Phillies team BABIP

by Matt Swartz on Jul 9, 2008 2:50 AM EDT Comment 10 comments

The past few days, the Phillies have hit a lot of line drives and flyballs that seem to go right at people. I wondered if this isn't a systemic problem all year long. I hate to make excuses like it's all luck, but I wonder if some of our hitting troubles aren't simply due to misfortune.

Consider the following:

	HR rate	BB rate	K rate	BB/K	BABIP	XBH rate	RS/G
2005	0.03	0.103	0.163	0.59	0.309	0.087333	4.950617
2006	0.038	0.099	0.175	0.52	0.305	0.096888	5.339506
2007	0.037	0.101	0.175	0.53	0.315	0.101969	5.506173
2008	0.04	0.098	0.167	0.54	0.285	0.098646	5.021978

It seems that a lot of the Phillies statistics are similar to previous years. It seems that the main difference is the team BABIP. Given the constant extra base hit and homerun rates and the constant walk and strikeout rates, I wonder if the problem isn't a lack of singles falling in. I would guess that the run scoring is at least partly down due to luck.

Thoughts?

0 recs | Comment 10 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Interesting

I don’t know if your stats allow it, but can you look at BABIP for the last few weeks when the offense has really struggled? I wonder if this stretch accounts for the bulk of the downturn in BABIP for the team?

by David S. Cohen on Jul 9, 2008 10:31 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

well, I can quickly compile June + July, even though obviously they started up June very well:

HR rate: .035
BB rate: .101
K rate: .218
BB/K: .51
BABIP: .170
XBH rate: .088
RS/G: 4.38

Clearly a lot of this is a low BABIP though they are a bit short on extra-base hits and high on strikeouts during the phase. GIven their high walk rate, I doubt that would have much to do with swinging at bad pitches and getting out in the count early. Probably very unlucky if also playing a bit worse.

by Matt Swartz on Jul 9, 2008 11:26 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

.170?!?

Sheesh.

by taco pal on Jul 9, 2008 11:36 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

OOOPS

CHECK THAT! BABIP: .273.

Not sure where the hell I got .170 from. Wow.

Still way low but not crazy low.

SORRY.

by Matt Swartz on Jul 9, 2008 12:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

ALSO

furthermore, the K rate is .191 not .218. my bad again. i clearly wasn’t thinking when i put those numbers together.

by Matt Swartz on Jul 9, 2008 1:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I’d like to believe this. I’ve been looking through the situational splits to see if there’s anything that explains what I perceive as a yawning disparity between their robust overall production numbers (runs, team OPS) and the very frequent outages over the last month or so. The BABIP dropoff certainly would seem to account for at least some of it.

by dajafi on Jul 9, 2008 2:23 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Thanks for this, MattS. Obviously this would seem to indicate that the Phils are a bit unlucky (at least statistically speaking), and while a BABIP above or below .300 is sustainable in some circumstances (e.g. Howard because of the shift), it seems like the entire team BABIP sitting at .273 can’t stay that way for very long. Fingers crossed, at least.

by PhillyFriar on Jul 9, 2008 8:19 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Well, teams can certainly sustain BABIP’s above or below .300. It’s pitchers who have so little control over that statistic. But hitters will tend towards their career norms, and I would expect the Phillies to tend towards .310 or so unless they were doing something else different overall.

by Matt Swartz on Jul 9, 2008 8:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I may be wrong, but I think while an individual player can sustain an oddball BABIP (if you will), the law of averages dictates that a .273 BABIP for an entire team - over the course of, what, more than 3000 at bats this year - is flukish, and will (as you say) tend towards the norm of .300 to .310 or so.

I’m trying to use statistics as a fancy way to say that we’ve gotten unlucky. Now whether that’s actually true or not remains to be seen. Stay tuned, I guess…

by PhillyFriar on Jul 10, 2008 2:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Right, the point of my post in the first place was that we’ve gotten unlucky. I was merely saying that you were probably underestimating when you suggested the mean they would tend towards is .300. I would guess it’s closer to .310 than .300, as the team has consistently had a BABIP around .310 due to some major line drive hitters like Howard, Utley, and even Werth.

by Matt Swartz on Jul 10, 2008 3:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs