Mookie4ever wrote: This is the RC definition on ESPN (Runs created [(H + BB + HBP - CS - GIDP) times (Total bases + .26[BB - IBB + HBP] + .52[SH + SF + SB])] divided by (AB + BB + HBP + SH+ SF) (I think that THT keeps theirs a secret). H, BB, CS, GIDP, SF, SB etc are all influenced by the players around you and the players that you play against. Do you really think that Jason Bay's RC/G would be the same if he played on the Yankees?
Haven't followed this whole debate, but this is just silly. Click on the THT stats page and click on the glossary and you find their explanation. The ESPN formula is about the simplest (and most inaccurate) one in use. The THT one is far better.
I have no idea if marver is right on the whole argument, but I do know this---he's a lot more right about the stats.
GotowarMissAgnes wrote: Click on the THT stats page and click on the glossary and you find their explanation. The ESPN formula is about the simplest (and most inaccurate) one in use. The THT one is far better.
actually it's pretty vague.
Runs Created. Invented by Bill James, RC is a very good measure of the number of runs a batter truly contributed to his team’s offense. The basic formula for RC is OBP*TB, but it has evolved into over fourteen different versions. We use the most complicated version, which includes the impact of hitting well with runners in scoring position, and is adjusted for ballpark impact. RC/G refers to Runs Created Per Game, which Runs Created divided by the number of outs made by the batter, times 27.
Tavish wrote:The point is that people felt the THT numbers appeared to be innaccurate compared to ESPN.com's. When ran across 22 seasons worth of data (1002 team seasons) both formulas came out basically even with a 94.7% R^2 when estimated runs were compared to actual runs.
haven't read much of this thread but this story seems somewhat topical with what seems to be some SD talk. i heard that when the giles trade was being discussed that dave littlefield was pushing and pushing for xavier nady and oliver perez. towers apparently held the same high view of nady and insisted that DL take jason bay instead or no deal. so basically DL stumbled into what remains one of the few good things he's ever done...and of course was able to acquire the subject of his man-crush, nady, this season for the afore-mentioned perez and rob. hernandez
Mookie4ever wrote:But then I don't need RC/G to tell me that Jason Bay is a far better value at $1M per than Giles at $7.5+M.
In the discussion of the Giles-Bay trade, I think this is the most overlooked part. Runs Created, Win Shares, whatever, it doesn't matter. Giles and Bay are both great hitters. However, when you consider how much the Bucs have been paying Bay versus how much the Pads have been paying Giles, coupled with the fact that Giles isn't getting younger and is in decline while Bay is in his prime, the Pirates are the clear winners. Of course, this might be more evident if they weren't so boneheaded with their other transactions and could actually put together a winning team.
Mercer Boy wrote:I'm not reading through all of this, but as long as Littlefield is last, I agree.
Gosh, you're lazy. People put a lot of effort into this crapfest. Least you could do is read it.
Maine has a good swing for a pitcher but on anything that moves, he has no chance. And if it's a fastball, it has to be up in the zone. Basically, the pitcher has to hit his bat. - Mike Pelfrey
Cafe Home
Fantasy Football
Fantasy Basketball
Fantasy Hockey
by GotowarMissAgnes » Tue Aug 15, 2006 11:16 pm 
actually it's pretty vague.
