Should "total runs involved in" replace RBI

Dr Positivity · Post #1 » by **Dr Positivity** » Sat Sep 29, 2012 6:49 pm

I was thinking about RBIs because of the Cabrera vs Trout articles. While I respect the sabermetrics that say Trout blows him away, I have a hard time casting off 133 RBI vs 79 as totally useless information. That's a 30ppg vs 18ppg sized gap. Does it mean nothing that Cabrera is scoring nearly 70% more runs than Trout? I mean the goal of offense is to score runs. The fact that Trout has 8.1 OWAR to Cabrera's 7.2 doesn't entirely pass the sniff test to me

What if the stat was instead a "total runs involved" stat that looks like

(Runs - HR)* + RBI

*Runs scored via homers are excluded, because they are counted in the RBI column. Or just call it RBIs + Baserunning Rs

This stat removes a lot of the pitfalls of RBI IMO. The main thing RBI misses is a players who add value to their team by getting on base and getting into scoring position. If Trout gets on base with a double, and Pujols also hits a double to score him, Pujols gets RBI credit for it and Trout doesn't. However in the total runs involved in stat both Trout and Pujols would get a +1 for the play. Furthermore and importantly in the case of Trout's MVP candidacy, this accounts for his baserunning and stolen bases big time. Trout being such a good baserunner and stealer allows him to put himself in scoring position and score to home, more often than a guy like Cabrera, so he scores more runs. This is why Trout has by far the highest Runs Scored in the AL, with 125, Cabrera being 2nd with 107. Trout has 96 "Baserunning Rs" by my metric and Cabrera has 65, a huge gap reminiscent of Cabrera's RBI one. To give an example of how RBI can be misleading, Soriano in the NL has 106 RBI's vs McCutchen's 98, but has 35 baserunning Rs to McCutchen's 76. Soriano's total number is 141 and McCutchen's is 174 which does a much better job reflecting the difference between them offensively this year.

The stat wouldn't be perfect but I think it'd be a lot more respectable than RBI by giving a player value for every time one of his plays led to a run scored (whether it's off his bat or another's). Here btw are the numbers I got for Cabrera and Trout

Trout
79 RBI
96 Baserunning Rs
Total =175

Cabrera
133 RBI
65 Baserunning Rs
Total = 198

Because 10 Rs is worth a W for WAR, that would make Cabrera 2.3 Ws more valuable offensively. Bball reference has Trout with +0.9 more OWAR, so that's a +3.2 swing in Cabrera's favor. Trout is ahead +3.5 in the overall WAR (10.5 to 7.2). So Trout still ends up ahead if defense is given that weight but it's a lot closer. Another thing that could be done is adjusting for teams, where the Angels overall offense is almost 12% better. This has some pitfalls but it would account somewhat to a player having a better chance to score off the bases or with teammates on with better teammates, as well as accounting for better offenses chasing the good pitchers more often

I think RBI is dieing but a stat trying to incorporate baserunning Rs could help replace it somewhat. People want to know who's scoring the runs

Post #2 » by **HCYanks** » Wed Oct 3, 2012 4:05 am

Runs scored have most of the same fundamental problems as a metric for a player that RBIs have: they're entirely dependent on how good the surrounding offense is, where in the batting order the player is, and general "luck" in terms of how many runs an individual player happens to bring in from season to season.

I think Miggy has a defensible case as an MVP candidate, and WAR should in no way be the be-all end-all in an MVP discussion (and I'm saying this as a SABR nerd), but any argument even loosely involving the triple crown shouldn't either. It's a shame that Miggy will be a lock if (when, unless Hamilton has a multi-HR day tomorrow) he gets the triple crown, and several of the paid professionals voting for him won't be able to amount an argument deeper than "he won the triple crown, that's why."

Mad-Eye Moody · Post #3 » by **Mad-Eye Moody** » Wed Oct 3, 2012 6:19 pm

RBIs has to be the stupidest stat in any sport out there. I can't believe it continuously gets used as a primary offensive stat. Granderson has 100 RBIs with an OPS just under .800. Case in point. (Not saying Granderson isn't a good hitter, just hasn't been as great as last year).

UZR, WAR, FIP are much better stats to compare players, but I never see them used on TV broadcasts. They only recently started using OPS, which I guess is something.

Post #4 » by **TyCobb** » Wed Oct 3, 2012 10:19 pm

No one stat is gospel, so if you're looking at RBI as anything more than how many runs a batter drove in while at the plate, then you're doing it wrong.

Post #5 » by **sunshinekids99** » Thu Oct 4, 2012 11:50 am

Mad-Eye Moody wrote:RBIs has to be the stupidest stat in any sport out there. I can't believe it continuously gets used as a primary offensive stat. Granderson has 100 RBIs with an OPS just under .800. Case in point. (Not saying Granderson isn't a good hitter, just hasn't been as great as last year).

UZR, WAR, FIP are much better stats to compare players, but I never see them used on TV broadcasts. They only recently started using OPS, which I guess is something.

I'm with you 100%. Problem is you will confuse over half the people who watch the game if they start putthing a UZR rating or WAR.

Mad-Eye Moody · Post #6 » by **Mad-Eye Moody** » Thu Oct 4, 2012 2:31 pm

sunshinekids99 wrote:
Mad-Eye Moody wrote:RBIs has to be the stupidest stat in any sport out there. I can't believe it continuously gets used as a primary offensive stat. Granderson has 100 RBIs with an OPS just under .800. Case in point. (Not saying Granderson isn't a good hitter, just hasn't been as great as last year).

UZR, WAR, FIP are much better stats to compare players, but I never see them used on TV broadcasts. They only recently started using OPS, which I guess is something.

I'm with you 100%. Problem is you will confuse over half the people who watch the game if they start putthing a UZR rating or WAR.

Yeah that would definitely be a problem. But I think it's time to educate the casual fan base of saber metrics. I know a lot of people who watched Moneyball and really enjoyed it. We live in the information age. New advanced stats that can be used for better analysis should definitely be welcome.

On another note, it's not just casual fans that are unaware of these stats. There are baseball fans of over 30 years who still don't accept these stats and keep throwing RBIs out there as a meaningful stat. Not to sound ageist, but Generation Y is definitely more receptive of saber metrics, than the baby boomers.

Still, what Cabrera accomplished is amazing, and congrats to him.