Keith Law's Top 100 for 2020

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

2 minutes ago, PantsRowland said:

It's quite simple. Hitters get base hits at a higher rate on pitches they can handle and make outs on pitches they can't handle at a much higher rate. Pitches a batter can't handle result in strikes or poor contact. This should be obvious.

Again, this statistically is not true.

Contact quality does not even take into account exit velocity; it literally has next to zero impact on a players expected BABIP. 

You are confusing the difference in OPS and BA on LD, FB's, IFFB and GB's with quality of contact and EV.

What we have learned about BABIP in the last 10 years is that the league average remains 300, but some players are capable of being better, and the ones who are worse are driven by FB's and pull tendencies. It has nothing to do with contact quality.

[Vulture]

If it's not quality of contact driven, what else could it be since he put the ball in play regularly throught out his career. Sixteen years of bad luck? BABIP has nothing to do with walks so not sure how that is relevant, the question is balls put in play. Ozzie never put up an OpS better than .660 despite regularly being near the top of mlb in strikeout rate. He like Madrigal could barely get the ball out of the infield, that is exactly the reason he put up poor numbers. Certainly wasn't a lack of contact.

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

Additionally I have no idea how you are managing to turn Madrigal's k-rate into a negative thing. 
 

Madrigal doesn't "not k" because he's bunting or throwing his bat haplessly at the ball just to touch it - he doesn't not k because he's hitting endless pitchers pitches. He doesn't K because he has the ability to cover the entire plate and he has great hands.

This assumption that if Yolmer only struck out 10% of the time instead of 20% that those extra 10% of balls in play would be weak ducks because they would come off pitchers pitches is just wrong and I have no idea where you read it.

Of players with the 10 lowest k-rates over the past decade, the average BABIP for that group of players was 299.2; right around league average.

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

4 minutes ago, PantsRowland said:

If it's not quality of contact driven, what else could it be since he put the ball in play regularly throught out his career. Sixteen years of bad luck? BABIP has nothing to do with walks so not sure how that is relevant, the question is balls put in play. Ozzie never put up an OpS better than .660 despite regularly being near the top of mlb in strikeout rate. He like Madrigal could barely get the ball out of the infield, that is exactly the reason he put up poor numbers. Certainly wasn't a lack of contact.

If I post an external source will you accept this fact, or are you just going to be hung up on one comparison and player?

Maybe Ozzie had a high IFFB rate? Maybe he hit 75% of his GB's to one side of the field. What I can say is his low babip had very very little to do with his perceived "soft, medium, hard" contact rates.

In the last 20 years, the highest "soft hit rate" in major league baseball belongs to Ichiro - Ichiro has a career BABIP of 298. Second? Dyson, with a 291 BABIP. 3rd? Jose Reyes with a 291 BABIP. 4th? Adam Engel with a 305 BABIP.

Soft hit rate does not at all correlate to a lower BABIP. 

Over that same period of time, the second highest hard hit rate in baseball? Joey Gallo. He has a career BABIP of 275. Why? Because he's a heavy FB hitter with heavy pull tendencies on the ground. THat is what suppresses BABIP, not EV or contact quality. 

Edited February 28, 2020 by Look at Ray Ray Run

[Vulture]

5 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Again, this statistically is not true.

Contact quality does not even take into account exit velocity; it literally has next to zero impact on a players expected BABIP. 

You are confusing the difference in OPS and BA on LD, FB's, IFFB and GB's with quality of contact and EV.

What we have learned about BABIP in the last 10 years is that the league average remains 300, but some players are capable of being better, and the ones who are worse are driven by FB's and pull tendencies. It has nothing to do with contact quality.

If you don't think being able to handle a pitch effects whether a batter gets a hit or not, I don't know what to tell you. That is just total nonsense. contact quality doesn't take into account exit velocity? Sorry, a weakly hit ball is poor contact no matter what your statistical analysis is. A hard hit ball is good contact and results in more hits that is just a plain fact

[Jack Parkman]

4 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Additionally I have no idea how you are managing to turn Madrigal's k-rate into a negative thing. 
 

Madrigal doesn't "not k" because he's bunting or throwing his bat haplessly at the ball just to touch it - he doesn't not k because he's hitting endless pitchers pitches. He doesn't K because he has the ability to cover the entire plate and he has great hands.

This assumption that if Yolmer only struck out 10% of the time instead of 20% that those extra 10% of balls in play would be weak ducks because they would come off pitchers pitches is just wrong and I have no idea where you read it.

Of players with the 10 lowest k-rates over the past decade, the average BABIP for that group of players was 299.2; right around league average.

I actually agree with the low k rate as a negative hypothesis. I think that by definition in order to have a K rate as low as Madrigal you have to be doing one or both of two things: 

a) attacking early in the count and rarely allowing yourself to get to 2 strike counts

b) swinging at pitcher's pitches and making outs some other way. 

In the end, an out is an out over the course of a season. 

 

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

Just now, PantsRowland said:

If you don't think being able to handle a pitch effects whether a batter gets a hit or not, I don't know what to tell you. That is just total nonsense. contact quality doesn't take into account exit velocity? Sorry, a weakly hit ball is poor contact no matter what your statistical analysis is. A hard hit ball is good contact and results in more hits that is just a plain fact

I edited my post to further show you proof. 

It's not what I think here, this is a statistical fact. I'm not sure what to tell you if you refuse to believe the actual outcomes. 

and contact quality, as you are defining it and as defined by FG's and all other publications (under soft, medium, hard) does not account for EV.

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

5 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:

I actually agree with the low k rate as a negative hypothesis. I think that by definition in order to have a K rate as low as Madrigal you have to be doing one or both of two things: 

a) attacking early in the count and rarely allowing yourself to get to 2 strike counts

b) swinging at pitcher's pitches and making outs some other way. 

In the end, an out is an out over the course of a season. 

 

a would be a great theory jack if Madrigal wasn't runnin above average walk rates.

b would be a great point if you actually thought not making contact on a pitchers pitch is somehow better than making contact lol

[Jack Parkman]

3 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

a would be a great theory jack if Madrigal wasn't runnin above average walk rates.

b would be a great point if you actually thought not making contact on a pitchers pitch is somehow better than making contact lol

I actually think that b is better than making contact, because umpires are not infallible and those are probabably equally likely to be called balls vs. strikes. It's very rare that a pitcher has the whole plate on the edge of the zone.

Edited February 28, 2020 by Jack Parkman

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

1 hour ago, Jack Parkman said:

I actually think that b is better than making contact, because umpires are not infallible and those are probabably equally likely to be called balls vs. strikes. It's very rare that a pitcher has the whole plate on the edge of the zone.

Jack the argument here revolves around you insinuating a low k rate is bad. So the option isnt hitting the pitchers pitch or walking. In the example you gave and Implied, he either k's or hits a pitchers pitch.

The BABIP on a strike out isnt great.

Edited February 28, 2020 by Look at Ray Ray Run

[Jack Parkman]

10 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Jack the argument here revolves around you insinuating a low k rate is bad. So the option isnt hitting the pitchers pitch or walking. In the example you gave and Implied, he either k's or hits a pitchers pitch.

The BABIP on a strike out isnt great.

The most likely outcome on a pitcher's pitch is an out, whether by strikeout or batted ball. Your best chance of reaching base is to either take that pitch and wait for the next one, or hope that it's called a ball.  

[Dominikk85]

2 hours ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Again, this statistically is not true.

Contact quality does not even take into account exit velocity; it literally has next to zero impact on a players expected BABIP. 

You are confusing the difference in OPS and BA on LD, FB's, IFFB and GB's with quality of contact and EV.

What we have learned about BABIP in the last 10 years is that the league average remains 300, but some players are capable of being better, and the ones who are worse are driven by FB's and pull tendencies. It has nothing to do with contact quality.

Pop up rate, line drive rate and exit velocity plays a role too. And also running speed a little.

[Dominikk85]

3 hours ago, TomPickle said:

Yolmer "Drives the Ball" Sanchez had the lowest ISO among qualified hitters in baseball last season by nearly 30 points. 12 pitchers (min 50 PA) had higher ISO than Yolmer last year. It's fine if you are low on Madrigal, but obviously if he has less power than the worst power hitter in baseball his career isn't going to be anything special.

 

The power is a concern but yolmer has a 13% k-bb rate and madrigal had a -6% k-bb rate.

He won't walk  9% but if he strikes out 7% and walks 6% in the majors which I think is realistic that is still a huge difference to yolmer and hamiltom who strike out a lot more.

K-bb rate makes a big difference. Still power is important but he only needs a 300 babip to hit 300 while yolmer needs a 340 babip to hit 300.

I also think he can add some strength and become a 10-12 hr guy or so and then he is like a 110 wrc+ guy but even if he is a 4 homer guy he still is like a 90 wrc+ guy I think.

 

[Jack Parkman]

@Look at Ray Ray Run

I don't believe that it's possible to maintain such a low k rate without just giving away ABs for the sake of not striking out. Based on what I've seen of Madrigal that's exactly what he does. 

Edited February 28, 2020 by Jack Parkman

[Dominikk85]

Madrigal also has some mechanical reserves in his swing.

He has very little load in his swing for example. Most mlb hitters coil the hips and shoulders in a couple degrees as they stride but nick basically just lifts his knee and goes straight forward.

This is part of his contact ability probably as the swing is very direct and quick and a big coiling up can cost you some contact but a little bit of coiling up could give him a bit more batspeed and pop.