Taking Sides: RBI vs. RBIs

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

Obviously, RBI is the correct term. But which do you use when in casual conversation? Do you take pains to say "RBI" or will you let a stray "RBIs" slip out every now and again? Do you correct and/or admonish those who use the latter?

― Broheems (diamond), Friday, 16 April 2004 20:36 (twenty-two years ago)

i was just think about this a couple days ago, sadly enough. _technically_, of course, rbi is correct, but either is perfectly fine by me. it's only natural to pluralize it in speech or in writing, especially since almost no one says run/runs batted in.

― John (jdahlem), Friday, 16 April 2004 20:47 (twenty-two years ago)

I'm not about to get grammatically pedantic on someone for saying RBIs, since, after all, at the very least it sounds good.

I think however any controversy can be headed off if everyone just called them ribbies or rib eyes.

― Leee O'Gaddy (Leee), Friday, 16 April 2004 20:52 (twenty-two years ago)

either is fine with me but if someone says "ribbie" in conversation i tend to punch them in the mouth.

― otto midnight (otto midnight), Saturday, 17 April 2004 21:03 (twenty-two years ago)

I've even heard some announcers try to push the idea of RsBI, since 'Runs' is the only plural word in the phrase.

That's just stupid, though.

― boldbury (boldbury), Saturday, 17 April 2004 22:58 (twenty-two years ago)

ribbie

*ducks*

― Leee O'Gaddy (Leee), Sunday, 18 April 2004 00:22 (twenty-two years ago)

(This is the slowest bench clearing brawl ever.)

― Leee O'Gaddy (Leee), Sunday, 18 April 2004 16:29 (twenty-two years ago)

I like the 'ribbies' term too. And because I have nothing else to add, I will leave you with a great quote from Cardinals radio color man Mike Shannon: "I just want to tell everyone Happy Easter and Happy Hanukkah."

― bnw (bnw), Sunday, 18 April 2004 16:53 (twenty-two years ago)

shannon is such a dweeb.

― John (jdahlem), Sunday, 18 April 2004 17:07 (twenty-two years ago)

that reminds me of the one summer's eve when I was hanging out with a friend of mine, really drunk, and I turned to her and quite seriously said "hey....(nod)...Merry Christmas." I wasn't really trying to be funny either it just sort of came out.

― Gear! (Gear!), Sunday, 18 April 2004 17:23 (twenty-two years ago)

but yes, RBI or RBIs is okay. I usually say RBIs or ribbies

― Gear! (Gear!), Sunday, 18 April 2004 17:24 (twenty-two years ago)

>either is fine with me but if someone says "ribbie" in conversation i tend to punch them in the mouth. <

How about when ESPN's chirping high-school sports editor Karl Ravech calls em "rib-eye steaks"? That's when I reach for my revolver.

I actually don't say "RBI" out loud much since I discovered it's not an informative stat...

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Monday, 19 April 2004 18:08 (twenty-two years ago)

I actually don't say "RBI" out loud much since I discovered it's not an informative stat...

I understand the rationale behind that statement, but I still don't believe it's a completely useless stat.

Now, some kind of percentage that would show how often a hitter drove in runners in scoring position would be nice to see. We'll call it the Boldbury Index. Get Bill James on the phone!

― boldbury (boldbury), Monday, 19 April 2004 18:20 (twenty-two years ago)

There is a preexisting stat called BA w/ RISP.

― gygax! (gygax!), Monday, 19 April 2004 18:35 (twenty-two years ago)

Yeah, but what I have in mind is kind of an enhanced version of that stat. Something like this:

Total RiSP Driven In/Total RiSP

It would account for runs driven in from third while making an out, plus you would be penalized for not driving in a runner from second with an infield hit.

Ex.

AB1: Runner on 3rd. Grounder to 2nd. Runner scores.
AB2: Runners on 2nd and 3rd. Pop-up to 1st. No runners score.
AB3: Runners on 2nd and 3rd. Infield hit in the hole at short. One runner scores.

BA w/ RiSP= .333
Boldbury Index= .400

― boldbury (boldbury), Monday, 19 April 2004 18:49 (twenty-two years ago)

Sorry, all the RISP info shows it's pretty much related to a guy's performance in other situations, over a long enough period. RESISTANCE IS FUTILE!

I think it was on BP the other day that I read Mattingly was better the year AFTER he drove in 145 ... but Rickey was hurt/subpar, so he had many fewer RBI.

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Monday, 19 April 2004 18:53 (twenty-two years ago)

all i know is that mattingly is single handedly doing what the red sox haven't been able to do for the better part of a decade, turn the yankees into a bunch of poor hitting schlubs.

― otto midnight (otto midnight), Monday, 19 April 2004 19:02 (twenty-two years ago)

Sorry, all the RISP info shows it's pretty much related to a guy's performance in other situations, over a long enough period. RESISTANCE IS FUTILE!

"On a long enough time-line, everyone's rate of survival goes to zero."

Believe me, in about 10 years, you'll be rattlin' of your favorite player's BI like it was your SS#.

― boldbury (boldbury), Monday, 19 April 2004 19:05 (twenty-two years ago)

RBI measures actual runs as opposed to pretend theoretical ones, therefore it is far from a "useless" statistic.
[note that "useless" is nearly always the word used; not "overrated", not "misunderstood", but "useless". maybe statheads would find their tenets more welcome in the minds of "traditional baseball people" if they stopped resorting to such obviously false hyperbole.]

― John (jdahlem), Monday, 19 April 2004 19:15 (twenty-two years ago)

Note I never said "useless."

It is inescapably team- and context-related, though, and has promoted the fallacy (to some minds) that Joe Carter was a great hitter.

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 20 April 2004 14:45 (twenty-two years ago)

the fallacy (to some minds) that Joe Carter was a great hitter.

i'd love to see what his career numbers were at fenway. he nailed sox pitching in boston. in my uninformed opinion he was a great hitter at that park.

― otto midnight (otto midnight), Tuesday, 20 April 2004 14:56 (twenty-two years ago)

'Note I never said "useless."'

uh, my bad.

― John (jdahlem), Tuesday, 20 April 2004 16:09 (twenty-two years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.