REDREAD

12-31-2008, 12:49 AM

dougdirt's post on the Tavaras thread got me thinking. I'm not a big fan of the BABIP/luck theory, but he made a good point:

Whether it was earned or not, the likelihood of him repeating a .371 average on balls

in play is very unlikely. Between 2000 and 2007 there were 1747 people with at least 400 PA

in a season. The number of people with a .371 BABIP or higher over that period of time was

a grand total of 36. Let me repeat that, 36 of 1747 people were able to post a .371 BABIP or

higher over a 400 PA season. Thats barely 2%. Thats pure luck. Whether you are willing to admit

that or not is another thing, but it is what it is.

Then I remembered WestOfYou's post about Tavaras bunting for base hits. He does it a lot, and is quite successful at it.

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1786792&highlight=bunt#post1786792

In 2007, Tavaras was 37 for 52 when trying to bunt for a base hit.

So let's recalculate the BABIP number, when we back out the bunt hits and bunt attempts.

I think this is valid, because bunting for a base hit is different than the typical attempt to get a basehit.

Obviously, for Tavaras, when the time was right, it was much more successful than swinging away.

I hope the BABIP fans agree that there is a different set of conditions associated with bunting for a basehit vs

just swinging away and hoping it falls between fielders.

Since I am not sure how many of Tavaras' failed bunts were considered in play (vs a pop up out of bounds),

I will give a range of the adjusted BABIP.

I am going to show my math, just in case I make a mistake.

Wily had 119 hits in 2007. If his BABIP was .371, that means he put 321 balls into play.

Backing out his bunts, he had 82 non bunt hits, his adjusted "in play" is between 269 and 284

That makes his revised BABIP between 288 and 305. I am guessing that this BABIP is not considered lucky.

Note, this is not an attempt to say that Tavares is a good or bad acquision. Just another look at BABIP.

Edit: I hope doug's quote was refering to Tavaras. But maybe I was mistaken and he was talking about Dickerson.

In any event, part of the discussion involved Tavaras being lucky in getting hits in 2007. IMO, even if I used the wrong

BABIP number for 2007, the point about backing out bunts is still valid, IMO.

Whether it was earned or not, the likelihood of him repeating a .371 average on balls

in play is very unlikely. Between 2000 and 2007 there were 1747 people with at least 400 PA

in a season. The number of people with a .371 BABIP or higher over that period of time was

a grand total of 36. Let me repeat that, 36 of 1747 people were able to post a .371 BABIP or

higher over a 400 PA season. Thats barely 2%. Thats pure luck. Whether you are willing to admit

that or not is another thing, but it is what it is.

Then I remembered WestOfYou's post about Tavaras bunting for base hits. He does it a lot, and is quite successful at it.

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1786792&highlight=bunt#post1786792

In 2007, Tavaras was 37 for 52 when trying to bunt for a base hit.

So let's recalculate the BABIP number, when we back out the bunt hits and bunt attempts.

I think this is valid, because bunting for a base hit is different than the typical attempt to get a basehit.

Obviously, for Tavaras, when the time was right, it was much more successful than swinging away.

I hope the BABIP fans agree that there is a different set of conditions associated with bunting for a basehit vs

just swinging away and hoping it falls between fielders.

Since I am not sure how many of Tavaras' failed bunts were considered in play (vs a pop up out of bounds),

I will give a range of the adjusted BABIP.

I am going to show my math, just in case I make a mistake.

Wily had 119 hits in 2007. If his BABIP was .371, that means he put 321 balls into play.

Backing out his bunts, he had 82 non bunt hits, his adjusted "in play" is between 269 and 284

That makes his revised BABIP between 288 and 305. I am guessing that this BABIP is not considered lucky.

Note, this is not an attempt to say that Tavares is a good or bad acquision. Just another look at BABIP.

Edit: I hope doug's quote was refering to Tavaras. But maybe I was mistaken and he was talking about Dickerson.

In any event, part of the discussion involved Tavaras being lucky in getting hits in 2007. IMO, even if I used the wrong

BABIP number for 2007, the point about backing out bunts is still valid, IMO.