At Bat Performance (grading system) ?

[Drill]

What is the grading scale for Performance at Bat. I know it has something to do with the amount of pitches a batter takes and the type of hit a batter hits.

I was talking to a college coach and he was telling me about ABP I think is the correct acronym for At Bat Performance. He was telling me that its not all about batting average. They could play you for a pull one night and you could hit it right to the outfielder and the next night you could hit it to the same spot and no one will be playing you to pull. You are graded for the amount of pitches and type of hits you make even if it is an out.

Anything over 8 pitches at bat is like 1 point. (the same as a hit from what i remember) This seems a better way to technically grade someone performance wise and gets into the details of what a batter is really doing at bat for the team.

What is your basic understanding of this process compared to batting averages. And what is the point system?


Thanks


drill

[Jake Patterson]

What is the grading scale for Performance at Bat. I know it has something to do with the amount of pitches a batter takes and the type of hit a batter hits.
drill

Not sure I use BA, OBP, SP, SOR (Strike out ratio) Etc...

[TG Coach]

What is the grading scale for Performance at Bat. I know it has something to do with the amount of pitches a batter takes and the type of hit a batter hits.

I was talking to a college coach and he was telling me about ABP I think is the correct acronym for At Bat Performance. He was telling me that its not all about batting average. They could play you for a pull one night and you could hit it right to the outfielder and the next night you could hit it to the same spot and no one will be playing you to pull. You are graded for the amount of pitches and type of hits you make even if it is an out.

Anything over 8 pitches at bat is like 1 point. (the same as a hit from what i remember) This seems a better way to technically grade someone performance wise and gets into the details of what a batter is really doing at bat for the team.

What is your basic understanding of this process compared to batting averages. And what is the point system?


Thanks


drill

I've never heard it specifically used across baseball. I know of coaches who have created their own scoring system to use internally to their team. I don't believe it could be used across the league since the determinations would be very subjective.

When I coached 12U softball and baseball I kept a quality at-bat percentage. It was an "is" or an "isn't", nothing more. The purpose was to show kids there are times when a hitter can be doing his/her job even if the boxscore doesn't reflect it. Some "non hit" quality at-bats would be hitting behind the runner, putting the ball on the ground to drive in a run with a runner on third and infield back, lining out (can't control where the fielder's are) and any hitter who runs up the pitch count on the pitcher.

[kylebee]

What is the grading scale for Performance at Bat. I know it has something to do with the amount of pitches a batter takes and the type of hit a batter hits.

I was talking to a college coach and he was telling me about ABP I think is the correct acronym for At Bat Performance. He was telling me that its not all about batting average. They could play you for a pull one night and you could hit it right to the outfielder and the next night you could hit it to the same spot and no one will be playing you to pull. You are graded for the amount of pitches and type of hits you make even if it is an out.

Anything over 8 pitches at bat is like 1 point. (the same as a hit from what i remember) This seems a better way to technically grade someone performance wise and gets into the details of what a batter is really doing at bat for the team.

What is your basic understanding of this process compared to batting averages. And what is the point system?


Thanks


drill

For my kids (and myself), the stats I use are typically average number of pitches seen per plate appearance, on-base percentage, and number of times they successfully execute special plays (hit and run, sacrifice bunt, etc.).

However, my approach to hitting has improved significantly after I stopped worrying specifically about the number of pitches I see per plate appearance. Oftentimes in the amateur leagues I play in the pitchers will throw a batting practice fastball down the middle third of the plate for their first strike. There's no way I'm taking that to work a deep count - this is the pitch I want, so I go at it.

One of the better quotes I've heard in the offseason regarding plate discipline is this: "Half of good plate discipline is swinging at the first pitch you can make solid contact with, even if it's the first or second pitch you get."

[Jake Patterson]

Maybe Scorekeeper could help us here???

Score???

[Utility07]

My coach used that with us through high school.

0 is a strike out.
1 is a pop up.
2 is a weak grounder.
3 is a fly ball.
4.........I cant remember what 4 is. It might be a walk.
5 is a Hard ground ball.
6 is a line drive.

Its something like that. Then you take the percentage, like BA. Anything overr .600 is considered successful.

[Centerfielder2]

My coach used that with us through high school.

0 is a strike out.
1 is a pop up.
2 is a weak grounder.
3 is a fly ball.
4.........I cant remember what 4 is. It might be a walk.
5 is a Hard ground ball.
6 is a line drive.

Its something like that. Then you take the percentage, like BA. Anything overr .600 is considered successful.

Take the percentage of what ??
my coach uses soemthing like that but we just add up the points

[Go Cardinals]

Take the percentage of what ??
my coach uses soemthing like that but we just add up the points

that's dumb because what if you hit a ground ball really hard, that normally they couldn't throw home, but you hit it hard enough that they could get the guy out at home. here's a good system. (yes i am making it up on the sport) lets say you do your job. It may be get on base to start a rally, bunt the guy over, drive a runner in, whatever. if you do that, you get a point, like an at bat. lets say you hit the runners in like your supposed to, then you fail o bunt a guy over, you .500. next, you can never say that your yeam needs a homerun. all that counts are hits, bunts, etc. next, if your team loses you lose, and you fail, you and your team get an f for that game. i would gladly go 0-4 with 4 strike outs as long as we win the game. all that matters is a win. if you get the win, and you had 2 chances to do your job and you did it both times, then you are 1.000. really all that matters is a win.

[kylebee]

that's dumb because what if you hit a ground ball really hard, that normally they couldn't throw home, but you hit it hard enough that they could get the guy out at home. here's a good system. (yes i am making it up on the sport) lets say you do your job. It may be get on base to start a rally, bunt the guy over, drive a runner in, whatever. if you do that, you get a point, like an at bat. lets say you hit the runners in like your supposed to, then you fail o bunt a guy over, you .500. next, you can never say that your yeam needs a homerun. all that counts are hits, bunts, etc. next, if your team loses you lose, and you fail, you and your team get an f for that game. i would gladly go 0-4 with 4 strike outs as long as we win the game. all that matters is a win. if you get the win, and you had 2 chances to do your job and you did it both times, then you are 1.000. really all that matters is a win.

Just because the team wins and you go 0-4 with 4 strikeouts doesn't mean you had a good day. You are part of the team, and as such, you have to contribute as well. No coach is going to give you credit if you go 0-4 with 4 strikeouts and the team wins anyway.

[Go Cardinals]

Just because the team wins and you go 0-4 with 4 strikeouts doesn't mean you had a good day. You are part of the team, and as such, you have to contribute as well. No coach is going to give you credit if you go 0-4 with 4 strikeouts and the team wins anyway.

that's not what i ment, i am fully aware of that. what i meen is, you should do your best to help ur team, and if you succeed in that you should too. and for me, a win is the most important thing.

[TG Coach]

Just because the team wins and you go 0-4 with 4 strikeouts doesn't mean you had a good day. You are part of the team, and as such, you have to contribute as well. No coach is going to give you credit if you go 0-4 with 4 strikeouts and the team wins anyway.

Players don't play well every game. The team comes first. Winning comes first. If the player can play, the stats balance out. That's why they're called averages. I'll bench any player who sulks over his game when the team is winning. Besides, if a player can't do it with his bat that game, he can still have impact with other parts of his game.

A team player feels good when his team wins regardless of his performance. A good player won't get a thrill having a big game statistically and his team loses. The object is to win the game.

[Utility07]

Take the percentage of what ??
my coach uses soemthing like that but we just add up the points

Number of points / (Number of at bats X 6)

[kylebee]

Players don't play well every game. The team comes first. Winning comes first. If the player can play, the stats balance out. That's why they're called averages. I'll bench any player who sulks over his game when the team is winning. Besides, if a player can't do it with his bat that game, he can still have impact with other parts of his game.

A team player feels good when his team wins regardless of his performance. A good player won't get a thrill having a big game statistically and his team loses. The object is to win the game.

Obviously the object of the game is to win, but individual performances make up the wins. I'm not saying that you should be focused solely on your own personal stats, but they are what you can most directly control to help your team win.

[TG Coach]

Obviously the object of the game is to win, but individual performances make up the wins. I'm not saying that you should be focused solely on your own personal stats, but they are what you can most directly control to help your team win.

FOR KYLEBEE: Can a player go 0-3 in three plate appearances with no runs scored and no rbi's, yet help his team at the plate? Afterall, he hit .000 for the game. Can a pitcher help his team walking back to back hitters? Afterall, it hurts his stats.

As for your comment on stats, players don't control stats to help the team win. Players do what's needed to help their team win. Stats fall into place. Also a player can strike out four times and have a great game in the field. Tell me what spot in the order a player hits and I'll tell you how his stats might be affected if he's a team player. When a player gets caught up in stats he stops being a team player.

[kylebee]

TG Coach,

You are of course ignoring pitching and fielding stats, and now you're just arguing to argue. You know what I'm getting at - the team's success is a compilation of individual efforts, the one you can most directly control being your own. Don't read too much into the word "stats" which apparently seems to send you flying off the handle.

[TG Coach]

TG Coach,

You are of course ignoring pitching and fielding stats, and now you're just arguing to argue. You know what I'm getting at - the team's success is a compilation of individual efforts, the one you can most directly control being your own. Don't read too much into the word "stats" which apparently seems to send you flying off the handle.

You didn't answer my two questions. One was about pitching. I also added a player can have a bad day at the plate and win the game with his glove.

[son who is sidearm]

this is so true coach.

my son's team faced the first place team in rec ball(11and 12 yrs old). the lead off hitter went 0-3, 2 stike outs and a pop up to the catcher. but he made 4 diving stops on hard hit balls and robbed them of base hits, caught 2 line drives both he had to move at least 2 steps to snagg. over all this boy was vaccum cleaner at ss nothing got passed him. i would say over all this boy won the game for his team. because he killed so many rallies with his glove and took my son's team bats out of the game

[scorekeeper]

What is the grading scale for Performance at Bat. I know it has something to do with the amount of pitches a batter takes and the type of hit a batter hits.

I was talking to a college coach and he was telling me about ABP I think is the correct acronym for At Bat Performance. He was telling me that its not all about batting average. They could play you for a pull one night and you could hit it right to the outfielder and the next night you could hit it to the same spot and no one will be playing you to pull. You are graded for the amount of pitches and type of hits you make even if it is an out.

Anything over 8 pitches at bat is like 1 point. (the same as a hit from what i remember) This seems a better way to technically grade someone performance wise and gets into the details of what a batter is really doing at bat for the team.

What is your basic understanding of this process compared to batting averages. And what is the point system?

I haven’t got a clue what your coach friend is talking about. When Googling it under “baseball” doesn’t get even 1 hit, I have to assume he’s come up with his own system of measuring performance, just as most coaches do. that doesn’t mean its good or bad, but just that it isn’t a “standard” baseball metric.

But from your description, my guess is he’s using some kind of combination of PPPA(Pitches per PA) and QAB(Quality at Bats), and has either come up with a way that relates them, or believes there’s a direction cause and effect relationship between them, and therefore its something he values.

Like everything else, different things have much more or less meaning at one level than another. FI, getting to see a lot of pitches in the ML is a definite advantage. But that advantage only happens because pitchers, hitters, and umpires perform at a much higher level than any level below.

You have to accept that as a group, ML P’s are gonna be around the strike zone much more often than say a 12YO LLI regular season pitcher. You also have to accept that ML H’s are gonna be much better at reading pitches and determining whether or not they’re “hittable”. Also, you have to accept that ML umps are generally gonna be calling pitches much better, thus allowing both the P and the H to take advantage of their advanced skills.

If you go to http://infosports.net/scorekeeper/ and look in the left margin at “Combined Batting” page 26, or Hitting – As of 5/22, page 25, you’ll see how I show batters and the # of pitches they see, and try to relate it to a couple of “normal” stats. The “Combination Bating” includes both fall and the regular HS baseball season.

Notice that I’m now using a lot of “per PA” stats rather than “per AB”. Believe me, it makes a great deal of difference.

I think you’ll notice that the Henderson boy is for all intents and purposes, at least one of the, if not the “best” performer, at least in what’s presented on that page, but you’ll also notice that among the regular players, he also sees the fewest pitches!

A lot has to do with his size, he’s one of the smallest regulars, and therefore P’s seem to think he can be overpowered with FS’s, which is a very big mistake. When he was 10, his parents put a batting cage in the back yard for he and his sister, a SB player. Since then, he’s routinely hit at least 5-600 balls a week at home, and he absolutely loves to turn the machine up to 95+! So what these pitchers are doing, is playing right into his strength.

Take a look at page 12 of the “Combined” and look at his PA’s per K, and you’ll see that this boy goes more PA’s without striking out than anyone. But, if you look at page 9, you’ll see he’s kind of in the middle of the pack as far as BB to K ratio, which many people value a great deal.

But, if you go back to page 7, you’ll see that he K’s very infrequently, and walks very infrequently too. But if you think about it, that’s quite understandable considering his average PPPA is less than 3! You need to see at least 4 pitches to get a walk, and at least 3 to K! But, none of those stats alone can possibly tell everything there is to know about anyone!

Whether or not QAB’s is a valid measure, personally I don’t think so. It could be I suppose, but talk about subjective! Perhaps one day when computers are measuring the trajectory and velocity of every hit ball, and are able to compare how solid that ball was hit by looking at the velocity, angle, location, and rotation of the pitch, QAB’s will take on a great deal more meaning. Until then, its all in the perception of the viewer, and everyone perspective and perceptions are different. that makes it an invalid measure to me.

I suppose I could do any number of stats that related number of pitches seen to result, but I honestly don’t thing there’s a relation that would hold up under very much scrutiny, other than guys who see a lot of pitches tend to walk more.

Something to do with pitches that I feel is much more significant for measuring players, is the number of pitches as it related to pitchers. Go to pages 5-8 of the Combined Pitching, and look at Pitches per Batter and Pitches per Inning. Looking at pages 9&10 gets into much more detail, as do pages 11&12. but, even at that, I still don’t believe there’s any way to make a valid prediction about the “success” of either a individual P or an H, based on number of pitches.

However, if you look at pages 15-18, you will see something pretty neat. I threw in PPI and PPB into a stat that was looking at team “W’s” and “L’s”. 15 times the Ps who threw the fewest pitches per batter won the game, 21 times they lost, and 4 times the game was ties or the PPB was exactly the same.

However, if you go to page 26, you’ll see that of the 32 games where there was a winner, or where there was a difference between the two teams in the number of “free passes”, 25 times the team who gave up the fewest, won. That’s slightly more than 78%! So, if a coach really wants to pick something that might most help his team win games, he’d want his hitters drawing as many walks or getting hit as much as possible, and his pitchers to give up the fewest possible. all the rest of the stuff is important, but it sure doesn’t seem to have the same importance. ;)

[scorekeeper]

Not sure I use BA, OBP, SP, SOR (Strike out ratio) Etc...

I know you’ve been a successful coach and helped many others do the same, so I’m assuming when you put the ellipsis(…) there, you weren’t indicating the listed stats were all you used, but rather a combination of many different statistics, as well as the experience to understand how they all related to each other. ;)

[scorekeeper]

My coach used that with us through high school.

0 is a strike out.
1 is a pop up.
2 is a weak grounder.
3 is a fly ball.
4.........I cant remember what 4 is. It might be a walk.
5 is a Hard ground ball.
6 is a line drive.

Its something like that. Then you take the percentage, like BA. Anything overr .600 is considered successful.

Just goes to show the myriad of different ways people define “success’.

Think about how little the difference is between a pop up or a weak grounder, and a laser shot. since a ML bat can only be 2 ¾” in diameter, that’s the difference between a foul pop to the C and foul straight into the dirt. Of course a lot has to do with the swing plane in relation to the pitch plane too, but let’s discount that for the time being.

The difference between any of those things and the next one is very likely less than a half inch, half degree, or half a MPH on either the pitch or the swing. Is that really a valid way to judge success or failure?

[Jake Patterson]

I know you’ve been a successful coach and helped many others do the same, so I’m assuming when you put the ellipsis(…) there, you weren’t indicating the listed stats were all you used, but rather a combination of many different statistics, as well as the experience to understand how they all related to each other. ;)

That is correct. One key stat in and of itself means little when evaluating the player's overall performance.

[scorekeeper]

That is correct. One key stat in and of itself means little when evaluating the player's overall performance.

As much as anyone would like to believe otherwise, I suspect that more often than not, most fans, parents, players, and coaches, get themselves into a rut because they tend to concentrate on very few stats. and to make it worse, they prolly concentrate on stats that have been around since the beginning of the game.

Its not that those stats aren’t valid, but in the last 30 years or so, baseball stats have changed dramatically, just as everything else has that’s been affected by computers. Shoot, if I had the entire database of ML baseball players, I could compute the percentage stats that show up in BaseballReference.com for all of them in just a few seconds on just about an PC purchased in the last 5 years.

50 years ago, just computing batting averages for one player who had a 15 year career would almost certainly have been done by hand, and would have taken at least 5 minutes, and probably a lot more.

Times surely have changed, ;)

[Utility07]

Just goes to show the myriad of different ways people define “success’.

Think about how little the difference is between a pop up or a weak grounder, and a laser shot. since a ML bat can only be 2 ¾” in diameter, that’s the difference between a foul pop to the C and foul straight into the dirt. Of course a lot has to do with the swing plane in relation to the pitch plane too, but let’s discount that for the time being.

The difference between any of those things and the next one is very likely less than a half inch, half degree, or half a MPH on either the pitch or the swing. Is that really a valid way to judge success or failure?

Ok....name one baseball stat that cant be changed by a few degrees or inches. What you just wrote could throw out any statistic.

[scorekeeper]

Ok....name one baseball stat that cant be changed by a few degrees or inches. What you just wrote could throw out any statistic.

Very true, and that’s why they call baseball a game of inches.

But, that’s also why only a dolt would use one statistic to make any kind of judgment about success or failure.

If it could be done, and it very soon will be able to, reducing hitter’s successes to how “solidly” they hit the ball would be a fantastic metric! But in order to really be valid, it would have to factor in each and every pitch and what was done with it.

I wouldn’t have any problem at all with calling a guy who hit the most balls closest to the sweet spot with the best swing plane for that pitch, as the most successful hitters. But there would have to be much more to it than that.

But the bottom line would have to be that the scoring system, whatever it was, had to be much more objective than someone using a scoring system that could neither be defined, duplicated, or reasonably consistent from player to player and situation to situation.