Andre Ethier is sexy

[Archie]

Hits (and hence batting average) are generally a function of luck and the quality of the defense rather than any reflection of the pitcher. The BABIP is the batting average of balls in play which is largely influenced by the defence and also random variation; BABIP should generally revert to a pitcher's career numbers, .471 is unsustainable through the season.

I understand Babip and regression to the mean for both pitchers and hitters in that category.

but I find it hard to agree completely with the first portion of the above statement. Hits/BA are generally a function of luck and the quality of defense?

I believe that is a portion of a hitter's BA, but its alot smaller than the actual fundamental skill on squaring a ball up that a hitter has.

otherwise how would we have such consistent lucky outliers year after year like Pete Rose, Wade Boggs, Tony Gwynn, Stan Musial, Ty Cobb, George Brett, Ichiro, ect ect.

they didn't get THAT lucky every year.

3-4 years ago I was big on using the eye test of defense when capping a baseball game. I think the market was behind in that. It caught up in 2010 I think. and became efficient by and large.

I think that Defensive metrics suck and will never fully tell the whole story. I think people can over Sabermetricize and lose some of the innate feel for the game.

players AREN'T just random number generators as Justin7 might say.

I least I hope not. cause I hate computers

 

[Archie]

Going into the games today, there were two LAD starting pitchers ranked in the top 25 in 2011 WAR and they were at #23 and #25.

don't want to know about this year. as a10% sample size against only a portion of the league doesn't tell me much.....

can you give me 2010 for the current starters? including garland and Lilly?

 

[Polaroid]

I believe that is a portion of a hitter's BA, but its alot smaller than the actual fundamental skill on squaring a ball up that a hitter has.

otherwise how would we have such consistent lucky outliers year after year like Pete Rose, Wade Boggs, Tony Gwynn, Stan Musial, Ty Cobb, George Brett, Ichiro, ect ect.

they didn't get THAT lucky every year.

When I said it was a function of luck and defense, I meant from the perspective of the pitcher. If you have a player who has the ability to consistently hit a high % of line drives and/or is a fast runner so a grounder to 3rd is a hit more often than not then they are going to have a high career BABIP. But from the point of view of the pitcher this isn't the case - for every ten Ichiro Suzukis a pitcher faces, there is going to be an equal number of the likes of Carlos Penas skew the average back to normality.

 

[Archie]

another question I want to know the answer to, is how to look at a particular ballparks "effects" and how a pitcher's peripherals and gb/fb ratios, zone factors for fielders ect can be coupled.

example. Derek Lowe tends to be an extreme GB pitcher, what do you do with him pitching vs a fb pitcher at wrigley when the wind is blowing out at 15 mph's?

PNC park. has a 404 foot "notch" out in the power alley in lf. They have two of the fastest players in baseball manning that notch......although A. McCutch's defense metrics make him out to be a bad fielder. ( I don't agree with that) I think it is a function of hard hit liners and gappers finding the grass because his pitcher's suck and john russell played him way way too shallow)

anyways. back to PNC, you have a fb pitcher that has a low HR rate. how do you treat him in PNC if he pitches vs the Pirates? vs maybe the Cubs who don't have the best/speediest lf/cf combo???


do you fade a cub fb pitcher at PNC? even if everything else tells you to take the cubs?

sorry random tired thoughts here. stream of consciousness

 

[Polaroid]

don't want to know about this year. as a10% sample size against only a portion of the league doesn't tell me much.....

That is true but what is also true is that it is very unlikely that the Dodgers will have five pitchers in the top 25 in any recognized metric, the only team with a chance of doing that will be the Phillies. With the probability of an injury to any of the rotation, I'd say it's more unlikely than likely.

can you give me 2010 for the current starters? including garland and Lilly?

Kershaw, Billingsley and Kuroda were all in the top 12 last season. Lilly was #33 and I'm not even going to click back the required number of pages to see where Garland is.

 

[Archie]

When I said it was a function of luck and defense, I meant from the perspective of the pitcher. If you have a player who has the ability to consistently hit a high % of line drives and/or is a fast runner so a grounder to 3rd is a hit more often than not then they are going to have a high career BABIP. But from the point of view of the pitcher this isn't the case - for every ten Ichiro Suzukis a pitcher faces, there is going to be an equal number of the likes of Carlos Penas skew the average back to normality.

but could it not be true, that some pitchers are just very hittable despite having good "stuff"

having played alot of baseball, i'm just telling you that so many pitchers with "NO Stuff, find a way to keep batters off balance and keep batters from squaring up the ball.... and so many pitchers that can throw 97, are extremely hittable.... alot of times it is somthing simple like delivery motion, tipping pitches, angle of release ect.

all the above narrative to say: if its true that a hitter can be an outliar, why can't a pitcher have a low babip because he keeps hitters off balance, changes speed, has late movement and induces alot of charity hop one bouncers and pop fouls in play?

Pitching can't be reduced to SO's, BB's, and balls in play/luck


and by the way, other than bunts you won't find many MLB hitters being fast enough to beat out grounders to third more than 4-5 times a year outside of bunts....

maybe in little league but not MLB

 

[Archie]

That is true but what is also true is that it is very unlikely that the Dodgers will have five pitchers in the top 25 in any recognized metric, the only team with a chance of doing that will be the Phillies. With the probability of an injury to any of the rotation, I'd say it's more unlikely than likely.



Kershaw, Billingsley and Kuroda were all in the top 12 last season. Lilly was #33 and I'm not even going to click back the required number of pages to see where Garland is.

3 in the top 12? not too shabby. it actually kinda refutes my earlier assertion that they wouldn't be a starting pitching staff suited for the playoffs...

and now that I think about it....

with Kershaw and Billingsly so young. those guys could have break out cy young type years.... who knows....

I don't like the way their innings pitched have advanced over the years at such young ages though

 

[fiveteamer]

Both you niggers geeks suck, flip a coin.

 

[Polaroid]

but could it not be true, that some pitchers are just very hittable despite having good "stuff"

having played alot of baseball, i'm just telling you that so many pitchers with "NO Stuff, find a way to keep batters off balance and keep batters from squaring up the ball.... and so many pitchers that can throw 97, are extremely hittable.... alot of times it is somthing simple like delivery motion, tipping pitches, angle of release ect .

The discussion here started with Matt Garza and I said his high BABIP isn't sustainable, you can just look at his K/BB rate to see his efficiency. If another pitcher is very hittable through tipping pitches or whatever, they generally won't have the ability to strike out or prevent walks.

all the above narrative to say: if its true that a hitter can be an outliar, why can't a pitcher have a low babip because he keeps hitters off balance, changes speed, has late movement and induces alot of charity hop one bouncers and pop fouls in play

BABIP is generally not a metric you can judge a pitcher on, it's usually used more to explain why an individual pitcher gets lucky/unlucky over the short term. BABIP brings the defensive capability of the team into the equation; a pitcher for a good defensive team is always going to have a lower BABIP than the same pitcher on a bad defensive team. If there was a ball hit into the corner of right field, would you rather have Vlad or Ichiro fielding it? Is it the fault of the pitcher if Vlad flops on the ground while Ichiro catches with ease?

Pitching can't be reduced to SO's, BB's, and balls in play/luck

xFIP is the most efficient way of predicting a pitcher's future ERA.

and by the way, other than bunts you won't find many MLB hitters being fast enough to beat out grounders to third more than 4-5 times a year outside of bunts....

maybe in little league but not MLB

That was purely an example to show how you can see outliers in BABIP.

 

[Archie]

BABIP brings the defensive capability of the team into the equation; a pitcher for a good defensive team is always going to have a lower BABIP than the same pitcher on a bad defensive team. If there was a ball hit into the corner of right field, would you rather have Vlad or Ichiro fielding it? Is it the fault of the pitcher if Vlad flops on the ground while Ichiro catches with ease?

I like it better when you say that BABIP brings the defensive capability of the team into the equation.....

ALOT BETTER THAN.....

saying "Hits (and hence batting average) are generally a function of luck and the quality of the defense rather than any reflection of the pitcher."


I don't see those two statements as analogous. I see them as apples and oranges

"ANY reflection of the pitcher"?

these aren't pitching machines at the local coin operated batting cages out there.....

 

[Polaroid]

3 in the top 12? not too shabby. it actually kinda refutes my earlier assertion that they wouldn't be a starting pitching staff suited for the playoffs...

and now that I think about it....

Three in the top 12 only got them to 4th place in the NL West last season.

with Kershaw and Billingsly so young. those guys could have break out cy young type years.... who knows....

I don't like the way their innings pitched have advanced over the years at such young ages though

Kershaw/Billingsley have been consistently good young pitchers, Kuroda less so - I'd be surprised to see him doing as well in 2011. I really don't see their innings pitched by Kershaw/Billingsley to have any detriment to their future development, the spike in IP when they reached the majors isn't too vast and I think any problem would have already showed itself.

 

[Archie]

Three in the top 12 only got them to 4th place in the NL West last season.



Kershaw/Billingsley have been consistently good young pitchers, Kuroda less so - I'd be surprised to see him doing as well in 2011. I really don't see their innings pitched by Kershaw/Billingsley to have any detriment to their future development, the spike in IP when they reached the majors isn't too vast and I think any problem would have already showed itself.

I hear ya, but dead arm syndrome in July/August/September is somthing pirate fans are familiar with.

Kershaw/Billingsly have pretty high ceilings IMO

and yes Kuroda is way overachieving it would seem....

but i've said the same for guys like Mark Buehrle and 55 year old Livan Hernandez for a few years now...

look at Livan's BABIP. it cost me alot of $ last year fading him. Same with Freddy fucking Garcia.....

when May arrives I'm still considering chasing on those two all year

 

[Archie]

Three in the top 12 only got them to 4th place in the NL West last season.

good point.

like I said orginally, they need more hitting. to go with having a good 4th and 5th starter and potentially top shelf 1 and 2's

I don't see it happening. I mean maybe Loney finally reaches potential. but it doesn't look good for that.


but I stand on the solid ground ( and I"m sure i'm jinxing them) of having 5 starters.......that have almost zero injury history..... THAT IS HUGE

that are consistent not prone to horrendous outings. that will give you workhorse innings, save the bullpen, ect. save the shifting of RP coming out of the BP to be spot starters, save having to have alot of AAA spot start call ups ect...


KEEP a team in the game, minimize blow-outs and anything can happen in the crazy boring game of baseball.

 

[Polaroid]

I like it better when you say that BABIP brings the defensive capability of the team into the equation.....

ALOT BETTER THAN.....

saying "Hits (and hence batting average) are generally a function of luck and the quality of the defense rather than any reflection of the pitcher."


I don't see those two statements as analogous. I see them as apples and oranges

I said the same thing in both statements. AVG and BABIP are basically the same school of thought - AVG is the batting average and BABIP is the batting average of balls in play (which excludes home runs). BABIP and AVG both generally depend on luck and the quality of the defense.

"ANY reflection of the pitcher"?

these aren't pitching machines at the local coin operated batting cages out there.....

Probably none that can attain 12K/9 while allowing a BABIP close to .500 to major league players.

 

[Archie]

I said the same thing in both statements. AVG and BABIP are basically the same school of thought - AVG is the batting average and BABIP is the batting average of balls in play (which excludes home runs). BABIP and AVG both generally depend on luck and the quality of the defense.

I just took a 90 sec doze on the couch. its been a long weekend for me.

i'll continue this tomorrow.

thanks for the responses, I'm learning alot. but confused on a few issues I guess. maybe when I read it tomorrow morning I won't be confused.

I just thought in one quote you were saying that BA against is "generally" a function of (read: usually/almost always) luck and the quality of defense.

I think that is in stark contrast to saying a metric brings "defensive capibility INTO the equation" I read that as saying, among many other variables (such as skill level of the pitcher or ballpark factors) BABIP brings defense into the equation

into denotes, a smaller portion than "generally a function of " two qualities...... DEFENSE and luck.

like I said i'm tired, i'm sure i'm all turned around and splitting hairs.

but I think ya gotta give a pitcher more credit for HIS skill....than saying that Hits and BA against is generally a function of only two factors..... luck and defense..

there are many NON strike out type pitchers that are able to pitch to contact and still get batters out with weak grounders, pop flies, 300 foot fly balls ect.....

you need to account for those type of pitchers too.... and I think the metrics have a HOLE or gap there when it comes to that kinda pitcher

the guy that has an 84 mph fastball, but changes speed, hits exact locations based on scouting reports, pounds low and away. mixes his pitches up ect.

think Jamie Moyer his last few years

 

[Polaroid]

I just thought in one quote you were saying that BA against is "generally" a function of (read: usually/almost always) luck and the quality of defense.

I think that is in stark contrast to saying a metric brings "defensive capibility INTO the equation" I read that as saying, among many other variables (such as skill level of the pitcher or ballpark factors) BABIP brings defense into the equation

into denotes, a smaller portion than "generally a function of " two qualities...... DEFENSE and luck.

It was my choice of words in describing different metrics over a number of posts rather than suddenly bringing something into the equation.

but I think ya gotta give a pitcher more credit for HIS skill....than saying that Hits and BA against is generally a function of only two factors..... luck and defense..

The point of metrics like xFIP is giving a pitcher more credit for his skill. No one but the pitcher can control how many batters he walks or how many he strikes out. A pitcher generally has little effect as to how often a ball in play results in a hit or a fly ball results in a home run.

there are many NON strike out type pitchers that are able to pitch to contact and still get batters out with weak grounders, pop flies, 300 foot fly balls ect.....

you need to account for those type of pitchers too.... and I think the metrics have a HOLE or gap there when it comes to that kinda pitcher

Of course, a groundball pitcher is going to get a lot of groundballs but that still brings the defense into question since they have to prevent the ground balls from turning into hits. But still, the pitching metrics are still important - it's better to strike out a hitter than it is to give him the opportunity to get on base via a groundball.

the guy that has an 84 mph fastball, but changes speed, hits exact locations based on scouting reports, pounds low and away. mixes his pitches up ect.

think Jamie Moyer his last few years

Pitch speed is a pretty irrelevant measure. If you're throwing at low speeds then it is a given that you must know how to mix your pitches, otherwise you won't be playing in the majors. Phil Hughes loses 3mph on his fastball and he is out of the team, Tim Wakefield can still get whiffs on a 72mph fastball.

 

[Archie]

It was my choice of words in describing different metrics over a number of posts rather than suddenly bringing something into the equation.



The point of metrics like xFIP is giving a pitcher more credit for his skill. No one but the pitcher can control how many batters he walks or how many he strikes out. A pitcher generally has little effect as to how often a ball in play results in a hit or a fly ball results in a home run.



Of course, a groundball pitcher is going to get a lot of groundballs but that still brings the defense into question since they have to prevent the ground balls from turning into hits. But still, the pitching metrics are still important - it's better to strike out a hitter than it is to give him the opportunity to get on base via a groundball.



Pitch speed is a pretty irrelevant measure. If you're throwing at low speeds then it is a given that you must know how to mix your pitches, otherwise you won't be playing in the majors. Phil Hughes loses 3mph on his fastball and he is out of the team, Tim Wakefield can still get whiffs on a 72mph fastball.

good points, but to the issue with a pitcher mixing pitches and being in the big leagues.....

how do you measure that kind of skill? how do "Metric-ize" that..... there are many "holes" like I said earlier with intangibles.

for example again to bring up Moyer. and many others. they are pitching to contact. they aren't striking out alot of guys. but they are still able to get outs.

why?

because they are able to somehow get that 1/16th of an inch edge of a hitter when it comes to getting the barrel on the bat squarely.

I've love to see a list of the top ten pitchers to get infield pop flys, infield foul pop flys, infield two hoppers to ss or 2b. ect.

I don't deny that metrics bring clarity. but I submit that there are areas where metrics actually cloud the issue and have "holes"

I guess all in all i'm saying. I love statistics, and baseball in the most perfect game for using/tracking/handicapping with stats. for multiple reasons.....


but at the same time, having grown up and played baseball at many levels until the mid 20's I see how stats and metrics MISS somthing.....


its why many 70 year old men are still advanced scouting other mlb teams, and scouting the HS's, colleges, S. American villages ect......

somtimes numbers fail..... and somtimes the EYE test prevails.


I'm trying to find a balance with that when capping.

the past 2 years i've not seen or been studying/enjoying MLB like I used to.

but very rarely will accept blind metrics as an acceptable way of modeling. let alone capping

 

[Polaroid]

good points, but to the issue with a pitcher mixing pitches and being in the big leagues.....

how do you measure that kind of skill? how do "Metric-ize" that..... there are many "holes" like I said earlier with intangibles.

for example again to bring up Moyer. and many others. they are pitching to contact. they aren't striking out alot of guys. but they are still able to get outs.

why?

because they are able to somehow get that 1/16th of an inch edge of a hitter when it comes to getting the barrel on the bat squarely.

The skill of mixing pitches should in most cases be reflected in a pitcher's long term metrics such as FIP/xFIP. I'm not going to calculate it exactly, but I'm looking at Jamie Moyer's 2006-2010 stats and his ERA seems pretty much in line with his actual FIP/xFIP. Some years his ERA is higher than it should be, some years it's less but it appears to be a pretty much accurate long term measure.

The case of intangibles is definitely true in MLB but it is the exception rather than the rule. Jamie Moyer doesn't exhibit anything other than the metrics he produces although someone like Matt Cain consistently posts a very low HR/FB ratio - but that could very well be because of pitching coaches in SF rather than any inherent ability (and there is a lot of material about Cain's HR/FB ratio if you're interested).

but at the same time, having grown up and played baseball at many levels until the mid 20's I see how stats and metrics MISS somthing.....


its why many 70 year old men are still advanced scouting other mlb teams, and scouting the HS's, colleges, S. American villages ect......

somtimes numbers fail..... and somtimes the EYE test prevails.

MLB is not like the other sports when it comes to player development and the draft is a real crapshoot (although a good scouting team can assist in it). They draft from HS and from colleges, someone posting awesome numbers from HS is not necessarily MLB material. Scouts looking at HS players are going to use their eyes to look for future potential rather than any numbers when drafting. When players are nowhere being fully developed, you can't really rely upon numbers.