What stat is RF on the edit rosters page. It's in between fld% and Opt.
In the glossary it says it's range factor. What does this stat track?

Range factor

Thanks, but i was wondering what it tracks. Is it better to be high or low?

It tracks assists and putouts per 9 innings. Higher is better.

Awesome, thanks for the help.

it's a meaningless statistic

Explain.

It has no value or significance for an individual player, it's contextual. It does sorta show which part of the field your outs are skewed towards, so that's something I guess. But even if all 7 of your fielders had the best ratings in the league at their positions, they can't all lead the league in RF because that's not how math works

Posted by rwgeorge7 on 3/12/2017 8:35:00 PM (view original):
Thanks, but i was wondering what it tracks. Is it better to be high or low?

High or low doesn't actually mean anything, better fielders make a few extra plays I guess, but none of the teams have an identical distributions so 2.5 doesn't mean better than 2.35. Defensive ratings are the only things on the game that matter when it comes to high or low

IMO it is contextual, but it's more important to pay attention when RF gets low rather than high. It helps you identify problems in how your defense performs.

When I started, I made a common error I see many owners still making, using fielders with barely adequate range for their positions and hoping their mediocre batting would make up for it. One of the other owners pointed out that my CF had the lowest RF in the league. I started putting the team's stats together and realized that while we weren't making a stupid amount of errors, we were probably allowing two or three extra hits per game. I replaced the CF with a 90+ Range guy who eventually won a few gold gloves, and began upgrading defense throughout my system.

Point is, paying attention to RF helped me fully buy into the value of defense.

pjfoster's posts need to be read within the context that he often dispels poor advice in these forums.

Posted by pjfoster13 on 4/17/2017 1:31:00 AM (view original):
It has no value or significance for an individual player, it's contextual. It does sorta show which part of the field your outs are skewed towards, so that's something I guess. But even if all 7 of your fielders had the best ratings in the league at their positions, they can't all lead the league in RF because that's not how math works

The problem we, in a broad sense of HBD users, think we know EXACTLY what "best ratings" mean. I'm sure there are stats we should ignore but RF isn't one of them. As tec said, the low ones should draw your attention even if you think your guy has one of the best ratings in the league. You need to figure out why it doesn't translate to production.

The only elements of fielding that matter are % and +/-. I reiterate that RF couldn't possibly be more meaningless. In a sample league at a sample position, Henderson Little (85-85-60-60) has the best range factor in right field at 1.69, and Pasqual Bautista (56-75-59-76) is narrowly behind at 1.63. At the bottom are Adalberto Mujica (67-52-76-63) at 1.30 and Ozzie Graham (58-77-64-72, that sequence looks familiar) at 1.13. Let's pick an important position, how about shortstop- Hideo Donald (83-88-91-90, above average) leads at 5.64 and Jeff Ulrich (71-82-89-83, woefully inadequate range) is 2nd at 5.59. On the opposite end are Brian Stein (88-86-97-90, excellent) at 5.12 and Carmen Pittinger (81-81-86-80, slightly below par) at 5.00. At 1B, iron fisted Jesus Espinosa (45-37-42-38) is 3rd at 10.80 and gold glove candidate Brett Morman (67-61-54-53) is last at 9.67

There literally couldn't be any less correlation between talent and Range Factor, it's simply a meaningless volume statistic that explains the manner in which your distribution is skewed. In a perfect world your catcher would have a RF of 27 and your fielders would all have a RF of 0 because your pitcher is striking out every hitter. It's 100% contextual. If your 1B is super-high in RF it probably means that your team has a high cumulative gb/fb, and vice versa if your OF is high in RF it means you have flyball pitchers. If your C is super-high in RF it correlates with your pitchers' ability to get strikeouts.

Considering the OP asks "what does it track" and your answer is "it's better to be high", perhaps I'm not the one who is dispelling bad information

This is where I stopped: "has the best range factor in right field..."

There are positions that matter very little in the field. Rightfield is one of those. It's why I started using failed C in RF. A good arm is more important in right than range.

There are a variety of factors that affect RF but, just like I don't ignore I have a bunch of CS while leading the league in SB, it's just a bad idea to ignore range factor.

Posted by pjfoster13 on 4/17/2017 4:22:00 PM (view original):
The only elements of fielding that matter are % and +/-. I reiterate that RF couldn't possibly be more meaningless. In a sample league at a sample position, Henderson Little (85-85-60-60) has the best range factor in right field at 1.69, and Pasqual Bautista (56-75-59-76) is narrowly behind at 1.63. At the bottom are Adalberto Mujica (67-52-76-63) at 1.30 and Ozzie Graham (58-77-64-72, that sequence looks familiar) at 1.13. Let's pick an important position, how about shortstop- Hideo Donald (83-88-91-90, above average) leads at 5.64 and Jeff Ulrich (71-82-89-83, woefully inadequate range) is 2nd at 5.59. On the opposite end are Brian Stein (88-86-97-90, excellent) at 5.12 and Carmen Pittinger (81-81-86-80, slightly below par) at 5.00. At 1B, iron fisted Jesus Espinosa (45-37-42-38) is 3rd at 10.80 and gold glove candidate Brett Morman (67-61-54-53) is last at 9.67

There literally couldn't be any less correlation between talent and Range Factor, it's simply a meaningless volume statistic that explains the manner in which your distribution is skewed. In a perfect world your catcher would have a RF of 27 and your fielders would all have a RF of 0 because your pitcher is striking out every hitter. It's 100% contextual. If your 1B is super-high in RF it probably means that your team has a high cumulative gb/fb, and vice versa if your OF is high in RF it means you have flyball pitchers. If your C is super-high in RF it correlates with your pitchers' ability to get strikeouts.

Considering the OP asks "what does it track" and your answer is "it's better to be high", perhaps I'm not the one who is dispelling bad information

Range factor has value. Whether YOU choose to disregard it is entirely your prerogative. But if you're going to post in these forums, telling others to disregard it is just downright irresponsible.

I'm pretty sure this is not the first time you've expressed your opinions as "fact" in an irresponsible manner in the forums. Others who may be fairly new here should be aware of that, and to not take your posts as gospel.

And FYI, my answer to "what does it track" was not simply "it's better to be high". Go back and re-read. Try to apply some comprehension skills this time around.