Why does everyone like the Rangers?

[Sinister Cat]

I am not 100% on this but a hitter's BAbip works the same as LD%; that is, while a hitter has a little more control over it than a pitcher (which is barely, if at all), there is an acceptable range and any large deviation within a year likely means regression should be expected. So yes, of course a higher LD% has to do with BAbip but if you look at Bradley's LD% over the years there is no consistency:

2004: 18.9%
2005: 22.7%
2006: 15.4%
2007: 23.5% w/ OAK, 16.4% w/ SD
2008: 24.2%

Of course you can use these stats for individual hitters, but I will admit other factors should be looked in to such as GB/FB, HR/F, LD%, etc... It is not as straightforward as it is for pitchers because hitters do have some control.

I'm just not sure what BAbip tells you with respect to a hitter... all stats should be expected to regress to some mean.. we can just glance at Bradley's BA/SLG/OBP etc and know that he's going to regress. I don't think the fact that his BAbip tells us much.

Seems like it, as you mention, has more value for pitchers. First because they have less control (although obviously some pitchers do get hit hard so their line drive % is related to BAbip and is under their control), but also because they always have more or less the same fielders behind them, so BAbip can be a measure of how much they got screwed by a bad defense.

Anyway, I think for both hitters & pitchers BAbip is most useful for determining how lucky someone is in a relatively small sample. As you get later in the season, an out-of-whack BAbip for a hitter is not as likely to be a measure of how lucky they are. Yes Bradley will regress-- it is a near certainty he will not perform as well for the rest of this season or next-- but I don't think we need to rely on an idea that he's been lucky and his hits have fallen in to foresee this.

[BadBeatBodog]

BAbip tells you pretty much the same about a pitcher or hitter. BAbip DOES apply to hitters. Increased LD% or not, extremely high BAbips are unsustainable and show a player is getting lucky and should regress. It is not a given that the regression will take place in the same season, but a decline the following season is most assuredly guaranteed, and that was the point of my post about Bradley. If anything, the bigger the sample size the better, in most if not all cases.

[BadBeatBodog]

Let me explain it a different way. Unlike BAbip regression for pitchers, which goes towards a league average, hitter BAbip regresses towards the player's own number. A hitter has control over their BAbip, but that doesn't mean it can't be too high or low.

[Wilforth]

I like the way Texas ensures that most of their games go Over.