Matt Kemp's 2008 Was Pretty Special

by R.J. Anderson on Nov 15, 2008 1:55 PM EST

Using my new SQL skills (thanks Colin!) I ran a few queries. The one I'm publishing today was simple: since 1900, I wanted the highest BABIPs for players with 450+ at-bats as well as 150+ strikeouts. The at-bats weren't really necessary, unless someone struck out more than 50% of the time, but whatever. I assumed players with high strikeout totals would have more extreme BABIPs because they're obviously putting less balls into play. Little did I know how extreme they would turn out.

Here's everyone with a BABIP over .350.

Player	Team	Year	AB	H	HR	BB	SO	BABIP
Jose Hernandez	MIL	2002	525	151	24	52	188	0.405
B.J. Upton	TBA	2007	474	142	24	65	154	0.393
Bobby Bonds	SFN	1970	663	200	26	77	189	0.387
Mo Vaughn	BOS	1997	527	166	35	86	154	0.384
Dick Allen	PHI	1965	619	187	20	74	150	0.367
Mo Vaughn	BOS	1996	635	207	44	95	154	0.366
Mark Bellhorn	BOS	2004	523	138	17	88	177	0.365
Sammy Sosa	CHN	2000	604	193	50	91	168	0.363
Matt Kemp	LAN	2008	606	176	18	46	153	0.361
Andres Galarr.	MON	1988	609	184	29	39	153	0.361
Ryan Howard	PHI	2006	581	182	58	108	181	0.356
Preston Wilson	FLO	1999	482	135	26	46	156	0.356
Jorge Posada	NYA	2000	505	145	28	107	151	0.355
Jim Thome	CLE	1999	494	137	33	127	171	0.354
Ben Grieve	TBA	2001	542	143	11	87	159	0.353
Jim Thome	CLE	2001	526	153	49	111	185	0.353
Ray Lankford	SLN	1998	533	156	31	86	151	0.352

See, Jose Hernandez knew he was being highly successful when he put balls in play, so he figured he'd just swing at anything and watch it turn into a hit. Bobby Bonds proves that his family's name is on top of any stat report, ever. Mo Vaughn and Mark Bellhorn represent Boston well (I guess?) and then there's Matt Kemp. The 24 year old who-probably-should-not-play-center-but-had to-because-his-team-cannot-judge-defensive-talent Dodger who hit well enough for an OPS just a tick below .800. Not bad for only his second season with more than 300 plate appearances, even if he did go down on strikes 153 times this season.

For those wondering, Dave Kingman's 1981 season was the lowest with an average of .206. Jose Canseco appears to be the only other player on record with these restrictions and a BABIP below .250, although over the years Rob Deer and Jeff Burroughs gave it a legitimate run.

Tweet Comment 20 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Read More: low babip, Matt Kemp (CF - LOS)

Comments

By the way...

This post serves as fair warning to all reader’s of RJ’s future abuse of slicing and dicing data. It’s going to get out of control quickly, folks. Not that that’s a bad thing.

Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.

by Sky Kalkman on Nov 15, 2008 2:10 PM EST reply actions

Very much so.

by R.J. Anderson on Nov 15, 2008 2:19 PM EST up reply actions

Also,

Kemp had a .411 BABIP last year. Has he simply been lucky for two seasons in a row?

by Peter Bendix on Nov 15, 2008 2:13 PM EST reply actions

If he's prone to high strikeout totals...

Then not necessarily. Although at some point I would guess (no data to back this up) his BABIP will have a season of collapse, wouldn’t you?

by R.J. Anderson on Nov 15, 2008 2:18 PM EST up reply actions

Maybe your new-fangled database skills can study this question.

What is the year-to-year correlation of hitters’ BABIP? How much should we regress one season’s worth? Two seasons’? What if you include multiple variables, like K-rate, HR-rate, LD%, etc? Once you get season data from your database, Excel can run the multi-variable regressions.

Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.

by Sky Kalkman on Nov 15, 2008 2:27 PM EST up reply actions

It's very possible.

The big thing to learn is joins – I’ve gotten part of the tutorial on joins written up, but it’s a heavy topic to deal with.

To do a simple correlation, you don’t even need Excel. To correlate XR to RUNS (left over from my great run estimator test from a while back), you would use:

((SUM – (SUM * SUM / COUNT)) / sqrt((SUM – pow(SUM, 2.0) / COUNT) * (SUM – pow(SUM, 2.0) / COUNT))) AS R

It’s a bit mealymouthed but perfectly functional.

I has a blog. | Ask a sabermagician!

by cwyers on Nov 15, 2008 11:39 PM EST up reply actions

…or it would be, if SBN didn’t eat parts of it. Substitute asterisks for the x’s below:

((SUM – (SUM x SUM / COUNT)) / sqrt((SUM – pow(SUM, 2.0) / COUNT) x (SUM – pow(SUM, 2.0) / COUNT))) AS R

I has a blog. | Ask a sabermagician!

by cwyers on Nov 15, 2008 11:41 PM EST up reply actions

…I give up.

I has a blog. | Ask a sabermagician!

by cwyers on Nov 15, 2008 11:42 PM EST up reply actions

Posted a question along these lines over at StatCorner

Inquiring minds want to know.

by Nick J on Nov 15, 2008 11:00 PM EST reply actions

Excuse me?

by R.J. Anderson on Nov 15, 2008 11:08 PM EST up reply actions

Just meant that I had the same question...

How much should we regress BABIP and/or batted ball data when making projections? To put it another way, how much of BABIP (and for that matter batting average) is skill, and how much is random variation/luck?

The guys at StatCorner said they’re working on it. I just find it curious how commonplace the acceptance of DIPS is among sabermatricians, yet nobody seems to have answered the question as to how luck impacts the other side of the ledger.

by Nick J on Nov 16, 2008 8:06 PM EST up reply actions

Actually...

That’s not completely true. There HAS been a good amount of research into the luck side of hitting. But I don’t think we’ve really decided how to differentiate between luck and skill when it comes to LD% and BABIP.

In short, good question. I look forward to what people discover.

by Nick J on Nov 16, 2008 8:12 PM EST up reply actions

Oh, okay.

by R.J. Anderson on Nov 16, 2008 8:20 PM EST up reply actions

Here.

I has a blog. | Ask a sabermagician!

by cwyers on Nov 16, 2008 8:26 PM EST up reply actions

What's wrong with Kemp in center field?

Dewan’s Plus/Minus has him at -1 (16th) and Baseball Musings’ PMoR has him about average. All in all, I don’t see 1/10th of a win being so detrimental that he should be forced to move to a corner.

by Chad Moriyama on Nov 16, 2008 6:21 AM EST reply actions

Optimally he'd play in a corner.

by R.J. Anderson on Nov 16, 2008 10:54 AM EST up reply actions

Is it worth it?

Runs wise I mean.

He already has one of the best throwing arms in center, and if he can improve his range marginally to average, doesn’t his offensive production become much more valuable to the Dodgers from center than a corner? After all, it might allow them to field something like Ramirez-Kemp-Ethier or really Any High Priced Slugger-Kemp-Ethier.

I didn’t really look at his RF runs saved. :o

by Chad Moriyama on Nov 17, 2008 8:51 AM EST up reply actions