Here are the numbers not counting today's game:

           BAbip   BA     Diff

Shopp  .411  .250   +161

Pods    .360  .305     +55

Gomez .357  .281     +76

Chiri    .342   .286    +56

Middl   .335  .288     +47 

AGon    .329  .300    +29

Sween  .327  .270    +57

Byrd     .325  .270     +55

Ross    .322   .269     +53

CC       .319   .282     +37

Ortiz   .315   .318            -3

Kalish  .310  .229      +81

Ells      .306   .277     +29

Nava   .302   .246     +56

Pedey .298   .288      +10

MLB    .293   .255      +38

Youk  .288   .233       +55

Aviles .269  .250       +19

Salty  .269  .225        +44

Punto .258  .200        +58

Loney .253  .233        +20

DMac  .242  .214        +28

Lava   .196  .161        +35

Iggy   .132  .111         +21

 

The biggest differentials:

Shopp 161

Kalish 81, Gomez 76

Punto 58, Sween 57, Chiri 56, Nava 56, Pods 55. Byrd 55, Youk 55, Ross 53

Midd 47, Salty 44, CC 37, Lava 35

AGon 29, Ells 29, DMac 28, Iggy 21, Loney 20

Aviles 19, Pedey 10

Papi -3

 

There is a lot of debate over the meaning of these numbers, but for those who think Gomez might be the answer at 1B next year, he may come back down to earth by then.

Also...

Shoppach did great while with us, but it might have been a bit of a mirage.

Kalish could be much worse than he has looked this year.

Papi, Pedey and Aviles could have better numbers with a bit more luck.

I am not a big believer in the value of Babip, and I AM one of those guys who thinks Gomez deserves at least a shot at 1B next year. He has hit the baseball well at every level he has been at, including in the majors. Not sure if he will be a fixture there, but I am not concerned about his offense. Its his defense that might be the problem for him.

Some of that has to be nuanced.  Papi's avg is usually lower than his BABIP because he never beats out a ground ball, and he probably hits a fair amount of shots into the shift.  Ciriaco and WMB could be due for some reversion.  It also needs to be taken in context of what their norms are.

A lot of the BABIP is driven off your K/W ratio.  Pedey's BABIP and average were down because his K/W ratio decreased.  The RS as a whole need more discipline.

In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

I realize 104 PAs is a small sample size, but a .754 OPS is not 1B or DH material. And, the BAbip indicates his OPS could have been lower with normal luck.

He also had only an .819 minor league OPS in over 3300 PAs. Now, the .913 AAA OPS is impressive, and I am not writing him off. There have been many players who turn it around at later ages than most, but there are also countless players who do well in AAA, but never come close to equaling those numbers in MLB. I'm all for giving Gomez a shot, and since I do not think we will seriously compete in 2013, I don't see any harm in giving him a look, however, if a deal comes along to get a solid 1Bman under team control for several year, I wouldn't let it pass by based on hopes for Gomez. I actually have higher hopes for Travis Shaw or eventually moving possible blocked prospects like Cecchini or Bogaerts to 1B by 2014 or so.

In response to Joebreidey's comment:

Pardon me if I missed something here, but BAbip is based on just balls put into play and the averages associated with it. It does not count Ks or BBs in the equation.

Next year we can give Gomez a shot, as you said. Its a rebuilding year anyway. If he fails to produce then we do need to go after a 1B who can really help us. In any event, its the pitching we really need to focus on, not the offense as much. That needs a total do-over.

In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

I agree and have always said it is all about the pitching. My point about 1B was that if the right deal comes along to get a solid 1Bman this winter, we should consder it, since next winter may not have a comparable opportunity. I certainly would not forgo getting a solid dtsrter to trade for a solid 1Bman this winter- that's for sure.

It's very interesting to look at them all in one list.  I'm surprised to see Shoppach up there - that's a huge gap, but he Ks a lot which is why his BA is so low relative to his BABIP - but most of the rest at the top were predictable as they all so greatly exceeded their history i.e. got lucky over a small sample size.

I wish all the career minor leaguers well and never write off anyone until all options are exhausted....but it would be astonishing if Ciriaco, Gomez, Nava etc. ever play well enough to hold down a starting job with the Sox. 

In response to moonslav59's comment:

Oh absolutely. There is no need to focus solely on pitching. Hopefully our GM can multitask and build other areas for the future as well. The guys in the FO need to sit down and set up some realistic goals. I would think that planning to make a run for the playoffs in 2014 and a run at a ring in 2015 might be realistic. Hopefully the fans next year will understand what is going on. As long as progress is being made I will be content.

In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

That pretty much sums it up nicely. I do think we can make some moves geared towards 2014 and beyond that also help us do better in 2013, and who knows, maybe a miracle can happen, but I'd be content with just having a good feeling about moving in the right direction by this time next year.

A lot of the BABIP is driven off your K/W ratio.  Pedey's BABIP and average were down because his K/W ratio decreased.  The RS as a whole need more discipline.

[/QUOTE]

Pardon me if I missed something here, but BAbip is based on just balls put into play and the averages associated with it. It does not count Ks or BBs in the equation.

[/QUOTE

Unless I am not understanding the stat,  a guy who K's alot , should generally have a bigger difference between BA and Babip....since his average his reduced by the K, but his Babip would not be......thus if you had 2 guys with 600 ABs, 200 hits, 30 HR, 10 SF and player A K's 100 times and player B K's 50 times....both would have BA of .333, but Player A would have a Babip of .354 and player B would have a Babip of .321. Player B by virtue of K'ing less is making more outs on balls in play, so his Babip is lower. You can say that player B hit more balls in play and yet made more outs, so he must have been unluckier, but since guys who K less tend to hit the ball less hard than guys who K more, their hit balls are less likely to get past a fielder.

 

If BABIP minimizes or ignores K's by the batter, what's the point? 

I completely agree the FO needs to go after a good hitting firstbaseman because Gomez/Loney ain't the answer.  Youk was the answer for several years.  Then AGon was. 

I also agree the FO is wrong if they think pitching is the only problem to fix.  Even if Ortiz, Middlebrooks, Pedroia, Ellsbury, and Ross are all healthy next year, the Sox need another big bat in the lineup. 

Unless I am not understanding the stat,  a guy who K's alot , should generally have a bigger difference between BA and Babip....since his average his reduced by the K, but his Babip would not be......thus if you had 2 guys with 600 ABs, 200 hits, 30 HR, 10 SF and player A K's 100 times and player B K's 50 times....both would have BA of .333, but Player A would have a Babip of .354 and player B would have a Babip of .321. Player B by virtue of K'ing less is making more outs on balls in play, so his Babip is lower. You can say that player B hit more balls in play and yet made more outs, so he must have been unluckier, but since guys who K less tend to hit the ball less hard than guys who K more, their hit balls are less likely to get past a fielder.

 

True, but BAbip is only about the balls that are hit and the percentage of those balls that go for hits or outs.

If player A has 600 PAs and Ks 100 times and walks 100 times, that means he hits the ball 400 times. If he gets 100 hits, he will have a BA and BAbip of .250.

If player B has 600 PAs and Ks 50 times and walks 50 times, that means he puts the ball in play 500 times. If he gets 25% of his hit balls to fall in for hits (125 of 500), he will have the same BAbip numbers as player A. The less Ks and BBs shouldn't make a big difference with BAbip. It does with overall BA though.

However, I get your point about having more k's makes your BA more likely to be lower since you put the ball in play more often, so yes, the differential numbers are affected.

If BABIP minimizes or ignores K's by the batter, what's the point? 

It doesn't minimize K's. It is a useful tool to see if a player is getting more or less of his share of hit balls that go for hits or outs. It is a rough guide to who is "lucky" and "unlucky" over a set period of time. Sure, some batters hit the ball harder than others, so are likely to get more hits when they do make contact, and that is where comparing a players past BAbip with his current one can help judge if he is playing over his head or not that season.

Moon,

It may give you a genral indication of being lucky or not, but since the only difference between the BA calcualtion and the Babip calculation if HR, K's and SF, clearly it weights those when comparing players....so you could easily have two players with the exact same BA and exact same Babip, but without seeing their games you couldnt be sure if one was luckier than the other....especially since teams dont play abalnced schedule....Player a might play more games in his division vs teams with better defenses than Player B's division......or Player B may play more games in a Division where the other teams pitchers have higher K ratios and thus he was more likely to strike out than to make outs on bateed balls proportinate to his normal average. I dont disagree it is one of many tools you can use to judge a player, and might be more useful if you compare a Players Babip for the year to his Babip average for the last 5 years.....that would show perhaps that the given year was luckier than he normally has on his batted balls

IMO BaBip is a statistic of dubious significance and if it is useful at all, its way down the line in terms of ability to predict the future success of a player. Better stats: OPS, OPS+, BA, K's/100 ABs..etc

This post has been removed.

Moon,

It may give you a genral indication of being lucky or not, but since the only difference between the BA calcualtion and the Babip calculation if HR, K's and SF, clearly it weights those when comparing players....so you could easily have two players with the exact same BA and exact same Babip, but without seeing their games you couldnt be sure if one was luckier than the other....especially since teams dont play abalnced schedule....Player a might play more games in his division vs teams with better defenses than Player B's division......or Player B may play more games in a Division where the other teams pitchers have higher K ratios and thus he was more likely to strike out than to make outs on bateed balls proportinate to his normal average. I dont disagree it is one of many tools you can use to judge a player, and might be more useful if you compare a Players Babip for the year to his Babip average for the last 5 years.....that would show perhaps that the given year was luckier than he normally has on his batted balls

All stats are flawed and so is BAbip. One could compare two guys with 40 HRs and see that one was helped by park dimensions, strength of opponent's pitching, and line-up protection. Sure, BAbip is not perfect for determining who has gotten lucky or not, but it has been a pretty dependable indicator for projecting who will come back to the norm if his BAbip is out of sinc with his normal rate over previous years.

In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

Not so much K/AB as much as K/W.  High K's with a good K/W probably just means a batter aiming for the fences, but only at pitches in the zone.  As long as you don't swing at bad pitches, there are a number of ways to be successful.

In response to Joebreidey's comment:

And then there are a few hitters that seem to be able to do well even swinging at several bad pitches... like Beltre.

In response to Joebreidey's comment:

K/W is also useful, IMO more so than BABIP. And both are less useful IMO than OPS and OPS+ as well as OBP. Sometimes we get too bogged down with peripheral statistics. Its not that these peripherals are useless, its just that when you quote 15 stats on a player the ones that are really meaningful get diluted.

This post has been removed.

In response to TrotterNixon's comment:

Unless, as your hero softy once said, you have AGon batting 2 or 3 slots behind you, then OBP and SLG% does not matter.