"Joe Carter was the RBI machine of his generation". So said coliver in MED's Hall of Famers thread. Now I don't want to pick on coliver; this type of comment is frequently made about Joe. But is it right? Was Joe Carter a uniquely good RBI man? If so, despite the fashion among analysts to deride RBI at the expense of other metrics, it might be a good reason to revisit our opinions of Touch 'Em All Joe.
I think there are four ways to look at whether Carter was an "RBI machine", any of which might be considered valid, but some more important than others. First, is whether he amassed a lot of raw RBI. Second, and more importantly, is whether he amassed a lot of RBI, given his opportunities at bat. Third, is whether he amassed a lot of RBI, considering his overall offensive production (this is less important, but still an interesting question). Fourth, is whether he was a good hitter with men on base, or whether his RBI total was higher than expected given his other offensive numbers. This I call a "run element" analysis.
1. Raw RBI totals.
First, let me point out that Joe stands 48th on the career RBI list. That's a very good accomplishment. Joe led his league in RBI once, came in the top three five times, and the top ten eight times. So he has some solid opening RBI credentials.
Joe's "era", I would estimate, is roughly 1981-2000, a nice two-decade period, allowing two years on either side. Joe should certainly have more RBI than most of his contemporaries during that time, since Joe played 16 seasons during that time while the average RBI man who played in Joe's era could only be expected to play 10 seasons.
The top ten RBI men from 1981 to 2000 :
While Joe doesn't show up as the RBI machine here, fourth overall behind two first-ballot Hall of Famers and Harold Baines isn't too bad.
Overall, there are 42 men (plus Dante Bichette) who had 1000 RBI in that timespan, and those are the guys I will study here. 1000 is a nice cutoff because Rickey Henderson and Tim Raines are just below, at 973 and 964 (along with Mo Vaughn, Julio Franco, B.J. Surhoff, Jay Buhner, and Greg Vaughn) and it's nice to cut them out of the study. It's still a diverse group; it runs from Wade Boggs and Paul Molitor to Kent Hrbek and Cecil Fielder.
2. RBI per opportunity
This is what truly separates the RBI men from the boys... or the Paul Molitors and Tony Gwynns, anyway. More than raw totals, the true RBI machines are the guys who drive in runs often, as opposed to guys who just get a lot of trips to the plate.
There are two important measures here. The first is RBI per plate appearance, which measures how good a guy was in driving in runs based on the chances he got at the plate. The second is RBI per out, which measures how many runs a guy drove in, based on the number of opportunities he took away from the team.
In RBI per 100 plate appearances, Joe Carter ranks 14th among the 43 leading RBI men of his generation, with 15.4. The top ten:
Now personally, I would submit that these guys are the RBI men of Joe Carter's generation. If you want to rank only the guys who are within four or five years of age to Carter, then he still ranks behind Canseco and Fielder and Galarraga and Darryl Strawberry.
In RBI per 27 outs, Joe Carter ranks 24th among the 43... below-average. The top ten:
This is the true measure of how a player's RBI impact his team. Guys who can drive in runs without taking opportunities away from their teammates are the RBI guys you want.
3. RBI as a percentage of offensive value
I used Runs Created as a measure of offensive value, then looked at how many RBI a guy had relative to that Runs Created number. A guy who had absolutely average offensive skills (in an absolutely average context) would have a 100% figure here... he would drive in exactly as many runs as he had RC).
Joe Carter is the champ here. Well, Joe and Cecil Fielder (another player on this year's Hall of Fame ballot). Joe's RBI were 20% larger than his overall offensive value, coming 2nd out of the 43 players. The top ten:
These are the guys for whom the RBI represents what they do best as offensive players. It doesn't say much about their actual value, since value is used as a benchmark here. But it's an interesting list. Another way of looking at this list, if you like, is that these are the guys most overrated by looking at their RBI totals. (Most underrated? Boggs, Gwynn, Molitor, Barry Bonds, and Ryne Sandberg).
4. Run Elements
I will always remember Bill James's shorthand for calculating RBI in his Brock2 projection system, because it gives a great succinct (approximate) formula for calculating how many RBI a player will amass...
RBI = .235*TB + HR
This works very well even today, by the way. For the majors as a whole, in 2003 this estimate is off by just 1%.
For Joe Carter, this estimate for his career gives 1315 RBI, which is 130 less than his real total of 1445. Carter's total of +130 ranks very well, 5th overall out of the 43, but not well enough to capture the title "RBI machine of his generation". The top ten:
Incidentally, some of Joe's positive total is explained by added opportunities, not by hitting well with runners in scoring position. Over the 10 years for which Retrosheet has data, Joe hit .270/.335/.453 with RISP, as opposed to .263/.308/.467 overall. His lower SLG with RISP wouldn't result in an abnormally high number of RBI.
So there you have it. I think, overall, that guys like Juan Gonzalez, and even Harold Baines, are more deserving of the title "RBI Machine of his generation" than Joe Carter.
For Jays fans, he'll still be Our Hero.
I think there are four ways to look at whether Carter was an "RBI machine", any of which might be considered valid, but some more important than others. First, is whether he amassed a lot of raw RBI. Second, and more importantly, is whether he amassed a lot of RBI, given his opportunities at bat. Third, is whether he amassed a lot of RBI, considering his overall offensive production (this is less important, but still an interesting question). Fourth, is whether he was a good hitter with men on base, or whether his RBI total was higher than expected given his other offensive numbers. This I call a "run element" analysis.
1. Raw RBI totals.
First, let me point out that Joe stands 48th on the career RBI list. That's a very good accomplishment. Joe led his league in RBI once, came in the top three five times, and the top ten eight times. So he has some solid opening RBI credentials.
Joe's "era", I would estimate, is roughly 1981-2000, a nice two-decade period, allowing two years on either side. Joe should certainly have more RBI than most of his contemporaries during that time, since Joe played 16 seasons during that time while the average RBI man who played in Joe's era could only be expected to play 10 seasons.
The top ten RBI men from 1981 to 2000 :
Cal Ripken 1627
Harold Baines 1573
Eddie Murray 1519
Joe Carter 1445
Barry Bonds 1405
Chili Davis 1372
Jose Canseco 1358
Mark McGwire 1350
Rafael Palmeiro 1347
Gary Gaetti 1341
While Joe doesn't show up as the RBI machine here, fourth overall behind two first-ballot Hall of Famers and Harold Baines isn't too bad.
Overall, there are 42 men (plus Dante Bichette) who had 1000 RBI in that timespan, and those are the guys I will study here. 1000 is a nice cutoff because Rickey Henderson and Tim Raines are just below, at 973 and 964 (along with Mo Vaughn, Julio Franco, B.J. Surhoff, Jay Buhner, and Greg Vaughn) and it's nice to cut them out of the study. It's still a diverse group; it runs from Wade Boggs and Paul Molitor to Kent Hrbek and Cecil Fielder.
2. RBI per opportunity
This is what truly separates the RBI men from the boys... or the Paul Molitors and Tony Gwynns, anyway. More than raw totals, the true RBI machines are the guys who drive in runs often, as opposed to guys who just get a lot of trips to the plate.
There are two important measures here. The first is RBI per plate appearance, which measures how good a guy was in driving in runs based on the chances he got at the plate. The second is RBI per out, which measures how many runs a guy drove in, based on the number of opportunities he took away from the team.
In RBI per 100 plate appearances, Joe Carter ranks 14th among the 43 leading RBI men of his generation, with 15.4. The top ten:
Juan Gonzalez 19.8
Albert Belle 18.6
Mark McGwire 18.5
Frank Thomas 17.4
Jose Canseco 17.4
Ken Griffey Jr. 17.4
Cecil Fielder 17.0
Dante Bichette 17.0
Jeff Bagwell 16.8
Sammy Sosa 16.6
Now personally, I would submit that these guys are the RBI men of Joe Carter's generation. If you want to rank only the guys who are within four or five years of age to Carter, then he still ranks behind Canseco and Fielder and Galarraga and Darryl Strawberry.
In RBI per 27 outs, Joe Carter ranks 24th among the 43... below-average. The top ten:
Mark McGwire 8.03
Frank Thomas 8.00
Juan Gonzalez 7.79
Albert Belle 7.53
Jeff Bagwell 7.36
Ken Griffey Jr. 7.27
Jose Canseco 6.88
Barry Bonds 6.73
Cecil Fielder 6.70
Dante Bichette 6.54
This is the true measure of how a player's RBI impact his team. Guys who can drive in runs without taking opportunities away from their teammates are the RBI guys you want.
3. RBI as a percentage of offensive value
I used Runs Created as a measure of offensive value, then looked at how many RBI a guy had relative to that Runs Created number. A guy who had absolutely average offensive skills (in an absolutely average context) would have a 100% figure here... he would drive in exactly as many runs as he had RC).
Joe Carter is the champ here. Well, Joe and Cecil Fielder (another player on this year's Hall of Fame ballot). Joe's RBI were 20% larger than his overall offensive value, coming 2nd out of the 43 players. The top ten:
Cecil Fielder 121
Joe Carter 120
Matt Williams 118
Ruben Sierra 116
Gary Gaetti 116
Juan Gonzalez 116
George Bell 115
Dante Bichette 113
Jose Canseco 111
Andre Dawson 110
These are the guys for whom the RBI represents what they do best as offensive players. It doesn't say much about their actual value, since value is used as a benchmark here. But it's an interesting list. Another way of looking at this list, if you like, is that these are the guys most overrated by looking at their RBI totals. (Most underrated? Boggs, Gwynn, Molitor, Barry Bonds, and Ryne Sandberg).
4. Run Elements
I will always remember Bill James's shorthand for calculating RBI in his Brock2 projection system, because it gives a great succinct (approximate) formula for calculating how many RBI a player will amass...
RBI = .235*TB + HR
This works very well even today, by the way. For the majors as a whole, in 2003 this estimate is off by just 1%.
For Joe Carter, this estimate for his career gives 1315 RBI, which is 130 less than his real total of 1445. Carter's total of +130 ranks very well, 5th overall out of the 43, but not well enough to capture the title "RBI machine of his generation". The top ten:
Paul O'Neill +185
Harold Baines +170
Wally Joyner +167
Eddie Murray +137
Joe Carter +130
Ruben Sierra +130
Dante Bichette +124
Mark Grace +107
Cecil Fielder +105
Dave Winfield +105
Incidentally, some of Joe's positive total is explained by added opportunities, not by hitting well with runners in scoring position. Over the 10 years for which Retrosheet has data, Joe hit .270/.335/.453 with RISP, as opposed to .263/.308/.467 overall. His lower SLG with RISP wouldn't result in an abnormally high number of RBI.
So there you have it. I think, overall, that guys like Juan Gonzalez, and even Harold Baines, are more deserving of the title "RBI Machine of his generation" than Joe Carter.
For Jays fans, he'll still be Our Hero.
