OK, so here’s one significant problem with the way I do this blog — I will write these excessively long and rambling posts, and then the comments will read like so:
“Joanna Kearns rocks!”
“What you want to do is take the coefficient of Y and …”
“Incorporate intentional walks!”
“How could you just leave Helen Hunt off the list?”
“Don’t you think that slugging percentage is a better gauge of Courtney Thorne Smith?”
It can get awfully confusing for a simple-minded guy like myself. So, for once, we’ll try to keep the post somewhat on point (I have noticed that we have already failed). A hot TV Mom-Wife post will be coming soon, along with (I think) a companion hot TV Dad-Husband post on Margo’s blog. You can pop on there today and read as she mocks my unique ability to drive in snow.
But this will be about what one brilliant reader called the JoeBI, my plus minus system for determining who, iI believet, had the best RBI season. I have heard your suggestions and additions and complaints and I have to say: Who do you think I am, Copernicus? The JoeBi was already pushing my meager math skills. You want me to put in all this other stuff?
OK, I HAVE tried a couple of your suggestions to mix things up. Hell, we’re just playing around anyway. I think it would be instructive here to include a note from my friend Dan Shaughnessy’s latest column (as passed along by brilliant reader Arby Writer):
“Memo to 30-year-old stat geeks combing through Jim Rice’s numbers: Get out of the house and look at the sky one time. I know personal contact frightens you, but let go of OPS for a moment and try talking to someone who saw Rice play, or better yet, played against him.”
So, I was working out the Expected RBI percentage and … WHOA! I just peeked outside … the sky’s blue? When did that happen? Why doesn’t anyone tell me these things?
Sorry — I promised to keep this on-point. I really do like Dan, by the way. I think he gets a kick out of this stuff.
The point of this JoeBI exercise — assuming it actually has a point — is to try and give us a little bit more multi-dimensional look at RBIs. That’s really it. Many of us have tried to take a stab at creating our own catch-all stat (I spent much of Wednesday with Royals starter Brian Bannister — a fabulous guy, by the way — and HE has created some of his stats too and is a big Baseball Prospectus reader. So there you go. Big column coming up on him. Great guy). I think there are some pretty good catch-alls … EQA, Win Shares, Runs Created, OPS+, Total Average and so on.
But the point here is much more confided. Like it or not, people talk about RBIs — they are simply too engrained in the baseball culture to avoid — it would be nice to put them in a little perspective. That’s all. There are all sorts of biases inherent in RBIs, as everyone knows. You see that someone drove in 130 RBIs in a year, and from that number you have no idea:
1. How many runners were on base when the batter came up.
2. Where those runners were.
3. How many outs there were.
4. What ballpark they were in.
5. At what point in the game those RBIs were driven in.
6. How often the batter walked with runners in scoring position.
7. How often the batter was intentionally walked with runners in scoring position.
8. How often the batter hit into a double play and killed a rally.
9. How aggressive and fast the runners on base were.
10. And lots and lots and lots of other things.
Still, if someone drives in 130 RBIs, most baseball fans across America would assume that the player had an absolutely amazing season — an MVP season in many cases, certainly the best RBI year. But I don’t think that’s true. If someone came up with 200 men on base and drove in 100 RBIs, that to me a much better year than the guy came up with 358 men on base and drove in 130. The point here is to just give a LITTLE more insight into the RBI — I don’t think you could ever correct all of the biases, and I don’t you would ever want to because at some point it just wouldn’t be fun anymore.
So, you already know about the plus/minus system. I figured out expected RBIs based on how many runners were on first, second and third base for the batter that year (thank you Prospectus for the numbers — did I mention that Brian Bannister loves ya?). So, a few of you asked me to subtract walks from the equation, but I’m not going to do that for a couple of reasons that probably don’t make much sense.
1. I think we subtract walks from stats too often as is. That’s how a screwed up stat like batting average got popular in the first place. To my way of thinking, walks should be incorporated in every single stat — they are a part of the game. The idea that a walk is a “non at-bat” is absolutely ludicrous to me. And while we all appreciate that walks are WAY more valuable than baseball history has allowed, one downside of walks is that in those non-bases loaded situation, you can’t drive in a run when you walk. I’m not arguing that it’s BAD to walk with runners on base. But that’s now what we’re measuring here. We’re measuring, simply, an abilty to drive in runs. I think you have to include walks — it’s part of the picture. There are plenty of other stats that give Mike Schmidt his due credit for walks.
2. I already told you I was stretching the limits of my mathematical talents to begin with.
On the other hand, I can see the value for subtracting INTENTIONAL WALKS because those are different (and much, much less frequent). Intentional walks indicate that the manager/pitcher believes the batter is such a good RBI man, they won’t even give him the chance. I appreciate that there are also many variations of the unintentional/intentional walks, but … OK, it’s time to go outside and look at the sky again.
Yep. Blue.
So, for you, I did come up with a variation on the theme — an RBI+ stat that incorporates intentional walks, double plays and plate appearances. I’m not sure I like it better than my +/-, but I’ll give you the leaders for the last five years in all three categories.
2007
RBIs
Alex Rodriguez 156
Magglio Ordonez, 139
Matt Holliday, 137
Ryan Howard, 136
Vlad Guerrero, 125
+/-
Magglio Ordonez, +36
Victor Martinez, +25
Matt Holliday, +24
Alex Rodriguez, +24
Raul Ibanez, +23
RBI+
Magglo Ordonez, 146
Victor Martinez, 136
Raul Ibanez, 134
Aramis Ramirez, 130
Matt Holliday, 129
(A-Rod at 128)
2006
RBIs
Ryan Howard, 146
David Ortiz, 137
Albert Pujols, 137
Lance Berkman, 136
Justin Morneau, 130
+/-
Lance Berkman, +31
Albert Pujols, +28
Miguel Cabrera, +25
Michael Young, +25
Justin Morneau, +21
RBI+
Lance Berkman, 148
Albert Pujols, 144
Miguel Cabrera, 137
Michael Young, 135
Bobby Abreu, 132
(Ryan Howard ranked 18th at 122)
2005
RBIs
David Ortiz, 148
Manny Ramirez, 144
Mark Teixeira, 144
Alex Rodriguez, 130
Andruw Jones, 128
+/-
Mark Teixeira, +34
David Ortiz, +31
Manny Ramirez, +24
Jorge Cantu, +24
Garrett Anderson, +21
RBI+
Mark Teixeira, 147
David Ortiz, 142
Mike Sweeney, 135
Garrett Anderson, 134
Jorge Cantu, 134
2004
RBIs
Miguel Tejada, 150
David Ortiz, 139
Vinny Castilla, 131
Manny Ramirez, 130
Vlad Guerrero, 126
+/-
Miguel Tejada, +27
David Ortiz, +25
Scott Rolen, +25
Carlos Guillen, +22
Victor Martinez, +20
RBI+
Carlos Guillen, 138
Scott Rolen, 136
David Ortiz, 133
Darin Erstad (?), 131
Aramis Ramirez, 130
2003
RBIs
Carlos Delgado, 145
Preston Wilson, 141
Gary Sheffield, 132
Jim Thome, 131
Albert Pujols, 124
Richie Sexson, 124
+/-
Carlos Delgado, +28
Preston Wilson, +26
Gary Sheffield, +25
Garret Anderson, +23
Albert Pujols, +22
RBI+
Chris Stynes (??), 137
Carlos Delgado, 136
Gary Sheffield, 135
Albert Pujols, 134
Garret Anderson, 134
I have no idea what any of this proves except that Chris Stynes led all of baseball in 2003 in RBI+, which seems a most compelling reason to junk that stat. It should be noted, however, that Stynes did have a really good RBI year, despite hitting .255 with a lovely OPS+ of 83. With the number or runners on base, he was expected to drive in 55 runs — he drove in 73. How did he do it? On closer inspection, his .615 batting average with the bases loaded (8 for 13 with 23 RBIs), and .375 average with runners on second and third (3 for 8 with 7 RBIs) probably had something to do with it.
Anyway, I think I’ll stick with plus-minus for now unless you are in love with RBI+, which I doubt, or you have have more objections, which I suspect you might. Now to fill in a few personal requests:
* * *
Request 1: What was Brook Jacoby’s plus-minus in 1987?
Excellent question. In 1987, as many of you Tribe fans already know, Jacoby hit 32 home runs and drove in 69 RBIs, making it one of my favorite ever Cleveland Indians years. I mean HOW do you hit 32 home runs and drive in only 69?
I’ll tell you how — you have nobody on base. Jacoby had a bad RBI year in 1987, true, BUT he had 620 plate appearances and only 175 runners on base, a low number. He scored a -14, which is bad, the worst of his career, but not HISTORICALLY bad, certainly not as bad as the overall RBI numbers would indicate.
* * *
Request 2: Can you tell me Nick Punto’s +/- last year as well as the average third baseman?
One of our brilliant readers often asks about Nick Punto (who, by the way, made one of the greatest defensive plays I’ve ever seen). I’m kind of hoping it IS Nick Punto, or a relative anyway. You know we live to serve.
Punto, last year, was an abysmal -19. I unfortunately did not break up this list by positions .. but just scanning …
A-Rod, +24
Aramis Ramirez, +18
Mike Lowell, +18
Miggy Cabrera, +17
David Wright, +10
Adrian Beltre, +10
Garrett Atkins, +9
Chipper Jones, +9
Ryan Zimmerman, +6
Pedro Feliz, +1
Jose Bautista, -5
Casey Blake, -10
Alex Gordon, -10
Nick Punto, -19
I wish I could give you a better answer.
* * *
Request 3: How did Jim Rice actually rank each year of his prime in RBI plus/minus?
You’re trying to get me in trouble with Dan, aren’t you? (Quick check: Sky. Blue. Yep).
1975: +6 (28th)
1976: +2 (41st)
1977: +14 (14th)
1978: +24 (2nd behind Dave Parker)
1979: +22 (5th — Fred Lynn led all of baseball with +30, for you Lynn fans)
1980: +5 (37th)
1981: -7 (bad)
1982: +7 (29th)
1983: +16 (tied for 6th with George Brett)
1984: +17 (4th)
1985: +4 (47th)
1986: +6 (34th)
Overall … really good three year peak, nice years in ’83 and ’84, was always an above average RBI man but perhaps not always an RBI machine.
Dave Parker, on the other hand …
1975: +16 (4th)
1976: +20 (1st)
1977: +1 (middle of pack)
1978: +26 (1st)
1979: +6 (middle of pack)
1980: +11 (15th)
1983: 1 (middle of pack)
1984: +13 (12th)
1985: +18 (7th)
1986: +20 (2nd)
1987: +3 (middle of pack)
1989: +16 (8th)
Two first place finishes, six Top 10 finishes overall, RBI machine.
I’m sure the requests to do this for Mattingly will be coming.
* * *
Request 4: Can you list of the plus/minus leaders.
Sure, why not.
1959: Ernie Banks* and Gus Bell (31)
1960: Eddie Mathews (22)
1961: Jim Gentile (33)
1962: Tommy Davis (41)
1963: Hank Aaron (27)
1964: Joe Torre (23)
1965: Tony Oliva (26)
1966: Boog Powell (21)
1967: Yaz (24)*
1968: Jim Northrup (14 — year of the pitcher)
1969: Ron Santo (18)
1970: Johnny Bench (26)*
1971: Joe Torre (30)*
1972: Billy Williams (31)
1973: George Scott (21)
1974: Jeff Buroughs (24)*
1975: Fred Lynn (18)*
1976: Dave Parker (20)
1977: Al Cowens (27)
1978: Dave Parker (26)*
1979: Fred Lynn (30)
1980: George Brett (38)*
1981: Bill Buckner (28)
1982: Hal McRael (40)
1983: Ted Simmons (26)
1984: Don Mattingly (22)
1985: Don Mattingly (32)*
1986: Jose Canseco (22)
1987: Harold Baines (24)
1988: Kirby Puckett (25)
1989: Will Clark (27)
1990: Matt Williams (25)
1991: Will Clark (29)
1992: Terry Pendleton (21)
1993: Andres Galarraga (24)
1994: Dante Bichette (18)
1995: Dante Bichette (29) … Coors Field is taking over.
1996: Dante Bichette (39) … Yep, we’ve got to consider balparks.
1997: Tony Gwynn (41)
1998: Juan Gonzalez (32)*
1999: Matt Williams (33)
2000: Jeff Cirillo (31) … fifth Rockies player.
2001: Juan Gonzalez (30)
2002: Miguel Tejada (27)*
2003: Carlos Delgado (28)
2004: Miguel Tejada (27)
2005: Mark Teixeira (34)
2006: Lance Berkman (31)
2007: Oh-wee-oh, Magglio (36)
I put an * by the MVPs, or at the least the ones I remembered off the top of my head.
It occurs to me this might be a reasonably interesting team stat too … rather runners left on base, this might offer a somewhat more telling snapshot of runs left off the board. Or not. I’m really tired.
Loading ...
35 Comments, Comment or Ping
Steve Buffum
> Casey Blake, -10
Excuse me as I have a heart attack from Not Surprise.
To the layman, Blake’s nigh-inconceivably bad hitting with RISP suggests he’d hate this stat. A lot.
Jan 17th, 2008
Dwight K. Schrute
I think what all this says is that Duane Kuiper is a first-ballot Hall of Famer.
Jan 17th, 2008
David Taylor
I wonder if you could weight your statistic to reflect the number of bases a player moves the runner in getting the RBI. For example, it is more valuable if you get an RBI by scoring a runner from 1st (3 bases) with a double than from scoring a runner from 3rd (1 base) thru a sac fly.
Jan 17th, 2008
Clayton (Exeter UK)
Is Nietzsche kind of like Ubaldo Jimenez? I mean, there’s all this great stuff but you keep worrying that he’s gonna fall of the edge?
Jan 17th, 2008
Mark
I like the idea of this stat and I actually like keeping it relatively simple instead of making many adjustments. It seems to be a good measure of a batter’s ability to drive home the runs that are available to him.
I’m not sure if you included Homeruns in here but it would seem to me to be more “pure” if you left walks in and counted Homeruns to make this simply a stat of “if this guy comes up with men on base what is the chance they will score”. A walk might be better than an out but it still doesn’t actually drive in the run. If the guys behind you don’t drive the run in either then your walk didn’t actually accomplish much and if anything for some of the bigger RBI guys out there that might be a negative depending on who is behind you in the order. For that reason I like leaving walks in there as chances if you consider this simply a measure of ability to get the guys home.
Obviously this stat will track with RISP average to an extent but it I find the career trends interesting too to see if there is some inherent ability to drive in the runners that are available. Would it be reasonable to consider some hitters more “clutch” in a sense if they were excellent at driving in available baserunners even if their overall performance was not at a superstar level?
Clearly some of the best RBI men in the game are going to be near the top of the +/- charts but it might also be interesting to note which lesser names fare well on this chart to see which guys could possibly be big RBI guys if they got the chance. Even though the +/- system accounts against their expected RBIs the sheer magnitude of the chances to pad your + (or -) number can increase your standing. I wonder if there would be a simple way to normalize this to the number of opportunities a batter had to see who would be the top RBI guy for a given season if he had the same number of baserunners. Maybe just normalize it to a certain number of baserunners like 250 and see how many they would have driven in. On further inspection I wonder if this is something along the lines of what your RBI+ is doing but I’m not quite sure.
For example if you did something like this for Brook Jacoby and projected his phenomenal rate of RBIs to a more “normal” amount of baserunners how much worse would he look and how would that fit into a historical context and on the flip side how good would Chris Stynes look in a historical context if he could actually keep up that RBI rate for more baserunners (in spite of his own overall stats)? I understand that regression to the mean can affect this but I think it would still be an interesting thought exercise and clearly you would want to set a minimum number of baserunners to qualify it.
Anyway, enough rambling!
Jan 17th, 2008
Paul White
Joe - By excluding intentional wlkas, aren’t you going to get wildly skewed results for guys who batted 8th in the NL most of their careers? I mean, no one would want to argue the RBI-man merits of Leo Cardenas or Johnny Edwards, despite the fact that each is in the top-100 in IBB’s all-time, right?
Jan 17th, 2008
Langer
Isn’t Total Bases divided by Date Appearances the best gauge for any woman?
Or: to stay on topic, Mattingly?
Jan 17th, 2008
Mike
I dunno, Joe. I just checked the sky out here and it’s gray.
Jan 17th, 2008
Oddibe Kerfeld
I love how Dan Shaughnessy’s daughter sent out a plea for people to write good comments about her dad’s book on Amazon and instead it created a backlash that drove the rankings into the ground. I guess a lot of people really don’t like him.
Jan 17th, 2008
Jeff P.
I like the +/- better than rbi+. If I had known you were taking requests I would have asked about Tony Batista’s 2003 and 2004 season. Seriously how does a guy with an obp that low drive in that many runs? I’m guessing there were runners on base on almost every plate appearance.
P.s. Joanna Kearns does rock!
Jan 17th, 2008
Fran
“No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance.”
Posting the hot TV Husband/Dad post on this baseball-related blog & relegating the hot TV Wife/Mom post to Margo’s blog is a clear violation of the spirit of Title IX.
(Margo’s blog looks like fine & entertaining writing but it doesn’t seem to have much about baseball.)
Jan 17th, 2008
James
‘Posting the hot TV Husband/Dad post on this baseball-related blog & relegating the hot TV Wife/Mom post to Margo’s blog is a clear violation of the spirit of Title IX.’
Which is exactly why Joe is NOT doing what you said
Jan 17th, 2008
Fran
Huh? I quote:
“A hot TV Mom-Wife post will be coming soon, along with (I think) a companion hot TV Dad-Husband post on Margo’s blog.”
(Consider a smiley added)
Jan 17th, 2008
Tim Lacy
As a Cubs fan, I’m pleased to see Aramis Ramirez’s name come up more than once here. I feel he’s somewhat underappreciated in Chicago, despite being re-signed here. - TL
Jan 17th, 2008
SoxfaninKC
How about the numbers for +/- or RBI+ for Emil Brown the past few year? It’s embarassing that he led the Royals in RBI’s in any year let alone more than one year but it always made me wonder if he led the team because he had the most opportunites or if he had a couple of “clutch” years at the plate.
Love the blog Joe.
Jan 17th, 2008
patsfan
I can’t imagine Brook Jacoby’s season is particularly historic. For example, last season Alfonso Soriano hit 33 HR with 70 RBI and Chris Young (D-Backs one) hit 32 HR with 68 RBI.
Now granted, both of them were hitting leadoff in the NL, so they often batted after the pitcher’s spot, which surely has a huge difference compared to an AL player. But based on two guys having a similar season to Jacoby just a year ago, I would hazard a guess that such a low ratio of RBI/HR with a high amount of HR isn’t all that rare.
Love the article.
Jan 17th, 2008
Dan
David Taylor Says:
I wonder if you could weight your statistic to reflect the number of bases a player moves the runner in getting the RBI. For example, it is more valuable if you get an RBI by scoring a runner from 1st (3 bases) with a double than from scoring a runner from 3rd (1 base) thru a sac fly.
***********************
David, does a run count more if it is scored from first on a double than if it is scored from third on a sac fly? There is no possible reason to make such an adjustment.
Jan 17th, 2008
Jeff P.
That 1987 Tribe team had 14 players with over 100 at bats and 10 of them had obp under .310. Butler, Franco, and Tabler got on base alot which explains Joe Carters 106 rbi’s. If Jacoby had batted cleanup he may have drove in 100 runs.
Jan 17th, 2008
Terry
I like ROB and its variations. It has the potential to be the baseball version of the physics Theory of Everything. There are a lot more variables then what are already listed – break down rbi situations when the batter is facing left handed v. right handed pitching, place in the batting order, ROB statistic of batter before and after, the type of pitch the batter hit, what about the value of sac flies or squeeze plays? It’s a theory of managing everything once a batter reaches base. Consider a pitching statistic of how well a pitcher performs in different ROB situations. But then I looked outside and thought this is why I watch baseball. No matter what the theory of everything may predict, I always see something unexpected and unique during the course of the game, which is terrific – or perfection when a play is consistent with ROB Theory of Everything. I predicted to my daughter two batters before Manny Ramirez got to the plate that if the Mariners keep the bases loaded then Manny will hit a Grand Slam: (the following partial box score from September 10, 2004 thanks to baseball-reference.com)
Top of the 7th, Red Sox Batting, Ahead 7-2, Masao Kida facing 5-6-7
— 1 J Varitek Single to LF (Ground Ball)
OO 1– 6 K Millar Ground Ball Double Play: 3B-2B-1B
— 3 O Cabrera Single to CF (Ground Ball)
1– 4 B Mueller Walk; Cabrera to 2B
12- 5 D Roberts Walk; Cabrera to 3B; Mueller to 2B
Aaron Taylor replaces Masao Kida pitching
R 123 5 J Damon Single to RF (Ground Ball); Cabrera Scores; Mueller to 3B; Roberts to 2B
R 123 5 M Bellhorn Walk; Mueller Scores; Roberts to 3B; Damon to 2B
Pokey Reese pinch runs for Mark Bellhorn batting 2nd
RRRR 123 3 M Ramirez Home Run (Fly Ball to LF); Roberts Scores; Damon Scores; Reese Scores
It was a meaningless home run in a meaningless game, but hall of fame bonding at the ballpark between me and my daughter thanks to my intuitive knowledge of Theory of Everything ROB: No pitcher wants to give up a walk with the bases loaded, if the unintentional intentional walk is given to Manny then you face David Ortiz. Manny knows he’s going to get a pitch to hit from Aaron Taylor because he doesn’t have an out pitch for Manny, and don’t blink or when Manny gets his pitch you’ll miss the laser beam shot to left.
My other favorite Red Sox grand slam was by Jim Rice, in the 10th inning on the Fourth of July, 1984 at Fenway Park – I forgot the A’s intentionally walked Dewey with two outs and first base open to pitch to Rice. Was Dewey more feared than 6 4 3 Rice? I want Rice in the HOF, but if he gets in then there must be a spot for Deweeeey Deweeeeey Deweeeeeey (Again thanks to baseball-reference.com)
Bottom of the 10th, Red Sox Batting, Tied 9-9, Gorman Heimueller facing 8-9-1
— M Barrett Single
1– G Hoffman Reached on E4/Sacrifice Bunt; Barrett to 2B
O 12- W Boggs Bunt Groundout: 3B-2B/Sacrifice; Barrett to 3B; Hoffman to 2B
-23 D Evans Intentional Walk
Jackie Gutierrez pinch runs for Glenn Hoffman batting 9th
RRRR 123 J Rice Home Run; Barrett Scores; Gutierrez Scores/unER; Evans Scores
Jan 18th, 2008
Terry
Rereading the box score there was only one out with first base open and Dewey was intentionally walked - that makes a difference.
Jan 18th, 2008
JB
Speaking of the HR/RBI ratio, I seem to remember a Dodger (I think, Greg Brock but it coulda been Franklin Stubbs) had something like 30 HRs and 60 RBIs.
Jan 18th, 2008
JB
In 1986, Stubbs had 23 HR and 58 RBI.
Brock had 20/66 in ‘83 and 21/66 in ‘85.
Not as big adeal as I thought.
Jan 18th, 2008
El Lay Dave
patsfan: how rare is an RBI:HR ratio like that? If I use 70:30 = 2.333 as the standard, I find that out of the 1075 30-HR seasons that have happened in the modern era, exactly 51, or 4.74% have had a ratio of 2.333 or less. That’s pretty rare, I guess. The list of 51:
Player RBI/HR RBI HR Year Tm G PA
Barry Bonds 1.877 137 73 2001 SFG 153 664
Rob Deer 2.000 64 32 1992 DET 110 448
Barry Bonds 2.000 90 45 2003 SFG 130 550
Alfonso Soriano 2.065 95 46 2006 WSN 159 728
Brad Wilkerson 2.094 67 32 2004 MON 160 688
Mark McGwire 2.100 147 70 1998 STL 155 681
Mark McGwire 2.121 123 58 1997 TOT 156 657
Alfonso Soriano 2.121 70 33 2007 CHC 135 617
Chris Young 2.125 68 32 2007 ARI 148 624
Felix Mantilla 2.133 64 30 1964 BOS 133 470
Harmon Killebrew 2.133 96 45 1963 MIN 142 596
Willie Mays 2.154 112 52 1965 SFG 157 638
Brook Jacoby 2.156 69 32 1987 CLE 155 620
Barry Bonds 2.163 106 49 2000 SFG 143 607
Troy Glaus 2.170 102 47 2000 ANA 159 678
Mark McGwire 2.173 113 52 1996 OAK 130 548
Frank Robinson 2.184 83 38 1956 CIN 152 668
Barry Bonds 2.189 81 37 1994 SFG 112 474
Brady Anderson 2.200 110 50 1996 BAL 149 687
Sammy Sosa 2.204 108 49 2002 CHC 150 666
Hank Aaron 2.205 97 44 1969 ATL 147 639
Adam Dunn 2.217 102 46 2004 CIN 161 681
Matt Williams 2.233 96 43 1994 SFG 112 483
Sammy Sosa 2.238 141 63 1999 CHC 162 712
Barry Bonds 2.244 101 45 2004 SFG 147 617
Ken Griffey 2.250 90 40 1994 SEA 111 493
Mark McGwire 2.262 147 65 1999 STL 153 661
Nate Colbert 2.263 86 38 1970 SDP 156 636
Hank Aaron 2.265 77 34 1972 ATL 129 544
Harmon Killebrew 2.265 111 49 1964 MIN 158 682
Jim Thome 2.269 118 52 2002 CLE 147 613
Mark McGwire 2.281 73 32 2000 STL 89 321
Jim Edmonds 2.282 89 39 2003 STL 137 531
Norm Cash 2.282 89 39 1962 DET 148 629
Sammy Sosa 2.286 80 35 2004 CHC 126 539
Ted Williams 2.289 87 38 1957 BOS 132 546
Adam Dunn 2.300 92 40 2006 CIN 160 683
Duke Snider 2.300 92 40 1957 BRO 139 592
Davey Johnson 2.302 99 43 1973 ATL 151 651
Wally Post 2.306 83 36 1956 CIN 143 586
Mark McGwire 2.308 90 39 1995 OAK 104 422
Mickey Mantle 2.310 97 42 1958 NYY 150 654
Ron Kittle 2.313 74 32 1984 CHW 139 525
Frank Howard 2.313 111 48 1969 WSA 161 702
Willie McCovey 2.318 102 44 1963 SFG 152 627
Dave Kingman 2.324 86 37 1976 NYM 123 510
Derrek Lee 2.326 107 46 2005 CHC 158 691
Jose Canseco 2.326 107 46 1998 TOR 151 658
Roger Maris 2.328 142 61 1961 NYY 161 698
Jose Valentin 2.333 70 30 2004 CHW 125 504
Jan 18th, 2008
Walter
alright, if we’re taking requests, how about JOHN BUCK’s +/- with 18 homers and 48 rbi’s?
Jan 18th, 2008
Aaron
I was wondering the same thing as Walter. Please?
Jan 18th, 2008
Owen
I prefer the JoeBI to the RBI+. The reasons may anger you, but here they are:
1) RBI is popular because it’s a layman’s stat. Easy to understand. JoeBI centers around 0. If you’re plus, you’re good, if you’re minus you’re bad. Actually I think that sort of dichotomy is a real problem in how people think (i.e. criminals bad, law-abiders good), but for a baseball stat, the simplicity is comforting. With RBI+ I’m not sure what’s good anymore. Maybe if I thought about it a little more it’d all come together, but right now I look at the numbers and I’m not sure what they mean.
2) JoeBI is you versus the field. The context is built in. No need to wonder how it compares to the rest of the league. Well I guess you can still wonder a little bit, but a JoeBI of +10 is easier to grasp than an RBI+ of 86.
3) You can have fun (you especially Joe) doing the JoeBIs of teams against the league, players against their own teams (as in, making the 2007 Mets in total the average and seeing how Jose Reyes did), years versus other years.
4) I named the JoeBI. Everytime someone uses that term, I feel a little more like a rockstar. It might make JoePo feel like a rockstar too. Please use it at any and all opportunities.
Brian Bannister is great. This Mets fan was sad to see him go.
Jan 18th, 2008
Mike C
Not reading through all these comments, but I remember a Mark Bellhorn season with the Cubs (maybe 2002ish?), where he hit 27 HR and only had 56 RBI. His OPS was just under .900, as I recall. Now that’s a remarkably low-RBI season!
Jan 18th, 2008
Jim
Can you give the numbers for Adam Dunn and Griffey Jr. for the last several years?
Thanks!
Jan 18th, 2008
Jay S in CoMo
I attended the Royals Caravan in Columbia, Mo last night, and who was sitting at the table but none other than Brian Bannister. When it was my turn to shuffle past his station and get my autographed 3×5 giveaway I (trying to be cordial and social and not just repeat, “Looking forward to a great year” for the umpteenth time to him) mentioned that his name had popped up on the blog here. He looked puzzled for a second, and then when I mentioned The Baseball Prospectus, he smiled and confirmed that he and Joe had talked a bunch about stats, etc. I think an exact quote was, “You have to be pretty careful talking to most reporters, but Joe seems like a great guy.”
Then, to my amazement, he pulled out his web-enabled phone and said, “Now what site was that on?” So with a line stretching through the Hy-Vee back to the freezer section, we tracked down the site here, and I pointed him to ROB II. He got back to signing autographs and moving the line along, but as I was lingering and chatting with our 1580 KTGR guys who were waiting for an interview with Trey Hillman, I looked over and caught him reading the blog on his phone!!!
So, (I checked, too… the sky is blue) a real-world adventure made possible by JoeP’s blog. Thanks!
Jan 18th, 2008
Butch
Not to get off-topic - oh, what the hell.
“Memo to 30-year-old stat geeks combing through Jim Rice’s numbers: Get out of the house and look at the sky one time. I know personal contact frightens you, but let go of OPS for a moment and try talking to someone who saw Rice play, or better yet, played against him.”
So I guess Shaughnessy was a big supporter for Phil “You’re in my Hall of Fame” Rizzuto, eh? He also must be a staunch defender of the Veterans Committee from its critics. “Jesse Haines? Unless you played against him, you have no right to say he’s not a Hall of Famer.”
“You never played the game, nerd” is never a good argument… especially with nerds.
Jan 18th, 2008
Greg P.
One of my favorite HR/RBI combos was Wayne Gross. He had 2 such seasons -
1977 with Oakland 22 HR/63 RBI and 1984 with Baltimore - 22 HR/64 RBI with a stellar .216/.346/.442 line.
What would his JoeBI be?
Take a bow, Owen, that’s an outstanding name or maybe it should be JoaldoBI??
Jan 18th, 2008
patsfan
Good stuff, El Lay Dave. I was thinking about doing the legwork for something like that but didn’t get around to it. As Clinton might say, I guess whether or not you consider a ratio like that to be rare depends on what your definition of “rare” is. 51 times in the modern era doesn’t sound like a lot, but on the other hand it’s about one in every twenty 30-HR seasons. And since more than twenty players are hitting 30 HR each year nowadays, it seems like on average it would happen once or twice each year. Glancing at the list, it’s certainly happening much much more frequently within the last 10 years.
The thing I found most interesting about your list was how many big, big HR seasons were included in it… Maris, Bonds, McGwire, Sosa, and a ton of 45-50 HR years. It makes sense though, since if so many of your hits go for HR, it leaves fewer other types of hits where you can drive in teammates.
Jan 18th, 2008
James
Fran:
You said…
“Posting the hot TV Husband/Dad post on this baseball-related blog & relegating the hot TV Wife/Mom post to Margo’s blog is a clear violation of the spirit of Title IX.”
I was just saying you mixed them around. The TV Husband/Dad post is relegated to Margo’s Blog while the TV Wife/Mom blog is going to be posted on this blog. Just trying to make a joke.
Jan 18th, 2008
Dave W
Joe if your still taking requests i’d love to see Albert Belle +/- VS Mo Vaughn +/- in 1995
Jan 18th, 2008
Kyle
“Posting the hot TV Husband/Dad post on this baseball-related blog & relegating the hot TV Wife/Mom post to Margo’s blog is a clear violation of the spirit of Title IX.”
Unless Joe is recieving federal funds for his blog, it’s not a violation of Title IX at all.
Jan 18th, 2008
Reply to “ROB (Part II)”