Originally Posted by Griffey012
A double with runners on base should be more valuable than a double with nobody on. The issue with WAR is it attempts to neutralize hitters like Howard who are always up with guys on, and players on poor teams who are never up with guys on. It has given a value of expected runs created by each type of outcome. The problem is there are always going to be exceptions to the norm and you'll have guys that consistently can't hit with RISP, and their WAR's are inflated because they rack up a bunch of singles, doubles, and home runs with empty bases.
Howard has more 23 more home runs, 5 more doubles, and 4 more triples with runners on base in 50 less AB's than with nobody on. Dunn on the other hand has 43 less home runs, 56 less doubles, and 4 less triples in 500 less AB's than with nobody on. His AB/HR, AB/2b, and AB/3b ratios and BA all get worse with runners on, risp, risp 2 outs. While Howard's AB/HR, AB/3b, AB/2b ratios and BA are all better than or equal to what he does with nobody on base.
WAR does not account for the fact that Howard produces more with his hits than Adam Dunn does, because he produces more with runners on base and Dunn produces less with runners on base.
and for his career Howard is .987 OPS w/RISP and .951 without RISP. Not a huge difference, and over the next few years it will probably get closer as the sample sizes increase. That is why RISP is not used in Sabermetric statistics. RISP stats trend towards a players overall stats, and the overall stats have a larger sample size. So why use a smaller sample size when you have a larger one? No stats are perfect, but there is a reason RISP is ignored in Sabermetric stats. The sample sizes each year are small in comparison to the overall stats, and as historical stats have proven over a long enough time RISP stats are very similar to overall stats.
WAR is not a perfect stat, but way better than batting w/RISP for part of a year.