If you grew up with all the classic baseball stats -- pitchers' W-L records, RBIs, batting average -- and you get frustrated as all heck with the newfangled stats and the nerds who love them, you really need to read this blog post from Kansas City writer Joe Posnanski. It's sort of about Pedro Feliz, but it's really about how we're conditioned to believe in the power of certain numbers, and why it's always good to question assumptions. There's a ton of great stuff in here, like this:
Teams don't score runs because they have uniquely talented RBI men. Teams score runs because more often than their opponents, they put together a string of useful offensive plays -- walks, hits, stolen bases, hit-by-pitch, beating out double play grounders, taking extra bases, advancing on throws , on and on and on. That, most of the time, is what lead to runs. The RBI guy cannot do it himself except with solo home runs. And teams don't win games by hitting solo home runs. No, really, they don't. I looked it up. In 2009, offenses that scored all their runs on solo home runs were 24-193. Houston lost a game to Cincinnati 6-5 while hitting five solo home runs. For the decade, teams relying entirely on solo home runs went 267-1837.
There's one small point Posnanski leaves out, which is worth mentioning: like a lot of baseball stats, RBIs can be arbitrary. You get an RBI when you ground out and a runner on third scores -- but not if you hit into a double play? Huh? You get credit for an RBI if a guy comes around to score but not if he's thrown out at the plate? Why should a hitter be penalized for his slow teammates? I won't steal any more of Posnanski's thunder. Go read his piece. (Link tip from McCovey Chronicles.)
One more link today: Will Carroll has posted his Team Health Report for the Giants with strong praise for head trainer Dave Groeschner: "He came back to take over the San Francisco staff and has not only continued Stan Conte's excellence, but built on it."
