Comments on: A Closer Look: Travis D’Arnaud

By: AJ

AJ — Mon, 07 Feb 2011 06:30:18 +0000

Well at least you spelled neutralized correctly once out of your 4 efforts. I’d suggest taking an English course before you decide to criticize someone else’s analysis, you annoying tard.

By: Mike Newman

Mike Newman — Tue, 11 Aug 2009 17:47:35 +0000

Saw D’Arnaud last night and was extremely impressed. His bat is HUGE and I definitely see him as a 20+ HR big league catcher. I maybe see 2-3 guys come through each year with his bat. He’s a stud!

By: Alan

Alan — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 16:56:09 +0000

The best I can add is that batting average is more subject to random variations than most other statistics. So in a small sample size, you can see 30 point swings that don’t really indicate a change in ability, just a matter of those small hits going through or being caught.

The more at bats you have, the smaller the range of probable batting averages becomes. This is why I’m suspicious of hitting splits like RISP. In 50 at bats, you can get all kinds of weird anomalies.

By: Boston Phan

Boston Phan — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 15:21:08 +0000

An article on milb.com about the D’Arnuads playing together. I don’t think that’s their picture on the right…

http://web.minorleaguebaseball.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20090623&content_id=5486306&vkey=news_milb&fext=.jsp

By: LarryM

LarryM — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 14:17:43 +0000

judas_priest,

I get what you are saying. But it would really only apply to what one might call the “strong” version of the BABIP argument – that is, the notion that a bad BABIP is entirely a matter of bad luck. But that is, indeed absurd. The better argument – and, I think, a very good one – is this:

(1) Judging a young player on 1/3 of a season is a bad idea, period, and

(2) That’s especially so when the player has an absurdly low BABIP by his own standards, and when his other fundementals (isolated power, SO and BB numbers) haven’t declined.

That’s really the argument for D’Arnaud, and it’s a good one. That doesn’t mean that you throw out the low batting average, but you need to put it in context, and part of that context is that his low BABIP suggests (doesn’t prove) that he has been (in part, at least) the victim of bad luck.