"A Better Measure of Hitting Ability -- Runs Created" - according to the sabermetrics of Bill James, the formula is as follows: Runs = (hits+walks)(total bases) / (at bats+walks) This formula reflects two important aspects in scoring runs in baseball. The number of hits and walks of a team reflects the team's ability to get runners on base. The number of total bases of a team reflects the team's ability to move runners that are already on base. This runs created formula can be used at an individual level to compute the number of runs that a player creates for his team. Runs per game = "runs created" / (at bats-hits*players outs)(27*number of outs in a game) This above formula breaks the afforementioned formula down even futher, resulting in a number that reflects a game to game basis. The final number is not a refection of the actual amount of runs created per game, but rather a number that would value the player's offensive contribution, or worth. I had some time, I thought it would be fun and interesting to run this formula on some of the Astros bigtime players as well as players from Round Rock and New Orleans to judge their worth to the team in terms of flat out production. *all "runs created" numbers were rounded to tenths **all RPG numbers were rounded to hundreths MLB - The Astros C. Biggio - (180)(238) / (544) = 78.8 / (364)(27) = 5.85 J. Bagwell - (196)(205) / (528) = 76.1 / (332)(27) = 6.19 C. Beltran - (93)(132) / (250) = 49.1 / (157)(27) = 8.44 L. Berkman - (242)(230) / (540) = 103.1 / (298)(27) = 9.34 J. Kent - (161)(214) / (473) = 72.8 / (312)(27) = 6.30 I calculated the platooning third basemen's stats as well to compare the two offensively and what they brought to the team: M. Ensberg - (133)(148) / (400) = 49.2 / (267)(27) = 4.98 M. Lamb - (78)(98) / (210) = 36.4 / (132)(27) = 7.45 AAA - New Orleans C. Burke - (202)(232) / (525) = 89.3 / (323)(27) = 7.46 T. Whiteman - (35)(33) / (106) = 10.9 / (71)(27) = 4.15 (Whiteman has only been in AAA a handfull of games) AA - Round Rock W. Taveras - (164)(147) / (419) = 57.5 / (255)(27) = 6.09 C. Jimerson - (138)(190) / (493) = 53.2 / (355)(27) = 4.05 NL Central For the sake of comparison I calculated the numbers of the lead-off hitters of the two teams ahead of the Astros in the division - St. Louis and Chicago. C. Patterson - (180)(238) / (533) = 80.4 / (353)(27) = 6.15 T. Womack - (170)(175) / (481) = 61.9 / (311)(27) = 5.37 MLB Also, for grins, I thought I would compare some of the 2004 National League MVP canidates: S. Rolen - (207)(274) / (512) = 110.8 / (305)(27) = 9.81 A. Pujols - (224)(316) / (552) = 128.2 / (328)(27) = 10.55 A. Beltre - (203)(316) / (519) = 123.6 / (316)(27) = 10.56 B. Bonds - (295)(250) / (487) = 151.4 / (192)(27) = 21.29 The sabermetrics of Bonds' RPG are staggering. I thought these numbers would create interesting conversation concerning their importance of their place in the game as well as their translation to the field and how it reflects upon each player. I'm sure everyone's thoughts will differ, but to each his own.
So...we need to resign Beltran. He rating is pretty high even though his average is lower than usual. Biggio compares quite favorably with his competition. I am pretty suprised at Corey Patterson being that high, he seems to go after bad pitches often. And it confirms what I thought about Bonds- he should definitely be the MVP.
That number for Bonds is just sick... I watched the game last night, and its amazing how locked in he's in on EVERY PITCH.
yes they are sick. it's also sick how anybody could consider anyone but bonds as the run away MVP. it's like the jordan effect is setting in with people who are looking at the MVP.
thank you. as long as that guy is on the field, he is the MVP, no matter how much of a jackass he might be. he's far and away the best baseball player i've ever seen in my life. i'm not sure there's anyone even close, frankly. he deserves to be mentioned among names like ruth, mays, williams and aaron. that's the highest praise i could give any position player in major league baseball. bill james' favorite player of this generation, you ask??? none other than CRAIG FREAKING BIGGIO!!!! (i had to get that in)
While I agree Bonds is definitely MVP, why is it that he only gets swinging strikes? It's a lot easier knowing if you take a pitch, it will always be a ball, even if it's right over the plate.
C'mon... Bonds never takes pitches right over the plate. Why? Because he can hit those out to the next county. Sure he gets a few borderline calls to go his way... nothing different than Greg Maddux having catching a corner of the plate that's 2 feet away, or even Clemens sometimes getting a low strike call on that splitter. Most of the time, the pitches to Bonds aren't even that close... and the most amazing thing is that when they are, he almost always hits a homerun. That's hard.
I think that the number differential between Lamb and Ensberg speaks volumes as to who should be starting between the two. Enough with this platooning of postions, I would like to see Lamb get the start, as he has earned it with better all around play, and Morgan come in off the bench.
True... but factor in a.) Lamb's subpar defense, b.) Lamb's extremely high value as a left-handed pinch hitter, and c.) Ensberg's BA with RISP... and you can see why Ensberg deserves his fair share of starts. Trust me... if Lamb could play defense consistently... he'd be an everyday player. And, unless your name is Biggio... you apparently must play consistent defense to stay in this lineup.
Lets not make this out as if Ensberg is some excellent 3rd baseman here. Morgan may be a better fielder, but only slightly. I completely agree about needing a lefthanded pinch hitter, but we have one in Palmero, and to a lesser extent, although currently starting, Jose Vizcaino. Lamb has been much more worthy of the starting job, and is much more reliable and needed in the starting line-up than Ensberg. The slight difference in fielding is not enough to warrant the desparity between the two in terms of "runs created" on a per game basis. And in those terms, Lamb is just flat-out, outproducing Ensberg.
