Quote:
Originally Posted by nanwynnfan
When I tallied DiMaggio's negative outs [K+HIDP] I factored in the years the DP stat was not recorded at a higher than average rate for J.D., so the 11.36% figure contains that padded input.
The difference between 30.9% and 11.36% of total outs is significant.
Agreed, by statistical regression it can be illustrated that a K > regular out on a scale of @ 1%. However, this is due to circumstances in which the K may be agreed by all parties to be just an out. The hurtful artithmetic factor of a K is a matter of circumstance. I do not attempt to make more of it than this:
.........A K, except for rare occurrences can reasonably be presumed to be unprductive. I does not hold promise for advancing a runner. A ground out, a fly out, a sacrifice, may move a runner[s] up, perhaps even drive in a run.
The way I counted the two was: K = 1 unproductive out; HIDP = 1 unproductive out [NOT 2, it is simply 1 added out . normal routine out].
This context gives more credibility to the 31% - 11% out differential point I tried to make.
|
To expand on the difference in K rates, I took a look at some bases occupied stats for an arbitrary middle-of-the-order hitter with an RBI reputation (Joe Carter, in this example - I checked around to a handful of other middle-of-the-order hitters, and the numbers seem pretty typical based on the eyeballing test).
Carter had runners on in roughly 50% of his plate appearances. Of those, the splits were:
1-- ..... 38%
-2- ..... 20%
--3 ..... 9%
12- ..... 14%
1-2 ..... 8%
-23 ..... 5%
123 ..... 5%
There is also very little difference in the distribution of at bats with 0, 1, or 2 outs. I don't have the specific permutations, but let's keep it simple and keep an even distribution of outs to base-situations, shall we?
Per 162 games, Joe had only 34 K to Mickey's 115 K, a big difference of 81 K. With no runners on base, or with two outs, there is no difference between th K and the batted-ball out. Assuming the same base-out situations, we can expect that means there we can expect a difference of about 40 extra times per 162 games that Joe put the ball in play on an out, as compared to Mickey, and if we take a third of those to be with 2 outs, we have a difference of 27. Let's divide those up:
1-- ..... 11
-2- ..... 6
--3 ..... 3
12- ..... 4
1-2 ..... 3
-23 ..... 2
123 ..... 2
Note that all fractions have been rounded up, hence the imbalance in the numbers.
Now, with only a runner on first, it's quite a bit less common to see a runner advance on an out-in-play - unless it's a bunt or a hit & run ground ball out, the lead runner will usually be out, or fail to advance on a flyball. That makes 33 runners with a reasonable chance to move up a base. Not all of them will advance, but lets assume that every one of these runners does advance on Joe's contact. This is an extreme assumption, but I'll use it anyway, just to see what happens. The advancement could be abstracted as adding 33 total bases to Joe's seasonal averages (as compared to Mickey).
If we compare that to a double play, the DP has two effects: it adds an out, and it subtracts a baserunner. That can be shown by turning one walk into an out. Per 162 games (using Joe's known career numbers to fill in the mising three years) Joe hit into an average of 17 DP's to Mickey's 8. That's a difference of 9 DP's in Mickey's favor. If we apply these comparative modifications to Dimaggio's numbers, we end up with the following:
Dimaggio: .320/.381/.620 (1.001) (actual .325/.398/.579 (.977) )
Mantle: .298/.421/.557 (.978) (no change)
As we can see from this, the impact of these "negative outs" (using a fairly liberal assumption for advancing runners) Joe does, in fact, gain ground, upping his slugging and OPS, but decreasing his OBP (relative to Mantle). Running these modified numbers through the RC/27 formula, I arrived at 9.0 for Dimaggio, compared to an unmodified total for Mickey. That is a definite difference, and it does close the gap a little, but Mantle's offense still comes out ahead, even before adjusting for era.
That's the difference between relative extremes in terms of K rates. It's not a trivial difference, but it's also not all that big a difference. The thing to remember about K rates is that even guys who K a lot usually put the ball in play. There are bases to be gained for outs on balls in play, but all players put the ball in play with regularity. There are two problems with perception here:
- Failures in these situations tend to stick in our mind, creating a more negative perception of the K than is reality.
- Most of the tangible benefit to avoiding K's tends to manifest itself in a player's batting average.
Dimaggio probably did help his team quite a bit by putting the ball in play and advancing runners, but the difference between him and other hitters in that regard is also probably overstated.