Re: Overrated stats - HR's, K's, RBI - truth or fallacy?
posted at 6/30/2013 1:01 PM EDT
In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:
I've been reading quite a few comments this year on the question of whether or not HR's and K's are overrated. Just look at yesterday's game thread for examples.
I'm going to add RBI to the mix because that is another stat that is often referred to as being overrated. I once read a statement by Keith Law that the RBI stat was 'meaningless'. That really irritated me. How can RBI be meaningless? You don't win any games if you don't score any runs. And based on the current 2013 MLB stats, only 5% of all runs scored do not result in an RBI.
I still have a problem with Law's statement, but part of the problem is that he didn't expand on exactly what he meant. I have to assume that what he meant was that a player's RBI total doesn't necessarily reflect his performance.
A textbook example of the RBI distortion is the 2007 RBI totals of Lugo and Pedroia. Lugo had 73 RBI in 630 PA. Pedroia had 50 RBI in 581 PA.
But Lugo hit 237/294/349, and Pedroia hit 317/380/442.
The issues with HR's and K's are a little different, but I think there is a similarity. It's not so much a question of whether a HR, RBI or K is important in the context of one at-bat, it's a question of how important it is in the context of the whole season.
Fire away people.
My biggest problem is with guys who SO too much under all circumstances, but especially with RISP like Napoli. The primary reason our team is still on top of the division are the much improved OBP's across the board. If guys like Napoli, Gomes, Salty, Middy and Drew had a better eye at the plate it would make us even better. To Naps credit he does at least drive in some runs and take more BB's to cover up his K's a bit better.
Our big K numbers in most cases kill more rallies than the occassional HR'S/RBI'S we get from these guys in return. They are also normally our lowest OBP guys which pretty much tells the story.