September 07, 2006
The Magic 3000 - and I'm Not Talking Hits
Glenn Berggoetz wrote up his research on using Runs+RBI as a Hall of Fame standard. Here's his summary:
Recently I've heard some sports talk radio hosts speaking of Frank Thomas and whether he's a Hall of Famer or not. I have long seen Thomas as a sure-fire Fame member, and was surprised by the hosts' comments. A solid RBI man who scored lots of runs because of his high on-base percentage, I began wondering if there was a magic number involving runs and RBIs that would guarantee a player Hall of Fame induction. And there is.
I began quite simply - I added up hundreds of players' totals when it came to their career runs scored and RBI numbers. I quickly found that, just like with hits, everyone who has ever combined for at least 3000 runs plus RBIs has made it into the Hall of Fame. And since Thomas has surpassed 2900 and should reach 3000 by early 2007, he seems a certainty for the Hall of Fame.
I also became intrigued with those stars who just missed the 3000 total, and some recent retirees and where they stand in regards to the magical 3000.
Topping the list of non-Hall of Famers who are close to 3000 R+RBI is Andre Dawson, with 2964. Close behind is Harold Baines with 2927, a player who is typically not referred to as a Hall of Famer.
The list of non-Hall of Fame players with at least 2800 R+RBI is a short one. Along with Dawson and Baines, Fred McGriff has 2899, Dwight Evans comes in with 2854, and Bill Dahlen rounds out the list with 2824.
It's also interesting to note the totals of some players who have retired in recent years and are sometimes spoken of as Hall of Fame material. Roberto Alomar proved to be a strong offensive performer, but his R+RBI total stands at just 2642. Even farther from the magical number is Edgar Martinez. A standout for years, Martinez's total is just 2480. Sandwiched between these two stars is Mark McGwire, whose total sits at 2581.
Other notables include Hall hopeful Jim Rice, who totaled 2700 R+RBI. Other impressive totals for players with little or no chance of making the Hall include Dave Parker with 2765, Darrell Evans with 2698, Rusty Staub with 2655, Joe Carter with 2615, Chili Davis with 2612, and Jose Canseco with 2593.
A current player whose Hall of Fame status is a bit nebulous is Bernie Williams. How does he stand in the R+RBI category? Williams recently went over the 2600 mark. While reaching 3000 R+RBI for Williams seems out of the question, his total is getting high enough to where his Hall of Fame status is steadily improving.
The R+RBI formula, however, bodes well for Dawson. Of every Hall of Fame-eligible player who has accumulated 2900 or more R+RBI, Dawson is the only one not in the Hall. It would seem Dawson's Hall of Fame election is probable.
Adding runs scored with runs batted in may seem like a simple formula, but reaching 3000 R+RBI has proven to be a perfect indicator of Hall of Fame election.
I like that standard a lot better than others I've seen. The game is about runs, and it seems the voters recognize that. High OBAs and high slugging percentages get you there, and those are the best hitters.
It's nice as a measure but if you don't deduct homers you're double counting a homer as both a run and an rbi.
But the author might not be too concerned.
I found it kind of odd that he chose to include Alomar in the discussion. Alomar was a second baseman who lead off a good portion of his career. RBI is obviously an opportunity dependent stat which would disadvantage a lead-off batter. While high totals of runs and RBI are something to be considered it does not tell the full story. It may be a useful stat for corner players, but I wouldn't give it much credence for up the middle defensive players.
"...a perfect indicator of Hall of Fame election."
Well, no. It'd be a perfect indicator if everyone who had 3000 R+RBI is in and everyone who does not have 3000 R+RBI is not in.
Here's a question which is amenable to analysis--how does one's probability of getting into the HoF change as R+RBI increases? That is, if R+RBI = 2300, what's the probability that a player will make the HoF? 80%? 40%? 10%?
I'm guessing there are a lot of arbitrary "standards" like this that we could find if we cared to look.
Wow, harsh crowd. It seems like the point is being missed. Simply stated, only one player to acheive 2900 runs+rbi is not in the HoF. That's a pretty strong correlation. I can't use it to identify every HoF player, but I can use it to verify their credentials as a hitter. That is all the author is attempting to establish. As for the double counting of HR, I think that it maybe a good part of the reason why this works as a quick analysis tool. It takes into account the effect of power numbers on HoF status, even if it is not truely sabermetric in its approach.
Here's some other interesting names for this list of players not yet eligible (the numbers are accurate as of yesterday's games and keep in mind some of these players have only played for about 10 years).
Rafael Palmeiro (3497)
Rickey Henderson (3410)
Cal Ripken Jr (3342)
Ken Griffey Jr (3071)
Jeff Bagwell (3046)
Sammy Sosa (2997)
Gary Sheffield (2925)
Manny Ramirez (2771)
Larry Walker (2666)
Andres Galarraga (2620)
Steve Finley (2593)
Tim Raines (2551)
Jim Thome (2539)
Juan Gonzalez (2465)
Ivan Rodriguez (2251)
Jim Edmonds (2176)
Derek Jeter (2104)
Interestingly, Mike Schmidt only has a total of 2777.
Biggio is also in there right under 2900
Kind of poetic how Sammy Sosa falls just short of the magic mark...
You should NOT subtract home runs. On virtually every run, one player who knocks it in gets and RBI and the player who scores it gets the run. On Home Runs, the player who hits it both scored the run and had the RBI. This works on a team level as well.
baggy is IN!!!!
and biggio, a LEADOFF guy getting to 2882 is just AWEsome. it is DANG hard to drive in runs from leadoff in the NL
re: Ryan Howard
so far in one and one-half years, Howard has hit 76 home runs and driven in over 200 runs, so he's at 276 in 1.5 years. That works out to 350 per two year.
If he does 350 every two years, he could reach the magic 3000 plateau in around 17 or 18 seasons total including these two.
Fifteen more seasons would be 2021 and Howard would be 40 then.
Of course, he will have some monster seasons during his 20s and his performance will level off during his 30s, as with Frank Thomas, but as with Thomas, I believe he will reach 500 home runs and 3000 RBIs and Home Runs and the HOF.
Howard will be the first African American player inducted from the Phillies, and hopefully Dick Allen will be inducted alongside him at long last from the veterans committe, a player who at his peak was very similar to Howard, but whose personal demons, aggravated by terrible racial problems of the 60s and 70s, destroyed what should have been a great career.
--art kyriazis, philly
This metric would be so much better if it included productive outs.
Just noticed this, from "basura": "It's nice as a measure but if you don't deduct homers you're double counting a homer as both a run and an rbi."
He was talking about adding Runs to RBI's as a measure of performance, but not subtracting Home Runs from the total - - the so-called Runs Produced formula. The problem is the Home Run hitter deserves the double count since he has done what is normally two jobs: scoring the run, and knocking it in. Look at it this way. In 1987, Andre Dawson had 137 RBIs, and 90 Runs Scored. Ozzie Smith had 75 RBIs and 104 Runs Scored. But Dawson had 49 home runs, and Smith none. So Smith "wins" the Runs Produced crown. Because he hit no home runs and Dawson hit 49? How can that be? Can anyone seriously maintain Smith produced more runs than Dawson? Of course not. The solution is to view each of the elements of Runs Produced (runs and rbis) as "half runs" since you normally need two people to produce the "full run". From that perspective, home runs should generate the so-called "double count." The home run hitter has done two jobs. Put another way, Dawson shouldn't lose the title because he hit 49 homers and his nearest competitor hit none. Even Ozzie would agree with that.
Howard has hit 76 home runs and driven in over 200 runs, so he's at 276 in 1.5 years.
It is Runs + RBI, not Home Runs + RBI.
It would be just as interesting, maybe moreso, to see the other end of the limit with this standard. That is, how low can you go before you have no chance of getting in. Seeing Alomar compared to Edgar Martinez and Mark McGwire doesn't seem fair because of the difference defensively. The low end would be a better indicator for the defensive positions, which traditionally get shorted in the hall of fame.
Alan Trammell (2,234)and Lou Whitaker(2,470) come to my mind. It grates on me that voting thus far indicates neither has much chance of getting in, while Ozzie Smith (2,050) got in on the first ballot. Not that Ozzie doesn't deserve it, but the difference in thier careers is not THAT significant.