SB Nation Atlanta Editor's Pick
Uggla: A Study in BABIP
When your starting second basemen has smashed 154 HRs over the last 5 years and begins the season with a .180/.250/.335 line, you begin to worry. Uggla's 59 wRC+ isn't the worst among second basemen in the majors, but Chris Getz, Orlando Cabrera, and Omar Infante have out-performed his offensive "contributions" (apologies to the lone trailer, Mark Ellis).
But we know that he's been terrible. What we want to know is what we can expect from him in the future. Although we can't get back the 52.8 million dollars we're going to pay him over the next 4 years (2012-2015), we might get back the type of performance that justified that 4-year extension.
Uggla has had a terrible start and a brief glance at his advanced stats suggests improvement. Prior to Wednesday's game Uggla had a .197 BABIP and a .291 xBABIP, a batted ball profile that indicates he has been unlucky, and a profile just below his career .296 BABIP.
However, a closer look at his profile reveals a more discouraging outlook for Uggla. This reveals a line drive rate of 14.6% (career 16.5%), ground ball rate of 46.4% (career 38.1%), and fly ball rate of 39.1% (career 45.4%). Given the trade-off of fly balls (which generally fall in less for hits) for ground balls (which generally more often fall in for hits), it is not surprising that Uggla has a similar expected batting average on balls in play (.291) to his career BABIP (.296), despite the lower drive line rate. But can we really expect a .291 BABIP going forward if these trends continue?
Looking at the grounders, the league-average player bats for a higher average on grounders than fly balls, but that doesn't mean this difference is the same for every player. Like most of the Braves, Dan Uggla is slower than average and should not expect to get to as many hits as his peers do on ground balls. So, in Uggla's case, grounders aren't as valuable and you can safely reduce a few points off Uggla's xBABIP.
In terms of fly balls, 15.2% of Uggla's have left the yard during his career, which means that fewer of his fly balls are reflected in his yearly BABIP than most hitters. However, this year only 11.9% of Uggla's fly balls have left the yard, meaning that more fly balls will be included in his BABIP (which excludes home runs), thus lowering what we can expect for his BABIP going forward. Furthermore, Uggla has popped out on 10.2% of his fly balls this year compared to 8.4% of the time during his career, which his xBABIP does not account for.
Unless Uggla somehow changes his batting profile (either through his approach, mechanics, or something else), his speed, lack of home runs, and increased pop outs all lead to the conclusion that his xBABIP won't be quite as high as his .291 xBABIP suggests, and that it will be much lower than his .296 career BABIP.
These aren't extreme changes, but the trends aren't encouraging. He gets most of his value for frequently hitting enough fly balls hard enough to leave the yard. If he's not doing this we'll still be wondering if his name is Dan.
Sources: Fangraphs, Cot's Contracts
This FanPost does not express the views or opinions of Talking Chop.
27 comments
|
5 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Nice work.
BABIP is so flawed and the more I think about it the less I like it. xBABIP is slightly better, but I still don’t buy the whole lucky or unlucky thing for a hitter outside of an at-bat or two. A good hitter makes his own luck and a bad hitter doesn’t (or at least doesn’t very often.)
I’d be a little more encouraged for Uggla if he was hitting the ball well, but as your post states, he really isn’t. He’s had a couple days to “clear his head” or whatever, and I think he’ll turn it around eventually. How much he turns it around is the big question, though, and we’ll probably know if the contract was worth while in the next 12 months or so. He isn’t going to get any younger.
"This is gonna feel so good getting this thing off my chest. That's what she said."
Twitter: @scottcoleman55
I’ll admit that I haven’t looked at baseball through the lens of advanced statistics for a while but I would put more stock into BABIP than I would the “skill makes luck” argument. There are so many factors involved in a single at-bat, with each changing the possible outcome. And the difference between a cut fastball and a 4-seam fastball isn’t always swing and miss. Ideally the plane of the bat would insure some kind of contact within a certain amount of movement. And this is just one factor. Beyond pitch selection things like match-up, individual strengths, situation, and defense are all factors that CAN weigh heavily in a hit versus an out.
In a game where a defenders placement 10 feet one way or the other can drastically change the outcome I’m inclined to think that while skill is by far the dominant factor, we must consider other things. Maybe BABIP or any similar stat isn’t the best indicator, but its better than using a straight skill=outcome formula, keep in mind this is a game built on failing the majority of the time.
BABIP can't be flawed...
There is no measurement of what should happen; it is strictly a measure of what has happened. It is not predictive, so it can’t be flawed.
However, what can be flawed is people’s interpretation of BABIP.
-C
It’s rough to sit through these games and not have someone that can’t hit a Ball?
by cthabeerman on May 27, 2011 11:19 AM EDT up reply actions
...But xBABIP can be flawed
While BABIP is a measurement of what happened and cannot be flawed, xBABIP is predictive in that it predicts what to expect from a certain batted ball profile and can be flawed. It is flawed because it predicts the same BABIP for certain hit types regardless of the player’s speed, power, etc.
Apologies if it wasn’t clear.
Absolutely...
xAnything can certainly be flawed, because it is a predictive stat that uses rates to project a logical outcome. There are so many circumstantial occurrences in baseball that predictive stats should only be used as a cheat sheet…one should not expect accurate results based upon such indicators.
You pointed out this discrepancy quite well in your fanpost, I think. I agree with your conclusions regarding his BABIP v. his xBABIP.
-C
It’s rough to sit through these games and not have someone that can’t hit a Ball?
by cthabeerman on May 27, 2011 12:16 PM EDT up reply actions
Well, to say that BABIP is flawed is just saying that simply expecting everyone’s BABIP to be .300 is wrong. Without BABIP, xBABIP is useless-you don’t know what one means without the other. The stat itself is harmless, but people use it wrongly. It should be used with xBABIP, though even xBABIP has some accuracy issues.
My buddy and I just decided that the braves would be set if we could get Matt Kemp, Jose Reyes, and Albert Pujols.
by willlinn on May 17, 2011 2:13 PM EDT
So we have this information but something I would like to see...
is where Uggla is hitting the ball when he makes contact. Are defenses able to shift around to accurately predict where he is hitting it? Thus making his BABIP stand up since he’s not (or may not be) able to control where he is hitting the ball?
chriti04, impressive post and I like this type of info. Look forward to your next post. :-)
Don’t worry about older women until you turn 22. It’s called the Saltalamacchia.
by bwellnjonesco on May 19, 2011 4:13 PM PDT
He’s a dead pull hitter to the left side of the infield, and he can’t hit the outside pitches.
"What are you doing, putting the tying run on first base? This is baseball, not backgammon!" -Walter Matheau, The Bad News Bears
I want the neat little graph that goes w/ that comment...
some call it a spray chart, produce it and credence will be lent to your statement. :-)
Don’t worry about older women until you turn 22. It’s called the Saltalamacchia.
by bwellnjonesco on May 19, 2011 4:13 PM PDT
by Klemson Krash on May 27, 2011 9:53 AM EDT up reply actions
Here it is...

"What are you doing, putting the tying run on first base? This is baseball, not backgammon!" -Walter Matheau, The Bad News Bears
sorry, fail.
"What are you doing, putting the tying run on first base? This is baseball, not backgammon!" -Walter Matheau, The Bad News Bears
No I'm pretty sure that is accurate.
by DogDaysofSummer on May 27, 2011 8:34 PM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
Pelican
"One thing I’ve learned as a Phillies fan is that a lot of people hate our team and its fans."-commenter on The Good Phight
by Chipper Pwns on May 28, 2011 12:19 AM EDT up reply actions
rec'd
Don’t worry about older women until you turn 22. It’s called the Saltalamacchia.
by bwellnjonesco on May 19, 2011 4:13 PM PDT
by Klemson Krash on May 28, 2011 3:27 AM EDT up reply actions
It had the dots saying where Uggla hit the ball when I saw it. When I saved and uploaded it, the dots disappeared.
"What are you doing, putting the tying run on first base? This is baseball, not backgammon!" -Walter Matheau, The Bad News Bears
That looks like an accurate representation of Uggla’s hits to me
by Quilvio Veras on May 29, 2011 10:42 AM EDT up reply actions
Great post!
I will say I’m not the best at understanding these stats, but as I was reading this, I was wondering if there is a way to get his early season BABIP for his career? Only reason I say that is because it would seem to be harder to compare an early season to a whole season/ career when you are talking about a slow starter. Like I said, I am really slow when it comes to this stuff, but I was just wondering if that would change anything.
by UpstateNyBravesFan on May 27, 2011 7:14 AM EDT reply actions
Sure...
Splits tab on Fangraphs.
Mar/April: .264
May: .306
June: .292
July: .299
Aug: .315
Sep/Oct: .297
-C
It’s rough to sit through these games and not have someone that can’t hit a Ball?
by cthabeerman on May 27, 2011 11:26 AM EDT up reply actions
So not tring to be a pain
but does that mean anything? LoL I really don’t get BABIP or XBABIP…
by UpstateNyBravesFan on May 27, 2011 10:47 PM EDT up reply actions
Of Course
You’d have to dig a bit deeper. You’d have to look at ML average BABIPs by month because it is possible that hitters as a whole do worse in Mar/April. You’d have to look at his batted ball profile to make sure it’s not just very terrible luck. All the data is available, just takes a lot of work.
The point of the post was primarily to suggest that just because Uggla’s batted ball profile suggests a .291 BABIP (xBABIP), it does not mean he has performed at that level—accounting for his speed and power.
Essentially, don’t equate xBABIP with BABIP without first laying out tons of assumptions.
What is the difference between the two (BABIP/xBABIP)
by UpstateNyBravesFan on May 28, 2011 8:18 AM EDT up reply actions
I could be wrong
But the first is the stat itself and the second is a prediction based on the first.
"He knows where he's throwing. If he didn't, there'd be dead bodies strewn all over Idaho." - Washington Senators scout on Walter Johnson
The first (BABIP) tells you what a given player’s average is on his balls in play (excludes home runs and I believe foul outs).
The second (xBABIP) estimates what the player’s average on balls in play “should” be given his batted ball profile. But as I noted in the article, it assumes all players reach base with the same frequency on different batted ball types, so it’s not totally accurate.
This is great and all...
but Uggla is well over 200 plate appearances now and he’s batting .178. When is this guy going to hit?
WHY would you give him a 50 million+ extension before this year?! Ughhh…they should have waited and then signed him for peanuts in comparison after this disgrace.
And spent that money on McLouth
and then ate it
"Insanity is doing the same thing, over and over again, but expecting different results."
— Albert Einstein
Twitter: @biggentleben
by biggentleben on May 31, 2011 8:44 AM EDT up reply actions

by 























