I've heard from a contingent of stat guys who are pretty anti-RBI. The RBI number fluctuates with BABIP and lineup placement. For example, Andy Marte would get a lot more RBIs in the four-hole than at the bottom of the order, but it would be more reflective of the OBP of the players in front of him than it would of any improvement in his offensive abilities.

My take is that the RBI has some uses, but as far as objective measures of run-production go, you're probably much better off with slugging percentage.

RBI's are more a function of the OBP of the folks in front of the hitter than of the hitters prowess.  One of the better cases in point was ex indian Joe Carter in 1990 who knocked in 115 runs for the Pods while hitting .232 and slugging .391 (bleech!).  He got those RBI's because the three guys in front of him; Bip Roberts, Robbie Alomar and some guy named Gwynn had OBP's of .375, .340 and .357.  Felix Fermin could have had a big year hitting behind those thrree!

Here are two THT articles (here and here) on RBI.

Unfortunately, RBIs are key for fantasy baseball <sarc>

Like what everyone else has said, if Hafner hits 7th in our lineup, his RBIs will drastically go down even if he hits .340.

And just imagine how many more RBIs Grady would have if he hit 3rd rather than leadoff.

While RBIs are usually a topic for MVPs, etc., it really is a function of the lineup and how many opportunities you have.

The short answer is that RBIs are partly a product of a player's teammates, so it's not really indicative as to how good a hitter he is. And there's many other stats that do a better job of measuring how good a hitter is.

I like OPS+ as a "quick and dirty" comparative tool, because it measures a player's OPS versus the league he played in.

I doubt folks around here are entirely anti-RBI.  I'm not, and I don't think Ryan is.  I think it's more that we're comfortable (and feel our readers are) with several other stats that are less problematic.  You may love RBI's, and I don't hate them, but the fact is that they're deeply problematic as a way of comparing any two players.

It is largely the case that VORP has replaced RBI among many well-read fans.  VORP does not depend on batting order, opportunity, park, league, etc., and it's adjusted for position.  Both stats are based on "runs," which any fan can understand.  One guy has 30 VORP, another guy has 6 ... everyone has a gut-level idea of what 24 runs are worth.

It's why I love this site. RBI's are a useless stat. It tells you nothing about a player.