An article for you guys on BABIP

http://fantasyfootballcommunity.com/viewArticle.aspx?id=858 PART 1

http://fantasyfootballcommunity.com/viewArticle.aspx?id=881 PART 2


Czar I'd like to hear your opinion on this. I honestly didn't even read the whole thing but I know you and a lot of other guys like to use BABIP a lot. The articles are basically a guy saying how BABIP is a useless stat.

Kyle, that guy is trying to bend the stats to prove his point and failing miserably. I wouldn't even waste my time reading through that garbage again.

1. You can't just use BABIP by itself. It isn't that simple. You have to factor in career trends and whether or not the guy is a linedrive hitter or a flyball hitter. You also have to account for contact rate and how much a guy strikes out. I can tell from the two examples that he uses that he has no idea what he was talking about.

First example: Andrew Jones is an extreme flyball guy. He will never have a high BABIP and his average will fluctuate with his HR's.

Example two: BJ Upton. And you may have seen me write on Upton. Fact is that Upton did crash. He was carrying an unsustainable BABIP and a terrible contact rate that, at the time did not support a .339 average (much like his brother last year). Sure, he finished at .300, but that means that he likely had to hit .260-.270 for the remainder of the season (exactly what Shandler was predicting.) He crashed and still led the league at .396. That is one reason I avoided him in all drafts last year. Upton's BABIP was a much more normal rate last year of .351, which is what I am likely to expect from him going forward, but his avg. was a disappointment to many at .273. Not to me because I expected it. I did not expect the power loss, but that came from taking a little off his swing to try and make more consistent contact. Once he hits for power again (this year?) and continues to lower that strikeout rate, we may see him approach .300 again.

2. Taking a players previous history: You have to know the type of guy that you are dealing with. A guy like Matt Holliday for example is a pure line drive hitter. His BABIP is always going to be .340 or above and among the league leaders. A guy like Konerko, who I drafted, is a notoriously low BABIP guy with a decent contact rate, but last season he was at .247 which is just plain awful. I don't expect the league avg. .300 there, but something more like in the .275-.280 range. I drafted Encarnacion knowing that he was a much better hitter than .251. He will rebound and be in the .280's this season I hope and if he maintains or improves that power, I'll be very happy.

3. There is always going to be a career year. Take Magglio Ordonez's .363 two years ago. His BABIP that season was off the charts for him at .386. His career rate, I believe was .316. Well last season he was more in line with his career BABIP, which resulted in the .317 average instead of the .363 avg. Jorge Posada was an identical case that year as well, but his BABIP was even more unsettling and you knew it was no sustainable. This is also where the data can be useful. Was Magglio really a .363 hitter? Well, Magglio had a history, so it was easy to say no. But what if he were a rookie, or this was his second season? One look at that .386 BABIP would tell you that he is not likely to sustain that type of production over the course of his career.

4. Use the data just like any stat, but don't rely solely on it. It can lead to great bargains come trade time. Take Garrett Atkins two years ago. Remember that miserable first half he had? Well, if you looked as his awful BABIP and knew that he was just getting unlucky, coupled with the fact that his contact rate was almost identical to previous established norms, you knew it was only a matter of time before he pulled out of it and starting hitting again. At the end of May, he was hitting .223 with only 3 homeruns, but he only had 32 K's in 196 AB's. He was still putting the ball in play just fine, but getting no results. Atkins is a linedrive guy that should have a BABIP in the .320 range. I don't know what it was at that point, but it was bad. The correction came and he ended up at .301. People were giving him away or dropping him outright at the end of May. Sometimes there are guys that don't come out of funk though, either due to injury, or the concern lately would be possible previous steroid use (Travis Hafner?).

5. BABIP should always be used with contact rates IMO. IF a guy is showing a poor BABIP and striking out more, I will avoid that guy. If he is putting the ball in play the same amount that he always has, but just not getting the results, he becomes a target. One of my favorites for example this season will be Micheal Young. Most people look at Young and see decline. I see opportunity.

2007: .314 avg in 639 AB's with 109 K's .367 BABIP
2008: .284 avg in 645 AB's with 107 K's .326 BABIP

To be fair, his line drive rate did drop as well from 27.2% to 22.5%, but not enough to suggest to me that he is in decline. The .326 BABIP was the lowest since his first full season in the bigs and I think he was just unlucky. Playing through a broken hand probably didn't help.

I'm predicting he will bounce back this season and hit .300 again based on this information and given his career numbers and established norms.

Read Mike Podhorzer's rebuttal. I'm in regular contact with Mike and he is a good guy. http://www.fantasyplayers.com/mlb/FeedItem.asp?FEED_ITEM_ID=40166

Jesus Kyle, what the F did you get me started on?

Anyway, in answer to your query, use it just like any other stat as a part of your scouting, but don't rely solely on it and that other guy is full of shit and I wouldn't concern myself with reading his crap anymore. I can tell from his Part II in response to Mike that he is just a sarcastic piece of shit that is trying to bend certain situations to fit his view of things. Those types of people can be scary because they sound very persausive like they have a clue, when they really don't.

The only useful thing I get from that guy is that he is trying to apply the human element, and I get that part. It is played between the lines and not on the stat sheet.

Sometimes it isn't as easy as applying all these numbers and saying, he will be better or worse this year. But the statistical analysis is a tool, just like anything else.

It tells whether a guy is actually getting lucky, or displaying some type of growth in other areas. For example, in my article on Nelson Cruz last season, I came to the conclusion that he was not the same AAAA failure we had seen in the past. An increased BB rate, power, and a decreasing K rate led me to the conclusion that his improvement was real and legit.

A similar breakout by Dallas McPhereson is met by a lot more scepticism on my part because he did none of those things. He is still striking out at the obnoxious rate he did before and when (if) he hits the majors again, he is going to get eaten alive by major league pitching.

Damn Czar I wasn't expecting all that. The only reason I even came across the article is because I post on the Barracuda forums from time to time. Most of the guys on there are from Fanball where I had been posting for 5+ years and they moved over there when Fanball decided to make their forums for paying customers only. Anyways there was a topic on there about Milton Bradley and if he would have a good year for the Cubs. I posted what I believe you had said about his BABIP on RW. And he quoted me and told me that BABIP was useless and told me to read those links.

I probably won't even reply to the guy since I honestly don't care what he thinks. I just figured you might wanna see it since I know you use that stat a lot, and I knew you would have some good feedback.

Actually his exact words were "BABIP has no correlation with batting average"

GBPig99 wrote:Damn Czar I wasn't expecting all that. The only reason I even came across the article is because I post on the Barracuda forums from time to time. Most of the guys on there are from Fanball where I had been posting for 5+ years and they moved over there when Fanball decided to make their forums for paying customers only. Anyways there was a topic on there about Milton Bradley and if he would have a good year for the Cubs. I posted what I believe you had said about his BABIP on RW. And he quoted me and told me that BABIP was useless and told me to read those links.

I probably won't even reply to the guy since I honestly don't care what he thinks. I just figured you might wanna see it since I know you use that stat a lot, and I knew you would have some good feedback.

Bradley isn't a true .321 hitter though.

He is a perfect example of how you use the data spot flukes. His .396 BABIP led all of baseball last season and is nowhere near his established norms. He also K'd and ungodly rate at 27%. Guys that strike out 27% of the time almost never ever approach .300.


Bradley is a career .280 hitter. Are we supposed to believe that somehow he became such a stud that he can strike out more than ever and still raise his average by 40 points? I don't buy it for a minute. Bill James is predicting .287 from Bradley this season and I can buy that. .320 with a 27% strikeout rate again? NOT A FRIGGIN CHANCE.

And that doesn't even factor in his injury history and the fact he has to play in the field now.

Man, this guy is so arrogant and believes his own bullshit that it sounds like the perfect time for a $50 bet.

So, he writes this article and bangs out a couple of examples and he has deluded himself that it is now fact over all of the other data that is being used by everyone else?

Classic.

Ah, looking back on ancient history.

I hope that you avoided Bradley and invested heavily in Michael Young based on my take on BABIP combined with other stats.

Guys that don't use it are way behind those that fully grasp it.