Baseball stats

[D. Bergin]

Originally Posted by Mark17

Then there's John Kruk in 1993, scoring 100 runs on just 6 SB. He gets on base and sits there until Dave Hollins or Darren Daulton drives him in. In this case, runs scored are almost an incidental stat. On base percentage matters, but scoring runs is totally dependent on the guys behind in the order. Just a matter of being on base at the right time.

You tend to be on base at the right time more often, the more times you get on base.

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by D. Bergin

You tend to be on base at the right time more often, the more times you get on base.

Right, that's why on base percentage matters. But once you're on base, nowadays, you don't have to do anything except wait.

[Jim65]

I don't know anyone who thinks batting average means nothing. Its just not a good judge of a players value. Batting average counts all hits the same, singles are the same as home runs. Hank Aaron and Rusty Greer are both .305 career hitters, does anyone think they are similar players?

[Mike D.]

I don't think runs scored is a bad thing by any means...but like a lot of stats, like pitchers wins and RBI's, there's a recognition that it's not 100% an individual statistic.

Having more of them is a good thing, having less of them is less good, but there's shades of gray in between.

[Rad_Hazard]

I'm not sure about runs scored, but I do find a lot of value in the runs created formula.

Statistic Description: Runs Created A set of formulas developed by Bill James and others that estimates a player’s total contributions to a team’s runs total. This is computed with the "technical" formula when possible. If SB or CS data is missing, the "basic" formula is used. If HBP, IBB, SH, SF, or GIDP data is missing, the "stolen base" version of the formula is used.

Runs Created was developed by Bill James back in the late 1970's as a method to determine offensive performance.

The basic formula is base hits plus walks, multiplied by total bases; the result is then divided by at bats plus walks. The general format of the formula is times on base, multiplied by bases advanced, divided by opportunities.

James developed several different versions of the formula, the most well-known of these is the Technical version. The formula for this version is:

On Base = Hits + Walks + Hit Batsmen - Caught Stealing - Grounded into Double Plays

Bases Advanced = Total bases + .26 (Walks + Hit Batsmen - Intentional Walks) + .52 (Sac. Hits + Sac. Flies + Stolen Bases)

Opportunities = At bats + Walks + Hit Batsmen + Sac. Hits + Sac. Flies

With this I created a spreadsheet and divided Runs Created by PA and came up with what I refer to as "Density", which should show how potent each batter was in their allotted PA's. No stat is perfect, but I really like this list. I could only fit the first 37 in the screenshot, but you get the idea.

[familytoad]

Interesting list.
Some of the usual suspects and a couple very unusual.
Lance Berkman top 20?
No Rickey in top 37.

Something about that list seems odd..

[Rad_Hazard]

Originally Posted by familytoad

Interesting list.
Some of the usual suspects and a couple very unusual.
Lance Berkman top 20?
No Rickey in top 37.

Something about that list seems odd..

Agreed, there are a few oddities, but those can be explained in the low amount of PA's for those suspect entries. The formula is solid though and dividing it by PA's gives us a solid stat for runs creation per PA.

Here is the next chunk from 38-75. Rickey clocks in at 72. Lots of Runs Created, but also a ton of PA's so it dilutes it a bit.

If you went purely off of Runs Created and not divide it by PA's, he comes in at #12. (second screenshot of top 37 without dividing it by PA's).

I like the list when it divides by PA's better since it's not a counting stat, but an actual per PA potency stat regardless of how many PA's a player had. So it all depends on if you value longevity or efficiency more.