From: jhg8680@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Jon  Hamkins)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: RP/PA for AL and NL (More bogus RP stats)
Date: 21 Jul 92 22:23:55 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana

djohnson@cayley.waterloo.edu (David Johnson) writes:

>In article <3451@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP> dtate+@pitt.edu (David M Tate) writes:
>>In article <BrqtJn.w0@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu> djohnson@cayley.waterloo.edu (David Johnson) writes:
>>
>>>In article <3388@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP> dtate+@pitt.edu (David M Tate) writes:
>>
>>>>In article <Brp3LH.LEo@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu> djohnson@cayley.waterloo.edu (David Johnson) writes:
>>
>>>>>If you are looking for a good denominator how about total team runs.  This
>>>>>will show the players value to the team.  
>>
>>>>!?  What makes you say that?
>>
[lots of deletion]

>What you don't think that a player who has more RBI and Runs than anyone
>else on the team isn't valuable.  A guy with a lot of RBI and Runs scored
>for their team as compared to other players shows that that player has been 
>more productive in the opportunities he has got than other players on his
>team.

No, it doesn't.  Just because one has the most RBI's on the team
doesn't mean he has made good on the highest percentage of his RBI
opportunities.  You write as though everyone on the team has the same
opportunity for RBI's.  Clearly this isn't the case.  Lead-off hitters,
for example, are great OBP men, and are frequently arguably one of the
best hitters on the team.  What kind of RBI numbers do you think they
put up when they are either leading off an inning or batting after the
bottom of the order has left the bases empty?

The same thing holds for runs.  Why should a guy who gets on base be
penalized because the part of the batting order after him can never
advance him to home?  (Or to turn it around, why should a guy at the
bottom of the order, who hardly ever gets on, benefit from the fact
that when he does get on he is often knocked in by the best hitters of
the team that bat after him?)

>>>If Joe Carter played for
>>>California he will not likely get as much of an opportunity to drive in
>>>runs and will be driven in less as well 
>>
>>True.
>>
>>>but dividing it by the teams total
>>>runs this factors in the whole teams inability to drive in runs.  
>>
>>No, what it does is tell you approximately where Joe Carter ranks among
>>Angels players in terms of being awarded RBIs.  It *prevents* you from
>>making any comparison with players on other teams, since the context of
>>playing on the Angels has nothing in common with, say, the context of
>>playing for the Blue Jays.

>But this stat will show the ability of Carter to drive in runs when he
>gets a chance to.  

No, as explained above.  If you want to divide by opportunities, then
divide by opportunities.

California scores less runs because they get less
>opportunities to do so 

Sorry to cut you off in mid-sentence, but this really makes little
sense.  Every team has 27 outs to work with, if they need them.  24, if
they don't.  OK, continue:

thus Carter as an individual player will have less
>opportunities as well and thus his RBI and Run total will go down.  This
>value I find with this stat as compared to others is that it doesn't
>depend as much on the players who hit in front and behind him as some stats
>do.

But it does!  The batters hitting behind the great OBP batters are
getting the most RBI opportunities.  Even if they don't make good on
the oportunities, they kill the inning for the other guys on the team,
and in the end, they STILL will come out with a good RP to team RBI
ratio. 

>>What fraction of the '27 Yankees' runs did Babe Ruth drive in?  Compare that
>>with Nate Colbert on the Padres of the early '70s.  Was Nate Colbert more
>>valuable than Babe Ruth?

>>The problem with this "more valuable to his team" thing is that you give a
>>player credit for having rotten teammates, which is silly.  Colbert may or may

>A good player should get some Credit and not be brought down just because
>he has poor teammates.  We are trying to evaluate a player fairly not
>make him look bad because he has bad teammates.
> 

I still want to see you answer David Tate's question about Babe Ruth.

>>>Lets put
>>>Carter on a lousy offensive team and he gets 90 RBI hits .280 30 HR and 
>>>scores 50 runs.  Does this make him a worse player than if he had 105 RBI
>>>and 65 runs scored with 30 HR and .280 average on a good hitting team.  Lets
>>>say the first team scored 600 runs and the second team scored 750.
>>>
>>>     Team #1 - RC = 110
>>>               Players Value =  110/600 = 0.183
>>>     Team #2 - RC = 140
>>>               Players Value =  140/750 = 0.186
>>
>>I think you mean "RP", although that name is pretty objectionable, too.
>>
>>The point is not that it makes him a worse player; the point is that it
>>makes him *the same* player, whichever team you put him on.  Regardless of
>>the RBI and R totals that his team makes out of him.

>But isn't that what we want when comparing players.  How would he do on an
>average team rather than a good team or a poor team.  The problem with
>RBI and RUNS is that it depends too much on what the players are hitting 
>around him are doing.  In my example i made Carter the *same* player on
>different teams and giving Carter the same rating on whatever team he
>plays on is the best thing about this stat.  Carter should be just as
>good of a player on California as Toronto it is just that he will be less
>productive because he gets less opportunities.

Yes, we do want them to rate the same no matter what team they are on.
But your example, as far as I can tell, is with ficitious data, so I'm
not very convinced that this goal is met by your method.  How about
computing it for a real world player.  Especially someone who even
remains on the same team, but just changes his order in the line-up.  I
think you'd be surprised at the difference.

>>(Aotherside: why am I arguing with someone who thinks you can tell how good
>> a player is from his batting average, HR totals, runs scored, and RBIs?)

>I never said this and so you shouldn't use this as any kind of arguements.
>If I thought that Avg, HR, Runs, and RBI were adequite why would I even
>think about creating a new stat let alone post it.

Huh?  You're saying you support using RP/(team R or RBI), right? 
Mixing up the stats you say are inadequate won't suddenly produce an
adequate stat. 

     ----Jon Hamkins  (hamkins@uiuc.edu)
         University of Illinios
         Urbana, IL