Here we go. If you like, check out Part One.

Using the "technical" version of runs created, which includes SB and CS stats in estimating a batter's success in staying on base and advancing runners, as well as SF and SH in the advancing runners section of the equation. The version I used, as well as Baseball-Reference (as far as they stated and as far as I know), goes something like:

( "Producing Baserunners / Keeping Baserunners on base" (H+BB+HBP-CS-GIDP) x

"Advancing Baserunners" (TB + (.26 x (BB - IBB + HBP)) + (.52 x (SH + SF + SB))) )  /

"Opportunities" (AB + BB + HBP + SH + SF)

All together:

( (H+BB+HBP-CS-GIDP) x (TB + (.26 x (BB - IBB + HBP)) + (.52 x (SH + SF + SB))) )  /

(AB + BB + HBP + SH + SF)

According to this metric, the 2008 Brewers as a unit created approximately 795 runs, which is approximately 5.7% runs above the Brewers' actual runs scored. I was mistaken in Part One, when I stated that the Brewers' 2008 runs created was almost 8% above the actual runs scored; the estimate of runs created I used to inform that statement featured an aggregate of the individual 2008 Brewers' runs created projections with the Brewers. That RC total was approximately 813 runs, which is approximately 2.7% above the 2008 Brewers' RC using team stats; how is this possible you ask?

Quite simply, the Brewers as an aggregate of individual production are different from the Brewers as an actual unit, a unit that plays through situations, and produces in sequence with one another. There are ways in which we can intertwine the individual aggregate projections in order to bring them back to the 795 runs created projection, and closer to the actual 750 RS. Those methods were, quite frankly, more difficult and in-depth than I wanted to employ here; I wanted this to be a somewhat easy survey to follow!

So, for the sake of convenience, I used the Brewers' individual runs created projections from Baseball-Reference, simply because of their availability. You should follow along via B-R player pages; it's rather easy to do -- runs created, as well as other stats, are listed under " Special Batting" sections on each player page. In order to bring the individual RC projections closer to the actual RS by the Brewers, I divided the Brewers' 2008 RS (750) by the 2008 aggregate RC (813), and then multiplied each player's individual RC by that percentage (which is .92251; meaning, each RC projection is approximately 92% of that player's actual runs production in the Brewers' team environment.

I am aware that there are more accurate methods to rectify this issue, but as I stated above, I wanted to keep this rather simple, and I wanted to use methods I am more familiar and comfortable with.

Here's the fun stuff:

2008 Brewers' starters (Braun, Cameron, Fielder, Hall, Hardy, Hart, Kendall, and Weeks): 649 aggregate RC in 4746 PA; corrected to approximately 598.71 RS.

2008 Brewers' main bench (Branyan, Counsell, Dillon, Durham, Gross, Gwynn, Kapler, and Rivera): 144 aggregate RC in 1083 PA; corrected to approximately 132.48 RS.

2008 Brewers' auxiliary bench and pitchers: 20 aggregate RC; corrected to approximately 18.45 RC.

The starters and main bench account for the vast majority of the Brewers' production in 2008, of course; the starters' 4746 PA accounted for just over 75% of the team's total PA, and their approximate 598 runs scored / adjusted runs created account for almost 80% of the Brewers' total run production in '08. The bench's 1083 PA account for over 17% of the team's total PA, and their 132 runs scored / adjusted runs created account for just under 18% of the team's runs scored.

***

Now, an exercise involving the starters, and an exercise showcasing some of the value of Runs Created, as it concerns "small" or "background" stats that nonetheless affect advancement of runners and ultimately, creating runs...here are eight "little" things for our starters, which alone account for almost one win above the Brewers' '08 Pythagorean W-L (which was approximately 87 wins):

Notice how the little things add up -- without considering issues with extra base hits, luck with BABIP and balls-in-play %, K% or BB%, without concerning any major hitting issues, we've accounted for almost one win's worth of production in stolen base attempts, sacrifice flies, and double play ground balls. And that's just looking at one aspect of the player's game that changed; if we scrutinized the record, we might gain a run or so back, but we might also find more "little thing" blindspots, too...

This is just a start to answering my initial question, which was, How do we account for 50 runs scored for 2009? We've accounted for almost 9 runs thus far....now it's time to move forward....