Hits correlate with slugging. The higher the BABIP, the higher the SLG.Originally Posted by 757690
Hits correlate with slugging. The higher the BABIP, the higher the SLG.
"This isn’t stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner
That's not a strong correlation. A strong correlation would be if pitchers with high SLG, had equally high BABIP, and visa versa. A list of pitcher's SLG from high to low, would roughly mirror a list of pitcher's BABIP, from high to low, and that isn't the case.
Hoping to change my username to 75769024
HR aren't included in BABIP and it still strongly correlates with SLG. The list of pitchers SLG from high to low does roughly mirror a list of pitchers BABIP and to the extent the association is weakened, a major driver is the removal of HR.
"This isn’t stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner
Is there a very small variance between the highest and the lowest pitcher's SLG as well, because that would need to be the case in order for the correlation to have any meaning, at least in this discussion.
Hoping to change my username to 75769024
Far as I can tell there's almost no correlation between the two. Joe Saunders, Jhoulys Chacin and Ted Lilly were among the NL BABIP leaders last year, and none of them posted a low SLG against. Roy Halladay, Matt Garza and Chris Carpenter had low SLGs against and above average BABIPs.
Good pitchers routinely keeping the opposing SLG low. Meanwhile BABIP jumps all over the place. In other words, SLG reflects skill, BABIP reflects luck.
I'm not a system player. I am a system.
Just wanted to quote it to point out that even top guys don't really control BABIP all that well.
From the Cincinnati Enquirer:
http://news.cincinnati.com/article/2...PT04/304050134Ryan Ludwick, who made his Reds’ debut with an RBI double, said when he faced Cueto in the past, he felt as if Cueto were trying to strike out every hitter. That wasn’t the case Thursday.
“He’s pitching now,” Ludwick said.
“I don’t care or look to strike out the hitters,” Cueto said. “I look to get the hitters out through less amount of pitches. I’ll get more innings.”
Here's data for pitchers between 2008-2011 tabulated as individual pitcher seasons (i.e. CC Sabathia will show up as 4 entries for example):
"Very small variance" can be defined differently by different individuals, but these variables are pretty tight IMHO. For reference here's the data for age of this population (which isn't so "tight"): Mean= 28.2; variance= 18.4; STDev= 4.3.Code:Mean Var STDev BA .269 .0053 .073 BABIP .305 .0063 .079 SLG .429 .0209 .145
Here's the regression of the variables being discussed for pitchers between 2008-2011:
Clearly, BABIP predicts SLG well.Code:r2 BA/BABIP .98 BA/SLG .97 BABIP/SLG .93
"This isn’t stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner
I have no idea what any of that means. Sorry. I'm not that smart. I'll just end this, because I have a feeling we're boring eveyone else. Lol
Hoping to change my username to 75769024
I don't feel like crunching the numbers, but I can guarantee you've messed up big time in there. If Halladay, Garza and Carpenter can be top 10 among NL ERA qualifiers in SLG against, yet near the bottom the list for BABIP, then I can guarantee you there's no meaningful correlation between the two. It egregiously fails an eyeball test. The BABIP and SLG against lists are wholly different animals.
I'm not a system player. I am a system.
Agreed. There's also no way that BA correlates to BABIP that highly, especially not just R but R2.
"No matter how good you are, you're going to lose one-third of your games. No matter how bad you are you're going to win one-third of your games. It's the other third that makes the difference." ~Tommy Lasorda
I always wondered as a kid..... why Jim Palmer never struck out more than 200 in a year despite going close to or over 300 innings per year. He had a very good rising fastball. His control was good but not outstanding. He would walk 2-3 guys a game and sometimes more.
He must have figured he only needed to try for strikeouts when he needed them and let his GG filled D behind him catch the ball.
Palmer had his Davey Johnson, Belanger, Robinson, Bobby Grich and Paul Blair behind him. Cueto has Votto, BP, Rolen, Stubbs, Bruce and we will see how Cozart is. I would rather get outs and get more innings with less pitches from the starters. Maddux must have been very lucky his whole career.
I'm bored.
Was my post the tipping point?
So don't read the thread? I actually think this is a really interesting conversation -- just the type I was hoping would happen when I posted the question. Thanks to all involved!
“Every level he goes to, he is going to compete. They will know who he is at every level he goes to.” -- ED on EDLC
Posting Permissions
|
Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please. |
Reply With Quote