Chris Young does something good (while not on the sox, f'in kenny)

[rangercal]

They wouldn't in mine. Because if you are hitting .182 you aren't scoring any runs and the only reason you are getting RBIs is because you are having an incredible amount of opportunities.

or you are getting your hits at the right time.

 

The point is, that would never happen.

Im debating as if it would. If someone averages 8 RBI's a week, he has a spot in my lineup anytime. In the end runs win the game, not average.

 

RBI's are like W-L for pitchers. They may not be 100% irrelevant, but they are very dependent on circumstances not under that player's control. Therefore, they should be taken with a few big grains of salt.

If you want to take that angle. Then I will take the angle batting avg. can be raised depending on who bats behind you, determining what pitches you see ( circumstances not under that player's control).

[NorthSideSox72]

or you are getting your hits at the right time.

Im debating as if it would. If someone averages 8 RBI's a week, he has a spot in my lineup anytime. In the end runs win the game, not average.

If you want to take that angle. Then I will take the angle batting avg. can be raised depending on who bats behind you, determining what pitches you see ( circumstances not under that player's control).

Angle?

 

Tell me, how does a player get RBI's with no one in front of him, other than a solo HR?

 

If you want to see how good a player is at creating or knocking in runs, then use a stat that actually tells that story. For knocking in runs, use something like BA-RISP. Then you have a valid statistic. This isn't an "angle", this is called good statistical analysis - removing independent variables. RBI as a gross total is subject to too many of those. RA-RISP is therefore much more valid statistically in telling you how a player does in those situations.

 

And no one is arguing that runs aren't the bottom line offensively, so I'm not sure what you are getting at with that.

[Felix]

are you talking about the course of a year or the course of the season? If anyone averaged 8 RBI's a week despite hitting .182 would have a spot in my lineup anyday.

So what happens when the people in front of him stop getting on base and stop giving him opportunities? Then you're left with a worthless hitter who can't hit his weight (or can barely hit his weight).

[rangercal]

So what happens when the people in front of him stop getting on base and stop giving him opportunities? Then you're left with a worthless hitter who can't hit his weight (or can barely hit his weight).

No, the debate was 8 RBI a week. Bottom Line. I think I lost you.

[NorthSideSox72]

So what happens when the people in front of him stop getting on base and stop giving him opportunities? Then you're left with a worthless hitter who can't hit his weight (or can barely hit his weight).

 

 

No, the debate was 8 RBI a week. Bottom Line. I think I lost you.

 

Dude, you're hilarious. You debate RBI's, Felix asks you what if no one is on in front of him (which, um, is kind of key for RBI's), and you say "no, the debate was 8 RBI a week". Do you not see the circle you just talked in?

[witesoxfan]

No, the debate was 8 RBI a week. Bottom Line. I think I lost you.

 

and if he hits .300 he'll drive in 12

[Felix]

No, the debate was 8 RBI a week. Bottom Line. I think I lost you.

How do you get RBI? By knocking in people that are already on base or hitting a homerun and driving yourself in. If you're hitting below .200, chances are you aren't hitting too many homeruns (or just suck at everything else in which case you are a pretty crappy hitter anyway).

 

So, what happens when the players before this crappy hitter aren't getting on? The RBIs stop, and the player loses any sense of productivity that they ever had (however small it was in the first place). THIS is why people rather players who are more productive (say, .300/.350/.500) over players that can't hit, but get RBIs. The players who actually hit well are more likely to stay productive over the course of a handful of years, and don't rely on other players on the team to make opportunities. On the contrary, the crappy hitting player will need to either pick up their game or continue to rely on the players in front of him, which is a horrible, horrible approach to the plate in baseball.

 

Make sense?

[Dick Allen]

How do you get RBI? By knocking in people that are already on base or hitting a homerun and driving yourself in. If you're hitting below .200, chances are you aren't hitting too many homeruns (or just suck at everything else in which case you are a pretty crappy hitter anyway).

 

So, what happens when the players before this crappy hitter aren't getting on? The RBIs stop, and the player loses any sense of productivity that they ever had (however small it was in the first place). THIS is why people rather players who are more productive (say, .300/.350/.500) over players that can't hit, but get RBIs. The players who actually hit well are more likely to stay productive over the course of a handful of years, and don't rely on other players on the team to make opportunities. On the contrary, the crappy hitting player will need to either pick up their game or continue to rely on the players in front of him, which is a horrible, horrible approach to the plate in baseball.

 

Make sense?

 

Ever heard of productive outs? Young must have a few or he just gets hits when there are runners on base. Driving in runs is an art. Most guys hitting .182 would strike out or pop up to second with a runner on third. I think the fact that he still is driving in runs while not hitting very well is a good sign. He's not going to hit below .200 much longer.

[santo=dorf]

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Apr 10, 2007 -> 09:49 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ever heard of productive outs? Young must have a few or he just gets hits when there are runners on base. Driving in runs is an art. Most guys hitting .182 would strike out or pop up to second with a runner on third. I think the fact that he still is driving in runs while not hitting very well is a good sign. He's not going to hit below .200 much longer.

Or how about the fact he bats .077 with the bases empty (13 at-bats) and have a .949 OPS with runners on (13 at-bats) ?

[Felix]

Ever heard of productive outs? Young must have a few or he just gets hits when there are runners on base. Driving in runs is an art. Most guys hitting .182 would strike out or pop up to second with a runner on third. I think the fact that he still is driving in runs while not hitting very well is a good sign.

Yes, but think of how many more opportunities there would be if he were actually being a productive hitter. Suppose he were to start getting hits instead of those weak groundouts to second with the runners on second and third. He would be so much more productive, and both his numbers and the teams performance would benefit greatly from it.

 

The RBIs are too dependent on the players in front of him in the lineup that they just don't show a players performance during the year. If the players in front of CY aren't getting on, and he doesn't get the RBIs that he has thus far, how do you look at his season? I'd say its pretty crappy thus far, and the fact that the people in front of him have gotten in scoring position isn't going to change my opinion on it.

 

He's not going to hit below .200 much longer.

Thats not really the point.

[rangercal]

Dude, you're hilarious. You debate RBI's, Felix asks you what if no one is on in front of him (which, um, is kind of key for RBI's), and you say "no, the debate was 8 RBI a week". Do you not see the circle you just talked in?

8 RBI's is 8 RBI's even if they came by Solo shots ( which you already mentioned, so I didn't think it was necessary to point out again)

 

Or how about the fact he bats .077 with the bases empty (13 at-bats) and have a .949 OPS with runners on (13 at-bats) ?

Dude, I'm just going by the bottom line, quit bringing all these "what ifs" into the equation.

 

and if he hits .300 he'll drive in 12

hitter A .183 /8 RBI

 

hitter B .300 ( RBI produiction never mentioned)

 

 

That's all this debate is about. who would you rather have? That's it. If everyone misunderstood me, I apologize.

[santo=dorf]

QUOTE(rangercal @ Apr 10, 2007 -> 10:28 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Dude, I'm just going by the bottom line, quit bringing all these "what ifs" into the equation.

Um, those are his numbers and it was in response to Dick Allen's posts. Spearking of "what if's"...........

 

QUOTE(rangercal @ Apr 10, 2007 -> 10:28 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

hitter A .183 /8 RBI

 

hitter B .300 ( RBI produiction never mentioned)

That's all this debate is about. who would you rather have? That's it. If everyone misunderstood me, I apologize.

[Dick Allen]

Yes, but think of how many more opportunities there would be if he were actually being a productive hitter. Suppose he were to start getting hits instead of those weak groundouts to second with the runners on second and third. He would be so much more productive, and both his numbers and the teams performance would benefit greatly from it.

 

The RBIs are too dependent on the players in front of him in the lineup that they just don't show a players performance during the year. If the players in front of CY aren't getting on, and he doesn't get the RBIs that he has thus far, how do you look at his season? I'd say its pretty crappy thus far, and the fact that the people in front of him have gotten in scoring position isn't going to change my opinion on it.

Thats not really the point.

The object of the game is to score more runs than the other team. The beautiful thing about baseball is that it doesn't necessarily take a hit to score a run, but if you read the earlier post, this guy does seem to hit pretty well with runners on base. He's obviously contributing greatly to the offense without getting on base very much. At least he's driving someone in. Using your theory, if he gets on all the time, he's just going to be dependent on someone else driving him in. At least he's producing. Driving in 8 runs in a week is being a productive hitter, regardless of his batting average.

[rangercal]

Um, those are his numbers and it was in response to Dick Allen's posts. Spearking of "what if's"...........

yeah no s***. We are debating this and player B doesn't even have RBI's.

[Felix]

The object of the game is to score more runs than the other team. The beautiful thing about baseball is that it doesn't necessarily take a hit to score a run, but if you read the earlier post, this guy does seem to hit pretty well with runners on base. He's obviously contributing greatly to the offense without getting on base very much. At least he's driving someone in. Using your theory, if he gets on all the time, he's just going to be dependent on someone else driving him in. At least he's producing. Driving in 8 runs in a week is being a productive hitter, regardless of his batting average.

Exactly the point. RBIs depend on other players, not just one (unless we're talking homeruns, obviously). Because of this, using them to evaluate how one player has done in the year doesn't make much sense.

Edited April 11, 2007 by Felix

[witesoxfan]

yeah no s***. We are debating this and player B doesn't even have RBI's.

 

So you'll take Chris Young over Jose Reyes?

[NorthSideSox72]

Or how about the fact he bats .077 with the bases empty (13 at-bats) and have a .949 OPS with runners on (13 at-bats) ?

Now THAT is statistically significant.

 

Its also interesting that half his at-bats are with men on base, which is a lot of opportunity.

[rangercal]

So you'll take Chris Young over Jose Reyes?

If Young would average 8 RBI a week ( which is 208 for the year) It would be hard not to. However, Reyes is responsible for a lot of run production himself ( 81 RBI and 122 Runs scored in 2006) .

[danman31]

Chris Young update: .197/.265/.609 with 10 RBI so that stupid 'but he's getting RBI!' argument doesn't fly anymore.

[Jordan4life_2007]

Chris Young update: .197/.265/.609 with 10 RBI so that stupid 'but he's getting RBI!' argument doesn't fly anymore.

 

He's been brutal of late.

[TLAK]

He's been brutal of late.

1 for 4 with a SB and a run scored last night. No Ks. I've seen him a couple times on MLBTV, he looks very overmatched at times but seems find little ways to help the team at some point in the game, even after looking bad for a couple ABs. He needs to go around the league a couple times so we can see if he adjusts -- or the league adjusts to him.

[ChWRoCk2]

Young hit 2 HRs today.

[Jordan4life_2007]

Young hit 2 HRs today.

 

He's also got an RBI single. It's just a matter of time before he starts doing what we all expect him to do.

[aboz56]

2 HR's tonight for Young

[Brian]

While Young would look good at the end of our lineup, Javy has been chucking this year.

Good for Chris.