Mike Trout, Yasmani Grandal, and Other Early BABIP Outliers

When it comes to early-season dominance or struggles, BABIP tends to be a featured player in many of the odder-looking lines. At the top of the league, you have the already amazing Mike Trout sporting a .519 BABIP, fueling a video game-like 236 wRC+ and a 1.224 OPS. On the flip side, quality players are still looking way up at the Mendoza line, such as Yasmani Grandal (.121 BA, .125 BABIP) or Kyle Tucker (.179 BA, .173 BABIP). Even though the evidence suggests that there’s more variability in BABIP ability among hitters than pitchers, a month of a season is a pitifully small amount of time to establish a new baseline expectation for BABIP. So, who is “earning” their BABIP and who isn’t so far?

Similar to the “x” Statcast stats, the ZiPS calculates “z” stats — I’ll let you guess what the z stands for — as part of its year-end projection model. These aren’t yet used in the simpler in-season model, though that’s in the works. Similar to Statcast, ZiPS estimates BABIP from the component parts: launch angle, exit velocity, speed data (for grounders), and so on. ZiPS also considers the direction a ball is hit, as a player’s pull tendency is a repeatable skill. This last data matters quite a bit. For example, grounders hit up the middle end up as singles about half the time, but grounders hit 15 degrees to the left or right of the second base bag are hits about a tenth of the time.

How does it work? The numbers are still volatile, but if all you have is zBABIP and actual BABIP, zBABIP is historically the better predictor. For all players with 50 PA in both 2020 and ’21, 2020 zBABIP is closer to 2021 BABIP than 2020 BABIP for 65% of players. Historically, the best predictor of actual BABIP, again using only these two stats, is a linear combination of 0.9 zBABIP and 0.1 actual BABIP.


Last season is still a small sample, but it’s at least interesting to look at 2020’s overachievers and underachievers.

zBABIP Overachievers and Underachievers, 2020
Name 2020 zBABIP 2020 BABIP Difference 2021 BABIP
Willi Castro .311 .448 .137 .264
Bobby Dalbec .275 .394 .119 .274
Ryan Mountcastle .282 .398 .116 .309
Alec Bohm .298 .410 .112 .258
Josh Fuentes .300 .406 .106 .225
Mike Brosseau .311 .412 .101 .222
Marcell Ozuna .294 .391 .097 .237
Willy Adames .297 .388 .091 .258
José Iglesias .320 .407 .087 .313
Ty France .304 .390 .086 .289
Donovan Solano .311 .396 .085 .375
Mike Yastrzemski .287 .370 .083 .288
Franmil Reyes .275 .355 .080 .318
Travis d’Arnaud .332 .411 .079 .262
Michael Conforto .335 .412 .077 .300
Name 2020 zBABIP 2020 BABIP Difference 2021 BABIP
Josh VanMeter .282 .159 -.123 .194
Hunter Renfroe .247 .141 -.106 .250
Gregory Polanco .295 .193 -.102 .250
Brett Phillips .329 .235 -.094 .355
Gary Sánchez .253 .159 -.094 .200
Gavin Lux .288 .195 -.093 .281
Tyler O’Neill .272 .189 -.083 .292
Danny Jansen .273 .190 -.083 .083
Nick Senzel .283 .204 -.079 .278
Edwin Ríos .294 .216 -.078 .094
Rougned Odor .235 .157 -.078 .128
Joc Pederson .278 .200 -.078 .302
Elvis Andrus .277 .200 -.077 .194
Kole Calhoun .287 .211 -.076 .364
Bryan Reynolds .307 .231 -.076 .341

Running 2021, I did run into an odd hiccup: zBABIP was suddenly overestimating actual BABIP for the league as a whole, something I had not come across before. I ran a number of tests to see if there was a particularly type of player who zBABIP was now overrating, but I never found any significant difference among hitters based on power, level of ability, groundball tendencies, contact rate, etc. In other words, it’s evidence that across the league, players are getting fewer hits from balls hit the same way in the same direction than in past years. My hypothesis, which I will revisit at the end of the year, is that we’re seeing the effects of the slightly deadened ball.

You Aren't a FanGraphs Member
It looks like you aren't yet a FanGraphs Member (or aren't logged in). We aren't mad, just disappointed.
We get it. You want to read this article. But before we let you get back to it, we'd like to point out a few of the good reasons why you should become a Member.
1. Ad Free viewing! We won't bug you with this ad, or any other.
2. Unlimited articles! Non-Members only get to read 10 free articles a month. Members never get cut off.
3. Dark mode and Classic mode!
4. Custom player page dashboards! Choose the player cards you want, in the order you want them.
5. One-click data exports! Export our projections and leaderboards for your personal projects.
6. Remove the photos on the home page! (Honestly, this doesn't sound so great to us, but some people wanted it, and we like to give our Members what they want.)
7. Even more Steamer projections! We have handedness, percentile, and context neutral projections available for Members only.
8. Get FanGraphs Walk-Off, a customized year end review! Find out exactly how you used FanGraphs this year, and how that compares to other Members. Don't be a victim of FOMO.
9. A weekly mailbag column, exclusively for Members.
10. Help support FanGraphs and our entire staff! Our Members provide us with critical resources to improve the site and deliver new features!
We hope you'll consider a Membership today, for yourself or as a gift! And we realize this has been an awfully long sales pitch, so we've also removed all the other ads in this article. We didn't want to overdo it.

I also took the opportunity to look back at past Aprils and see if there is a similar discrepancy between zBABIP and BABIP in past Aprils, possibly due to early-season weather. I found no such discrepancy. This will be something to review as the season progresses.

zBABIP Overachievers, 2021
Name zBABIP BABIP Difference
Brandon Nimmo .303 .465 .162
Mike Trout .365 .517 .152
Yermín Mercedes .272 .413 .141
Nick Maton .307 .439 .132
Tucker Barnhart .345 .474 .129
Jean Segura .296 .419 .123
Yordan Alvarez .316 .438 .122
Tyler Stephenson .300 .421 .121
Francisco Mejía .233 .347 .114
Randy Arozarena .289 .403 .114
Luis Robert .320 .433 .113
Jared Walsh .278 .388 .110
Yadier Molina .260 .365 .105
Charlie Culberson .298 .396 .098
J.D. Martinez .280 .376 .096

Sadly, Mercedes, one of the most fun breakouts this year, appears on the overachiever list. While he’s hitting for good power, and that’s likely to continue, there’s a lot of air in that .373 BA to deflate. Trout naturally appears on this list, something that should be expected when a hitter has a BABIP over .500. The good news is that even with the largest discrepancy between zBABIP and BABIP, he still has the best zBABIP in baseball, at .365. Barnhart, while an overachiever, still has earned a high early-season BABIP thanks to being a line drive machine. (The league as a whole has a .622 BABIP on line drives, a .227 BABIP on grounders, and a .122 BABIP on fly balls.)

zBABIP Leaders, 2021
Name zBABIP BABIP Difference
Mike Trout .365 .517 .152
Byron Buxton .365 .417 .052
Jake Marisnick .347 .333 -.014
Starling Marte .347 .381 .034
Tucker Barnhart .345 .474 .129
J.T. Realmuto .344 .397 .053
Yadiel Hernandez .344 .364 .020
Roman Quinn .343 .214 -.129
Nate Lowe .339 .364 .025
Donovan Solano .339 .375 .036
Colin Moran .338 .392 .054
Niko Goodrum .336 .404 .068
Jesse Winker .335 .420 .085
Luis Arraez .334 .320 -.014
Corey Seager .333 .317 -.016

Two breakouts this season, Lowe and Winker, appear on this list, which is good news for their teams and fantasy players who have them on their roster. There was also quite a lot of meat behind Buxton’s 2021, earned before a hip injury put him on the shelf for a possibly extended amount of time. And while you probably shouldn’t be bullish on Quinn overall, there’s at least a good reason to think he can hit better than a pitcher, as damning with faint praise as that is. Juan Soto just misses the list, with a zBABIP about 60 points better than his actual BABIP, which would give him a season far more in line with expectations.

zBABIP Underachievers, 2021
Name zBABIP BABIP Difference
Matt Carpenter .273 .094 -.179
Victor Reyes .328 .182 -.146
Danny Jansen .229 .083 -.146
Yasmani Grandal .261 .119 -.142
Edwin Ríos .231 .094 -.137
Josh Bell .295 .160 -.135
Roman Quinn .343 .214 -.129
Leody Taveras .299 .174 -.125
Roberto Pérez .291 .167 -.124
Kyle Tucker .299 .180 -.119
Hunter Dozier .287 .175 -.112
Rougned Odor .235 .128 -.107
Freddie Freeman .299 .193 -.106
Darin Ruf .293 .192 -.101
Miguel Cabrera .286 .186 -.100

There’s a real limit on BABIP ability at the low end. I’ve found that historically, BABIPs below .230 or so have minimal predictive value. This is unsurprising, as pitchers, who are very rarely selected for their offensive talents, historically have a BABIP in the .210 to .230 range (.213 in 2021). Even Randy Johnson, as awkward a hitting pitcher as I can remember, had a .234 BABIP for his career. Bob Buhl, a pitcher so incompetent offensively that he once had an 0-for-72 streak, still managed a .162 BABIP. Albert Pujols, meanwhile, just missed the top 15 (.262 zBABIP vs. .176 BABIP), meaning that there’s a lot of truth to a complaint that the Angels released him for basically the same performance they were happy to plug into the middle of their lineup for several years.

As for those still active, there’s hope for Carpenter! He’s nearing the end of his career, but his offensive numbers shouldn’t be quite this poor, no matter how defensive shifting is involved. With the zBABIP, Cabrera’s line looks more like his unimpressive recent seasons rather than that of a bad pitcher. And the stats suggest that the long leashes for Tucker and Bell have ample justification.

zBABIP Trailers, 2021
Name zBABIP BABIP Difference
Cristian Pache .205 .156 -.049
Willians Astudillo .207 .293 .086
Jordan Luplow .207 .136 -.071
Yu Chang .209 .179 -.030
Brett Gardner .213 .273 .060
Taylor Trammell .217 .237 .020
Miguel Sanó .218 .194 -.024
Eugenio Suárez .219 .156 -.063
Mike Zunino .227 .250 .023
Danny Jansen .229 .083 -.146
Jonathan Schoop .229 .231 .002
Didi Gregorius .229 .256 .027
Edwin Ríos .231 .094 -.137
D.J. Stewart .233 .226 -.007
Francisco Mejía .233 .347 .114

A .194 zBABIP isn’t a prediction for Sanó, but it is evidence that there really is something wrong with him this year, more than just the sore hamstring. He’s lost a shocking 10 mph of exit velocity and half his overall hard-hit rate, and zBABIP isn’t an outlier, as Statcast’s xBA thinks he only “deserves” a miserable .152 BA this year based on his performance. Seeing Suárez on a list like this should concern the Reds: He may not be as lousy as his .156 BABIP suggests, but he still ought to have a very low batting average this year so far. The only silver lining for his 2021 is that he’s played somewhat better defense at short since his two-error Opening Day performance.

In chat recently, I expressed the opinion that Pache would probably seize back playing time from Guillermo Heredia before the season’s over, but given that he hasn’t been that much better than his actual BABIP, maybe he’ll need more extensive time in the minors. Since being recalled, he hit a home run in his first game back on the major league roster but has gone 1-for-23 since.





Dan Szymborski is a senior writer for FanGraphs and the developer of the ZiPS projection system. He was a writer for ESPN.com from 2010-2018, a regular guest on a number of radio shows and podcasts, and a voting BBWAA member. He also maintains a terrible Twitter account at @DSzymborski.

35 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
DavidMember since 2016
5 years ago

My eyeballs (and selective recall) tell me that more ground balls up the middle seem to be turning into outs this year, as defenses seem to have a guy behind second a lot of the time. This could explain why zBABIP is overestimating BABIP—is there a groundball direction graph for 2021 yet?

PerkinsMember since 2019
5 years ago
Reply to  David

Related to this, BABIP vs. particular teams must differ somewhat. If LAD is indeed shifting uniquely, they’re going to gobble up GB’s that other teams just wouldn’t, and miss some that other teams would get to.

Also, I have to wonder what effect individual extremely talented defenders have on in-division opponents BABIP. Do prime Simmons and Arenado eat up significant BABIP from RHB? My guess would be zips is already factoring this in.

jbrynsvold
5 years ago
Reply to  David

I agree that anecdotally, shifts seem to be even more effective this year. Wondering if there is any data on that.

senor_mike
5 years ago
Reply to  David

Yes I was thinking the same. As a Met fan I have noticed/been told they are deploying shifts against RHB for the first time this year (in fact the botched play that spawned the dugout argument between Lindor and McNeil happened on a RHB shift), and I have seen McNeil field a slew of grounders up the middle.

The Shift appears to have found a new level of effectiveness.

MikeSMember since 2020
5 years ago

I know it is early, but Yasmani Grandal’s .113/.378/.242 line is just incredibly wacky. It’s so bizarre that he can be a useful offensive player (wRC+ 102) with such a poor batting average and slugging percentage. Nick Madrigal is outslugging him by 137 points!

Michael E Haddad
5 years ago
Reply to  MikeS

Madrigal was outslugging ABreu for a while. He’s tricky because he’s mixed in doubles and a triple into his numbers on top of an elite BA/OBP.

Smiling PolitelyMember since 2018
5 years ago

Am I right in understanding that the commissioner, finding the game too boring for the kids/people who spend money, deadened the ball, reducing action to historically-low levels…and earns $11million/year?

Has he come under any criticism for making changes without bothering to consider what consequences they might bring *before* enacting them? Will there be consequences for producing the “worst” effect possible? Will anyone write an article criticizing him for this?

Travis LMember since 2016
5 years ago

I am no fan of the commish, or the office itself. But what makes you think the office didn’t consider these consequences? How do you know that this isn’t the intended result?

(Also, there are many articles, especially on this site, that criticize the league offices. Your bewilderment reflects your perspective – something easily fixed by reading more about baseball!)

Smiling PolitelyMember since 2018
5 years ago
Reply to  Travis L

I’m no fan of Manfred, but I’m not opposed to change. The goal of deadening the ball was to creation more action in an otherwise monotonous, TTO game as well as to reduce overall scoring (according to the leaked Manfred memo published by The Athletic). Certainly, the latter is happening; I suppose you could call more routine flyouts “action,” but I wouldn’t, and I don’t see a rousing chorus of fans thankful for more softly-hit balls or the lowest batting avg since my grandparents were young. Considering, also, that MLB took ownership of Rawlings in 2018 with the overt goal of standardizing the ball, I don’t see how you can’t hold MLB and Manfred specifically responsible for the current situation.

The generalization of your comments aside, while Manfred’s faced criticism in general, I was disappointed by a lack of testing and a lack of criticism pointing out how little in-play study had been done with the new ball. Even now, as empirical data continue to emerge about a fundamentally different game than has existed before (see Dan’s claim today, for example), there is silence. I’d love to read more; you may assume I haven’t, but there’s actually a dearth of official response about/to the ball when it comes to the league, its actions, and its goals in this matter. When was the last time Manfred talked about it openly or shared data himself? When was the last time he explained why they made the changes they did or what success looks like? You’d think once, publicly, would be a minimum number.

Compare this to when the NBA tried to change balls during the preseason of 06-07; after facing a week or so of criticism from players and fans, they reverted, recognizing that changing the ball was changing the game on more levels than they considered. In 21-22, they’re changing again, working in tandem with the PA and manufacturer.

I’m not “bewildered;” I’m asking why something that’s fundamentally-changing the game doesn’t get more attention or commenting from the individual/institution supposedly in charge of managing it, and I wish more criticism of that issue existed. It’s perfectly reasonable to enjoy something different, but I’m not sure why Manfred gets a pass from the PA and media, given the dramatic impact it’s having.

bosoxforlifeMember since 2016
5 years ago

This topic has come up on this board a few times and I have agreed with the points you have made. Somehow it seems that the Lords of Baseball thought that virtually all the would have been HR’s from previous years would turn into doubles and triples but it appears that 36% simply fall into an outfielders glove. Did these people not see that coming? I am no fan of HR’s being the only or, at least, primary way of scoring but fewer runs and a .020 drop in batting average from the past full season and over 6000 more K’s than hits this year is far worse.

neuroccountantMember since 2020
5 years ago

I think the ball is behaving EXACTLY the way the league wanted it to behave. I’ll try to explain.

Let’s rewind back to last season. The league has identified a problem, which is that too many at-bats are ending in home runs or strikeouts and there isn’t enough action happening in the field or on the basepaths. They identify that a major cause of this phenomenon is that even only moderately well-hit fly balls are drifting over the fence for home runs rather than falling harmlessly into outfielders’ gloves. 2021 was the most recent year of a multi-year trend in this direction, and it’s not trending in that direction necessarily because the ball has continued changing but because more and more hitters are trying to maximize their launch angles to take advantage of the characteristics of the ball.

So now the 2020 season is over and in the ensuing offseason, the league is trying to determine what characteristics the previous ball had that exacerbated this problem and what characteristics a new ball would need to have to reverse the trend. It seems to me that a ball that turns more fly balls into outs rather than home runs is exactly what you’d want, and that’s what they seem to have produced. Hitters and teams’ front offices, however, haven’t yet adjusted to the new ball, and are still swinging for the fences trying to optimize launch angles using strategies that are largely based upon the old ball’s characteristics. As teams digest the data from the first six weeks of 2021, they will ideally develop strategies that have been adjusted to the new ball, which will hopefully involved prioritizing line drives for base hits and extra-base hits instead of pursuing homers uber alles.

We’ll see how the chips fall.

MikeD
5 years ago
Reply to  neuroccountant

This is possible. The issue is it could take a while for hitters and coaches to re-adjust their approaches. The second issue is the new ball seemingly is allowing for better grips and therefore better movement. The result is less HRs, less run scoring, lower BA, and even less action, at least for the time being.

neuroccountantMember since 2020
5 years ago
Reply to  MikeD

I would love to find out whether any increase in spin rates in 2021 vs. 2020 is the result of the ball or more widespread use by pitchers of… substances.

Smiling PolitelyMember since 2018
5 years ago
Reply to  neuroccountant

I don’t think anyone disagrees with you; the question is whether using MLB to determine different outcomes over the course of regular seasons without telling anyone constitutes effective governance

Michael E Haddad
5 years ago
Reply to  neuroccountant

I don’t know how the easiest solution to MLB problems isn’t banning substances. Draw a firm line with major consequences and see what happens.

bosoxforlifeMember since 2016
5 years ago
Reply to  neuroccountant

I commented on your points in response to Smiling Politely. Do you really think the league wanted to lessen offense? I think they have been shocked by what has happened. Record breaking low batting averages and record breaking high strikeout totals seem to have a large majority of fans complaining and the crescendo is growing. ESPN had a long dissertation on that subject today which included articles by almost every respected member of the media that covers the game. I am going to include a comment on MikeD’s comment below. Even if they were so inclined it is very, very difficult for hitters to adjust their approach on a whim, or at a moment’s notice. As velocity has overpowered more and more hitters, not many look confident when they step into the box and they aren’t thinking about placing the ball, they are hoping to simply hit it. The last out of Sunday’s Red Sox- Orioles game is a perfect example. The hitter Pat Valaika, even with 2 strikes, was clearly guessing fastball, and never moved as Barnes dropped a hook over the exact middle of the zone. This is not hitting but it is what the game is evolving into and it ain’t pretty.

casey jMember since 2026
5 years ago
Reply to  bosoxforlife

That last thing has happened for as long as there has been baseball.

dl80Member since 2026
5 years ago
Reply to  neuroccountant

I mostly agree with this take. The three solutions, in addition to keeping the deadened ball, are not all that radical, by themselves: 1) lower the mound, since we know this has worked in the past. 2) shrink the strike zone slightly, and implement robot umps, so that we have both a smaller and more consistent strike zone. 3) make a slight restriction on shifting so that there always need to be two infielders on either side of second base (or there can’t be more than 2 on the dirt on either side, or whatever).

I’m not in love with any of the solutions by themselves, especially the restrictions on shifts. But if the league wants more hits, fewer strikeouts, fewer home runs, and more line drives, this is the way.

SæderMember since 2024
5 years ago
Reply to  neuroccountant

I’ve seen this theory a bunch this year. But based on my surface level research, I’m not quite sure it’s reflected in the data. I went over to the FG stats page, went to league stats, tabbed over to Batted Ball, and the data going back to 2002 seems to be remarkably constant year over year since then. At least for GB/FB, GB%, LD%, FB%, IFFB% (pop ups). The outliers seems to be a spike in HR/FB from 2019-21. Indeed, possibly a weird new ball, right? In fact, 2021’s HR/FB is still higher than all prior years except 2017.

The other unexpected stat is that IFH% (number of grounders that become hits) is at its peak in 2020-21. So this makes me think that a lot of shifts aren’t really keeping batters off base in a significant way.

Now, I’m really not going to defend any of my analysis as I may be missing or misunderstanding fundamental concepts. I’m no sabrmetrician. But the batted ball stats just don’t seem to line up with many of what I’d expect given the online rancour, at least when it comes to the shifts and to swings.

The only thing that really stands out in my perusal of the different league stats over that period is that K% has gone from around 16.5% to 24%. So my general theory has been that messing with the ball misses the point (and it’d be great to somehow return to the pre-2018 ball rather than reinventing the ball each year), as does criticizing shifts and launch angle. I think the clearest fix would be in adjusting the zone. But I’m not really convinced that would be a clean solution either, as many have pointed out that you might just see an explosion in walks…. oy. real conundrum!

PS: here’s the link, I hope, to the league batted ball stats:
https://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=bat&lg=all&qual=0&type=2&season=2021&month=0&season1=1981&ind=0&team=0,ss&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0&startdate=1981-01-01&enddate=2021-12-31

MRDXolMember since 2021
5 years ago

Grandal currently owns an OBP (.372) more than 3x his batting average, because he’s walking an absurd amount– 29.7% BB!

HughesMember since 2016
5 years ago

Danny Jansen (lowest BABIP on the underachievers) is kind of painful to watch this year. He’s chasing, wiffing and getting bad contact. He’s got a few decent liners right at defenders.

radivel
5 years ago

Before Danny Jansen finally got a hit, at the end of his 0 for 35 streak, of all players who appeared in 40 ABs in a season in the past 100 years (over 37,000 player seasons) he had the 9th worst BABIP of any of them. I think it was 0.063 at the time or something like that.

Every time he connected, it was right at someone. He even hit a ball so well that it knocked the glove off the defender, but it was still right at him.

HughesMember since 2016
5 years ago
Reply to  radivel

And then he got 3 homers over the weekend, which did nothing for his BABIP.

Ryu is pitching tomorrow in Atlanta, and his career wRC+ is better than Jansen’s this season.

Lanidrac
5 years ago

Why do we always use BABIP while ignoring extra bases? While BABIP is still useful when looking at components, shouldn’t we focus more on “slugging percentage on balls in play” (SLGBIP) when looking at players’ offensive performance or team defense?

HamelinROY
5 years ago
Reply to  Lanidrac

To me, BABIP isn’t meant to be much of a ‘performance’ stat, that is not something I really grade a player based on.*

BABIP is more of a luck indicator. If a player is having a breakout or slump year, first thing is to compare BABIP for the season vs career. That can show you if they’ve just been lucky or unlucky, with their career likely representing a better ‘true’ number for that player. zBABIP is just another way to compare and can account for a player changing their batting approach.

*Obviously it does show a certain skillset, like line drives, speed, ability to avoid shifts, etc, which is of value

Lanidrac
5 years ago
Reply to  HamelinROY

Yeah, but shouldn’t we be looking at SLGBIP rather than BABIP to determine whether or not a hitter has gotten lucky? Hitting doubles and triples (well, along with speed in the latter case) instead of just singles is a skill with which hitters may have good or bad luck, too, you know.

Meanwhile, there’s usually additional defensive value and skill involved in robbing an extra-base hit, as well as value and skill in keeping a hitter from stretching a single into a double (or a double into a triple).

DLHughey
5 years ago
Reply to  Lanidrac

Just look at wOBA or xWOBA if you want to factor in extra base hits. zBABIP is more about the binary “did he get/deserve a hit or not” which can highlight variation due to other factors aside from what we can quantify.

Lanidrac
5 years ago
Reply to  DLHughey

Yeah, xwOBA is even better for judging true talent levels, but that just further proves that zBABIP shouldn’t be used at all. A binary factor is useless in that kind of measurement, plus it completely ignores home runs.

Meanwhile, BABIP can still be used for component measurements where we do just want a binary answer, while SLGBIP should be best for looking at overall batted ball luck (as opposed to looking directly for a true talent level) and the quality of team defense.

DLHughey
5 years ago

From what I’ve been reading, league wide wOBA is also trailing xWOBA, which makes your zBABIP seem even more valid given that it is also running higher than BABIP. zBABIP and xWOBA likely use a lot of similar inputs, but demonstrate different concepts, so this is definitely a job well done, Dan.

g4Member since 2020
5 years ago

Fantasy owner here who is growing concerned about Gregorius. Any Phillies fans out there who can anecdotally corroborate or counter whether you think his poor zBABIP thus far is reflective of a sharp decline in hit tool? Thanks.

TheGarrettCooperFanClub
5 years ago
Reply to  g4

His Statcast metrics have never been all that good, and last year they were outright bad. He relied on pulling fly balls over the fence for home runs in hitter-friendly ballparks (HRs are not included in BABIP, but that’s how he’s had most of his success). Just taking a quick look at his season, he’s still pulling the ball and hitting fly balls, but not all that hard, which combined with a deadened ball that has a lot of fly balls dying, it is not a good recipe for success for Didi. Seems to be pretty well deserved to me.

g4Member since 2020
5 years ago

Boooooo, but yeah, you’re right of course

Antonio BananasMember since 2026
5 years ago

I wonder if zBABIP factors the slowest runners enough. Miggy is slow AF and a .186 on BABIP doesn’t surprise me given his 53% GB%

Someone like Trea Turner could probably get Miggy out on a GB by running the ball to first. And I mean that literally. Miggy takes a little over 5 seconds to get to 1B. If it’s ~ 85-130 (per google) for a SS throw, that means Trea’s 30 ft/second would take him ~4 seconds to sprint to first (not sure the math of how long to get to his top speed, So I added a second), probably making up for the time the GB gets to him.

Hilarious.

Michael E Haddad
5 years ago

When you look at TA and Yerwins babip, it seems insanely obvious that they must come crashing down. That argument has been made against TA by baseball savants for years and has yet to happen. I’m going to save the same baseball nerds the drama with Yerwin, he’s not going to crash either, although 380 is unsustainable.

2-3 weeks ago I posted on the athletic that Yerwin’s ability to hit was for real in response to some article that said it wasn’t. I said that “Yerwin has an elite approach, similar to TA, in that both have a way of taking a pitcher’s pitch and just poking soft liners or medium sized grounders into holes.” I got ridiculed and tbh, I don’t know all the intricacies of stats like BAPIP. I also commented that when you watch both hitters every day instead of just relying on expected stats, you realize how good they are. You realize they should have high BABIPS.

Sure I’m a White Sox fan and probably biased and have a limited scope, but both these guys have a savant-like approach and I have yet to see pitchers find the hole. Until I do, BABIP won’t bring them down the way others seem to think it will.

LaBellaVitaMember since 2018
5 years ago

From a physics standpoint, BABIP values must be based on the batted ball exit velocity – literally. Which means there is a directional effect, as the graph nicely shows, and a magnitude, i.e., speed effect. I would like to see the same graph presented with the average speed of the ball off the bat as function of the relative angle.

Next, I would like to see these same graphs for each of the teams. Why? Because the high variation between the lines seems astonishing given how many teams do shift. A team that shifts properly should see a near flat line for the graph above.