WHY looking at BA over OBP is a much better way to go! because Kemps OBP is above his BA as expected. And Berkman’s OBP says he is really good at scoring runs yet scored less than Kemp did!
So you keep hoping to find RED APPLES in a sea of Apples and hoping the average percentage of RED APPLES (80% according to you) will get you more if you just look for Apples but in my way all I get are RED APPLES because I look at the stat that OBP Includes but HIDES with extra garbage!
I look for the ACT not a result!
I look for Hits and you look for the RESULTS of hits! Which has a 20% chance of misidentifying those events as hits!
You took a guy who would get on 10 more times than the other according to OBP yet actually did it by walking 20 more times in fewer at bats! Project those numbers forward to equal PA you still can’t project how many more runs he would have had or rbi he would have achieved!
All you would know is he walked a HELL of a lot which only drives in runs with the bases loaded!
And because of that LYING HIGH OBP number his OPS says he is way more productive than Kemp…
Was He?
Congrats you did get the right answer!
But only because you IGNORED what the OBP/OPS said!
And that really is all that I need to show here isn’t it?
“So you took the guy with lesser OBP? What does that tell you?”
That the difference in OBP was more than made up for in over all abilities, age and position?
So then you don’t look at the OBP you just say you do!
Then ignore it and look at everything else!
Thank you for finally admitting that NOT EVEN YOU pays attention to the OBP you just say you do so everyone else will get the wrong answer!
SO OBP is NOT the most important stat to RS when YOU actually look at the player to get!
First of all Metsie like I said it was a bad example. A .412 OB compared to a .399 OB for any two hitters is very negligable, especially two middle of the order hitters like Kemp (4th) and Berkman (5th) but I fear that your making the same mistake Minaya did with Bay. Your failing to take into account differences between the factors that helped produce the numbers.
You simply cannot plug a guy into a different lineup and expect the same results. The numbers are partly a function of the hitters in front of them, and behind them.
Like I said more hits and walks in front of you will increase your RBI’s simply because you have more opportunities to increase them. More hits and walks behind you will increase your runs scored because the guys behind you have more opportunities. Increasing you own hits and walks as well will take your lineup to a whole ‘nother level.
As always the answer to how do you score more runs? is more hits and walks.
Simple.
Very Negligible OK…You sau the guy with the Higher OBP got on 10 more times….DId he?
Backtrack all you want but you BOTH just admitted you look at the OBP and then ignored it based on other things!
A FAR CRY from what you both said you would so before the example was given!
It is a GREAT example if you two ACTUALLY DO what you say is BEST for everyone else to do!
Just not you!