The Ten Lowest BABIPs Since 1945

For hitters, BABIP is often an explanation for unusually good or bad seasons. But what causes a great or poor BABIP? And are we right to simply blame BABIP whenever a bizarre season happens? It might help to look at some extreme cases. Even if we don’t learn something about how to interpret hitters’ BABIP, we can at least have fun. Nerdy, nerdy fun.

What is BABIP?

Batting average on balls in play is exactly that: when you hit the ball and it’s not a home run, what’s your batting average? Imagine you’d only ever batted twice; first you hit a single and then you struck out. Your BABIP would be 1.000. If a single and a groundout, .500. After seven games of the 2013 season, Rick Ankiel had two home runs but no singles, doubles, or triples, so his BABIP was .000.

Across any given season, the average BABIP tends to be about .300. All this means is that, when you hit the ball at professional defenders, there’s a 70% chance they’ll get you out.

What influences BABIP?

The enemy. Defense and to some extent pitching are factors, but over the course of a full year, as you face the entire league, this averages out.

Power. If you hit twenty balls to the warning track, and a lot of them fall for hits, your BABIP will increase. But if they all carry right over the fence for home runs, they will stop counting for this purpose, meaning your BABIP will probably decrease since more of your hits will be excluded from the stat.

Hitting style. There are six infielders, so more ground balls tend to be fielded; this is why pitchers, who are wimpy at hitting, tend to have low BABIPs. Fly balls are often caught, so the best scores go to line-drive hitters.

Speed. If you’re fast enough to beat throws and bunt for singles, your BABIP will be higher. If you run like I do, probably not so much.

Luck. Maybe the biggest single factor is: are you lucky? We all see hard-hit balls straight at defenders, or guys who go on “hot streaks” where the ball “finds all the holes.” That’s called “luck,” and BABIP can quantify it. Believe it or not, you really can have good or bad luck that lasts an entire year.

Let’s illustrate these principles by looking at some hitters with very low BABIPs.

The Ten Lowest BABIPs Since 1945

10. Roger Maris, 1961 (.209). 38.4% of Roger Maris’ hits that year were home runs. (Stop now to think about that.) If the ball stayed in the park, somebody probably caught it. On the other hand, if the ball had a chance of leaving the park, it did. 61 of them did.

9. Jim King, 1963 (.208). Although somewhat powerful (24 homers), Jim King was also something else: bad. His BABIP never came close to league average, and in partial seasons after ’63 it would be .207 and .209. He was known as a power-hitting bench bat, and only found regular playing time on the miserable Washington Senators (106 losses that year).

8. Dave Kingman, 1982 (.207). Dave Kingman hit homers (37) and struck out a whole lot, and based on his terrible, terrible fielding metrics, he was a mighty slow fellow. There’s also another factor here: he was old. “But he was only 33,” you say. “If there was something to this age thing, he’d get worse as he got even older.” “Aha,” I reply, “that’s why you’re supposed to keep reading!”

7. Dick McAuliffe, 1971 (.206). Here’s our first plausible “bad luck” guy. A career .264 BABIP, and indeed the following year he had a .264 BABIP. A career .247 hitter, and the following year he hit .240. A career .343 OBP, and the following year his OBP was .339. So Dick McAuliffe bounced back just fine, but it’s worth noting two things: first, a career .247 hitter is not that good, and second, for whatever reason his walk rate did decline sharply during his “unlucky” year. Was he swinging more aggressively? If so, he was still striking out less than usual.

6. Roy Cullenbine, 1947 (.206). I mentioned Roy Cullenbine in my first post on these venerable pages: a man who combined all-time bad luck with a truly incredible batting eye, walking 22.6% of the time despite being a distinctly non-intimidating hitter. The only guy in 1947 who walked more was Triple Crown winner Ted Williams, and Williams was frequently being walked on purpose. Cullenbine’s possibly all-time-great ability to take a walk was rewarded with–well, never playing in another major league game.

He did hit 24 homers, but this is another bad luck year. Heck, Cullenbine’s BABIP in 1946 was .347.

5. Dave Kingman, 1986 (.204). Toldja so! Here’s Kingman, age 37, hitting home runs (35) but nothing else. A full-time DH by now, he (like Cullenbine) never played in the big leagues again.

4. Brooks Robinson, 1975 (.204). Only six home runs to his name, still manning third base, Brooks Robinson is another example of what’s becoming a clear trend: he was 38 years old. He played partial seasons after this, but not full ones. This was a truly godawful year: .201/.267/.274, good for a wRC+ of 54.

3. Ted Simmons, 1981 (.200). A catcher and a fairly slow runner turning 32, Simmons saw a small drop in power, which he partially recovered the next year, and a 97-point drop in his BABIP, hard to explain just from the power outage. The traditional explanation for his poor 1981 is that he had just moved to Milwaukee and the American League. Luck might have hurt him, too.

2. Curt Blefary, 1968 (.198). Carson Cistulli previously highlighted Blefary on this site. After winning Rookie of the Year in 1965, the young outfielder posted two more above-average seasons before falling off a metaphorical cliff in 1968. He was being bounced around between positions, and he was never a speedster: his defense inspired the nicknames Clank and Buffalo.

Part of it must be bad luck. The BABIP .045 below his career average bounced back in 1969, when he moved to catcher and had a fairly good season for the Astros; a power decline turned out to be real, but his other numbers recovered. And yet Blefary would play his last major league game at age 29, moving on to a career as a “sheriff, bartender, truck driver, and night club owner.”

1. Aaron Hill, 2010 (.196). Aaron Hill’s notoriously lost season is the only one here from the last twenty-five years–and the most dramatic of all. Interestingly, a RotoGraphs article on Hill attributes his 2010 to pure awfulness but his recovery in 2011 to an “inflated” BABIP. But a .196 BABIP, a full hundred points below average, counts as deflated, right? Hill sucked in 2010 despite 26 homers and a slightly increased walk rate.

The advantage of recency is that we have more data. Here the culprit is obvious: he had previously been, and would soon be again, very good at hitting line drives, but in 2010 his line-drive percentage dropped by half (just 10.6%) and more than half of the balls he hit all year became fly balls. Some of those drifted out of the park, but most drifted over a waiting defender. And even though Hill was walking more, he was also swinging more frequently at pitches outside the strike zone. Hill’s new approach in 2010 didn’t hurt his ability to take a walk, but it hurt his ability to drive the ball. Still, to earn the lowest BABIP in modern history, he also suffered from an entire season of some of the worst luck any batter’s ever had.

Conclusion

The BABIP losers here didn’t do badly over their careers: combined, these “bottom 10” earned 42 All-Star appearances (18 by Brooks Robinson), 3 MVP awards, and a Rookie of the Year prize.

This unscientific survey confirms a lot of preconceived ideas:
– slower players don’t create their own luck on balls hit in fair territory
– aging players often lose their speed or power or both
– swinging at balls outside the strike zone means you make inferior contact
– sometimes, good luck isn’t enough to save a terrible hitter
– sometimes, terrible luck is enough to end a good hitter’s career

But there’s an interesting question to be raised here. Some of these guys–Maris, Kingman–hit homers like crazy, thus suppressing their BABIPs. On the other hand, Blefary and Simmons lost home run power in their hard-luck years. Simmons was playing in a new ballpark and Blefary at a new position. Maybe they were the Aaron Hills of their times, adjusting their approaches in deleterious ways (probably swinging at more pitches). Maybe they hit the ball poorly for unknown, reversible reasons. Maybe they had bad luck.

If I were counseling hitters on how to maximize their batting average on balls in play, I would say this: cultivate speed and athleticism, swing at better pitches, and try to hit line drives. I don’t know if BABIP can or should be learned, however. Ultimately, BABIP is the baseball version of a zen koan or hippie bumper sticker. BABIP: Stuff Happens. Or, more accurately, sometimes in baseball you make your own fate, but sometimes your fate makes you.



Print This Post

Brian Reinhart is the Dallas Observer restaurant critic, a classical music writer for MusicWeb, and occasional Banknotes Industries correspondent. You may also know him from FanGraphs as the "Well-Beered Englishman." Follow him on Twitter @bgreinhart.


Sort by:   newest | oldest | most voted
Garys of Olde
Member
Member
Garys of Olde

Fun article, thanks!

Lintyfresh85
Guest

Great stuff!

Bradley Woodrum
Member
Member

Great work. There’s always a story behind the numbers.

CJ in Austin TX
Guest
CJ in Austin TX

By the way, Blefary did not switch to catching when he played for the Astros. He was used almost exclusively at 1b and didn’t play the catching position in Houston.

Gator1830
Member
Gator1830

What was the minimum plate appearances for this list?

wobatus
Guest
wobatus

Nice. Never heard of Cullenbine before. I don’t think he was “non-threatening.” You usually say that about a guy without power getting walks, but Cullenbine had an ISO of .198 that year. The year before his OPS was 1.014 and he batted well over .300. Seems pretty threatening. His career babip was in the .280s, so he likely did just have an unlucky final year. Still productive though, with a wRC+ over 130.

David Willard
Guest
David Willard

Nick Johnson in 2010 with the Yankees:
.167/.388/.306
98 PA, 12 hits, 24 walks.

I know it’s a small sample size, but dude had the LOWEST BA and the HIGHEST OBP on the team(pitchers excluded). I don’t know how to find something like that out, but I gotta assume that’s never happened before.

EDogg1438
Guest
EDogg1438

A lot of these years seemed to happen in the 1960s, when offense was depressed as a whole. I’m pretty sure that league-wide BABIP was lower during this time, which could explain some of these to a degree. I wonder if anyone has ever created a “BABIP+” stat to measure this effect.

Matty Brown
Member
Member
Matty Brown

Do the highest!

Jay29
Member
Jay29

This is rather anecdotal, but McGwire, Sosa, and Ruth had BABIPs near or higher than their career norms in their biggest HR years (excepting Bonds, whose .266 BABIP in ’01 was well below his career .285 BABIP).

So I figure that it’s not impossible that Maris could’ve had a career-average BABIP in ’61. That would’ve put his final batting average at .305 instead of .269. That final line — .305, 61 HRs, and roughly 150 RBIs — would’ve really impressed the old timey sports writers even more.

Ferd
Guest
Ferd

Times were different:

Blerafy’s 1968 season was good enought for a 109 OPS+. His career OPS+ was 115. League BA was .230 (Yankees had a team BA of .217 and Yaz led the league at .301). BAbip was .260 that year.

McAuliffe’s 1971 seas was good enough for an 86 OPS+. His career OPS+ was 109. Things were better, but not by much. AL BA was .247 and BAbip was .272

lexomatic
Guest
lexomatic

From what I remember about Aaron Hill, he was fighting against attempts at making him more patient. It seemed like he was always trying to hit home runs and didn’t. So… approach. But I don’t know if there’s evidence to support that.

Bip
Member
Member
Bip

How many of these guys are extreme flyball hitters? Flyballs have the lowest BABIP of the three batted ball types, and are the most likely (by a lot) to be home runs. That’s two big drags on BABIP wrapped up in one hitting approach.

wpDiscuz