Jump to content

5/5 O's at Tampa

baseballnelie

By baseballnelie
in Game Threads

Recommended Posts

Mackus Hangout Grand Counsel

Mackus

Posted
Posted
I know BABIP isn't the end-all-be-all of statistics, but it seems silly to me. Just doesn't tell me, personally, all that much.
It shows trends. It shows if a guy is giving up more or less or the same amount of hits than his performance would usually indicate. It basically adjusts WHIP for what a guy with an average defense would do. It basically tries to neutralize what the pitcher can't control, namely a particularly good or bad defense behind him.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 172
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Skeletor All-Star

Skeletor

Posted
Posted
According to the Rays broadcast the ball was hit so hard, and with Melvin playing in very close... I guess it's not an error?

The first MASN showed of it was when Scott was fielding it. I don't know. That would be a first time for me seeing a ball through the legs being called a hit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RVAbird All-Star

RVAbird

Posted
Posted
Alright, so BABIP is more useful as a pitcher's stat. Got it.

But, and I'm not trying to start that type of argument, nor am I trying to defend him, I think this is where OldFan and I start to kind of roll our eyes at stats like this.

My point is, you said yourself, it's a stat based on luck. Luck is not a measurable entity. Nobody has any control over it. A pitcher can't help how good the defense is behind him. As we all know, a defender can fail to record an out he should have made without committing an error. If Pie didn't make that catch last night, it would not have been an error if it dropped in, it would have been a hit like any other. Sherrill was fortunate that Pie is fast as crap and made a fantastic catch. That's all there is to it.

For my money, I'd rather look at a stat like WHIP and see how often a pitcher is allowing baserunners. If it's frequently, that's not good. I think it tells more of the story behind a pitcher's success or failure than any other. If a guy is allowing almost two runners PER INNING, he can't really expect good results, right? Conversely, if a pitcher is allowing less than one runner an inning, that's great.

I know BABIP isn't the end-all-be-all of statistics, but it seems silly to me. Just doesn't tell me, personally, all that much.

Although, as it was mentioned in the DCab scenario, it can have a direct effect on other things (WHIP and ERA, to name a few).

It doesn't tell you much if you're only interested in outcomes, but it tells you much more about performance and trends than WHIP. For example, over the course of a game a pitcher gets hit hard for 6 innings, striking no one out and inducing hard contact that seems to keep finding defenders (atem balls, if you will). As it turns out, he only allows 5 hits and a walk over the course of his game.

He ends up with a nice looking 1.0 WHIP, but the very low BABIP shows us that we shouldn't expect that trend to continue if he continues to perform the same way. It's highly likely that, with no strikeouts, more of those balls put in play will fall for hits in the future.

Some call this "luck," and that's a decent term for it I suppose, but it's really just the idea of an unsustainable trend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sanfran327 Hangout Grand Counsel

Sanfran327

Posted
Posted
It shows trends. It shows if a guy is giving up more or less or the same amount of hits than his performance would usually indicate. It basically adjusts WHIP for what a guy with an average defense would do. It basically tries to neutralize what the pitcher can't control, namely a particularly good or bad defense behind him.

Sure, I can appreciate that. It definitely makes sense. I guess I'm more of a bottom-line guy, and that's not always the way to go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...