LM Otero - ASSOCIATED PRESS
Tampa Bay Rays' Carlos Pena hits a triple (which isn't any better than a single, if you believe batting average) against the Texas Rangers in the second inning of Game 4 of baseball's American League Division Series on Sunday, Oct. 10, 2010, in Arlington, Texas. (AP Photo/LM Otero)
I've come up with a new, extremely complex statistic that I think will revolutionize baseball.
Let me go over how to calculate this statistic. Bear with me for a moment folks because it gets a little messy. First, you look at all the times a hitter comes up to bat. Give the hitter one point for every time they get on base by hitting the ball, except if the scorer feels like the fielder *probably* should've made the play (they get a point if the fielder is too lazy or inept to make it to the ball on time though). That's right, this statistic gives equal credit for home runs and singles, even though about 70% of the time a batter hits a single, he won't score, but a home run guarantees one run at minimum. We also don't give hitters any points for walking, because frankly, it's boring to watch, and who wants to tire out opposing pitchers and create run scoring opportunities anyways?
Then we divide the number of points accrued by the number of opportunities a batter has to get points, except we ignore some of these opportunities. Walks didn't count for anything at the beginning, so there's no reason to start counting them now, it's just easier to pretend they didn't happen. We WILL, however, count errors as opportunities, because even though the hitter succeeded in every way by getting on base, advancing runners, and not making outs... well we'll still hold it against them. If the hitter gets out but advances a baserunner, then we also don't count it as an opportunity, but only if the hitter did it on purpose, or if it's a fly out that leads to a run scoring. Ground outs that "accidentally" lead to a run scoring count as opportunities. The scorer will judge how pure the batter's heart was to decide if it was intentional or not.
To recap:
"Points"=Times on Base-BB-HBP-FC-RBOE-Dropped 3rd Strike-CI-SH
"Opportunities"=Plate Appearances-BB-HBP-SH-SF-RBOE-FC-Dropped 3rd Strike-CI-SH
Now to calculate this ground-breaking statistic, we divide the number of "Points" by "Opportunities". I shall call this "the batting average".
What's "batting average" good for? Well, I'm not positive to be honest. It sure as hell isn't a simple statistic like OBP (Times on Base/Times Batting) or homers (number of home runs). It's an absolutely lousy indicator of offensive ability, given that our Tampa Bay Rays scored the 3rd most runs in the league despite the 2nd worst batting average. The 2nd best batting average in the league went to the Kansas City Royals, who scored the 4th fewest runs. Or, for those of you who prefer more than anecdotal evidence, here's batting average weighed against other simple, easy to calculate offensive measures based on how well they've predicted a team's runs scored the last five years.
Well gee. It looks like it's better than looking at a hitter's home runs and ignoring everything else, barely. Good to know it beats considering just a small fraction of a hitter's outcomes. It's also a hair ahead of its cousin ISO that ignores a similar number of statistics, but at least ISO can claim to be a somewhat crude measure of power.
I'm not sure what similar claim batting average can make. It's not like it measures advancing of runners, because it treats singles and homers the same. Slugging percent is a much better indicator of that. It can't measure ability to keep the game going or providing run scoring opportunities (avoiding an out) because it completely ignores walks, errors, and a host of less common situations. On-base percentage is what we're looking for there. For every single thing we desire from a baseball statistic (simplicity, evaluating a specific ability, evaluating overall performance) there are measures that are indisputably better in every way.
One of the many complaints around the area about Carlos Pena -- and the Tampa Bay Rays as a whole, for that matter -- is that his batting average is low (looks like my statistic is catching on already!). I'm just not sure why I should care.
16 recs | 181 comments
Currently sending this to every dumb baseball fan I'm friends with
I’m sure they still will find a way to disagree.
Travis Lee - January 27, 2012
Batting average is important because I have a whole bunch of them memorized
It is unfair to expect those storage compartments in my brain to be suddently free themselves up for something more productive. Ty Cobb has been stashed away since the mid-70s.
nomoredevil - January 27, 2012
I enjoyed this.
When you think about it from the opposite direction like PGP has done here, it is easy to recognize how insane BA is.
BWoodrum - January 27, 2012
Paging TheGrinch.
Passionate Apathy - January 27, 2012
wouldn't want this thread closed too!
pudieron89 - January 27, 2012
b&
Jason Collette - January 27, 2012
Impressive post
Even though we already know the shortfalls of batting average, your post was interesting and engaging til the very end. Well done.
It makes me wonder about the history of some statistics in baseball. Might be an interesting series of articles, exploring different stats, why they were developed, and how they became mainstream.
Ian Moore - January 27, 2012
rec'd... hilarious
rglass44 - January 27, 2012
Seconded
Barnacles - January 27, 2012
"this"
Travis Lee - January 27, 2012
Very funny post
This is the best stat you have created since the Excite-O-Meter
http://www.draysbay.com/2010/8/24/1632294/how-exciting-are-the-tampa-bay
Where does the excite-o-meter fit among other #’s predicting runs?
FreeZorilla - January 27, 2012
never let it die
pudieron89 - January 27, 2012
Very poorly, unfortunately
benderbrodriguez - January 27, 2012 via mobile
I'm getting a correlation of ~.4
Keep in mind that offense is among the inputs on the “excite-o-meter”
PGP - January 27, 2012
Are those supposed to be the coefficient of determination values at the bottom of the graph?
MakeitRayn - January 27, 2012
Correlation, I'd imagine, R instead of R^2
Sandy Kazmir - January 27, 2012
This
benderbrodriguez - January 27, 2012 via mobile
I've seen this happen often, and it drives me nuts
Please, for the love of God, label your axes.
staplemaniac - January 27, 2012
It's correlation coefficient
My apologies for not including it, I could’ve sworn I mentioned it in the text
PGP - January 27, 2012
nbd
It’s a math teacher thing.
staplemaniac - January 27, 2012
An easy fix is just always name your graph X (w/units) vs Y (w/units)
MakeitRayn - January 27, 2012
Just the right amount of snark, have a rec, good sir
Also, cough wOBA cough, ahem excuse me.
Sandy Kazmir - January 27, 2012
woba is fiendishly complicated
Given that the weights vary from year to year
benderbrodriguez - January 27, 2012 via mobile
Right, but practical use dictates that you should just use the established weights, heck even Tango makes it easier:
BB/HBP: .7
1B: .9
2B/3B: 1.3
HR: 2
Sandy Kazmir - January 27, 2012
I was trying to weigh batting average against the mainstream numbers any fan could intuitively figure out the calculation of
PGP - January 27, 2012
My point is that it's a false dichotomy that OBP or SLG or BA are easier to calculate than wOBA.
Sandy Kazmir - January 29, 2012
Yeah But Still....
Thanks to Ken Funck over at Bpro for bringing this Hall of Famously Weak Arguments to the Table: Appropriate here:
1. "Yeah, but still."
When it’s heard: During the brief interval after you spend ten minutes articulating a cogent, well-supported, and almost certainly correct thesis in opposition to a popular baseball belief, and before passersby are amazed to see you ram your own head completely through a ballpark support column in response to your friend saying "Yeah, but still… Willy Taveras is a much better candidate to lead off than some slow guy with a .400 OBP, no matter what you say."
Why it’s weak: It’s not an argument; it’s merely abdicating the responsibility to cite any shred of evidence to support a position, as if that is somehow the same thing. It also assumes that all opinions should carry equal weight, regardless of the foundation on which they’re built—which is patently untrue.
MrNegative1 - January 27, 2012
Give me a line up with 9 .300 hitters and i'll bet you i score more runs than the 2011 Rays
sternfan1 - January 27, 2012
If they don't walk and only hit singles they wouldn't
Sandy Kazmir - January 27, 2012
Looking at all the 300 hitters from last year
Melky Cabrera had the lowest OBP with a 340 and only Starlin Castro had an OPS lower than 800
sternfan1 - January 27, 2012
Why don't you just say that you want nine good hitters?
Sandy Kazmir - January 27, 2012
SK, you'll not hear me applaud the guy with the .300 BA but as i point out
most of them in doing so are also good hitters
sternfan1 - January 27, 2012
You never specified nine good hitters.
mr. maniac - January 27, 2012
for the very reason i gave above when describing the 300 BA class of 2011
sternfan1 - January 27, 2012
the problem is that BA fluctuates more than any other offensive skills
So spotting a “.300-hitter” is nearly impossible. They might turn into a pumpkin at any moment.
By contrast, power hitting and walking are skills that stay consistent.
No one doubts that high BA is excellent for offense. The question is how you find guys that will actually do it consistently
XrayYankeeZulu - January 27, 2012
hmmm.... Ichiro's BA has really fluctuated through the years
sternfan1 - January 27, 2012
70% chance sarcasm, 30% genuine realization
Ben Tumbling - January 27, 2012
Ichiro BA
Imperialism32 - January 27, 2012
Ichiro SLG
Imperialism32 - January 27, 2012
Gee, it's almost like power fluctuates less
Imperialism32 - January 27, 2012
And yes, I realize these charts aren't on the same scale
Imperialism32 - January 27, 2012
And that ISO would've been better
Point is, there’s a point.
Imperialism32 - January 27, 2012
If you look at qualified batter since 2000 that have multiple qualified seasons within that span then Ichiro
actually had the 57th highest variance out of 368 players. He’s sandwiched between Aramis Ramirez and Marquis Grissom. Some years you get .370 last year you got .270
Sandy Kazmir - January 27, 2012
The advantage of singles over walks is
with runners on base, the opportunity to advance an extra base, as opposed to one with a walk. As far as the advanced metrics, I’m still learning and won’t pretend to have a clue otherwise, however I think there is a place for all of the statistics, old and new.
But when you look at someone like Pena, if he was hitting in the .270-.290 range, how much higher would his OBP be because of the addition IBB’s he would probably get, also how many additional extra base hits would he have that either drive in runs, or put him in a position to score?
Blue or CONKZILLA - January 27, 2012
If Pena hit .270-.290 it would look a lot like 2007.
Where he hit .282/.411./.627, with 46 HRs, all of which comes out o a massive .430 wOBA. There’s nobody here who doesn’t think that would be great. The problem is he can’t just wake up and say, I’m going to hit .280 this year. He’s a pull hitter and people use a massive (and very successful shift) on him, and he strikes out a lot. So the comparison we need to make isn’t really Carlos Pena with a low batting average to Carlos Pena with a high batting average, but rather, Carlos Pena with a low (realistic) batting average to a player with lesser power and lesser patience but a higher batting average.
Of course a single is better than a walk. Saying that they’re exactly the same is outdated rhetoric. Compared with the value of an out, though, the difference is very marginal. That’s why wOBA is nice. Smart people have figured out the exact difference in in value between them for us, and that’s part of the formula.
Whelk - January 27, 2012
That's why wOBA weights a walk at .72 and a single at .9 A single is more valuable than a walk, but not by all that much
Sandy Kazmir - January 29, 2012
Give me a lineup of 9 guys who OBP .400 and I guarantee they'll be much better
Hell give me a lineup of 9 current MLB players who have the last name Pujols and I guarantee they’ll be better still. We should just judge guys by how close their last name is to Pujols.
benderbrodriguez - January 27, 2012 via mobile
Would it be better to calculate this as how close each letter is, without allowing them to move?
Or should we do it so that an anagram of pujols is equal to pujols.
Whelk - January 27, 2012
For the record, a lineup of 9 .300/.300/.300 hitters would score less than 3 runs a game
Or did the 2011 royals example do nothing for you?
benderbrodriguez - January 27, 2012 via mobile
BOOOOOM
shakalaka
XrayYankeeZulu - January 27, 2012
did my example talk about the Royals, and did the Royals have 9 300 hitters in the line up?
BOOM
sternfan1 - January 27, 2012
Shack-A-Lak
Ben Tumbling - January 27, 2012
Does any team? Does it bother you that the population of one on your planet ensure extinction?
Sandy Kazmir - January 27, 2012
Way to ignore my point about 9 .400 hitters, and the fact that your lineup wouldn't score 3 runs per game
benderbrodriguez - January 27, 2012 via mobile
but here's the problem with that 300/300/300 comment--as it pertains to '11
it didn’t come close to happening 340 lowest OBP and only one below 800 OPS
and i’d suspect that’d hold true most of the time the last 10 years
sternfan1 - January 27, 2012
my colleague RJ ANderson supplied me with this, thanks RJ
http://www.baseball-reference.com/play-index/share.cgi?id=zkPe5
sternfan1 - January 27, 2012
Miggy is ridiculous.
blackraven - January 27, 2012
love watching that guy hit
special guy…hope he keeps it together..
It was just last year (I think?) that he was pulled over driving to spring training drunk as a skunk and caused a lot of worry among Tiger fans.
MrNegative1 - January 27, 2012
That stuff is so overblown, it's only a problem if you get caught, I guess.
Sandy Kazmir - January 27, 2012
true on the getting caught
here is the obligatory “back when Mantle and the boys were getting drunk every night” argument.
I guess it’s not a problem until you get caught.
But Cabrera, unlike others that have only been caught once (Choo for example), is known to have a problem with alcohol so it receives more attention each time he has an issue.
Hope he can keep it together.
MrNegative1 - January 27, 2012
I hope he gets ragingly drunk every single night and hits an extra base hit each following day, then I hope he tells the world that he wants to be buried upside down so the whole world can kiss his ass
Sandy Kazmir - January 27, 2012
love it!
Old school drunks are the best! rec’d
MrNegative1 - January 27, 2012
As long as he remembers that he has more money than God and should probably be taking a cab home
Sandy Kazmir - January 27, 2012
yep
MrNegative1 - January 27, 2012
So there were 22 qualified .300 hitters over that three-year span, and you're putting nine of them on one team?
Sandy Kazmir - January 27, 2012
"colleague"
rglass44 - January 27, 2012
Chances are
if a power hitter or someone with extra base power hits .300 his OBP and Slugging will be much higher. Nobody wants a team of Juan Pierre’s.
Blue or CONKZILLA - January 27, 2012
Well sure, but why look at avg at all then?
benderbrodriguez - January 27, 2012
Because the average fan doesn't look at walks
they look at what the hitter produces when he swings, which was mostly how I looked at numbers when I started reading DRB, though I did look at OBP as well, but most would probably argue that the primary part of OBP is BA. I’d be more concerned with BA with runners on base, whether advancing a runner or scoring him.
Blue or CONKZILLA - January 27, 2012
But why *shouldn't* the average fan look at walks? It's no more complicated that way
You’re right that the primary component of OBP is average, but looking at OBP tells you everything batting average, and then some.
If you walk with runners on, not only do you give the next hitter the chance to drive in the runners, but he can also drive you in too now
benderbrodriguez - January 27, 2012
I'm not disagreeing with you
but walks don’t drive in runs unless it’s a bases loaded situaion, or if there is a passed ball/wild pitch, and don’t generally add to the excitement factor of a line drive to left center.
Personally, I’m more concerned with BA from a guy like Pena than someone like Dez or BJ, because the better Pena hits, the more productive he’s going to be, and also walking more, with the likely increase in power numbers….with guys like Dez/BJ, they can make things happen with their speed, steals, bad throws, affecting the hitters count because of pitchouts…which is why I like the Keppinger signing, he’s a contact guy who should get guys over.
Blue or CONKZILLA - January 27, 2012
Batting Average
is one of the first statistics a young mind picks up while attending games with pop.
It’s easy to tell a 7 year old about batting average – a very easy concept for the young mind to grasp and then he or she can look up at the score board for each hitter and say … this guy sucks he’s only hitting .250…dad smiles and goes on drinking his beer and smoking his cigar (o.k. maybe no more cigars at the park) and the kid now is occupied with the scoreboard with this cool little thing called average.
That’s where it starts, that’s my story and I’m sticking to it.
MrNegative1 - January 27, 2012
We need to indoctrinate these youths in some kind of camp that drills wOBA into their heads. If you only want to use one number, use that, though I prefer including the triple slash
because it’s nice to get an idea of how a player puts up that aggregate number.
Sandy Kazmir - January 27, 2012
since I don't have kids
I don’t know what parents are doing to distract their kids during a game?
MrNegative1 - January 27, 2012
wOBA is much to hard for a young mind to grasp. OBP is where you start.
rglass44 - January 27, 2012
this
and it’s even easier to figure than BA
nomoredevil - January 27, 2012
I don't get the difficulty, it weights each event properly, kid's will learn anything if you tell them there isn't an alternative.
Sandy Kazmir - January 27, 2012
memorizing the weightings and explaining linear weights is rather easy.
rglass44 - January 27, 2012
as opposed to "dicide the times they got on base by the times they came to the plate"
rglass44 - January 27, 2012
"divide"
rglass44 - January 27, 2012
I think so, especially if you use Tango's method
Sandy Kazmir - January 27, 2012
lol... have you tried explaining linear weights to someone who doesn't "like math" or w/e? it'd be only worse with a kid.
rglass44 - January 27, 2012
A person needs to be at the "math can do cool things" part of their life
Before they’ll get why wOBA is cool.
Until then, I think a triple slash line with a HR total does just fine for kids. I mean, wOBA doesn’t make a whole lot of intuitive sense until you’ve spent time thinking about it’s components and what they mean as you watch baseball.
Whelk - January 27, 2012
What I'm trying to say is, a person needs to ask the question wOBA answers before it will make sense.
Otherwise it’s just like being told that the answer is 42.
Whelk - January 27, 2012
exactly. "Why do you multiply by those numbers?"
you have two responses: either explain the linear weights or say “because that’s how it works.” the first is impossible with kids, and the second undermines the entire process. i dont have kids, but ill try to never give them that answer if i do.
rglass44 - January 27, 2012
When I tutored undergrads, I would just explain calculus via option 2.
They may not be able to understand why, but they would be able to understand how to use it (to a lesser extent than the ones that would understand option 1).
MakeitRayn - January 27, 2012
This is how I always learned calculus. Don't get caught up in the why because if you know the how it will make sense the more you do it.
Sandy Kazmir - January 27, 2012
Yeah, but you knew, that you were calculating the area under a curve.
Or whatnot, and for whatever the equation was, you knew what that signified.
I’m not saying that people need to be able to invent wOBA themselves. But they should have gotten to a point where they say “I wish I knew how to properly value all these different batting events, for the purpose of comparing players offensively.” Once a person’s there, they can say, “Tango (or Newton/Liebnetz) figured out how to do this math, and I can trust them and use it myself.”
Whelk - January 27, 2012
All they need to realize is that OBP equates singles and homers and SLG doesn't properly value each base
Sandy Kazmir - January 27, 2012
Yeah, agreed.
And then it’s an easy jump from OBP to wOBA when they get a bit older.
Steve Slowinski - January 27, 2012
Water board them, simple
Warde - January 27, 2012
I'm already on it.
mr. maniac - January 27, 2012
It's easier to explain to a kid how OBP works
benderbrodriguez - January 27, 2012 via mobile
The first time I took my kid sister to a Rays game, she wanted to know how to know which hitters were good
I explained to her what OBP was and that it’s the easiest way to quickly tell how good a hitter was. Before the end of the game she was already crying out “oh no, Dioner Navarro’s up to bat? His OBP is just .260!”
PGP - January 27, 2012
That's a rec.
Steve Slowinski - January 27, 2012
OPS: Outs Per Swing
Jason Collette - January 27, 2012 via iPhone app
A kitten dies everytime
Dioner bats.
Blue or CONKZILLA - January 27, 2012
Condascend much?
You must be very proud of yourself.
homeboogie - January 27, 2012
Look at this guy
DeadeyeRR - January 27, 2012
It's condescend
Sandy Kazmir - January 27, 2012
this is some good irony
Warde - January 27, 2012
Thanks, I picked it out myself
Sandy Kazmir - January 27, 2012
Conduhsend*
FYP, ideeit.
Travis Lee - January 27, 2012
Where/to whom is this condescending?
benderbrodriguez - January 27, 2012 via mobile
morans, morens, riuns, biuns, sawx fans
pudieron89 - January 27, 2012
condescend
Sandy Kazmir - January 27, 2012
I'll never understand why people think BA is an easy stat while OBP is so difficult.
Moneyball said it best, simply put OBP is the number of times a batter does not create an out when he goes to the plate.
sattp - January 27, 2012
OBP
is the second easiest statistic to teach to anyone.
It could of very easily been put up on the scoreboard and dads could of added the "plate appearance’ thing and kid would’ve got the same result.
OBP/HR/RBI on all scoreboards would’ve been much better but someone in their infinite wisdom used Batting Average instead.
MrNegative1 - January 27, 2012
*could have
And yeah I have no problem with someone using home runs as a measure because it’s easy to calculate
benderbrodriguez - January 27, 2012 via mobile
batting average/HR/RBI
All good leading indicators to use for further examination.
All make following baseball a fun exercise.
All should remain as prominent as possible on stadium scoreboards for decades to come.
Keep it simple for the fan who just wants to have some fun at the park.
MrNegative1 - January 27, 2012
huh?
rglass44 - January 27, 2012
too simplistic?
MrNegative1 - January 27, 2012
RBIs are pretty dumb too.
Just because of the sporadic nature of what gets you an RBI and what doesn’t.
rglass44 - January 27, 2012
for a stat guy
RBIs are dumb.
Why knock the fan who sits in the stands, looks at the scoreboard, and see one guy with 80 RBI and one guy with 50 and says the 80 RBI guy is the better player.
I don’t believe that, you don’t believe that, but why begrudge the fan this simple lie?
MrNegative1 - January 27, 2012
let me quote again my big problem with RBIs:
rglass44 - January 27, 2012
i dislike all the stats BA/RBI/HR etc
don’t do much for me.
Understand why others like them though.
MrNegative1 - January 27, 2012
Times will change though.
Someday other stats will be listed up there. Heck, if you changed the stats up on the scoreboard, the whole next generation would view wOBA the same way as the past viewed batting average.
mr. maniac - January 27, 2012
The sign at the trop features OBP, SLG, and OPS with as much prominence as all the rest
benderbrodriguez - January 27, 2012
Good for the Trop
Andrew Friedman wants our fans to be smarter than other teams’ too. Yankees Stadium hasn’t gotten past hits, HR and RBI, and it’s not like they didn’t just rebuild the thing a few years ago.
Brickhaus - January 27, 2012
Seriously?
benderbrodriguez - January 27, 2012
Yeah, seriously
When the hitter comes up, it’s a huge photo, hits, RBI, homeruns and usually some other random statistical fact, 2/3 of which are useless (e.g., Cano is batting .378 with runners on first and second and two out).
Brickhaus - January 27, 2012
Ouch.
mr. maniac - January 27, 2012
uhhhh i dont remember that
rglass44 - January 27, 2012
definitely list OBP, SLG & OPS on the board
Also list K/9, BB/9, and WHIP for pitchers. I wish they’d replace WHIP with FIP though
Jason Collette - January 27, 2012 via iPhone app
They would, but...
The economics of this sport are so damn driven by nostalgia that any change will only be embraced by some. Hell, the DH has been around for 30 years now and half of baseball fans are still pissed off about it.
Brickhaus - January 27, 2012
But that's only b/c the DH is an abomination unto the Lord
nomoredevil - January 27, 2012
I prefer the DH to the pitcher hitting,
but historically, the production of the position has almost never equated to what it was expected to. Each season maybe 2 or 3 actually are producing at the rate of a CIF/COF.
Blue or CONKZILLA - January 27, 2012
if they'd put wOBA up on the scoreboard...
The reactions alone would be worth it
Jason Collette - January 27, 2012 via iPhone app
If Deumig can use wOBA, then anyone can.
mr. maniac - January 27, 2012
I thought the Grinch stole our analytical integrity
BossmanJunior333 - January 27, 2012 via mobile
He tried to Max it out instead.
MakeitRayn - January 27, 2012
Strikeouts
That is what gets me about Pena. I hate seeing 2nd and 3rd with 1 out and then Longo gets pitched around so they can strike out Carlos.
peteypab - January 27, 2012 via mobile
Do you hate it more or less than first and third with one out and guy hits a DP?
Sandy Kazmir - January 27, 2012
kericr - January 27, 2012
Is there a divide?
Between those that discuss stats to describe what happened as opposed to what may happen in the future?
Kudos to the guy that hits .300…chances are he probably had a good year in a number of other categories.
Would I rush to call him great for 2012, champion my team to sign him, or insist that he is a better option than someone else because of last seasons batting average? HELL NO!
A lot of the batting average talk seems to be centered, as the article points out, around Carlos Pena.
Now, Pena is a better option in 2012 at first base than Casey Kotchman except for those fans who point to batting average. These fans hold on to that batting average stat and use it against Pena as often as they do the K argument.
MrNegative1 - January 27, 2012
the point is "why use it?" what does it add to the conversation? it isn't even easy to figure out.
rglass44 - January 27, 2012
I thought WAR was the new end-all-be-all
If so and 2011 was not an aberration then, Kotchman was worth 2.8 wins and Pena was worth 2.6. Pena’s last year with the Rays in 2010, he was worth 1.1 wins.
Just sayin’
Just goes to show you, everyone digs the long ball
playjoyce - January 27, 2012
If there was likelihood that Kotchman of 2011 would be the Kotchman of 2012, then no one here would have a problem if he got re-signed
Ben Tumbling - January 27, 2012
I think September Kotch is the reason January Kotch is unemployed.
Vin - January 27, 2012
Yup
If he ended strong with a .325/.390/.450 season line, then we would have had some stronger advocation to re-sign him.
Ben Tumbling - January 27, 2012
I don't think it would've mattered much
Teams are just getting smarter
Transplanted - January 27, 2012
yeah those September numbers can kill ya like
Vladdy who’s 894 OPS got him that sweet deal with…oops or Derek Lee whose 969 Sept got him that sweetheart contract with… oh never mind
sternfan1 - January 27, 2012
Rays should sign Vlad-said way too often by people =(
Transplanted - January 27, 2012
so you think if kotch hit like he did until august to conclude the year he would still be unemployed?
rglass44 - January 27, 2012
Kotchman's september wasn't awful
If your worst wRC+ in any month is 98, well then you had a good overall season
benderbrodriguez - January 27, 2012
But the point that it raised red flags for teams probably stands
benderbrodriguez - January 27, 2012
That and the only difference between his 2009, 2010, 2011 seasons is his BABIP
Transplanted - January 27, 2012
ask Joe Maddon to explain BABIP to you some day
sternfan1 - January 27, 2012
Doesn't change the fact that the only difference between those 3 years
Is the amount of hits he had from the balls put into play. Can even extend that back to 2008 some, never stopped being the same player.
Transplanted - January 27, 2012
Ask Joe Maddon to explain RBI to you some day
benderbrodriguez - January 27, 2012
if you truly believe BABIP is 100% luck i feel sorrier for you than previously
sternfan1 - January 27, 2012
No one believes this
Kotchman’s 09, 10, and 11 numbers are remarkably similar excepting his BABIP. This is fact. Whether this change is due to changes in his ability are beyond what I know, but what I do know is that hitters and pitchers who have abnormally different BABIPs from their career mark almost always regress
benderbrodriguez - January 27, 2012
100% has nothing to do with it.
There’s no reason to force people into a binary box.
Whelk - January 27, 2012
is it even possible to construct a binary box?
nomoredevil - January 27, 2012
Kids these days do some crazy shit with binary.
Whelk - January 27, 2012
Nash figured it out
Brickhaus - January 27, 2012
Once you get past a certain baseline though
It gets narrower and narrower. If DRaysBay played a pickup game with the actual team, I guarantee you that even if our defense is somehow identical, they’d have a much higher BABIP than us. But once the pitching hits major league level, either you can hit it or you can’t. The guys who can’t hit simply because they can’t make solid contact get weeded out before they’re major league regulars. And the guys who are pure guess hitters and only hit the ball well when they correctly guess what pitch is coming (and therefore can direct it) also get eliminated before the majors, because they’ll end up striking out so damn much.
Brickhaus - January 27, 2012
exactly. so major leaguers' BABIP variation is in large part due to luck.
rglass44 - January 27, 2012
This simply isn't true
BABIP is very much a skill for hitters, albeit a volatile one over the course of one season. For guys with 2k+ PA (at which point I think it’s fair to say BABIP has stabilized), Choo, Votto, Kemp, Jeter, and Miggy are all above BABIPs of .350. These five guys really don’t have much in common in terms of the type of baseball player they are (other than good, which is probably a result of their ability to maintain high BABIPs), and they’ve all been significantly above league average consistently.
Similarly, hitters like Carlos Quentin, Joe Crede, and Rod Barajas have all consistently held BABIPs significantly below league average the last several years.
Long story short-For hitters, BABIP is largely skill derived, albeit volatile still. For pitchers, BABIP is not much of a skill.
benderbrodriguez - January 27, 2012
i dont think you guys are disagreeing at all here.
rglass44 - January 27, 2012
all 5 of them have 1 thing in common
They hit the shit out of a baseball. Hitters can set their own BABIP norms so the .290-.310 range doesn’t apply to everyone.
Jason Collette - January 27, 2012 via iPhone app
repeatable BABIP
Since 1970, one player has had at least 10 seasons of BABIP greater than or equal to .350 and that was Rod Carew who did it 10 times. Just 30 players over the past 42 seasons have done it as many times as twice in a single season.
Mo Vaughn did it more often than Edgar Martinez
http://www.baseball-reference.com/play-index/season_finder.cgi?type=b#ajax_result_table::none
Jason Collette - January 27, 2012
Sorry, I meant for pitching
Brickhaus - January 28, 2012
Casey Kotchman is still out there because teams want to look first for power at 1B
sternfan1 - January 27, 2012
Signing Jeff Keppinger to play at 1B and DH means we don't care, though.
Whelk - January 27, 2012
tally up the total games he gets combined at the two positions and it may not equal 10
sternfan1 - January 27, 2012
Games started, or games with a pinch hit appearance at DH or a inning at 1B.
Because I’d gladly take the over on the latter.
Whelk - January 27, 2012
where did i say it was awful?
rglass44 - January 27, 2012
Never said you, or anyone else, did
benderbrodriguez - January 27, 2012
That and his lack of power
for a CIF
Blue or CONKZILLA - January 27, 2012
Even if we is worth half, it is still higher than Pena 2010. I really do not understand it from a numbers perspective..
I think there is some clubhouse intangible that we cannot evaluate from stats. The “Gomes” factor. If the Rays were strictly looking at the numbers, then Kotchman for less money makes more sense.
playjoyce - January 27, 2012
You won't understand much from a numbers perspective if you only look at one year and use everything incorrectly.
Sandy Kazmir - January 27, 2012
It's the eyes man!!!
playjoyce - January 27, 2012
Batting average is a historical anomaly
Much like a lot of other statistics in various sports. It made sense once upon a time when there weren’t errors, the rules said you must pitch to contact, the ball was mushy and thus almost every hit was a single, and any way you reached base with the ball in play was called a hit. Of course, all of these things had changed by about 1890, but at that point batting average was already an integral statistic, baseball cards already existed, and people had actually started to use the statistics.
In any sport, how many statistics that were once considered important have fallen out of use over time? I can’t think of any.
Of course, baseball has a disproportionately high number of useless statistics compared to other sports.
Brickhaus - January 27, 2012
I think PPG in basketball is pretty comparable
You really need some context as to how they are getting the points (field goal percentage, free throw shots, 3pt %, turnovers, etc).
Barnacles - January 27, 2012
Also pace of game, moreso in college basketball
Imperialism32 - January 27, 2012
good comment
rglass44 - January 27, 2012
Kind of off topic
Tommy LaSorda used to drive into his pitchers head not to walk a batter.
He’d ask the staff (in the minors):
If a guy hits a ball in the gap and drops dead coming out of the batters box what happens? You tag him out and the body is removed from the field and the next batter steps up.
If a guy draws a walk and drops dead coming out of the batters box what happens? They remove the body and the opposing manager goes and gets another guy to run for him.
Just like the story.
MrNegative1 - January 27, 2012
So wait
What’s this about “given that our Tampa Bay Rays scored the 3rd most runs in the league despite the 2nd worst batting average”?
By my calculations (looking at the Runs Scored column of ESPN’s final standings for 2011), the Rays didn’t even score 3rd most in their division. In fact they scored the lowest number of runs in the AL East last year, were only 8th most in the AL, and 15th most in the entire league.
bejaman - January 28, 2012
I think he means in 2010.
Whelk - January 28, 2012
Yeah
My bad
benderbrodriguez - January 28, 2012
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of DRaysBay to post a comment.