BABIP Options

[syoo8]

Through seven games we are 2nd from the bottom in team batting average (.235) and 10th in the AL in team OPS (.723). I was wondering how much of this had to do with the Gods of BABIP. Here's a chart below. I split balls in play into grounders, line drives and flies/pop-ups.

Seems to me that we've been a bit unlucky so far. Pedroia, Drew, and Lowell in particular-- even 'Tek. OTOH Youks probably won't him .519 for the rest of the season.

Did this by hand collating data from B-R-- if someone knows of a way to automate this could you PM me?

[table= Red Sox BABIP, through April 13, 2009][tr][td=*] [/td][td=*] GBH [/td][td=*] GBIP [/td][td=*] [/td][td=*] LDH [/td][td=*] LDIP [/td][td=*] [/td][td=*] FBH [/td][td=*] FBIP [/td][td=*] [/td][td=*] H [/td][td=*] BIP [/td][td=*] BABIP [/td][/tr][tr][td=*]Ellsbury [/td][td=*]3 [/td][td=*]10 [/td][td=*].300 [/td][td=*]2 [/td][td=*]3 [/td][td=*].667 [/td][td=*]0 [/td][td=*]7 [/td][td=*].000 [/td][td=*]5 [/td][td=*]20 [/td][td=*].250 [/td][/tr][tr][td=*]Pedroia [/td][td=*]2 [/td][td=*]10 [/td][td=*].200 [/td][td=*]2 [/td][td=*]5 [/td][td=*].400 [/td][td=*]0 [/td][td=*]9 [/td][td=*].000 [/td][td=*]4 [/td][td=*]24 [/td][td=*].167 [/td][/tr][tr][td=*]Ortiz [/td][td=*]0 [/td][td=*]3 [/td][td=*].000 [/td][td=*]5 [/td][td=*]6 [/td][td=*].833 [/td][td=*]0 [/td][td=*]10 [/td][td=*].000 [/td][td=*]5 [/td][td=*]19 [/td][td=*].263 [/td][/tr][tr][td=*]Youkilis [/td][td=*]4 [/td][td=*]5 [/td][td=*].800 [/td][td=*]5 [/td][td=*]5 [/td][td=*]1.000 [/td][td=*]3 [/td][td=*]11 [/td][td=*].273 [/td][td=*]12 [/td][td=*]21 [/td][td=*].571 [/td][/tr][tr][td=*]Baldelli [/td][td=*]1 [/td][td=*]1 [/td][td=*]1.000 [/td][td=*]1 [/td][td=*]1 [/td][td=*]1.000 [/td][td=*]1 [/td][td=*]4 [/td][td=*].250 [/td][td=*]3 [/td][td=*]6 [/td][td=*].500 [/td][/tr][tr][td=*]Drew [/td][td=*]0 [/td][td=*]6 [/td][td=*].000 [/td][td=*]1 [/td][td=*]2 [/td][td=*].500 [/td][td=*]1 [/td][td=*]7 [/td][td=*].143 [/td][td=*]2 [/td][td=*]15 [/td][td=*].133 [/td][/tr][tr][td=*]Bay [/td][td=*]1 [/td][td=*]7 [/td][td=*].143 [/td][td=*]2 [/td][td=*]2 [/td][td=*]1.000 [/td][td=*]1 [/td][td=*]7 [/td][td=*].143 [/td][td=*]4 [/td][td=*]16 [/td][td=*].250 [/td][/tr][tr][td=*]Lowell [/td][td=*]0 [/td][td=*]10 [/td][td=*].000 [/td][td=*]1 [/td][td=*]3 [/td][td=*].333 [/td][td=*]2 [/td][td=*]9 [/td][td=*].222 [/td][td=*]3 [/td][td=*]22 [/td][td=*].136 [/td][/tr][tr][td=*]Lowrie [/td][td=*]0 [/td][td=*]1 [/td][td=*].000 [/td][td=*] [/td][td=*] [/td][td=*] [/td][td=*]1 [/td][td=*]8 [/td][td=*].125 [/td][td=*]1 [/td][td=*]9 [/td][td=*].111 [/td][/tr][tr][td=*]Varitek [/td][td=*]2 [/td][td=*]6 [/td][td=*].333 [/td][td=*]0 [/td][td=*]3 [/td][td=*].000 [/td][td=*]1 [/td][td=*]10 [/td][td=*].100 [/td][td=*]3 [/td][td=*]19 [/td][td=*].158 [/td][/tr][tr][td=*]Kottaras [/td][td=*]1 [/td][td=*]1 [/td][td=*]1.000 [/td][td=*] [/td][td=*] [/td][td=*] [/td][td=*]0 [/td][td=*]1 [/td][td=*].000 [/td][td=*]1 [/td][td=*]2 [/td][td=*].500 [/td][/tr][tr][td=*]Green [/td][td=*]1 [/td][td=*]1 [/td][td=*]1.000 [/td][td=*] [/td][td=*] [/td][td=*] [/td][td=*]1 [/td][td=*]3 [/td][td=*].333 [/td][td=*]2 [/td][td=*]4 [/td][td=*].500 [/td][/tr][tr][td=*] [/td][td=*] [/td][td=*] [/td][td=*] [/td][td=*] [/td][td=*] [/td][td=*] [/td][td=*] [/td][td=*] [/td][td=*] [/td][td=*] [/td][td=*] [/td][td=*] [/td][/tr][tr][td=*]TOTAL [/td][td=*]15 [/td][td=*]61 [/td][td=*].246 [/td][td=*]19 [/td][td=*]30 [/td][td=*].633 [/td][td=*]11 [/td][td=*]86 [/td][td=*].128 [/td][td=*]45 [/td][td=*]177 [/td][td=*].254 [/td][/tr][tr][td=*]2008 Red Sox BABIP [/td][td=*] [/td][td=*] [/td][td=*] [/td][td=*] [/td][td=*] [/td][td=*] [/td][td=*] [/td][td=*] [/td][td=*] [/td][td=*] [/td][td=*] [/td][td=*].313 [/td][/tr][/table]

[TomRicardo]

The LD hit percentage is exceptionally low. It should be about 75%.

[SoxScout]

B-R has this data in the player's splits, all you need to do is take out the home runs: http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/...09&t=b#traj .. I don't know if you went through play logs, or something else.

AL 2009:

LD: .751
FB: .158
GB: .231

AL 2008:

LD: .724
FB: .144
GB: .242

[syoo8]

B-R has this data in the player's splits, all you need to do is take out the home runs:

I went through the play logs, because I wanted to know quantities and not just percentages (i.e. 0 for 10 is more illuminative than .000)

[SoxScout]

I went through the play logs, because I wanted to know quantities and not just percentages (i.e. 0 for 10 is more illuminative than .000)

You can just subtract HR from AB and H

[cmurphycode]

There is a 5 percent chance(*) that, given a true BABIP baseline of .313, the Sox BABIP would be .254 or less at this point due solely to chance.

This is just about at the commonly accepted level of "strange". Given the LD percentages posted (although I am suspect of LD reporting in a small sample), I would expect the BABIP to normalize up. Of course, it's almost always true that BABIP regresses to the mean.


*The probability of getting a hit off a ball in play is represented by the binomial distribution B(177,.313). The cumulative binomial probability of having .254 or less can be calculated with binomcdf(177, .313, (.254*177)) on a TI calculator.

This post has been edited by cmurphycode: Apr 14 2009, 12:04 PM

[syoo8]

You can just subtract HR from AB and H

But subtracting HR from AB and H (and adding sac flies) doesn't tell you how many line drives, ground balls, etc. This is why I used game logs.

[SoxScout]

But subtracting HR from AB and H (and adding sac flies) doesn't tell you how many line drives, ground balls, etc. This is why I used game logs.

On the splits page it is broken down by "Hit Trajectory" into "Ground Balls", "Fly Balls", "Line Drives" and "Bunts".

[TomRicardo]

There is a 5 percent chance(*) that, given a true BABIP baseline of .313, the Sox BABIP would be .254 or less at this point due solely to chance.

This is just about at the commonly accepted level of "strange". Given the LD percentages posted (although I am suspect of LD reporting in a small sample), I would expect the BABIP to normalize up. Of course, it's almost always true that BABIP regresses to the mean.


*The probability of getting a hit off a ball in play is represented by the binomial distribution B(177,.313). The cumulative binomial probability of having .254 or less can be calculated with binomcdf(177, .313, (.254*177)) on a TI calculator.

Monkey with a hammer. You should be comparing the LD hit% to 75%.

[Eric Van]

The demonstrable bad luck amounts to 4 hits, which is 3+ runs.

[cmurphycode]

Monkey with a hammer. You should be comparing the LD hit% to 75%.

Is this what you mean?

30 LDIP, 75% chance of a hit on a given LD, with only 19 or less: 10.6%
In other words, there's a 10% chance of this happening due to sheer probability alone.

I don't think that's a fundamentally different analysis, you just prefer to look at the LD instead of all of the hits?


I know that neither are very strong or unusual statements, just a quantification of how rare this unlucky streak has been.
I tried to PM this, but your inbox is full.


EDIT:

EV, actually, I used SoxScout's numbers, I have just over 2 hits more than we actually got:
GB: 61*.242 = 14.762
LD: 30*.724 = 21.72
FB: 86*.124 = 10.664
14.762+21.72+10.664 = 47.146 (actual: 45)

The LD is 4 hits less, but that's made up by some of the others. 47 hits out of 177 opportunities is a mere 266 BABIP.

By the way, the chance of getting 45 or fewer hits instead of 47 is 40%.

This post has been edited by cmurphycode: Apr 14 2009, 02:08 PM

[MentalDisabldLst]

From what I've seen, our problem has been made worse by "squanders", i.e. poorly grouped hits and poorly timed GIDPs and the like. How is our scatter/cluster doing relative to the mean? And what would, say, a tool like linear weights suggest for how many runs we should have to date?

I think that will tell a stronger story than whether our line drives are falling for hits.

[Nite Vizhun UV]

The demonstrable bad luck amounts to 4 hits, which is 3+ runs.

Two of the losses were by 1 run. 3+ runs could have resulted in a 4-3 record at this point.

[E5 Yaz]

Two of the losses were by 1 run. 3+ runs could have resulted in a 4-3 record at this point.

Unless they all came in the same game.

[Sprowl]

Two of the losses were by 1 run. 3+ runs could have resulted in a 4-3 record at this point.

That means to me that even if the team had had good luck, plus the excellent luck to have their good luck perfectly distributed, they would still be playing mediocre baseball. Pitching has been just fair and defense has been poor. Better luck on BABIP can only help so much.

[paulftodd]

You can look at this site to reduce the work.

http://www.fangraphs.com/teams.aspx?pos=al...009&month=0

It seems the low BABIP may be due to the high FB% of 45.7%, a little bad luck on LD which are being hit at a healthy rate, and simply random variation due to small SSS, as well as the fact we have faced teams that have pretty good pitching. Like they say, all LD and GB are not created equal, some are hit harder than others, and the hardest hit have the highest BABIP, the weaker hit balls tend to have the lowest BABIP. It's hard to hit the ball well against good pitching. We need a couple of series with the Rangers, Indians and Orioles to smooth things out.

[Rudy Pemberton]

One thing to note is that the Sox GB / FB ratio, offensively, is 0.50 while the league average is 0.75. Tampa Bay and Texas are the only teams close to as low as the Sox, and they are hitting HR at a rate 50% higher than the Sox are. So, this probably explains why the BABIP is so low; the impression at least anecdotally to me is that the Sox are simply not making great contact as a team. It's probably fluky, and once things normalize the team will be fine.

Look at it this way; offensively Sox batters have been up 230 times with 9 HR, 25 BB, and 42 K. Opposition has been up 231 times with 11 HR, 27 BB and 50 K.

You'd expect the composite lines to be fairly similar, right?

Sox batters are hitting 235 / 314 / 409, while opponents are at 286 / 368 / 511.

I guess my conclusion is; it's 7 games. We'll drive ourselves nuts trying to figure this out; it's just noise, karma, and all that.