Ryan Kalish in SoxProspects Discussion Forum

0 Points

Ryan Kalish

Author	Comment
raftsox		#41	[url]	[-]
Veteran Member Posts: 1215 08/18/09 12:56 PM	AMarsh, Manny and Youks also had the highest line drive rates on the team. LD% is certainly the most definitive rate to look at when assessing BABIP, but someone with good speed and a strong LD rate is going to sustain a higher BABIP than a slow player with an equal LD rate. Nexus, I'm not sure why K rate would matter when looking at balls in play since K's don't count towards BABIP. Naturally an inability to make regular contact is going to hurt your ability to generate productive contact, but when looking at a stat like BABIP I don't see the relationship. Also, which isolated stat are you looking at? Discipline or Power? Please clarify with IsoD or IsoP because I have no idea which you're referencing and my argument (or confirmation) will vary greatly with either. I am speechless. ...this site is not intended to be a place where you post every ridiculous and half-formed thought that comes into your head. ... You should post less. - AMarshal2
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote
mushbone		#42	[url]	[-]
Rookie Posts: 18 08/18/09 1:03 PM	raftsox wrote: ... someone with good speed and a strong LD rate is going to sustain a higher BABIP than a slow player with an equal LD rate. I don't see how this is necessarily true. The batter's speed may (or may not) gain him a few more infield hits, but that's completely unrelated to his LD%. Speed makes exactly zero difference in determining whether a line drive becomes a hit or an out. I love the borscht -- Beau Vaughan
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote
Nexus		#43	[url]	[-]
Posts: 112 08/18/09 1:05 PM Forum Moderator	mushbone wrote: Nexus wrote: Pay attention to K and ISO rates when comparing BABIP. Using an extreme as an example, Ryan Howard's career BABIP is .332, which makes sense considering his lifetime .277 average is coupled with a .305 ISO, but a 33.1% K rate. On the flipside, Pedroia's career .308 average is very close to his .319 BABIP, thanks to a smaller K and ISO rate. There are obviously other variables that come into play (speed) but I always immediately look at a players K/ISO rates next to their BABIP and compare it to their career averages to see if they are getting "lucky" or not. Kalish 18.8% K rate (around career norm) coupled with his .157 ISO (below career norm) in AA proves Cem is right. Kalish's current .309 BABIP (below career norm) is probably attributed to defensive swings that produced a lot of choppers early on. Using Austin Jackson as an example of someone who I think is lucky this year, his .300 average doesn't look as good when factoring in his 25.6% K rate, a .115 ISO - with a BABIP of .394... and the correction is starting to take place as his numbers are falling back down to earth. Jesus Montero on the other hand, is a really good baseball player (with the bat, at least). I certainly understand why it's important to look at K rate in conjunction with BABIP, but why look at IsoP? Other than the indirect connection to home run rate, what difference does this make? Why not just use the direct rate of home runs per AB instead? And isn't LD% more important than either of these two factors in explaining a higher-than-average BABIP? Check it out for yourself. Compare past BA to BABIP, then look at the K% and ISO numbers. His LD% is down from earlier in his career, yet his BABIP stays consistent. I think you can contribute this to a higher ISO the last two years (and not just HRs). This "formula" will not apply for every player, but it certainly does for Youkilis... and we can conclude he's having a "luckier" year this year v. '08 based on higher K%, higher BABIP, but similar ISO from the previous year.
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote
mushbone		#44	[url]	[-]
Rookie Posts: 19 08/18/09 1:28 PM	Nexus wrote: Check it out for yourself. Compare past BA to BABIP, then look at the K% and ISO numbers. His LD% is down from earlier in his career, yet his BABIP stays consistent. I think you can contribute this to a higher ISO the last two years (and not just HRs). This "formula" will not apply for every player, but it certainly does for Youkilis... and we can conclude he's having a "luckier" year this year v. '08 based on higher K%, higher BABIP, but similar ISO from the previous year. You still haven't shown any relationship, much less explained one. If you want to claim that a high IsoP is key to having a high BABIP, you've got to say why, not just show one isolated example, especially when a counterexample is easy enough to find. IsoP is just another way of expressing total bases per hit, and BABIP is calculated from hits, not total bases. A high IsoP is usually going to have a depressive effect on BABIP because home runs are removed from consideration and reduce both the numerator and the denominator of the fraction by the same amount (K's have the opposite effect - they reduce the denominator only and always boost BABIP). Extra base hits other than home runs, although they increase IsoP, have zero effect on BABIP. Since home runs and Ks have opposite effects on BABIP, it's hard to see how those two factors are both highly correlated with high BABIP. If you're postulating that some unnamed factor is responsible for or related to all of them (high K rate, high IsoP and high BABIP), I'd be interested in hearing what it is. I love the borscht -- Beau Vaughan
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote
Nexus		#45	[url]	[-]
Posts: 113 08/18/09 2:04 PM Forum Moderator	mushbone wrote: Nexus wrote: Check it out for yourself. Compare past BA to BABIP, then look at the K% and ISO numbers. His LD% is down from earlier in his career, yet his BABIP stays consistent. I think you can contribute this to a higher ISO the last two years (and not just HRs). This "formula" will not apply for every player, but it certainly does for Youkilis... and we can conclude he's having a "luckier" year this year v. '08 based on higher K%, higher BABIP, but similar ISO from the previous year. You still haven't shown any relationship, much less explained one. If you want to claim that a high IsoP is key to having a high BABIP, you've got to say why, not just show one isolated example, especially when a counterexample is easy enough to find. IsoP is just another way of expressing total bases per hit, and BABIP is calculated from hits, not total bases. A high IsoP is usually going to have a depressive effect on BABIP because home runs are removed from consideration and reduce both the numerator and the denominator of the fraction by the same amount (K's have the opposite effect - they reduce the denominator only and always boost BABIP). Extra base hits other than home runs, although they increase IsoP, have zero effect on BABIP. Since home runs and Ks have opposite effects on BABIP, it's hard to see how those two factors are both highly correlated with high BABIP. If you're postulating that some unnamed factor is responsible for or related to all of them (high K rate, high IsoP and high BABIP), I'd be interested in hearing what it is. I never said higher IsoP equals higher BABIP. I look at the relationship between BA, BABIP, K%, and IsoP to determine if a player is lucky. In the case of Youkilis, he was a consistent .275-.280 hitter, with the same K% and LD%, and a .335+ BABIP through the first few years in the league. It wasn't until last year's boost in IsoP did we see his BA (not BABIP) go up. His BABIP remained constant from his career norms. Last year, I think his higher IsoP boosted his BA closer to his BABIP. This year, I think his high BABIP has made him lucky because his K rates are at career highs, but he's maintained the same IsoP from the previous year... therefore his BA is right in line with last years average. As for Dunn, I can't really explain how his .349 BABIP is 66 points higher than his current BA, especially when his K rates are the same and his IsoP is above career norms. Like I said, it won't apply for everyone. But Pujols is another example. Again, look at the relationship between all 4 categories above. K rates are constant, but in the years where his IsoP numbers are off the charts, look at his BA compared to his BABIP. And look at them when his IsoP numbers are lower. I don't think it's coincidence.
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote
mushbone		#46	[url]	[-]
Rookie Posts: 20 08/18/09 2:25 PM	Nexus wrote: I don't think it's coincidence. I do. There is no reason to believe it's significant. I love the borscht -- Beau Vaughan
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote
Nexus		#47	[url]	[-]
Posts: 114 08/18/09 2:45 PM Forum Moderator	mushbone wrote: Nexus wrote: I don't think it's coincidence. I do. There is no reason to believe it's significant. If K% remains constant, then higher IsoP means less discrepancy between BA and BABIP. Look at just about any player and this relationship applies, with speed guys being the exception.
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote
SoxSail		#48	[url]	[-]
Veteran Member Posts: 101 08/18/09 3:43 PM	raftsox wrote: SoxSail wrote: I don't think anyone can really sustain a .340 BABIP for multiple years, but if he's close to that -- and a .330 BABIP is doable -- he could be special. More likely long term is that he gets a little more selective and increases his walk and hr totals. With his defensive abilities, a .900 OPS is still a monster. Why? .300 is roughly league average, but is a terrible method of prediction. There should be no "regression to the mean" with BABIP, and quite frankly that is the one stat that needs sabermetric modification immediately. Things like speed play a monstrous role in improving BABIP, and Kalish has very good (+?) speed. A strong line-drive hitter with + speed could conceivably sustain a 0.340 BABIP. Also, Kalish's 2009 BABIP is 0.308. Obviously I'm wrong, but very few can sustain career BABIP above .340 (Youk is right at that mark): http://reconditebaseball....xtreme-career-babip.html Top 20 Career BABIP, Minimum 3000 PA, 1913-2007 Ty Cobb, .3785 Rogers Hornsby, .3655 Derek Jeter, .3613 Rod Carew, .3585 Ichiro Suzuki, .3572 Miguel Cabrera, .3538 Harry Heilmann, .3511 Joe Jackson, .3507 Tris Speaker, .3503 Bill Terry, .3500 Bobby Abreu, .3489 Ron LeFlore, .3466 Riggs Stephenson, .3459 George Sisler, .3458 Kiki Cuyler, .3456 Ross Youngs, .3454 Wade Boggs, .3438 Roberto Clemente, .3429 Kirby Puckett, .3421 Tony Gwynn, .3414
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote
DCRi		#49	[url]	[-]
Veteran Member Posts: 1019 08/18/09 4:24 PM Veteran Member	Isn't it a bit surprising that Ted Williams is not on that list?
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote
soxcentral		#50	[url]	[-]
Veteran Member Posts: 1001 08/18/09 4:38 PM Veteran Member	When Carew, Suzuki, Boggs and Gwynn, among others, all appear together it suggests that contact hitters who are smart in their approach and use the whole field are best equipped to sustain a high BABIP over their careers. It also hints strongly that it is not an entirely flukey statistic.
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote
mseskin		#51	[url]	[-]
Veteran Member Posts: 51 08/18/09 4:42 PM	Teddy Ballgame's BABIP was .329, 15 points LOWER than his career BA of .344... Bizarre.
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote
ancientsoxfogey		#52	[url]	[-]
Veteran Member Posts: 4133 08/18/09 4:50 PM Veteran Member	You don't see any of the all-time big hitters with a large percentage of their hits being home runs. BABIP doesn't reward their consistent power. Remember one thing about The Kid: He was a stubborn hitter who hit into a pronounced shift most of his career and didn't make any significant attempt to try to break it by hitting to LF. He got a lot of hits taken from him that way. In the same way that Ty Cobb used to claim that he could be much more of a HR hitter if he wanted to, if Ted had really tried to maximize his batting average, perhaps it's possible he could have challenged Cobb's all-time mark. The same might have been true for Babe Ruth, although I've never seen anything about him facing as radical a shift as Ted did.
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote
chavopepe2		#53	[url]	[-]
Posts: 1085 08/18/09 7:49 PM Senior Forum Moderator	A few notes about using BABIP and LD% with minor leaguers: (Using all Red Sox minor leaguers with 100+ PA as the sample) - There is very little correlation at all between LD% and BABIP. For the stat heads out there the t-stat value is .574. In other words there is a 56.7% chance that there is no statistically significant correlation. Compare this to a sample of all qualified major leaugers where the t-stat value is 6.80, meaning there is a .000000023% chance that there is no statistically significant correlation. In other words: Don't put very much stock in comparing LD% and BABIP at the minor league level.
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote
bishop		#54	[url]	[-]
Rookie Posts: 20 08/18/09 9:21 PM	DCRi wrote: Isn't it a bit surprising that Ted Williams is not on that list? Not really. In addition to being a power hitter who stubbornly hit into a shift he was really quite slow. He also played in an era where BABIP's were lower according to the chart - http://img68.imageshack.us/img68/7654/babipyw4.png . The chart's actually very interesting - baseball went 50 years with BABIP's between .270 and .290 then both leagues jump up to around .300 in 1995. Do we put that on steroids, tighter wound balls, etc. - it's not just the home runs that have gone up in baseball's new offensive era. soxcentral wrote: When Carew, Suzuki, Boggs and Gwynn, among others, all appear together it suggests that contact hitters who are smart in their approach and use the whole field are best equipped to sustain a high BABIP over their careers. It also hints strongly that it is not an entirely flukey statistic. They also tend to be contact hitters with speed. A slasher like Ichiro might not have the same LD%, but presumably a lot more of his GB are hit harder than someone with an uppercut swing.
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote
Haddock Field		#55	[url]	[-]
Veteran Member Posts: 162 08/18/09 9:42 PM	chavopepe2 wrote: In other words: Don't put very much stock in comparing LD% and BABIP at the minor league level. I think I would say, don't put too much stock in publicly available minor league line drive percentages. As far as I know, these are all based on milb.com play-by-play data. There is almost certainly a wide range in what various official scorers/stringers classify as a line drive. On top of that, in my experience, the play-by-play BIP types are frequently flat-out wrong (e.g., grounders described as flies)--it's not just a matter of differing judgment calls. Now if we had the same quality data on minor leaguers, I'm sure the LD%-BABIP relationship would be pretty similar to MLB.
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote
raftsox		#56	[url]	[-]
Veteran Member Posts: 1216 08/18/09 10:19 PM	mushbone wrote: raftsox wrote: ... someone with good speed and a strong LD rate is going to sustain a higher BABIP than a slow player with an equal LD rate. I don't see how this is necessarily true. The batter's speed may (or may not) gain him a few more infield hits, but that's completely unrelated to his LD%. Speed makes exactly zero difference in determining whether a line drive becomes a hit or an out. You missed the point. I was saying speed is independent of LD%, not that speedy players get more line drive hits. And I was refering almost directly to more infield hits; granted the shift in BABIP from 17 more infield hits isn't significant, but it is an increase above the traditional add .120 to LD%. I am speechless. ...this site is not intended to be a place where you post every ridiculous and half-formed thought that comes into your head. ... You should post less. - AMarshal2
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote
raftsox		#57	[url]	[-]
Veteran Member Posts: 1217 08/18/09 10:20 PM	I will now defer to Chavo's wisdom and leave this discussion alone. I am speechless. ...this site is not intended to be a place where you post every ridiculous and half-formed thought that comes into your head. ... You should post less. - AMarshal2
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote
chavopepe2		#58	[url]	[-]
Posts: 1086 08/19/09 4:46 AM Senior Forum Moderator	Haddock Field wrote: I think I would say, don't put too much stock in publicly available minor league line drive percentages. As far as I know, these are all based on milb.com play-by-play data. There is almost certainly a wide range in what various official scorers/stringers classify as a line drive. On top of that, in my experience, the play-by-play BIP types are frequently flat-out wrong (e.g., grounders described as flies)--it's not just a matter of differing judgment calls. Now if we had the same quality data on minor leaguers, I'm sure the LD%-BABIP relationship would be pretty similar to MLB. I agree with you. The problem is that BABIP is completely useless in determining how lucky a player has been unless taken relative to something else. At the Major League level you can look at career norms and LD% to get a good feel for if a player is getting lucky. At the minor league level neither of these things are very useful.
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote
Arquimedez Bozo		#59	[url]	[-]
Posts: 8431 09/02/09 4:30 PM Chris Hatfield Executive Editor SoxProspects.com	From BA's Wednesday Dish: • Prior to the season, there were questions about Red Sox outfielder Ryan Kalish's ability to hit for power. After suffering a hamate injury in 2007, he hit just five home runs between two levels last year. Kalish has shown more power in 2009, blasting 24 doubles and 15 home runs between high Class A Salem and Double-A Portland. Last night, Kalish went 3-for-4 with a double, one run scored and two RBIs. The 6-foot-1, 205-pound Kalish has a line-drive oriented swing with a gap-to-gap approach, though he has shown more loft in his swing this year than in previous seasons .
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote
Arquimedez Bozo		#60	[url]	[-]
Posts: 8456 09/04/09 1:11 PM Chris Hatfield Executive Editor SoxProspects.com	From BP: Speaking of good second halves Ryan Kalish, OF, Red Sox (Double-A Portland) Thursday's stats: 1-for-3, HR (11), 2 R, RBI, BB The best thing about Kalish's game might be that it lacks any real weaknesses. He can hit for average, flash some power, steal a few bases, work the count well and play a competent centerfield. It's not the flashiest package in the world, but everything is working of late, as the 21-year-old is batting .310/.378/.557 during the season's second half.
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Add Reply

Yuku free message boards

SoxProspects.com

SoxProspects Links

Ryan Kalish