Albert and Luck
Funky game today, to say the least. Even great pitchers need a little luck to throw a no-hitter, and Ortiz had a fair amount going today. Duncan in particular has to feel a little cheated; he hit the ball hard multiple times, and has nothing tangible to show for it. Anyway...all the talk about Albert has made me wonder how lucky he's been this year, so I checked out his BABIP. Don't know if anyone's mentioned this, but Albert's BABIP is way down from his career marks.
From 2001-2005, his BABIPs were .341, .310, .350, .304, and .318, respectively. That's an average BABIP of .324. This year he's down to .276 after today's game. That's quite a dip--the implication being that Albert has had a bit of a hard-luck year. Which sounds a little silly, considering he's still putting up a ludicrous .321/.423/.681 batting line. Still, I was wondering what his numbers would be like if his BABIP were more in line with his 2001-2005 average, so I gave him 17 more singles to raise his BABIP to .323. With those 17 extra singles--singles, mind you--added to his numbers, Albert's line would be a frightening .360/.456/.720, which is top-30 all-time territory. Yikes.
Keep in mind, this is just bringing his BABIP up to its established levels, and doing it all with singles. If he were having a "lucky" year (like 2003, if you're inclined to call it that), and if some of those hits were XBH instead of singles (not implausible), he'd be in truly rarefied air. And I'm not even mentioning the 2 weeks he spent on the DL. Although I think I just did.
None of this is particularly enlightening; it mostly just makes me feel fuzzy about just how ridiculously good Albert is. I s'pose you might take from this the expectation that his 2006 luck will level out a bit, and he might hit the ball even better the rest of the way. I'm not sure how expectations for Pujols could be any higher, but I don't doubt he could meet 'em. As far as the MVP debate goes, I...well, I'm biased. In any case, I doubt many voters credit BABIP or its implications about the relative contribution of luck to a player's performance, but...OK, let me just say this: Ryan Howard's BABIP is .347. Not helping his case.
0 recs |
5 comments
Comments
I would have predicted that
by Valatan on Sep 4, 2006 8:48 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Noticed
by Just Rope Ball on Sep 4, 2006 9:33 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
that's correct --- w qualifications
the 1st two months of the season, an insanely high pct of albert's flyballs were home runs --- something like 35 or 40 pct --- so the increased flyball frequency wasn't hurting him in any way. on the contrary, it was helping. but he's fallen off considerably since then --- down to 23 pct homer / flyball ratio, which is slightly above albt's career avg.
like the post, hummingbird.
by lboros on Sep 5, 2006 12:59 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
thanks
I take it that it's one of the Holy Grails of analysis to dissect issues like this, in order to figure out with some precision just how much luck has contributed to a given player's performance.
by Hummingbird on Sep 5, 2006 7:43 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
luck yes
by azruavatar on Sep 5, 2006 9:23 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

by 


















