And we wonder why SABR types are so snarky ...

[NAHSTE]

When dumb shit like this exists. Reads like a troll piece, but I think the guy is serious. Can't tell, to be honest. Anyway, here goes:

http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/04/23/justin-upton-hasnt-proven-the-naysayers-wrong-just-yet/

Justin Upton smashed his major league-high 10th homer Tuesday in the Braves’ 4-3 win over the Rockies. He’s hit three more homers than anyone else in the majors, and in just 19 games, he’s already more than halfway to surpassing his total of 17 from 150 games last year.

On the other hand, Justin Upton has driven in a total of 14 runs this year. That’s exactly as many as Daniel Nava has amassed. It’s the same total compiled by .191-hitting Anthony Rizzo. It’s also a match for Allen Craig, who is hitting .250 with no homers.

A lot of it is the Braves, no doubt. Andrelton Simmons, Jason Heyward and B.J. Upton have all struggled ahead of Justin in the third spot in the order. But a lot if it is Justin, too. He’s hitting .386 in 44 at-bats with the bases empty and .148 in 27 at-bats with runners on. Nine of his 10 homers have been solo shots.

Whether it totally fits into the “grit” narrative, Upton’s run production was part of the knock on him when the Diamondbacks decided to move him. Not only has he never topped 100 RBI, but he’s never even reached 90.

That’s not to say it’s ever been quite like this before. Last year, Upton’s average went down slightly with men on and RISP, but his slugging percentage went up. In 2010, he hit 50 points better with RISP than with the bases empty. Overall, though, his career line looks like this:

Bases empty: .286/.355/.509, 75 HR in 1,554 AB
Runners on: .267/.361/.449, 43 HR in 1,180 AB
RISP: .255/.363/.429, 23 HR in 645 AB

Upton averages a homer every 20.7 AB with the bases empty, every 27.4 AB with runners on and every 28.0 AB with RISP.

I don’t think any of that suggests Upton is poor in the clutch. Interestingly, he actually has better numbers in high leverage situations than medium or low leverage situations, as Baseball-Reference defines them. But up to this point in his career, there’s no denying that Upton hasn’t been all that productive in RBI situations. When he’s hitting solo homers every other game, that’s not a problem. Once he slows, the debate could rage again.

[Goober]

This reads like a bleacher report article? Did it come with a slideshow, showing each of Upton's RBIs this year?

[Warner2BruceTD]

I don't understand what point the author is trying to make, so it's impossible to skewer him or back him up.

His final paragraph basically says, "Upton isn't any worse in the clutch than he is normally, but he struggles in RBI situations." Huh? Which is it?

[NAHSTE]

I think my favorite part is how he proves the worthlessness of RBI in his second paragraph, thus undermining his entire premise, but continues to plow full steam ahead with it anyway.

On the other hand, Justin Upton has driven in a total of 14 runs this year. That’s exactly as many as Daniel Nava has amassed. It’s the same total compiled by .191-hitting Anthony Rizzo. It’s also a match for Allen Craig, who is hitting .250 with no homers.

Well, gee, it's almost as if RBI are a poor barometer for production!

[Slateman]

This wouldn't be a problem if Upton would steal more bases.

[NAHSTE]

Another solo job for Justin today. Lazy.

He'd have gotten an RBI out of it if his lazy brother didn't also hit a solo bomb immediately before him.

[Rudi]

I don't see the problem here. Upton similar to Adam Dunn in the fact that he may hit 35 HR, but won't have more than 70RBI in the process.

[Warner2BruceTD]

I don't see the problem here. Upton similar to Adam Dunn in the fact that he may hit 35 HR, but won't have more than 70RBI in the process.

Dunn had 100 RBI six out of seven years, and had 92 the seventh year.

[Hobbes]

Turrible, just turrible

[Villain]

Home Runs = Rally Killers #NotEvenOnce

[FedEx227]

Dunn had 100 RBI six out of seven years, and had 92 the seventh year.

Yeah, what the hell is Rudi talking about?

[SuperKevin]

I like RBIs because it's an easy number to keep track of but I understand it's a poor barometer for individual success. Can't really punish a guy because nobody is on base in front of him

[Glenbino]

RISP% still exists right?

RBIs, saves and ERA shouldn't be on the baseline stat rows now that there are more accurate barometers of success that exist and only remain their to cater to the old guard.

[Warner2BruceTD]

RISP% still exists right?

RBIs, saves and ERA shouldn't be on the baseline stat rows now that there are more accurate barometers of success that exist and only remain their to cater to the old guard.

So a triple with a man on first means nothing to you? How about two-run homers? You could argue RISP% tells an emptier story than RBI.

Nothing wrong with RBI. It's just a raw number, it's up to the user to under or overrate its application. For decades people overrated it and badly misused it (for example using it as a comparative stat), but mostly out of ignorance. Now we are seeing the opposite. People outthinking themselves and underrating it. To me, that's no better. Like most things, the truth lies in the middle. It's a number that still tells a story. You can go full geek and pretend it doesn't, but understand that you are making the same mistakes that everybody else made for decades.

And there is no reason to remove anything as a "baseline stat" (whatever that means). If you don't like saves, ignore them. I think FIP is worthless repetitive garbage that tells me almost nothing. So I never refer to it. If somebody likes it, they can knock themselves out.

[NAHSTE]

So a triple with a man on first means nothing to you? How about two-run homers? You could argue RISP% tells an emptier story than RBI.

What about solo home runs? Isn't that a hit with a RISP?