[討論] Passan其實也不是不願意解釋打擊率禮貌問題

看板BaseballXXXX作者EZ78 (EZ78)時間3小時前 (2025/08/04 08:29)推噓4(4推 0噓 19→)

留言23則, 3人參與討論串1/1

https://x.com/JeffPassan/status/1951747434549289092 有人誠心發問為啥打擊率不重要了這老哥就很有禮貌的認真回答 Great question, John. For most of baseball history, the walk was sneered at -- a lesser form of getting on base compared to the exceptional skill it takes to swing. The analytical revolution in the game changed that. If the objective of the game is to outscore a team, then the likeliest way to score runs is for people to get on base. Post-Moneyball, on-base percentage replaced batting average as more reliable metric for helping produce runs. Batting average was almost a victim of its own popularity, though. Because it does matter. It's just not the first determinant of a baseball player's quality. Sometimes I do fear the pendulum has swung too far in the anti-batting-average direction. Let's take three players as examples, with their batting averages, on-base percentages and slugging percentages: Manny Machado: .302/.361/.507 Juan Soto: .248/.383/.486 Eugenio Suárez: .248/.319/.572 Three totally different hitters. Machado is balanced and batting average-heavy. Soto’s average is deflated but he’s an on-base savant thanks to the highest walk rate in the major leagues. Suárez is a masher whose high slug is his calling card. So who’s the best? Well, if you’re judging by a metric called weighted on-base average, which seeks to be a catch-all offensive number that is park-neutral … they are pretty much identical. It goes to show: Offensively, there are plenty of ways to be really good. A great batting average is never a bad thing. But a poor one, as Soto and Suá rez illustrate, does not doom you to mediocrity. https://x.com/JeffPassan/status/1951753083790238007 A few postscripts, if I may: - Characterizing a .248 average as poor is wrong. The league-wide average is actually .246. Which I personally think is problematic. I'd love to see more balls in play because balls in play = action and forcing the defense to make a play demands skill. - There is also the concept of BABIP -- batting average on balls in play. Historically, the league-wide BABIP, determined by how often balls put in the field of play (home runs not included) land for hits, was around .300. Because of better defensive positioning, that number is closer to .290 these days. Some years, guys have excellent ball-in-play fortune. And some years, they don't. BABIP luck is often the difference between a good average and a lesser one, whereas walk rate tends to be much steadier year-over-year. - Another sub-category is batting average with runners in scoring position. This isn't particularly steady year-over-year, but it damn sure is important when it comes to run production. And some players just have a knack for hitting better with RISP than others, which illustrates another reason batting average itself is but a partial story. - There's strikeout rate, too. The strikeout has become an accepted part of hitting. I hate that. If you put the ball in play and it has a 29-30% chance of falling for a hit, then shouldn't an outcome with a 0% chance of falling for a hit thusly be penalized? Smarter people than me have determined that if higher strikeouts are the cost of higher slug, the tradeoff is worthwhile. I get the premise. I just find it to be an uglier form of a beautiful game. https://imgur.com/r2Txh4w

-- ※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc), 來自: 98.113.171.65 (美國) ※ 文章網址: https://www.ptt.cc/bbs/BaseballXXXX/M.1754267350.A.0C8.html

推

alex8725

08/04 08:31, 3小時前 , 1^F

08/04 08:31, 1^F

※ 編輯: EZ78 (98.113.171.65 美國), 08/04/2025 08:32:42

→

[討論] Passan其實也不是不願意解釋打擊率 禮貌問題

[討論] Passan其實也不是不願意解釋打擊率禮貌問題