Comments on: Top 16 Overrated Starters For 2008 http://skyking162.com/2008/04/top-16-overrated-starters-for-2008/ baseball with a hint of lime Fri, 30 Jul 2010 06:33:51 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3 By: Sky http://skyking162.com/2008/04/top-16-overrated-starters-for-2008/#comment-1194 Sky Fri, 18 Apr 2008 14:33:01 +0000 http://skyking162.com/2008/04/top-16-overrated-starters-for-2008/#comment-1194 I think Bannister can become a better pitcher via his analytical approach, but I doubt he can significantly beat the average .300 BABIP. MLB pitchers actually do show a difference in BABIP skill, but it's just really small -- I like to think of the range as .290 to .310, whereas it's more like .250 to .350 for hitters. Part of Bannister's plan is to get to counts where the BABIP goes down, mostly 2-strike counts. To do that, he'll have to throw more strikes early in the count. When hitters realize that, they'll swing earlier. The trick will be whether or not they're pounded for homeruns. If so, Bannister will have to throw fewer early strikes -- that will result in fewer homers, but league-average BABIP (fewer 2-strike counts) and more walks. Bannister's ERA is again really good this year, but his K-rate has gone way up. My hypothesis is that there's a big inter-relatedness between strikeouts, walks, homeruns, and BABIP. Since pitchers give up many more balls-in-play than HRs, BBs, and Ks, that's the first thing they have to keep in check. By adjusting their BABIP down towards .300, some tend to give up a lot of homeruns or walk a lot of guys. They're out of the majors. If they can survive, then they learn to balance strikeouts and walks without seeing HRs or BABIP go up. Strikeouts aren't just a sign of throwing unhittable pitches, but that you can put the ball in the zone and it won't get crushed for homeruns (although that sounds almost like the same thing.) Hopefully something in all that makes sense... I think Bannister can become a better pitcher via his analytical approach, but I doubt he can significantly beat the average .300 BABIP. MLB pitchers actually do show a difference in BABIP skill, but it’s just really small — I like to think of the range as .290 to .310, whereas it’s more like .250 to .350 for hitters.

Part of Bannister’s plan is to get to counts where the BABIP goes down, mostly 2-strike counts. To do that, he’ll have to throw more strikes early in the count. When hitters realize that, they’ll swing earlier. The trick will be whether or not they’re pounded for homeruns. If so, Bannister will have to throw fewer early strikes — that will result in fewer homers, but league-average BABIP (fewer 2-strike counts) and more walks. Bannister’s ERA is again really good this year, but his K-rate has gone way up.

My hypothesis is that there’s a big inter-relatedness between strikeouts, walks, homeruns, and BABIP. Since pitchers give up many more balls-in-play than HRs, BBs, and Ks, that’s the first thing they have to keep in check. By adjusting their BABIP down towards .300, some tend to give up a lot of homeruns or walk a lot of guys. They’re out of the majors. If they can survive, then they learn to balance strikeouts and walks without seeing HRs or BABIP go up. Strikeouts aren’t just a sign of throwing unhittable pitches, but that you can put the ball in the zone and it won’t get crushed for homeruns (although that sounds almost like the same thing.)

Hopefully something in all that makes sense…

]]> By: Frank http://skyking162.com/2008/04/top-16-overrated-starters-for-2008/#comment-1190 Frank Fri, 18 Apr 2008 00:11:30 +0000 http://skyking162.com/2008/04/top-16-overrated-starters-for-2008/#comment-1190 On Bannister (and others I suppose): In one of the articles you linked to earlier this year (http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2008/01/brian-bannist-2.html), Bannister discusses why he thinks he can "beat" the .300 BABIP mean that has been established. You praised him for his analytical approach to the game. Does this current analysis of your call out his theory as bunk? On Bannister (and others I suppose):

In one of the articles you linked to earlier this year (http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2008/01/brian-bannist-2.html), Bannister discusses why he thinks he can “beat” the .300 BABIP mean that has been established.

You praised him for his analytical approach to the game. Does this current analysis of your call out his theory as bunk?

]]>