I went back and look from 2010 till now. League average with no runners on was between 93 and 96 wRC+. With runners on, it was 97-101. Significant jump in OPS and a little increase in BABIP. So, I guess on average players do hit better with runners on base. However, that doesn't mean the Braves have been less lucky bc on average teams hit better.
¿Qué decisión tomar con respecto a Peráza?
- Thread starter GovClintonTyree
- Start date
I went back and look from 2010 till now. League average with no runners on was between 93 and 96 wRC+. With runners on, it was 97-101. Significant jump in OPS and a little increase in BABIP. So, I guess on average players do hit better with runners on base. However, that doesn't mean the Braves have been less lucky bc on average teams hit better.
Russ2dollas
10 yr, $185 million Extension
I'm saying Peraza as an OF isn't that sexy. That is bat isn't so good that we should be finding a way to force him in........also that is age doesn't require us to.
Jace is a SS playing 2B. Peraza would be a better SS than Jace. Albies is a SS. Simmons is our SS. So the most value for any of those guys is at SS. I don't think Peraza is that valuable in CF and I think he is of no value in a corner of the OF.
I don't understand the braves saying Peraza and Jace don't profile at as a 3B so let's try peraza in the OF. I think Maybin and/or Mallex are likely to be better than either guy in CF. If I'm moving Peraza to a place where his bat doesn't play, I'm keeping him in the IF where he's a stud defender. If you have Peraza and Simmons on one side of the diamond, how many ground balls are getting through?
I tend to think luck has a lot to do with it since really one years worth of stats for a player and a team is a small sample size in the grand scheme of things. Otherwise you would think the players and the teams would be able to do this year after year. And in the majority of cases this doesn't happen. They vary wildy from year to year.
Well, it is luck. The Braves haven't had more runners on base than other teams, they've been able to cluster hits together better than other teams; which makes them luckier.
chop2chip
Well-known member
I agree. I don't think our team has an especially strong ability to hit with RISP. But if we are getting on base at an above average rate, then we are going to be prone to those more favorable situations.
We need power to be a better offense. That's without question.
Like I posted above, I think that the teams who have high averages with runners in scoring position tend to not strike out as much. I could be making that up though.
You are.
Well based on the results from this year that theory holds true. I won't have time until later tonight to see if its works over a larger seasonsample.
chop2chip
Well-known member
Players that don't strike out as much are subject to more BABIP luck, but they aren't going to hit into a lot of double plays. Does it balance itself out?
That's forgetting the other question of whether or not the players striking out have more power or not.
Russ2dollas
10 yr, $185 million Extension
I think line up construction matters. I think depth of line up matters in these cases. Not sure if it matters significantly.
There are a lot of variables that are not quantified by these numbers. Just b/c the braves have clustered hits more than others does not mean it's all luck. Last year we saw lots of runners on base and lots of Ks. You can have teams and players that are more prone to double plays. You can play a schedule that has better or worse pitchers/defenders.
Comparing the Braves to other teams is also a SSS b/c each team's schedule is far from apples to apples.
I love the stats too. But people act like they are all knowing. They are doing there best to quantify and account for variables....but there are so many variables. And we don't know all the are really significant.
All that to say that I think gF is generally right, but that there could be factors where the Braves are more likely to get multiple hits than others.
The Dodgers along with the Jays are the best offenses in baseball imo. Dodgers have a team 259 average. With RISP they hit 287. They strike out over 20% of the time as a team. They just have good hitters so I don't think k% has much to do with that aspect of it. Now where that comes into play is where you would need a sac fly or just a grounder to 2nd to score a runner from 3rd. K's can come into play there.
In regards to the Braves. I think their 348 BABIP with men in scoring position (which is the highest in baseball) is the main contributor as to why they are doing good in that dept. And while there may be many factors on why that is the case. I think luck is the biggest one.
You don't need to do the research. There are plenty of articles available through google.
That depends on the player. The speedy guy who you want to make contact and beat out throws to first? Sure. But then you have guys like Andrelton who sometimes makes contact just for the sake of it and historically has had very bad BABIP compared to the league. He just makes a ton of weak contact and constantly it up. Then you have the typical slugger who make strike out a lot but when he does put it in play it's hard and generally finds a hole. As a whole I think these things tend to even themselves out.
The real problem you run into is when you have teams like the Braves had last year with players like Uggla and BJ. Who are just awful overall. They strikeout a ton and have weak contact. That gets you dreadful results as we saw.
But, the Braves don't have depth in the lineup. They are a pretty bad hitting team. On almost any day, they are going to have 4 below average hitters in the lineup (5 when KJ was out)
Look at the Giants for example. They have hit .274/.334/.410 in a pitching friendly park, yet only average 4.2 runs per game. The Braves have hit .257/.321/.374 and average more runs per game. (for thethe, the Giants strikeout less as well) What gives?
Could it be clutch? The Braves are 3rd in the National League in clutch index.
In the words of David Appelman, this calculation measures, “…how much better or worse a player does in high leverage situations than he would have done in a context neutral environment.” It also compares a player against himself, so a player who hits .300 in high leverage situations when he’s an overall .300 hitter is not considered clutch.
The Braves are average with men on base so they are slightly better than no base runners.
The Braves are 111 wRC+ with men in scoring position? Why is that? It's certainly not because they don't strike out.
If you could provide a legitimate reason why the Braves are scoring so many runs despite not hitting better than other teams, I'm all ears. Its certainly not strikeouts or "turning on the switch" with runners in scoring position.
Russ2dollas
10 yr, $185 million Extension
No because stats don't allow you to pick out a Team and explain why that thing behaves as it does.
I'm talking generalities. I think you are probably right. But you state it like it's an absolute fact. Basically I'm talking about the most likely scenario vs beyond a reasonable doubt.
For the braves it could be that they've faced a bunch of RH hitters and they are better vs RH. Or that they've faced lower quality pitchers. Or the type of hitters they have. Speed. One team is beating up on bullpens. One team is more steady and the other has wide variation in offense. Or any number of things. I don't think any of those are the reason, but we don't know how those variables or any others could individually or combine to impact.
These are all things that are definitely good points and researchable.
Actually thought that was a nice change of pace until the initial post was ended with premature recommendation to trade Peraza.
GovClintonTyree
<B>Vencer a Los Doyers</B>
It's better to trade a player a year too early than a year too late.
- Gov. Clinton Tyree (and possibly Branch Rickey)
I support this 100% And hope the Braves do this with their starting pitching moving forward while continually replacing them from thenfarm.