Rays And BABIP: James Shields Was Really, REALLY Unlucky In 2010
by BWoodrum on Sep 8, 2011 7:01 AM EDT
in Features & Analysis
Email
PrintRemember when James Shields was, like, terrible? And when the plebeian fan burned effigies of Joe Maddon because he included Shields in the playoff rotation?
Well, a lot of us here at DRB felt James Shields was really unlucky in 2010 -- we felt his batting average on balls in play (BABIP) had exceeded normal territory and crossed into unlucky. Well, we may have failed to anticipate how truly unlucky he was because, as it turns out, the 2010 James Shields was the only Rays starter with a BABIP over .320 in four years, if we disregard Mitch Talbot's 4-and-1/3-inning start in 2008.
Moreover, it has become increasingly apparent that the Rays' fielding emphasis has yielded the best starters' BABIP in the league since 2008:
When we drill down and look specifically at the starters since 2008, we see a lot of pitcher out-performing their ERA (as in: ERAs lower than FIPs):
Basically, any starter that pitches a significant amount of inning for the Rays should expect a BABIP under .300. If Shields had a BABIP of just .330 in 2010, his BABIP over the last four years would have also been south of .300.
Why is BABIP so important? Behold it's strong relationship to ERA:
Now consider that in context with the great starters BABIP and tell me that isn't a thing of beauty.
Thanks to J. Collette for pointing this out.
166 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I took a look at three SP who pitched for the Rays in the time frame you address and
were traded away, to see how BABIP affected them with a Rays defense behind them and then without
I don’t know if you can draw any conclusions
Edwin Jaclson
’08 Rays .304
’09 ..278
’10 .316
Scott Kazmir
’08 (Rays) ..270
’10 .283
Matt Garza
’08 Rays .278
’09Rays .274
’10 Rays .273
’11 .324
Could it be the Rays have a better set of SP, pitching in a pitcher friendly atmosphere? Garza seems most affected, but how much does Wrigley Field come into play?
I left 2009 off Scott Kazmir because he was traded, although his BABIP with LAA was .257 with them
I’m not as easily sold on this whole idea of BABIP explaining the sun and the moon and the stars, but it’s interesting
follow me on twitter @sternfan10
by sternfan1 on Sep 8, 2011 8:12 AM EDT reply actions 3 recs
This is good.
I’m very hesitant to use BABIP to predict future success, even with a 3 year data set. When we start referring to pitchers as data points we run into issues like this where we try to make blanket statements regarding them all. Pitchers (ideally) have so much more control over where they put the ball in or out of the zone than a hitter and thus their BABIP can be a product of leaving too many balls in the zone or being too predictable, as I feel Shields was last year. Hitter BABIP is much more telling of good or bad luck.
After the season, i'd love to see a Q & A with Shields and get his thoughts on the differences
in the ’10 & ’11 seasons
What changes did he make specifically?
follow me on twitter @sternfan10
Didn't he make an obvious change in his pitch sequencing?
His fastball useage is down 10%. Curveball is up 7%
I've laid the ground work, would be interesting to see someone else do this for last year as a comparison
http://www.draysbay.com/2011/6/23/2237457/profiling-rays-starters-part-1-james-shields
If you can't say something to someone's face then it's not worthy of being said behind their back.
by Sandy Kazmir on Sep 8, 2011 11:03 AM EDT up reply actions
Yeah. That was a good piece.
I think it’d be great to do one up like that for every Rays starter for a few years.
I can take a look in the offseason
I think I do my best work then because the data is frozen giving ample time to do a solid look before it changes again, even if the changes are minute.
If you can't say something to someone's face then it's not worthy of being said behind their back.
by Sandy Kazmir on Sep 8, 2011 11:27 AM EDT up reply actions
That's good idea.
Let’s touch base then. You can do them all if you want, but I’d be happy to split up the pitchers/seasons with you.
Ok, first priority will be Deserved wins for all AL teams one at a time which I plan to unveil at BtB, but I can chip in on these
It’s really only Shields, Price, Niemann, and Davis, though we could do Garza as well to see if there’s any change in philosophy going to the Cubs. I bet he’s throwing his slider more this year.
If you can't say something to someone's face then it's not worthy of being said behind their back.
by Sandy Kazmir on Sep 8, 2011 11:42 AM EDT up reply actions
Holy cow, he's up 10% on the slider and throwing the fastball 18% less to around 53%
All the hoping and wishing that I did that he’d throw less fastballs here and it’s pretty clear that was MGMT making the call.
If you can't say something to someone's face then it's not worthy of being said behind their back.
by Sandy Kazmir on Sep 8, 2011 11:43 AM EDT up reply actions
Oops
http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=3340&position=P#pitchtype
If you can't say something to someone's face then it's not worthy of being said behind their back.
by Sandy Kazmir on Sep 8, 2011 11:43 AM EDT up reply actions
Luck was certainly a factor, however, it wasn't just all bad luck
I doubt he’ll go into specifics, but Shields put a ton of work this offseason getting in better shape (legs) and fixing mechanical flaws. In addition to working with coaches he also did used biometrics to get mechanics straight.
Luck, sure. But also tangible work put in to improve as a pitcher as well as better selection.
www.espn1040.com, www.theprocessreport.com, www.bloombergsports.com Twitter @trancel
by Tommy Rancel on Sep 8, 2011 10:08 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Yeah, I think his amazingly great 2011 season is a testament to that.
A DRaysBay and FanGraphs writer from Cubs Stats and Twitter @BradleyWoodrum
Hitter BABIP is much more telling of good or bad luck.
This seems to run contrary to the overwhelming statistical evidence.
Holy shit, Sterny doing a WOWY, big time rec for this El Jefe
If you can't say something to someone's face then it's not worthy of being said behind their back.
by Sandy Kazmir on Sep 8, 2011 10:40 AM EDT up reply actions
Doesn't the fact that the Giants are down there with us speak to the fact that BABIP is to some degree a pitching skill?
If we can have an article on how Hellickson can induce weak contact leading to more pop flies, why is it so absurd to say that Shields was very hittable last season and made an adjustment in his delivery leading to vastly improved results? I don’t think luck is even close to the driving factor between James Yields 2010 and Complete Game James 2011.
Thank you puddy, you took the words out of my mouth
Joe Maddon made a comment on the hitting side of BABIP that really made me change my thinking
he basically said, how balls hit hard have a very good chance of getting through an infield whereas soft ground balls are fielded and turned into outs—make sense?
follow me on twitter @sternfan10
That was really new news to you?
Seriously, that’s just common sense. Speed, more than anything, is going to help a softly hit ground ball become a safe play for the batter. That, or a swinging bunt by a slugging type when the defense is playing back.
I'm not a fanboy, I'm a _______
by Jason Collette on Sep 8, 2011 8:45 AM EDT up reply actions
Not necessarily--i believe the Rays slowest runner is leading or near the top in INF hits
follow me on twitter @sternfan10
One player does not make an argument.
I love Casey Fossum. Now try and take me seriously. -- @steveslow
by Steve Slowinski on Sep 8, 2011 8:51 AM EDT up reply actions
No but there was a piece on FG awhile back saying speed had a lot less impact thatn you would expect on GB BABIP
Follow Me on Twitter @FreeZorilla
If anything, your point about infield hits backs up the luck department
As slow as Kotchman is, every single one of those infield hits is going to be luck off the bat because he’s not beating them out on speed and nobody “aims” a weakly hit ball on the infield. He has 51 infield hits in his career and 15 of them have come this season.
Longoroia has 14 infield hits this season, on a bad foot. He’s a classic example of the swinging bunt I was referring to. Erick Aybar, and his speed, have the same amount of infield hits as Kotchman and he is someone that would drop a bunt to get on base.
I'm not a fanboy, I'm a _______
by Jason Collette on Sep 8, 2011 9:02 AM EDT up reply actions
This is certainly, certainly true.
There are three main drivers of BABIP: skill, defense, and luck. I think the first two are the big drivers of most of the variation we see, but still, there were probably some #magic’d hits falling in against Shields last season too.
So if you prefer, simply think of it as: Shields’ 2010 was an even larger abberation than we thought. Considering the team-wide low BABIP rate, his results last season were ridiculous.
I love Casey Fossum. Now try and take me seriously. -- @steveslow
by Steve Slowinski on Sep 8, 2011 8:41 AM EDT up reply actions
But if you watched Shields 2010 instead of staring at your spreadsheet
You would have seen that almost every game he was getting hit hard, it was not a matter of balls dropping in. One remembers all too well the game against the Jays where Arencibia made mincemeat out of him, as did everyone else in the order.
Just because you have a good defense doesn’t mean you can catch line drives to the gap, or get to a hard-hit GB past the hole. Which is what Yields gave up a LOT of in 2010.
Yes.....
What exactly are you responding to here? Because I largely agree. “I think the first two are the big drivers of most of the variation we see, but still, there were probably some #magic’d hits falling in against Shields last season too.”
I love Casey Fossum. Now try and take me seriously. -- @steveslow
by Steve Slowinski on Sep 8, 2011 8:50 AM EDT up reply actions
I'm just honing my sf1 strawman skill.
But for real, I’m saying this is an incredibly misleading article title, or at the very least an author expressing his/the site’s opinion on Shields without exploring or even noting the alternative, which is just as bad as what sf1 does on a daily basis here.
Every batter has hits drop in occasionally. But that’s not what we’re arguing about here, unless one of the writers here wants to go through every single start of 2010 for Yields and show that bloop doubles and seeing-eye singles were the main culprits (they weren’t). That’s luck. Being hit around like a ragdoll is a mechanical flaw or characteristic of a terrible pitcher. Luckily for the Rays and MR. Shields, it was the former.
Eh, it's an article title.
Luck is a shorthand way of referring to the whole BABIP variation thing, and I don’t think you’ll find Brad disagreeing with anything said here.
I love Casey Fossum. Now try and take me seriously. -- @steveslow
by Steve Slowinski on Sep 8, 2011 9:12 AM EDT up reply actions
You want to write articles here?
Brad’s got a busy schedule and writes in multiple other places, so I’m sorry he wasn’t able to write an in-depth treatise to go along with the cool charts and research he did. If nothing else, you can frame your critique a hell of a lot more politely.
I love Casey Fossum. Now try and take me seriously. -- @steveslow
by Steve Slowinski on Sep 8, 2011 9:19 AM EDT up reply actions
Oh come on, this over an article title?
Frankly the whole “luck” thing is way overblown here. You can’t read a GDT without BABIP being thrown around in the most absurd ways.
OH GOD HE CAUGHT THE LINER, MUST BE BABIP
@dobbertweets
Wow Steve, show a little more coolness
I’m not attacking anyone here or being impolite, I’m pointing out something that many have noticed here. There’s no debating the quality of the data or the research done, just the presentation. There have been attacks with much more vitriol on the writers here and all I’ve been trying to do is point out a discrepancy in this one- seriously, what gives? I’m not even trolling for crying out loud.
And honestly, if he's so busy maybe he should prioritize.
Hand the data off to someone else and ask them to write it off with a h/t, which is what I even assumed this was with the note to Collette at the end. I like Woody’s work, and he’s more than shown he can take criticism here, polite or otherwise. This is not bad data and the charts are great, but it’s not much analysis and it doesn’t lead to any conclusions.
Actually...
He took the topic because it’s something I thought of while doing my Shields piece earlier but knew I wouldn’t have the time to hit it the way I wanted to with all of my pre-surgery appointments this week. The image I used on positional shifting was the main point I wanted to point out that the team’s BABIP is so good because Maddon puts the defense in optimal positioning so often.
People keep running under the assumption that .290-.310 BABIP range is the norm & the Rays pitchers are going to regress, but I strongly feel that the positioning here accentuates what are already good individual defenders and that the Rays have created their own norm. The fact Shields is the only starter to have a BABIP over .285 over the past two season says a lot.
I'm not a fanboy, I'm a _______
by Jason Collette on Sep 8, 2011 9:56 AM EDT up reply actions
You only alluded to the "positioning", but I think that can be explored much better, which was something I tried to do here
http://www.draysbay.com/2011/6/27/2246572/rays-babip-and-wobacon-against-since-2003
If you can't say something to someone's face then it's not worthy of being said behind their back.
by Sandy Kazmir on Sep 8, 2011 11:10 AM EDT up reply actions
Oh geez! I totally forgot about the shifting image!
I spent too much time massaging the data and making charts and spreadsheets (that I didn’t include). By the time I finished (hours later), I had almost entirely forgotten why I started the thing.
A DRaysBay and FanGraphs writer from Cubs Stats and Twitter @BradleyWoodrum
Amen
Sme w HR/FB. Compare him to pitchers in the same park w the same defense, not lg avg.
Follow Me on Twitter @FreeZorilla
Yeah, but there's a good chance we're wrong about that.
Outliers happen – and just because you get hit hard doesn’t mean you’re not unlucky about getting hit hard. Guys who wrack up strikeouts usually get weaker contact, too – and Shields was getting his strikeouts last year.
There’s a ton of research out there in support of DIPS. I know it’s tempting to try to explain, but just because some things are different doesn’t mean that they’re the answer.
by Whelk on Sep 8, 2011 10:12 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
So we should fall back to luck as the explanation when we don't have adequate resources or data points?
It’s been said elsewhere in this thread that pitchers have much more control over the BIP than the hitter, and I think a thousand innings is a good sample size that James has provided us each year for the past few years. Surely we can do better than looking at this season and last season and saying that the predominate (read: not ONLY, I’m not making a strawman) factor is terrible luck last year and normal-to-good luck this year.
Pitchers control more than hitters, but only so much
Pitchers can have the team defense shifted, but hitters can’t counter-act that unless the pitcher misses location or the batter just drops a bunt and takes the single. Ortiz isn’t hitting something the other way unless the Rays pitchers misses his pitch out and over the plate or is fooled on something off-speed.
Shifts are dangerous to lefties because they love the inside stuff, especially low so shifting requires the pitcher to hit his spots to induce the grounder or liner in play on the infield into the strength of the defense. Much like football in calling for a blitz from a side to cause a throw into hidden coverage.
I'm not a fanboy, I'm a _______
by Jason Collette on Sep 8, 2011 10:21 AM EDT up reply actions
We should look for explanations.
But we should be scientifically rigorous, and not start with the idea that there is one.
This feels like semantics
You’re saying that we shouldn’t explain BABIP in uncertain terms. I’m saying we shouldn’t overemphasize luck in the absence of a blockbuster stat that proves pitching skill or defensive prowess…even though we have a much better idea of those.
I'm just saying that the body of evidence, league wide, is on the side of luck.
And that I’m perfectly comfortable with that. I’m not comfortable with most of the explanations about why Shields is different this year. There’s a lot of descriptive accounts of the difference, that we would have never looked into if we didn’t notice the overall difference. If next year Wade Davis has a high strikeout rate and a high BABIP, I’m not at all comfortable saying “he needs to throw the fastball 10% less and the curve 7% more.”
And we don’t have a much better idea about “pitching skill.” We just don’t.
I completely disagree that the absence of quantifyable evidence for pitching skill is positive evidence for luck being a predominate factor.
That’s just incorrect. I’m not comfortable with that. I am much more comfortable with looking at the difference in Shields’ results this year and analyzing what he changed in the process. Tommy made some very interesting notes about Shields’ offseason training above, and we’ve seen other articles mentioning his increased reliance on the change while scrapping the cutter for the most part.
Except that he hasn't scrapped the cutter.
15.5% last year, 14.6% this year.
Don’t get me wrong. I’m all for that analysis. I think it’s great stuff.
But while I eat up all of that good work, I’m going to go on predicting every good strikeout pitcher with abnormally high BABIP to have a regular BABIP his next time out, regardless of what changes he does or doesn’t make.
hmm, wasn't aware. Thanks for pointing that out.
As for the rest of it, different strokes. Good discussion though.
His issue last year was more about pitch selection & location than anything
Over-reliance upon the cutter, lack of confidence in throwing his curveball when behind in the count were both HUGE issues for him last season. When you go back to April and hear Joey Bats say “I had no idea what he was going to throw me” you know that Shields had it all figured out.
Additionally, he’s much more under control emotionally this season (did he do work with the team head Dr?) because he doesn’t show that same pissed off body language that would lead to a snowball effect in innings last season.
I'm not a fanboy, I'm a _______
by Jason Collette on Sep 8, 2011 8:51 AM EDT up reply actions
OK, good points. When I said mechanical I meant anything not luck related, not necessarily a product of his release point of moves to the plate.
I completely agree that his pitch selection via decreased use of the cutter and increased use of changeups have been instrumental to his success this season. I can’t really speak about the emotional side because I haven’t paid much attention to that thing. It didn’t seem to me like he was as fiery as Garza and so I haven’t really noticed.
Yup, agreed. Selection and location are huge.
Not that he’s had as many reasons to be emotional, really. I think last season’s failures just wore on him by the end of the year.
I love Casey Fossum. Now try and take me seriously. -- @steveslow
by Steve Slowinski on Sep 8, 2011 9:02 AM EDT up reply actions
No doubt
He’d have some great innings and then one bad one, usually when Joe left him in one or two batters too long, and it would all fall apart
I'm not a fanboy, I'm a _______
by Jason Collette on Sep 8, 2011 9:04 AM EDT up reply actions
It's like with batters, if there's less balls in play then the affect of BABIP is more volatile, throw in plus fielders and it's easy to see why the Rays are on the fringes
And why the Giants took a step back with horrible SS play this year
If you can't say something to someone's face then it's not worthy of being said behind their back.
by Sandy Kazmir on Sep 8, 2011 11:06 AM EDT up reply actions
This is a big factor why
That’s why the Rays are able to keep their team BABIP down lower than anyone else. That count was from 3 weeks ago but when you’re shifting over 200 times more frequently than the 5th best team, your fielders are going to be in position to field even hard hit balls in play more often than not.
I'm not a fanboy, I'm a _______
Explain E-Jax lowering his BABIP significantly after leaving the Rays
If i had to break down BABIP into a pie based on the three categories Slow defined it to be, i’d give luck less than 10 %
follow me on twitter @sternfan10
I'd give it a 40/40/20 split
Shields had the same defense as the rest of the staff last season (40%) and yet saw his results be dramatically different than the others due to a faulty process (40%) and some bad luck (20%).
A pitcher absolutely can control some of his own fate. Their job is to make the batter make as little contact as possible but once contact is made, it’s up to a variety of elements that nobody can completely control including the field of play, the weather, and physics.
I'm not a fanboy, I'm a _______
by Jason Collette on Sep 8, 2011 8:56 AM EDT up reply actions
Jackson also became a different pitcher upon leaving here
His average fastball velo went up, he threw more sliders, improved his change-up, and found more control. Simply put, he’s a pitcher now and not just the thrower he was here in 08 (the only year he had a good defense behind him).
I'm not a fanboy, I'm a _______
by Jason Collette on Sep 8, 2011 8:58 AM EDT up reply actions
Also worth noting, I think the Trop plays into this to some degree:
Consider the Rays offense.
2011
Home: .269 BABIP
Away: .294 BABIP
2010
Home: .286 BABIP
Away: .298 BABIP
I love Casey Fossum. Now try and take me seriously. -- @steveslow
wonder if that new turf
Which BA mentioned (or someone) slowed the ball down this year has anything to do with anything.
It's also been an extreme pitcher's park for two years now.
Slow rollers or not, that’s going to help your team BABIP
do you have
the data suggesting the Rays pitchers BABIP on the road is much different from home? That’s be interesting to see.
Here are the home/road splits for Rays pitchers:
2011
Home: .266 BABIP
Away: .271
2010
Home: .270
Away: .289
So there’s a difference there, although both of them are still low due to the Rays’ defense.
I love Casey Fossum. Now try and take me seriously. -- @steveslow
by Steve Slowinski on Sep 8, 2011 9:08 AM EDT up reply actions
interesting
although I’d like to view just the starting pitchers with 100+ innings and not Team Pitching BABIP (Home/Away) as a whole.
Just using Shields as an example
Home BABIP: 2008 (.276), 2009 (.311), 2010 (.343), 2011 (.277) and
Away BABIP: 2008 (.306), 2009 (.312), 2010 (.344), and 2011 (0.247).
What does it mean? I have no idea.
you'd think that would only affect groundballs
2011 groundball rate – 43.6%
2010 groundball rate – 42.5%
I'm not a fanboy, I'm a _______
by Jason Collette on Sep 8, 2011 8:58 AM EDT up reply actions
also flyballs go to die, HRs don't count as hits in BABIP but outs are accounted for.
Follow Me on Twitter @FreeZorilla
When I look at the first graph
The two things that jump out are the teams with low BABIP’s are teams viewed as having the best pitching staffs and/or play in pitching friendly parks. Carrying Slo’s theme of three factors, it would seem skill would be a large factor, and in my mind park effects correlate positively to defense.
I think the “luck” component works when you are looking at an individual player over a short period of time (like a season or less), when you aggregate the starting pitchers of a team over three seasons, you should be doing a pretty good job of eliminating the luck variable in the equation.
Another DRB guy on Twitter, @jeffjohn1979
This is exactly what I was trying to get at earlier. BABIP for pitchers, in my opinion, has a lot more to do with skill.
The Giants have some fantastic pitchers and play in front of “veteran” (read:terrible) defenders. Their BABIP is low. And I just can’t accept that luck would pick up their defense that much.
then don't be afraid to say it--you applauded my post till Cason jumped in--stick up for your original thought
follow me on twitter @sternfan10
I don't know, maybe it's hust me. When i see the Royals and
Pirates at the highest end of the BABIP chart, can you really point to it as a legitimate stat?
follow me on twitter @sternfan10
How do you excuse the Twins then who were a playoff team in 3 of those 4 seasons?
I'm not a fanboy, I'm a _______
by Jason Collette on Sep 8, 2011 9:32 AM EDT up reply actions
Odd logic.
Yes, you just have to realize what it’s telling you. The same can be said of every statistic.
I love Casey Fossum. Now try and take me seriously. -- @steveslow
by Steve Slowinski on Sep 8, 2011 9:32 AM EDT up reply actions
10% of what? Of a player's skill? Overall ability level? Contributions?
I love Casey Fossum. Now try and take me seriously. -- @steveslow
by Steve Slowinski on Sep 8, 2011 9:55 AM EDT up reply actions
My problem with relying on BABIP too much for explaining a pitcher or hitter's good or bad periods, it never allows
for players having a good year or bad year. It assumes a player can never change. He is what he is and only BABIP or team defense or park factors vary his numbers from year to year. I just don’t buy into this, and it appears neither does Joe
I like these stats and enjoy the theories behind them, but some are simply hard to buy into, and this is one of them
follow me on twitter @sternfan10
That's not true.
A one year sample isn’t enough to go off of. If you’re talking a larger sample, like 3+ years, then it’s really rough for a player to make a huge change. It can happen, like with Bautista, but it’s not the norm. If you don’t buy into BABIP you need to stop reading this site.
Really? at this moment i'm tweeting with someone who's a huge saver guy and he found this thread very misleading
follow me on twitter @sternfan10
And who are you tweeting?
Because I only see one tweet in the past 10 hours from you.
by Erik Hahmann on Sep 8, 2011 10:05 AM EDT up reply actions
Art thou not thy DM?
If you can't say something to someone's face then it's not worthy of being said behind their back.
by Sandy Kazmir on Sep 8, 2011 11:43 AM EDT up reply actions
Why?
How did John Olerud’s BABIP go from .429 in 1989 to .297 the very next season? Are you telling me he was so scared of his success in 1989 that he changed his process to become just average the next season?
His 3 highest BABIPs:
.429 in 1989
.375 in 1993
.373 in 1988
Nothing higher than .315 in between or around those seasons, even in his prime.In fact between the .429 and .375, he was .297, .273, .294.
You are giving WAY too much control to the batter on this metric.
I'm not a fanboy, I'm a _______
by Jason Collette on Sep 8, 2011 10:02 AM EDT up reply actions
Did he have any sort of surgical procedure before those years? Perhaps some sort of puss draining type thing? Maybe he got a construction helmet that actually fit those years
If you can't say something to someone's face then it's not worthy of being said behind their back.
by Sandy Kazmir on Sep 8, 2011 11:19 AM EDT up reply actions
How did Julio Franco and Derek Jeter have more + .340 BABIP seasons than Tony Gwynn or Ichiro?
2 right-handed hitters would be at a disadvantage over lefties – especially two that are arguably 2 of the 5 best hitters in the past 40 years.
I'm not a fanboy, I'm a _______
by Jason Collette on Sep 8, 2011 10:05 AM EDT up reply actions
Jeter fits into Joe's interpretation better than anyone
Balls hit hard have a better chance of getting through
follow me on twitter @sternfan10
FternSan1 says Jeter > Gwynn
I'm not a fanboy, I'm a _______
by Jason Collette on Sep 8, 2011 10:12 AM EDT up reply actions
Well it's not like Gwynn was known as a power guy, Jeter has been a remarkable hitter over his career especially for his position even if it looks like he's masquerading as a SS at times.
If you can't say something to someone's face then it's not worthy of being said behind their back.
by Sandy Kazmir on Sep 8, 2011 11:20 AM EDT up reply actions
I think BABIP is much more indicative of luck on the hitting side of the equation, especially when there is no obvious changes in approach.
But it’s also a factor of the skill of the pitcher and the defense behind him, park factors, etc. so I do get tired of seeing luck as the throwaway line here. Sometimes, though, and especially more often in hitting, that’s all you can chalk it up to.
This makes little sense.
Changes in BABIP is indicative of luck on the hitting side, but it’s also a skill on the hitting side, in way that it’s not for pitches. Hitters have way more ability to maintian high BABIP.
Look at Price's BABIP with RISP this year compared to last.
It’s over .350 right now. You think he’s pitching vastly differently with a man on second base than he was a year ago? Please.
by Erik Hahmann on Sep 8, 2011 10:27 AM EDT up reply actions
That's my whole point
People are acting like a year’s worth of a sample size is big enough to suggest changes one way or the other.
by Erik Hahmann on Sep 8, 2011 10:29 AM EDT up reply actions
pitchers pitch very differently year to year, as adjustments are made in the offseason, injuries occur, lack of good training, etc.
and I would certainly expect a pitcher’s BABIP to be higher with RISP as the defenders are closer to the bases to hold on the runner (usually), limiting their range.
sorry, my point was that one year of BABIP is very telling of what was happening for a guy in said year
maybe it hasn’t “stabilized” but it is descriptive of how he got knocked around or didn’t.
I never said it wasn't a skill?
I’m actually much more a proponent of using BABIP as an indication of ability than of luck. I think you misread what I said. My point is that when attributing a certain portion of BABIP to luck, I’d consider it more of a factor in batter BABIP than pitcher BABIP.
you have no idea when a pitcher is getting hit, like last night Moore in DUR
and posters quickly defend his performance by ’BABIP’d’, w/o even seeing the game
follow me on twitter @sternfan10
Faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaar too small a sample
Stop with that nonsense.
by Erik Hahmann on Sep 8, 2011 10:06 AM EDT up reply actions
yes it is a small sample, but doesn't that apply to the one's using BABIP as the reason?
in other words, maybe he just wasn’t making his pitches?
stop with this nonsense
follow me on twitter @sternfan10
You too. What exactly is the point you're making?
Because I don’t think whatever you’re trolling about is any different than what we’ve already discussed above.
Again: There are three main drivers of BABIP: skill, defense, and luck. The first two are the big drivers of most of the variation we see, but luck still happens.
I love Casey Fossum. Now try and take me seriously. -- @steveslow
by Steve Slowinski on Sep 8, 2011 10:10 AM EDT up reply actions
In one start it's hard to tell.
We say BABIP’d mostly in a joking manner in one start.
by Erik Hahmann on Sep 8, 2011 10:11 AM EDT up reply actions
You've moved the goalposts 3 times in this thread alone
There were people on this site watching that game, as they do every Rays game. BABIP’d is another one of the meme’s here. When the Rays lost to Baltimore on Friday night, they hit 4-5 rocket shots that went right to a defender. That’s BABIP’d.
When a pitcher gives up 8 hits, and none of them come on line drives, that’s BABIP’d because those other batted ball types are less likely to result in hits than a line drive.
I'm not a fanboy, I'm a _______
by Jason Collette on Sep 8, 2011 10:08 AM EDT up reply actions
i don't need you to explain the stat to me
but when i see the pitching staffs of the Pirates and Royals leading the BABIP parade, it takes a severe hit for me
As for the Twins, they are always a staff that gives up the fewest BB’s, which will allow base hits not to turn into runs, thus the team’s success
follow me on twitter @sternfan10
"it takes a severe hit for me" -- what do you mean by this?
I love Casey Fossum. Now try and take me seriously. -- @steveslow
by Steve Slowinski on Sep 8, 2011 10:13 AM EDT up reply actions
That he doesn't believe luck exists in baseball
by Erik Hahmann on Sep 8, 2011 10:13 AM EDT up reply actions
Well, he's ignored batted ball rates all season, so that would explain it
I'm not a fanboy, I'm a _______
by Jason Collette on Sep 8, 2011 10:14 AM EDT up reply actions
And who were you tweeting with that has the same stance as you on BABIP?
Cause your twitter feed is empty.
by Erik Hahmann on Sep 8, 2011 10:16 AM EDT up reply actions
::crickets::
If you can't say something to someone's face then it's not worthy of being said behind their back.
by Sandy Kazmir on Sep 8, 2011 11:22 AM EDT up reply actions
It's a standard belief in the sabermetric community...
That batters tend to regress own historical three-year mean level in terms of BABIP. Batters can run from it, but they cannot hide from it
I'm not a fanboy, I'm a _______
by Jason Collette on Sep 8, 2011 10:17 AM EDT up reply actions
Nah he was unlucky
like Shields last year when he threw it right down the middle.
I do this for free
Prediction
BABIP will be redefined in the coming years. As of now, it is very lumpy with batted balls of 3 types being examined and logged for outcome.
I am going to guess that velocity off the bat for groundballs will be segmented (if it isn’t already among teams individual statistics).
Velocity and trajectory will be used for line drives and fly balls.
It should be
It’s been downward trending for a few seasons now
I'm not a fanboy, I'm a _______
by Jason Collette on Sep 8, 2011 10:13 AM EDT up reply actions
The smarter teams likely have their own data that we aren't privy to
That has all that, yeah.
by Erik Hahmann on Sep 8, 2011 10:13 AM EDT up reply actions
and, you're right
Improvements in field & hit f/x will give us more accurate data
I'm not a fanboy, I'm a _______
by Jason Collette on Sep 8, 2011 10:13 AM EDT up reply actions
Who is saying that here? No one.
I love Casey Fossum. Now try and take me seriously. -- @steveslow
by Steve Slowinski on Sep 8, 2011 10:14 AM EDT up reply actions
^^^^^
Goalpost movement #4…in the last hour
that may be a new record
I'm not a fanboy, I'm a _______
by Jason Collette on Sep 8, 2011 10:15 AM EDT up reply actions
I agree, that's why I like to look at the three components and come up with a weighted average BABIP in lieu of lumping everything together
((BAGB* # of GB) + (BAFB* # of FB) + (BALD * # of LD)) / Balls in play
The interesting thing is that most of the time if a guy is below career average in one of the trajectories he’s also below in the others even if the % of trajectories are the same.
If you can't say something to someone's face then it's not worthy of being said behind their back.
by Sandy Kazmir on Sep 8, 2011 11:25 AM EDT up reply actions
People who insist on not believeing in the value of BABIP as a predictor
Are taking Einstein’s view of quantum mechanics. They see the mountain of evidence, but they can’t bring themselves to accept it. They say that we just haven’t figured enough out yet, and someday they’ll be proven right.
There’s nothing wrong with this viewpoint, and maybe these people are correct, but it doesn’t make the mountain of evidence cease to exist. And it’s not a viewpoint that can/should be argued with.
...
Yeah, but there’s a good chance we’re wrong about that.
Outliers happen – and just because you get hit hard doesn’t mean you’re not unlucky about getting hit hard. Guys who wrack up strikeouts usually get weaker contact, too – and Shields was getting his strikeouts last year.
There’s a ton of research out there in support of DIPS. I know it’s tempting to try to explain, but just because some things are different doesn’t mean that they’re the answer.
by Whelk on Sep 8, 2011 10:12 AM EDT up reply actions
So you consider yourself as one of the people not accepting a mountain of evidence? I think I’ve lost your stance in this thread.
No. That was confusing on my part.
By “as a predictor,” I mean, “largely random,” as in it can be assumed to not be a skill and expected to stabilize.
Thanks for clearing that up.
But we’ve seen the ability of some elite pitchers to maintain a lower BABIP year in and year out. Names like Lincecum, Kershaw, Lester, Price, Verlander, Weaver, and Sabathia have all kept their BABIP’s below .300 each year since 2008 (with an error of one year around ~.310 for each while still pitching well).
Right, and I think that has to do with their K%.
A guy who’s missing bats is also getting weak contact (that’s why I love SIERA now, it accounts for things like that).
If Shields had stopped striking guys out, I would have worried.
And I understand using K% when a pitcher is pitching against more guys due to more BIP ending up as hits
but wouldn’t he have to get more outs via the K if he was simply more hittable by giving up more hard-hit balls?
If you haven't before, read the SIERA primer on fangraphs.
Especially part two. Here’s Steve’s overview, the full primer is at the bottom of the page. http://www.fangraphs.com/library/index.php/pitching/siera/
It talks about the link between the two, and describes how the relationships between BABIP, HR/FB and the batted ball components and strikeout rates are quadratic rather than linear. Most interesting read I’ve had in awhile, and puts some of the common sense back into DIPS.
Really good debate guys, thanks for spurring some great dialogue, Woody
If you can't say something to someone's face then it's not worthy of being said behind their back.
by Sandy Kazmir on Sep 8, 2011 11:17 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs
agree 100%
with this statement about Woody’s piece and the above statement about “data frozen in time”.
From this comment thread alone I have several ideas bouncing around my head.
More of this, less of the other stuff
Not directed at you, but the general crowd. More stuff that we haven’t covered much that seems to show insight.
If you can't say something to someone's face then it's not worthy of being said behind their back.
by Sandy Kazmir on Sep 8, 2011 11:44 AM EDT up reply actions
Thanks, Sandy.
And honestly, we only started the “other stuff” because the masses appeared to be asking for it. The masses changed, so the content does too.
A DRaysBay and FanGraphs writer from Cubs Stats and Twitter @BradleyWoodrum
Yeah, I just love how the same tired old topics weren't brought up in the article or the comments. Kudos to you for not opening that door and to others for not ramming it down
If you can't say something to someone's face then it's not worthy of being said behind their back.
I think the decrease in bad things happening on the 1st pitch help a lot
2010
.438/.439/.843 with 11HRs in 121ABs, 26 of the 53 hits were for XBHs too.
2011
.257/.261/.442 with 5HRs in 113ABs, 11 of 29 for XBHs
10% Decrease in FB & 10% Increase in CBs hopefully stays that way.
I put the screw IN THE TUNA!
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Please read our Community Guidelines.
Related FanPosts on DRaysBay
Related FanShots on DRaysBay
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
DRB Suggestion Box
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Eric Hosmer redefines the Baltimore chop with infield double (Video)
- College player makes impossible over the fence catch to save tournament game (Video)
- Security!: Camden Yards guard collides with Royals’ Mike Moustakas
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
- Benches clear at Fenway as Red Sox-Rays rivalry heats up
