Concern for David Wright

[RynMan]

BABIP = (hits-HR)/AB's

Right?

So how is this much better at indicating anything more relevant than what batting average tells you?

Close...it's this:
BABIP=(Hits - HR) / (AB - HR - K)

Thanks for the info LL.

Why is HR and K's subtracted from AB?

Because we're only measuring the hits in play out of the total balls in play. Neither home runs nor strike outs are in play so they get subtracted out.

I figured that, but was curious why HBP and walks weren't also subtracted.

I know now you are talking about at-bats and not plate appearances. These two terms seem to be used for one another I've found....yet they have different definitions.

[The Loveable Losers]

I figured that, but was curious why HBP and walks weren't also subtracted.

I know now you are talking about at-bats and not plate appearances. These two terms seem to be used for one another I've found....yet they have different definitions.

Right...this is a batting average equivalent for only the balls in play and as such things that wouldn't go into a normal batting average (sacrifices, bb, hbp, etc) don't go into this average either.

[garf112]

Here's why I'm not worried about David Wright:

HR/flyball 2004: 14.4%
HR/flyball 2005: 17.5%
HR/flyball 2006: 10.5%

Right now his flyball % is HIGHER than ever before: 14% higher than last year.

Looks like David is about to go on a power binge to me.




either that or his back injury is worse than we thought

[The Loveable Losers]

Here's why I'm not worried about David Wright:

HR/flyball 2004: 14.4%
HR/flyball 2005: 17.5%
HR/flyball 2006: 10.5%

Right now his flyball % is HIGHER than ever before: 14% higher than last year.

Looks like David is about to go on a power binge to me.




either that or his back injury is worse than we thought

Assuming that there isn't some other reason why his hr/f used to be high and it's not now I would agree with you.

[RynMan]

Here's why I'm not worried about David Wright:

HR/flyball 2004: 14.4%
HR/flyball 2005: 17.5%
HR/flyball 2006: 10.5%

Right now his flyball % is HIGHER than ever before: 14% higher than last year.

Does this not make sense to anyone else?

[The Loveable Losers]

Here's why I'm not worried about David Wright:

HR/flyball 2004: 14.4%
HR/flyball 2005: 17.5%
HR/flyball 2006: 10.5%

Right now his flyball % is HIGHER than ever before: 14% higher than last year.

Does this not make sense to anyone else?

He's hitting more fly balls and at the same time he's hitting less of them out of the park. If there was an injury, change in approach or age related decline in skills then you could say the falloff made sense. Given his age, skills and no noticeable change in approach I would expect the hr/f to rebound at least to 2004 levels if not back up near (or past) the 2005 levels.

[RynMan]

He's hitting more fly balls and at the same time he's hitting less of them out of the park. If there was an injury, change in approach or age related decline in skills then you could say the falloff made sense. Given his age, skills and no noticeable change in approach I would expect the hr/f to rebound at least to 2004 levels if not back up near (or past) the 2005 levels.

Ok, I understand the principle. I read it as if garf was saying that his hr/fb ratio had increased by 14%, not his fb %.

Man, I've been struggling in this thread. I think I'll just stay out from now on.

[bigh0rt]

He's hitting more fly balls and at the same time he's hitting less of them out of the park. If there was an injury, change in approach or age related decline in skills then you could say the falloff made sense. Given his age, skills and no noticeable change in approach I would expect the hr/f to rebound at least to 2004 levels if not back up near (or past) the 2005 levels.

Ok, I understand the principle. I read it as if garf was saying that his hr/fb ratio had increased by 14%, not his fb %.

Man, I've been struggling in this thread. I think I'll just stay out from now on.

No, please continue...

1) We can never talk enough about David Wright

2) There's certainly plenty here at the Cafe who have no idea what things like BABIP, and other factors outside of standard fantasy scoring are, and how they play into predicting what a player is going to do - so this, I imagine, is serving as some sort of a crash course for them, which is always a good thing.

[garf112]

He's hitting more fly balls and at the same time he's hitting less of them out of the park. If there was an injury, change in approach or age related decline in skills then you could say the falloff made sense. Given his age, skills and no noticeable change in approach I would expect the hr/f to rebound at least to 2004 levels if not back up near (or past) the 2005 levels.

Ok, I understand the principle. I read it as if garf was saying that his hr/fb ratio had increased by 14%, not his fb %.

Man, I've been struggling in this thread. I think I'll just stay out from now on.

No, please continue...

1) We can never talk enough about David Wright

2) There's certainly plenty here at the Cafe who have no idea what things like BABIP, and other factors outside of standard fantasy scoring are, and how they play into predicting what a player is going to do - so this, I imagine, is serving as some sort of a crash course for them, which is always a good thing.

I agree on both points! Especially #1.

[Smee]

No, please continue...

1) We can never talk enough about David Wright

2) There's certainly plenty here at the Cafe who have no idea what things like BABIP, and other factors outside of standard fantasy scoring are, and how they play into predicting what a player is going to do - so this, I imagine, is serving as some sort of a crash course for them, which is always a good thing.

I would fall under catagory number 2. It's nice to get an understanding of these things, it gives us the tools to more accurately predict and project future outcomes rather then relying on our gut. This is why I come here, to get an edge on the others in my league.