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

[Warner2BruceTD]

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

Glen apparently doesn't think those should matter. Only RISP%, a stat so obscure and flawed, you need a search party to find it.

[Glenbino]

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.

I'm sorry but don't we already record triples individually? I believe the same thing is true for home runs.

As far as how many guys a guy drives in on a HR or triple how does that actually help us to determine what that individual player actually contributed to his team? We should reward guys more because the people in front of them in the lineup were able to get on base? How does that make any sense whatsoever?

And how about the guy who hits a single with Mike Trout on first base and gets and RBI and then later in the game the guy hits the ball to the exact SAME EXACT SPOT of the ballpark with Pujols on 2B and Albert gets stuck on third because he has concrete feet? Is that second hit somehow LESS VALUABLE because the runners on base at the time had different skill sets?

[Warner2BruceTD]

I'm sorry but don't we already record triples individually? I believe the same thing is true for home runs.

What does this have to do with RBI or your fake made up stat, RISP%?

As far as how many guys a guy drives in on a HR or triple how does that actually help us to determine what that individual player actually contributed to his team? We should reward guys more because the people in front of them in the lineup were able to get on base? How does that make any sense whatsoever?

And how about the guy who hits a single with Mike Trout on first base and gets and RBI and then later in the game the guy hits the ball to the exact SAME EXACT SPOT of the ballpark with Pujols on 2B and Albert gets stuck on third because he has concrete feet? Is that second hit somehow LESS VALUABLE because the runners on base at the time had different skill sets?

These two paragraphs are where hardcore SABR people lose me.

To answer your question, yes, the second hit is less valuable, because it didn't produce a run. Just like a 3-run HR is more valuable than a solo HR, because it produces more runs. Stop trying to outthink yourself. A triple with the bases loaded in a tie game is more valuable than a triple with the bases empty in a 9-0 game in the 8th inning. If I have 8 triples with the bases loaded in tie games, and you have 8 with the bases empty in blowouts, then yes, my triples are more valuable. Is that fair? Maybe not. Maybe you were unlucky. Too bad. That has nothing to do with the value of each hit. And this is why we have a multitude of numbers to look at. Including RBI. Which is a bad comparative stat for the reasons you mention, but is just fine as a raw stat, especially when combined with other numbers.

[Warner2BruceTD]

Here is my main gripe with you. You think RISP% is a good substitute for RBI, which is mental, and i'll tell you why. And by the way, this isnt a pro RBI argument. I am well aware of the flaws of RBI, I am just not nearly as militant as some of you who think it has zero meaning or value.

RISP% discounts way too much run producing.

Let's say Mike Trout bats 100 times with RISP, and it's always 2nd & 3rd. Let's say he drives in one run every time. His RISP% is 50%, with 50 RBI.

Now let's say Bryce Harper faces that same exact scenario 75 times, but strikes out every time. He's sitting at 0%. But lets say Harper also hit 25 two-run HR's (with a man on first) the other 25 times. That's also 50 RBI.

You seem to think Trout is the better run producer, because of the 50% to 0% edge in RISP%. I call bullshit. Both men produced 50 runs. I don't care what base the runners started on. I care about how many runs scored. I would also argue Harper was the better run producer, because he came up with less men on base overall to drive in, thus less RBI opportunity, but your goofy stat only credits the batter when he starts the PA with RISP. If you disagree, you are a hypocrite, based on your assertion that all triples are created equal, because you can't control who is on base.

[Warner2BruceTD]

Also, I heard a lot of talk about how Miguel Cabrera's RBI total unfairly affected the MVP race last year. Because, you know, RBI are "dumb". So I looked up some numbers. And I call bullshit. The facts don't back that up. The facts say Cabrera did better than Trout in turning runners in to runs.

Cabrera had 316 non IBB PA's with runners on base. He converted 112 RBI in this scenario, or 35.4%, meaning a better than 1-3 ratio.

Trout's number is 29%, below a 1-3 ratio.

Trout also saw a slightly larger percentage of those runners on base in scoring position, as 60% of his PA's with men on base were with RISP, while the number comes in at 59% for Cabrera.

So Cabrera drove in a larger percentage of his runners on base, despite seeing smaller percentage of those runners in scoring position. Cabrera was a better 'RBI man' than Trout, no matter how you slice it. Not because of luck, not because of happenstance, not because of better teammates. None of that shit holds water.

So if you are blaming RBI, find a better reason. Baserunning & fielding, perhaps. Because Cabrera was better at producing runs, and that shit ton of RBI's was because he was awesome at driving in runners, and better at it than Trout, and not because of luck.

I then looked at Ryan Howard's peak RBI years. I compared the same numbers used for Trout/Miggy to a few other high RBI players from those years. What I found surprised me, because of general accepted opinion that says otherwise, but you won't find wild fluctuations in runners on base or runners in scoring position conversion rates. Howard had slight edges on some guys, and was slightly behind when compared to others. Most of the top RBI men of those years come it at similar percentages as Cabrera & Trout. Big HR hitters like Howard (and Cabrera) tend to have slightly higher percentages, which should come as no shock. Do the work yourself, and you will see. But keep in mind, I was only looking at the highest RBI totals, which are usually big power hitters that bat between 3-5 in the lineup. If you study the entire spectrum of batters, it probably would produce more varied results.

The bottom line, is TOTALLY discounting RBI is narrow minded & short sighted group think. If somebody wants to tell me they are a TOTAL product of luck or happenstance, prove it. Otherwise, I will continue to view the RBI as I always have, ever since I evolved from back of the baseball card analysis to first reading Bill James & Pete Palmer as a teenager, to diving deep into SABRy stuff like I do today - as a perfectly fine raw number, flawed as a comparison tool, that has some value when combined with other numbers.

[Glenbino]

I never brought up Trout being a better run producer than Miggy..

I knew Miggy had a better batting average with runners in scoring position (that's all that stat is BTW it has nothing to do with how many runners score) which is why I've never brought it up before. And LOL @ me making it up.. Just Google "batting average with runners in scoring position."

My gripe with the RBI is that unlike things like the slash line, hit totals and other base stats it is completely contingent on the performance of a player's teammates and lineup positioning rather than the individual performance of the player.

[Warner2BruceTD]

I never brought up Trout being a better run producer than Miggy..

I knew Miggy had a better batting average with runners in scoring position (that's all that stat is BTW it has nothing to do with how many runners score) which is why I've never brought it up before. And LOL @ me making it up.. Just Google "batting average with runners in scoring position."

My gripe with the RBI is that unlike things like the slash line, hit totals and other base stats it is completely contingent on the performance of a player's teammates and lineup positioning rather than the individual performance of the player.

BA w/RISP is not RISP%. This is where we are having a disconnect. RISP%, which I assumed you made up because I couldn't find it on FG or BR, is percentage of runners in scoring position driven in by the batter. We found it on MLB.com earlier in the chatbox when we were trying to figure out what the fuck you were talking about, because none of us had heard of it. Turns out you mistakenly used an acronym that actually does exist as an independent stat. Weird.

[Warner2BruceTD]

My gripe with the RBI is that unlike things like the slash line, hit totals and other base stats it is completely contingent on the performance of a player's teammates and lineup positioning rather than the individual performance of the player.

The word "completely" is where we will never ever agree.

To me, the batter has just as much to do with his RBI total as his circumstances. There will always be extreme luck in either direction. We should be smart enough to spot it when it occurs. This is where old schoolers fail when they use the raw RBI number to compare.

[FedEx227]

I agree you can't say it's completely contingent and to be honest most of the SABR people won't say that. I just don't think it's a significant measure of a players worth. It certainly tells you something, it tells a story no doubt, it's just a terrible way to measure Player A vs. Player B.

[NAHSTE]

Third inning of Braves-Tigers highlights the silliness of RBI.

Top of the inning: Bases loaded, 1 out, Justin Upton hits a tailor made double-play ball to the shortstop, but Infante drops the ball on the transfer. RBI fielders choice for Upton.

Bottom of the inning: First and third, 1 out, Miguel Cabrera bounces one up the middle, Simmons is able to get to it but Uggla tries to barehand the toss and drops it. RBI single for Miggy. (Was clearly an error but the hometown scorer gave him a hit. Batting average, cool. But that's for another day.)

[Warner2BruceTD]

Third inning of Braves-Tigers highlights the silliness of RBI.

Top of the inning: Bases loaded, 1 out, Justin Upton hits a tailor made double-play ball to the shortstop, but Infante drops the ball on the transfer. RBI fielders choice for Upton.

Bottom of the inning: First and third, 1 out, Miguel Cabrera bounces one up the middle, Simmons is able to get to it but Uggla tries to barehand the toss and drops it. RBI single for Miggy. (Was clearly an error but the hometown scorer gave him a hit. Batting average, cool. But that's for another day.)

What an intolerable, annoying post.

DISREGARD ALL STATS, WEIRD STUFF HAPPENS SOMETIMES

[Warner2BruceTD]

Third inning of Braves-Tigers highlights the silliness of RBI.

Top of the inning: Bases loaded, 1 out, Justin Upton hits a tailor made double-play ball to the shortstop, but Infante drops the ball on the transfer. RBI fielders choice for Upton.

Bottom of the inning: First and third, 1 out, Miguel Cabrera bounces one up the middle, Simmons is able to get to it but Uggla tries to barehand the toss and drops it. RBI single for Miggy. (Was clearly an error but the hometown scorer gave him a hit. Batting average, cool. But that's for another day.)

Also, you have misguided annoyances.

-"You cant assume a double play" never made sense to me, since you can "assume" other defensive plays. Those types of plays above should be errors, not fielder's choices.

-A batter should get credit for an RBI on a double play. Same for an error. Or any other batted ball that leads directly to a run. The stat isn't 'run batted in when you do something good', its run batted in.

[Villain]

We can all agree that bullpen wins and losses are COMPLETELY stupid, though.... right?

[Warner2BruceTD]

Do you know why Justin Upton has 18 RBI?

Because he's mashing the ball and has 12 fucking HR's.

18 is a GREAT RBI total, people! He's on pace for almost 130 or something.

SOLO HR'S ARE GOOD. A 12 HR to 18 RBI ratio is a little wacky, but not really. It's early in the season, and 18 RBI is really good for April 27. When you hit lots of homers, you tend to have a lot of RBI. Upton is hitting lots of homers, and has a lot of RBI. So what is the problem, here?

[Villain]

Anthony Rizzo also has 18 RBIs to go along with his 17 hits for a .200 batting average.