Daniel Cabrera... and BABIP

[Lucky Jim]

I've posted before, this BABIP stuff is crazy math trying to normalize a pitcher's balls in play versus other pitchers. It means nothing to me.

The statistic is born of the thought that pitchers have little say regarding the chances of a baseball put into the field of play. I think it's pure bunk.

Yes. Convincing indictment.

The statistic isn't "born" of anything - if anything, keeping track of the numbers brought people to the conclusion that pitchers had less control than originally thought.

[Sports Guy]

The stat tells you the batting average of balls put in play versus a given pitcher...Why is that bunk?

[Mackus]

I've posted before, this BABIP stuff is crazy math trying to normalize a pitcher's balls in play versus other pitchers. It means nothing to me.

The statistic is born of the thought that pitchers have little say regarding the chances of a baseball put into the field of play. I think it's pure bunk.

I disagree in both your conclusion and with your interpretation of what the stat measures.

[Sports Guy]

This is exactly right. Frobby's post also has a lot of merit to it.

Want a pretty good reason Cabrera has a 2.20 ERA in his two May starts?

He's thrown a strike on 64% of his pitches, while throwing a first pitch strike 60% of the time. You combine these rates with the kind of speed and movement that Cabrera has, and you have a pitcher who isn't likely to give up a lot of runs.

Once he gets comfortable with his new approach, I'm confident the strikeouts and missed bats will come. If that happens - watch out.

Yea, that stat is quickly becoming another favorite of mine...I find myself paying a lot more attention to it this year.

[jclrh]

Isn't there exceptions for certain pitchers who are mainly sinkerball pitchers? Take Chien Ming Wang, or Brandon Webb, or Fausto Carmona.

Wang has a BABIP of .269, Brandon Webb has a BABIP of .238 and Carmona has a BABIP of .302 although he has given up a 31 walks and only struck out 15 batters but has an exemplary 2.95 ERA. What happens if DCab has focused more into putting the balls into play rather striking out batter after batter?

[jclrh]

I agree that DCab only need to worry about is throwing as many strikes as possible, however many posters in this forum act as if it is a necessity for DCab to become a strikeout pitcher in order to have success in the major leagues. Maybe he has become a pitcher who would rather have the ball put into play than striking out batters now?

[Lucky Jim]

I agree that DCab only need to worry about is throwing as many strikes as possible, however many posters in this forum act as if it is a necessity for DCab to become a strikeout pitcher in order to have success in the major leagues. Maybe he has become a pitcher who would rather have the ball put into play than striking out batters now?

I think that it's possible that he can be successful with a K-rate under 6, but it's less likely than if he's striking out a few more guys.

It's not necessarily either/or. Guys with good stuff and good command aren't going to give up a ton of hits, whether they're trying for strikeouts or not. Scouts are offering Roy Halladay as a comp for Cabrera, and that's fine - a good one. I liked the old JR Richards comps, myself (back when he K'd one an inning), but I'll take Halladay.

Seriously, though - no one here wants Cabrera to do anything other than pitch well. Some formulas might make sense for us, but if D-Cab wants to flout conventional wisdom and succeed with a low-K rate...well, more power to him.

[tywright]

BABIP is a quirky stat because it lacks consistency and has too many variables that can affect it that are out of a pitchers control. With that said take into the consideration the 71 O's and their 4 - 20 game winners

Jim Palmer .251 BABIP

Dave McNally .231 BABIP

Mike Cuellar .239 BABIP

Pat Dobson .264 BABIP

The O's had 4 gold glovers that year (Brooks, Belanger, Davey Johnson, and Blair). Do you think it was a coincidence the 4 starters had low BABIPs?

Take a closer look at Pat Dobson's career BABIP. In 1970 with the Padres he had a BABIP of .305. Then he posts .269 and .258 in 1971 and 1972, respectively. His BABIP jumps back to a normal level of .298 when he was traded to Atlanta after the 1972 season.

[BaltimoreTerp]

I agree that DCab only need to worry about is throwing as many strikes as possible, however many posters in this forum act as if it is a necessity for DCab to become a strikeout pitcher in order to have success in the major leagues. Maybe he has become a pitcher who would rather have the ball put into play than striking out batters now?

Well...it IS more democratic.

[tywright]

All things being equal, I'll take a guy who strikes out 8 per 9 over one who supposedly "pitches to contact" any day of the week. However, all bets are off if the pitcher gets a lot of strikeouts on called strike 3s and/or he resorts to nibbling once he gets to 0-2 on someone.

Is there a stat compiled that shows Swinging K's/9?

[Hallas]

Out of curiosity, where the world did you come up with the part in bold? I'm not saying it isn't true, only that I don't know that I've ever seen that written.

You also have to be careful with BABIP in that different sources use different forumlas. This year I have made it a point to use Baseball-Reference as my data source for just about every stat that I track. This hopefully keeps me more consistent. Their version of BABIP is:

(H-HR)/ (AB - SO - HR + SF)

I realize you're using Median and not overall average, but the overall AL BABIP this year is .291 (according to both B-R and THT). The overall Strand Rate or LOB% is 71% (according to THT).

You also really need to be careful with statements such as "BABIP is a stat that measures luck." That is a very misleading, if not completely inaccurate, statement. Pitchers have more control over BABIP than which they are given credit. Using AL averages, the Orioles could be expected to give up 314 hits prior to Sunday's game (based on their batted ball data), but have actually given up 307.

Daniel Cabrera has given up 40 hits. His batted ball data predicts 45 hits allowed. For the month of May Cabrera has given up 9 hits compared to a predicted total of 12 hits allowed.

Also, dkdc's use of his career BABIP does make a lot of sense. See below.

SOURCE

If, in fact, BABIP requires more than one season's worth of data to become stastically significant, I have a significant problem with it, as well as any data that requires as much. There are too many variables that can arise when a pitcher goes from one season to another. For example, the pitcher might tinker with his mechanics, causing differences in his pitch velocity and movement, and resulting differences in his pitch f/x data. Now that we have a relatively uniform method for tracking a pitcher's movement with his pitches, I think it will be come easier to calculate a pitcher's expected BABIP based on his pitch movement going forward. However without that bit of information I feel like there's too much noise in general to make any kind of judgements based on BABIP.

[Lucky Jim]

If, in fact, BABIP requires more than one season's worth of data to become stastically significant, I have a significant problem with it, as well as any data that requires as much. There are too many variables that can arise when a pitcher goes from one season to another. For example, the pitcher might tinker with his mechanics, causing differences in his pitch velocity and movement, and resulting differences in his pitch f/x data. Now that we have a relatively uniform method for tracking a pitcher's movement with his pitches, I think it will be come easier to calculate a pitcher's expected BABIP based on his pitch movement going forward. However without that bit of information I feel like there's too much noise in general to make any kind of judgements based on BABIP.

To make any kind of judgment? So, a pitcher spends his career pitching to a .290 BABIP and then posts a .230 BABIP one season, and one can't make the judgment that, in the following year, it's more likely than not that it'll normalize?

These things aren't all or nothing propositions, are they?

[Lucky Jim]

Why yes there is.

For Cabrera, go to his B-R page. Click on the red Show or Hide next to Pitch Data Summary. Look for SOc%.

You'll see that 38% (13) of his strikeouts this year came on called strike 3. What you'll find is that a pitcher with a low number in this category (think roughly 25%) will be more consistent in the number of strikeouts he gets. A guy with a high number here is essentially relying on the ump (enter Eric Gregg joke here) to get him a lot of his strikeouts. Right or wrong, I equate a guy with a low number here as being someone who attacks hitters.

Is swinging strikeout really more relevant than overall % of swinging strikes? And if so, why? Seems a somewhat arbitrary distinction.

[tywright]

Why yes there is.

For Cabrera, go to his B-R page. Click on the red Show or Hide next to Pitch Data Summary. Look for SOc%.

You'll see that 38% (13) of his strikeouts this year came on called strike 3. What you'll find is that a pitcher with a low number in this category (think roughly 25%) will be more consistent in the number of strikeouts he gets. A guy with a high number here is essentially relying on the ump (enter Eric Gregg joke here) to get him a lot of his strikeouts. Right or wrong, I equate a guy with a low number here as being someone who attacks hitters.

Very interesting, thanks

Looks to me that DCab still isn't "attacking hitters" as he was 2-3 years ago.

[tywright]

Is swinging strikeout really more relevant than overall % of swinging strikes? And if so, why? Seems a somewhat arbitrary distinction.

Well in my experience the last strike is usually the hardest to get.