Phil Garner has a great quote in an article on Jason Lane:

"Batting average is a horrible way to evaluate a player's performance," Garner said.

But he then immediately follows it up with this gem:

"A guy can be hitting .300 and every time you have a runner on base in the seventh, eighth and ninth inning, he's striking out. That's a very poor hitter.

"Likewise, a guy can be a .260 hitter but every time he gets somebody on base in the seventh, eighth, ninth innings in a close ballgames, he's the guy driving it somewhere. That guy's a much better hitter and much more productive."

So batting average doesn't matter, but batting average with runners in scoring position does? I don't get it. You can't base how good a hitter someone is based on how he does with runners in scoring position. It's just as important to actually GET runners in scoring position. And you have to get on base to do that.