hard vs. soft contact (revisiting FIP)

[Curtis]

This is quoted from an article about how Sandy Alderson (Mets' GM) decided to keep Lucas Duda and trade Ike Davis last season. url is: Not all contact is created equal - Fake Teams

PITCHING AND QUALITY OF CONTACT

If hitting the ball hard is a good thing for hitters, it makes sense that giving up hard contact is a bad thing for pitchers.

That is why I think the theory that pitchers have little control over balls in play is very off base. Inside Edge has published data that supports the idea that pitchers do indeed have some control over the results on balls in play:

Batting average by batted ball type:

Hard: around .700

Medium: around .400

Soft: around .140-.150

% of _ that are hard hit:

Home runs: about 100%

Triples: over 80%

Doubles: over 70%

Singles: about 30%

Outs: about 7%

According to that data, pitchers who give up a greater degree of softer contact will have better results than pitchers who give up a greater degree of harder contact. That is why it is important to consider quality of contact when using FIP and xFIP.

Pitchers can control the quality of contact against them by throwing pitches with a lot of movement, by locating their pitches well, and by remaining unpredictable. Conversely, pitchers who throw flat pitches, locate their pitches poorly and remain predictable will give up a larger amount of harder contact.

The fantasy baseball writing team here at Fake Teams is currently working on bringing more access to hidden statistics such as hard hit rate. This is very exciting to me. Hopefully for the 2015 season we’ll be able to give our readers stronger access to this stat, because I think it will change the way we evaluate players in fantasy baseball.

[frangipard]

Originally Posted by Curtis

This is quoted from an article about how Sandy Alderson (Mets' GM) decided to keep Lucas Duda and trade Ike Davis last season. url is: Not all contact is created equal - Fake Teams

PITCHING AND QUALITY OF CONTACT

If hitting the ball hard is a good thing for hitters, it makes sense that giving up hard contact is a bad thing for pitchers.

That is why I think the theory that pitchers have little control over balls in play is very off base. Inside Edge has published data that supports the idea that pitchers do indeed have some control over the results on balls in play:

Batting average by batted ball type:

Hard: around .700

Medium: around .400

Soft: around .140-.150

% of _ that are hard hit:

Home runs: about 100%

Triples: over 80%

Doubles: over 70%

Singles: about 30%

Outs: about 7%

According to that data, pitchers who give up a greater degree of softer contact will have better results than pitchers who give up a greater degree of harder contact. That is why it is important to consider quality of contact when using FIP and xFIP.

Pitchers can control the quality of contact against them by throwing pitches with a lot of movement, by locating their pitches well, and by remaining unpredictable. Conversely, pitchers who throw flat pitches, locate their pitches poorly and remain predictable will give up a larger amount of harder contact.

The fantasy baseball writing team here at Fake Teams is currently working on bringing more access to hidden statistics such as hard hit rate. This is very exciting to me. Hopefully for the 2015 season we’ll be able to give our readers stronger access to this stat, because I think it will change the way we evaluate players in fantasy baseball.

My comment there:

Do you have data suggesting that some pitchers are indeed identifiably better at causing soft contact, and have maintained that skill over time?

Yes, it makes intutive sense that there would be, and that’s why it’s always been traditional baseball wisdom, but research has shown that very few pitchers are able to maintain their BABIP especially high or especially low; it fluctuates a lot more than things like K rate or BB rate, which strongly suggests it’s not something that’s primarily a trait of the pitcher.


The research does not contradict the "pitchers have little control over what happens once contact is made" theory, seeing as it identifies only hitters with different rates for different kinds of contact. If research showed that pitcher A was giving up hard contact at a consistent 30% clip and pitcher B was giving up 15%, and that ratio held up over time, then we’d have something.

[Curtis]

Originally Posted by frangipard

My comment there:

The research does not contradict the "pitchers have little control over what happens once contact is made" theory, seeing as it identifies only hitters with different rates for different kinds of contact. If research showed that pitcher A was giving up hard contact at a consistent 30% clip and pitcher B was giving up 15%, and that ratio held up over time, then we’d have something.

Good catch.