Posted by jrd_x on 2/25/2012 1:08:00 PM (view original):
This is a list of the top ten pitchers by BABIP since 1960, min 2500 innings pitched:
Catfish Hunter
Jim Palmer
Charlie Hough
Tom Seaver
Dave Stieb
Mel Stottlemyre
Juan Marichal
Don Sutton
Luis Tiant
Mike Cuellar
Here is a list of the top ten pitchers by FIP since 1960, min 2500 innings pitched:
Bob Gibson
Pedro Martinez
Don Drysdale
Nolan Ryan
Tom Seaver
Juan Marichal
Jim Bunning
Gaylord Perry
Roger Clemens
Steve Carlton
I don't know about you, since you think that 8 years of Clemens is better than 13 years of Clemens, but to me, the second list looks a lot better than the first.
Of the top 10 BABIP pitchers on jrd's list, five are Hall of Famers. Four of the other five made multiple All Star appearances. The only "outlier" of the bunch is Charlie Hough, who was a knuckleballer. According to what I have read about BABIP, knuckleballers tend to have abnormally low BABIPs.
Interesting how the top 10 pitchers on this list are either HOFers, or were generally regarded as very good pitchers in their primes. Why is that?
More "fun facts" about BABIP:
- Very few pitchers with long careers have BABIP above the league average
- There are no pitchers in the Hall of Fame with a BABIP higher than .300.
Since "more" implies "better" according to jrd, then players with long careers must be better than players with short careers, So is there some sort of mysterious correlation between BABIP and "better" pitchers. Or is that an unexplained statistical anomoly?
It's also interesting that there are no HOFer pitchers with a BABIP higher than .300. Since .300 is the magical norm that everybody converges to over time, is this just another unexplained statistical anomoly? Or might there be another reason?
I need jrd_x to enlighten me.