BBCOR Revisited

[gg2224]

Next year, NCAA-D1 baseball is moving to a low-seamed baseball, similiar to an MLB ball, with the hope to rejuvinate the offensive production that was lost when they made the move from the BESR bat standard to BBCOR bat standard in 2011. The Division II and III committees have yet made a decision on whether to follow D1's lead.

http://www.baseballamerica.com/college/ncaa-to-switch-to-flat-seamed-balls-in-2015/

This change made me curious as to the impact BBCOR has had on run production at Iowa's high school level. Using quikstats as a source, I collected the average run production for the top 10 run producing squads for each class for the final two years of BESR (2010/2011) and the first two years of BBCOR (2012/2013).

The results, detailed by class below, show that the switch to BBCOR, in three out of four classes, has significantly impacting run production haveing reducd the average runs scored per game by an average of 12.2% for classes 2A, 3A and 4A and 9.4% overall. 1A is the outlier with just a drop of 1.32% in average run production for the top ten scoring teams.

What do you all think?

1) Should high schools consider following the NCAA's lead and move to a low seamed baseball to better players and keep the game consistent across levels of play?

2) And what the heck is going on in Class 1A? The three larger classes have experienced a double digit percentage decrease
(12.2% ave) in runs scored per game since the introduction of BBCOR. However, 1A's decrease is an entire order of magnitude lower with just a 1.32% drop in run production. Why has BBCOR had almost no effect at the 1A level?

Class 1A - top ten run producing squads for each year:
BESR
2010 ave = 9.55 runs per game
2011 ave = 9.31 runs per game
2 year average = 9.43 runs per game
BBCOR
2012 = 9.60 runs per game
2013 = 9.01 runs per game
2 year average = 9.31 runs per game

Change = 1.32% decrease (-0.12) runs per game

Class 2A - top ten run producing squads for each year:
BESR
2010 = 8.91 runs per game
2011 = 10.02 runs per game
2 year average = 9.46 runs per game
BBCOR
2012 = 8.54 runs per game
2013 = 7.78 runs per game
2 year average = 8.16 runs per game

Change = 13.79% decrease (-1.30 rpg) in runs per game

Class 3A - top ten run producing squads for each year:
BESR
2010 = 8.28 runs per game
2011 = 8.84 runs per game
2 year average = 8.56 runs per game
BBCOR
2012 = 7.82 runs per game
2013 = 7.32 runs per game
2 year average = 7.57 runs per game

Change = 11.55% decrease (-0.99 rpg) in runs per game

Class 4A - top ten run producing squads for each year:
BESR
2010 = 8.24 runs per game
2011 = 8.41 runs per game
2 year average = 8.33 runs per game
BBCOR
2012 = 7.65 runs per game
2013 = 7.13 runs per game
2 year average = 7.39 runs per game

Change = 11.27% decrease (-0.94 runs per game)

Overall (all for classes combined)
BESR
2010 = 8.75 runs per game
2011 = 9.15 runs per game
2 year average = 8.95 runs per game
BBCOR
2012 = 8.41 runs per game
2013 = 7.81 runs per game
2 year average = 8.11 runs per game

Change = 9.38% decrease (-0.84 runs per game)

 

[3afootballrocks]

Interesting Stuff here... I would guess that the depth of quality pitching on those 1A teams is significantly less that what you would see from the larger schools. Also in speaking in terms of depth this affects the defensive team you put on the field as well. The smaller schools in most instances are playing less experienced younger players that are not as effective defensively. This could also drive up runs scored.

 

[gg2224]

Did a little further digging into the change in offensive stats of my test group since BBCOR bats introduced.

The most notable to me was the 47% drop in home runs overall - wow.

Here's some other results to consider. The numbers are the average change across all four classes in the 40 team sample

AVE - down 5.13%
OBP - down 3.5%
SLG - down 11.8%
Singles - down 3.5%
Extra base hits - down 16.3%
SAC - up 9.31% (1A = +6.3%, 2A = +2.6%, 3A = +11.0%, 4A = +16.4%)
HR - down 47% (1A = -37.5% 2A = -50.3%, 3A = -53.9%, 4A = -46.7%)

In almost every offensive stat, 1A hasn't seen the dramatic changes the other three classes have experienced. The end result is the 1A schools in the sample now score, on average, about 1 extra run per game than the larger class schools since the onset of BBCOR.

I think the 1 difference run is from two sources.

First, my somewhat educated guess is 1A doesn't see the number of high quality/high velocity pitchers that the other classes face. Therefore, 1A players are able to square up a few extra hits as well as earn a few more base runners due to an increased number of BB and HBP. 1A had increases in both these statistics since BBCOR while the other classes saw a drop in the number of BB and HBP being issued.

Second, while quikstats no longer keeps ROE (reached on error) as an offensive stat, 1A teams in the sample saw a 5% drop in Fielding Percentage since BBCOR. More errors means 1A is earning an extra free pass or two a game than the other class schools.

Finally, regarding the quality of quikstats data; well, it is quikstats. I've tried to stick to numbers that shouldn't be up to interpretaton but we all know there are schools that pad their hitting stats. I tried to minimize that impact by selecting the most proficient run producing schools. The assumption being that a team that is leading in run production is one of better teams and those teams tend to be better keeping accurate stats.

 

[terrehawk]

I would guess that the skewed #'s in 1A have more to do with poor pitching (walks, not enough velocity to get by hitters etc) and poor defense than most anything else.

Edited: you addressed this in your last post
This post was edited on 6/17 2:29 PM by terrehawk

 

[terrehawk]

Yes, I think the high schools (and smaller colleges) should follow the lead of a more lively baseball.

Watching the CWS is not nearly as interesting as it used to be. Particularly with the new stadium that is nearly impossible to hit a ball out of between the power alley's.

 

[gg2224]

Agreed. TH. While there is a certain excitement in the occasional 2-1,15 inning game as in last nights TCU-Virginia tussle, those games have become more the norm. It's hard not to think that with the livelier ball that game would have ended earlier.

As for the 1A hitters, even though I see the numbers, I'm not sure I understand how the difference in 1A pitching results in such different outcomes with a BBCOR bat? I mean, to me the numbers point to a difference in pitching, but I don't understand what's different about the physical interaction of your average 1A pitched ball and an average 1A BBCOR swing that's lessened the new bat's impact vs the larger three classes.

You've coached a heck of a lot more quality hitters than I've ever been around. In terms of batted balls, are we talking about the number of 'heavy' pitches or the 'spin' a 1A hitter sees vs his contemporaries in the other classes or is there something else in play?

 

[terrehawk]

I guess my initial thought was with lower quality pitching you end up with more walks and more balls squared up by hitters due to lack of velocity so you end up with many more runners on base overall.

Combine that with poorer defensive play at the lower level and possibly more stealing and running due to less ability/savvy/knowledge to hold and throw out runners and you end up with more guys in scoring position than you otherwise would. So now guys are scoring on hits and errors instead of just advancing IN TO scoring position.

the higher levels of HS ball are likely now more geared towards "small ball" and going station to station. At least what ive seen.

Wrongly in my opinion. I think they should be MUCH more aggressive on the bases now than ever since it takes 2 hits to score a runner from first. Not to mention that there are so many dead outs in a HS lineup, why on earth would you sit around and wait for a HS hitter to drive in a run when there are SOOO many creative ways to SCORE runs against HS defenses that will screw it up more times than not if you put pressure on them.

Ive always said that you can win more games with baserunning than ANY OTHER way at the HS and small college level. If you get a guy to 3rd and have another runner reach base....you are crazy if you leave it to the hitter (most hitters). Particularly with 2 outs and ABSOLUTELY with 2 strikes on that hitter. Again, why leave it to a .250 hitter that is more likely to strike out than put it in play.

More often then not, (certainly a higher % than that HS hitter) you are going to score AND the defense likely still will not get an out!

People sometimes forget what the real object of the game is. ......TO SCORE RUNS. Not batting average or stats!

ok...sorry for the rant...I just get frustrated watching HS baseball sometimes.

Anyway,I could be way off base with why 1a is seeing different results. Just my initial thoughts.

 

[gg2224]

Those are all pretty good points. I agree with your perspective on pitching that BB HBP numbers in 1A boost the number of potential base runners and therefore you have more opportunities to score runs. I think those factors are significant drivers in the 1A run production numbers.

But what really stood out to me was your comments on stolen bases and using aggressive baserunning to score runs. When I was digging through the numbers I thought I had looked at every statistical measure available to advance the runner, With my focus on the bat, I had overlooked the stolen base.

Stolen Base, Average Per Season

1A(BESR) = 101
1A(BBCOR) = 133 (+31.4%)
+31.4%

2A (BESR) = 89
2A (BBCOR) = 88 (-1.0%)

3A (BESR) = 80
3A (BBCOR) = 78 (-2.0%)

4A (BESR) = 80
4A (BBCOR) = 71 (-11.0%)

1A blows the other three classes away in this category. The three larger classes averaged just 79 per season (down from 83 before BBCOR). 1A is now stealing almost 70% more bases than the other classes combined average.

In other words, I think your arguement that there can be a cost to playing 'small ball' and taking multiple hits to score is well supported in the data - especially if you're a speedy team,

I've seen this in practice this year from my home town team. They happen to have good speed throughout their lineup. Its not just their increase in SB, it also their very aggressive approach on the basepaths. They are constantly putting pressure on defenses by stretching a single into a double, a double into a triple,etc. The result has been an increase of 3.6 runs per game over a year ago.

 

[gg2224]

To stay consistent with the other stats I've cited, here are the changes in SB numbers in terms of Average Stolen Bases Per Game Per Team:

1A: 2.86 | 3.69 | +29.2%
2A: 2.50 | 2.47 | -1.3%
3A: 2.12 | 1.96 | -7.5%
4A: 1.96 | 1.71 | -13.1%

 

[terrehawk]

Wow. That is pretty amazing. Im glad you looked into it.

I was hoping I wasnt off base.(haha) Its baffles me how coaches have become more conservative instead of less. That goes against every fiber of my being. The object of the game is to SCORE RUNS.

another thing I hate about small ball? Why give up an out (sacrifice) to move runners? RUN. Delay steal, straight steal, hit and run. At worst, go for a base hit bunt up to 1 strike. Then if you insist on the hitter moving the runner, you can sacrifice. Why coaches are so willing to give up an out is beyond me.

some might look at a team with a strong armed catcher and curl up in a ball and go back to station to station. Dumb. First off, few pitchers are good at holding runners and you still have to execute to throw the guy out.

Yes, you are going to "break a few eggs". You are going to run your self out of innings some times. However, the positives far outweigh the negatives.

Im not advocating stupidity here, mind you, just making HS kids make plays. More often then not, they are poorly coached on defensive play and again, they are HS kids. They WILL mess it up. Baserunning isnt necessarily about speed either. Its about pressure, technique and strategy.


Our local coach tried a first and 3rd play a couple times early on and it didnt work and now he crawled back in his shell and went back to station to station and leaving it up to poor hitters. Well, part of the failure is because the runners didnt have a good enough understanding of what to do and when. It isnt something you just work on in preseason and then touch on occasionally. ...you physically walk through and full speed time to time but you talk about it each game, in detail. (Such as reminding them NOT to run into a tag, particularly with 2 outs, in order to stay in rundown long enough to score the runner.) Its a daily thing. Incorporated in to the game as much as the approach you teach at the plate. Again, the object is to SCORE. not just "have a good approach at the plate" or "QAB's" or to just get on base. Baserunning and SCORING with baserunning has to be part of your offense. Not a side bar.

and, again, failure is going to happen. You flush it and DO IT AGAIN.

 

[gg2224]

Schools that were part of my analysis, meaning they were in the top ten run scoring teams per class in either 2010, 2011, 2012 and/or 2013. The number following the school means the number of years that school was part of the top ten for that class. Class assignments were as of the 2013 season.





1A Martensdale-St Marys 4

1A Newman Catholic, Mason City 4

1A Bishop Garrigan, Algona 3

1A North Tama 3

1A Kee, Lansing 3

1A Van Meter 2

1A Twin Cedars 2

1A Preston 2

1A Montezuma 2

1A BGM, Brooklyn 2

1A Lisbon 2

1A Lawton-Bronson 2

1A Don Bosco, Gilbertville 2

1A Calamus-Wheatland 1

1A Dunkerton 1

1A Coon Rapids-Bayard 1

1A Treynor 1

1A Clay Central-Everly 1

1A Cedar Falls, Northern Univ 1

1A North Sentral Kossuth 1

----------------------------------------------
2A Beckman, Dyersville 4

2A Kuemper Catholic, Carroll 4

2A North Fayette 3

2A Columbus Catholic, Waterloo 3

2A Cascade, Western Dubuque 3

2A Northeast, Goose Lake 2

2A Wilton 2

2A Van Buren, Keosauqua 2

2A Treynor 2

2A Regina, Iowa City 2

2A Davis County, Bloomfield 2

2A Solon 1

2A Van Meter 1

2A South Winneshiek 1

2A Lawton-Bronson 1

2A Central Springs 1

2A East Marshall 1

2A Alta/Aurelia 1

2A Albia 1

2A Maquoketa Valley 1

2A Maple Valley-Anthon Oto 1

2A Des Moines Christian 1

----------------------------------------------
3A Bishop Heelan, Sioux City 4

3A Marion 3

3A Central Clinton, DeWitt 3

3A Clear Lake 3

3A Sergeant Bluff-Luton 2

3A Chariton 2

3A Washington 2

3A Solon 2

3A Harlan 2

3A Glenwood 2

3A Wahlert, Dubuque 1

3A Centerville 1

3A West Delaware, Manchester 1

3A West Delaware 1

3A Vinton-Shellsburg 1

3A Dallas Center-Grimes 1

3A Epworth, Western Dubuque 1

3A Benton 1

3A Saydel 1

3A Norwalk 1

3A Maquoketa 1

3A LeMars 1

3A Davenport, Assumption 1

3A Dubuque, Wahlert 1

3A Waverly-Shell Rock 1

----------------------------------------------
4A Cedar Rapids, Kennedy 3

4A Fort Dodge 3

4A Sioux City, East 3

4A Southeast Polk 3

4A Prairie, Cedar Rapids 3

4A Iowa City, West 3

4A Mason City 2

4A Ankeny 2

4A Des Moines, East 2

4A Muscatine 1

4A Valley, West Des Moines 1

4A Sioux City, North 1

4A Sioux City North 1

4A Sioux City East 1

4A Clinton 1

4A Ottumwa 1

4A Epworth, Western Dubuque 1

4A Dowling Catholic 1

4A Linn-Mar, Marion 1

4A Lewis Central 1

4A Dowling Catholic, West Des Moines 1

4A Iowa City, City High 1

4A Iowa City West 1

4A Dubuque, Hempstead 1

4A Pleasant Valley 1



Edited for formatting
This post was edited on 6/21 2:16 PM by gg2224

 

[gg2224]

"The great tragedy of science, the slaying of a beautiful hypothesis by an ugly fact"...Berke Breathed through his character Oliver Wendal Jones in the comic strip "Bloom County" circa 1985.

With that said, it looks as though I owe 1A pitchers at least a partial apology.

1A free passes, meaning walks issues and hit batsmen per game, remained essentially steady after the switch to BBCOR. Further, the number of free passes per game was on par with the other classes, both before and after the BBCOR switch.

Total BB and HB per game by class.
Class | BESR | BBCOR | % change
1A: 3.59 | 3.58 | -0.45%
2A: 3.58 | 3.38 | -8.73%
3A: 3.60 | 3.53 | -5.63%
4A: 3.44 | 3.79 | +10.38%

This result, I think, strengthens the contention that it's the increased aggressive approach executed by 1A as they run bases that seems lessening the impact of BBCOR.

I mentioned a partial apology because 1A pitchers still may be contributing to the increased stolen bases via a failure to hold runners, poor pickoff moves, that might result from having to use younger, less experienced pitchers.

 

[tm3308]

Originally posted by gg2224:

"The great tragedy of science, the slaying of a beautiful hypothesis by an ugly fact"...Berke Breathed through his character Oliver Wendal Jones in the comic strip "Bloom County" circa 1985.

With that said, it looks as though I owe 1A pitchers at least a partial apology.

1A free passes, meaning walks issues and hit batsmen per game, remained essentially steady after the switch to BBCOR. Further, the number of free passes per game was on par with the other classes, both before and after the BBCOR switch.

Total BB and HB per game by class.
Class | BESR | BBCOR | % change
1A: 3.59 | 3.58 | -0.45%
2A: 3.58 | 3.38 | -8.73%
3A: 3.60 | 3.53 | -5.63%
4A: 3.44 | 3.79 | +10.38%

This result, I think, strengthens the contention that it's the increased aggressive approach executed by 1A as they run bases that seems lessening the impact of BBCOR.

I mentioned a partial apology because 1A pitchers still may be contributing to the increased stolen bases via a failure to hold runners, poor pickoff moves, that might result from having to use younger, less experienced pitchers.

I think the aggressive baserunning is absolutely the big factor. Looking at the team stolen base numbers from last season, it's dominated by the smaller schools. Des Moines East and Iowa City West were the only 3A/4A schools in the top 36/37 schools (I wasn't sure which class Shenandoah was in last year and they were 36th, followed by Heelan at 37th). Both of those schools were in the top 15, and East was 5th 174 SB. But BGM and Martensdale were the top two schools with 288 and 278 steals, respectively. I'm not going to keep looking back, because I highly doubt the numbers are going to change much. Smaller schools, if they've got a fast kid or two who get on base consistently, can steal far more often because fewer teams can hold them.

 

[oonfoofoo]

Lack of defense overall. Too many 1A games that I have been to look like 10 and under games......kid reaches first,,,guarantee ride to second and on to third. I attended 2 1A games last week that had quality 1A teams and they won by getting on and stealing there way to third and catchers inability to block. I know this isn't indicative of all 1A teams but this was 2 quality teams.

Pitching -
- lack of quality overrall
- lack of ability to hold runners
- lack of ability to come to plate fast enough

Catching - a lot of stealing at the 3A / 4A levels is not stealing on catchers but on all of the above related to pitching and it is exponentially higher at the 1A / 2A levels so I won't blame catchers.....but I would say that catching skills at the 1A are considerably lacking. A lot of passed balls on the catcher that are with pitchers that are throwing < 75 MPH. Unfortunately finding that athlete that can catch and do things that make a good catcher often put him at other positions that are obviously considered much more important,,,,,

 

[hawkeye4317]

good work all around.

the base running philosophies discussed is interesting and I'm wondering what high school coaches in Iowa have to say about that

 

[EHS1505]

The ability of some 1A coaches to differentiate between a passed ball/wild pitch and a stolen base could play a part in the skewed SB numbers. Not saying all, but there were 3 kids on one 1A team that were averaging 1 SB per time on base

Case in point, this year is skeptical again. The top 3 SB leaders are from small schools. Stats are slightly errant as I'm not factoring ROE's, but OBP and AVGs are not very far apart, (+1-2 chances at most)

1. 68 times on base. 8 hits that make stealing impossible (3B/HR), 14 more that make stealing highly unlikely/unnecessary (2Bs). That's 46 times that 2nd base was available. Player has 37 stolen bases.

2. 39 times on base. 1 hit that makes stealing impossible (HR), 1 more that makes stealing unlikely (2B) 37 times 2nd base was available. Player has 34 stolen bases

3. 38 times on base. 1 2B, 37 times 2nd base was available. Player has 31 stolen bases.

I'm aware people steal 3rd. I'm aware 1A pitchers struggle to hold runners/throw strikes. I'm aware 1A catchers are usually not as skilled as large school catchers, but averaging a SB per time on base seems more like a stats keeping error than legitimate baseball

Last year's leader:
70 times on base. 1 3B, 2 HR, 6 2Bs. 61 times 2nd was available... 65 SBs....

Thinking logically, that player would have HAD to have been on base with bases loaded a handful of times, thus decreasing the opportunities to steal even further... throw in a runner on 3rd while he's at 2nd or a slow runner on 2nd with him on 1st and I just don't see 65 stolen bases as a possibility unless he was being credited stolen bases on passed balls/wild pitches...

 

[tm3308]

Originally posted by EHS1505:

The ability of some 1A coaches to differentiate between a passed ball/wild pitch and a stolen base could play a part in the skewed SB numbers. Not saying all, but there were 3 kids on one 1A team that were averaging 1 SB per time on base

Case in point, this year is skeptical again. The top 3 SB leaders are from small schools. Stats are slightly errant as I'm not factoring ROE's, but OBP and AVGs are not very far apart, (+1-2 chances at most)

1. 68 times on base. 8 hits that make stealing impossible (3B/HR), 14 more that make stealing highly unlikely/unnecessary (2Bs). That's 46 times that 2nd base was available. Player has 37 stolen bases.

2. 39 times on base. 1 hit that makes stealing impossible (HR), 1 more that makes stealing unlikely (2B) 37 times 2nd base was available. Player has 34 stolen bases

3. 38 times on base. 1 2B, 37 times 2nd base was available. Player has 31 stolen bases.

I'm aware people steal 3rd. I'm aware 1A pitchers struggle to hold runners/throw strikes. I'm aware 1A catchers are usually not as skilled as large school catchers, but averaging a SB per time on base seems more like a stats keeping error than legitimate baseball

Last year's leader:
70 times on base. 1 3B, 2 HR, 6 2Bs. 61 times 2nd was available... 65 SBs....

Thinking logically, that player would have HAD to have been on base with bases loaded a handful of times, thus decreasing the opportunities to steal even further... throw in a runner on 3rd while he's at 2nd or a slow runner on 2nd with him on 1st and I just don't see 65 stolen bases as a possibility unless he was being credited stolen bases on passed balls/wild pitches...

That's definitely a strong possibility, but there are at least some teams where players really did get legit steals a great deal of the time. Martensdale is the only team I can speak with much authority on, since I both played and coached against them from 2008-2012. They stole a lot of bases because just about every player in the lineup could do so, and they were very aggressive because they could be. They also weren't led by one of the clueless coaches that you describe (and there are certainly guys like that), so I think you can pretty well trust the kind of numbers they were putting up.

And even if the steal numbers are a little bloated, I still think smaller schools are far more aggressive with their baserunning strategies than 3A/4A schools are.

 

[EHS1505]

I don't question Martensdales stats, I have a lot of respect for their program. BGM was the program I was speaking of. I know nothing of their program at all, it just caught my eye last year and noticed they had 2-3 up there again this year so I checked it against baseball logic and think it suspect and relevant to the threads study.

 

[tm3308]

Originally posted by EHS1505:
I don't question Martensdales stats, I have a lot of respect for their program. BGM was the program I was speaking of. I know nothing of their program at all, it just caught my eye last year and noticed they had 2-3 up there again this year so I checked it against baseball logic and think it suspect and relevant to the threads study.

Like I said, Martensdale is the only school at the top that I could speak about with any authority. I've never seen BGM play, but I do know that they've got some very fast kids. Jack Kline was the most explosive player in the state during football, at least in the smaller classes. So the number may not be 100% accurate, but I wouldn't be shocked if he really did legitimately steal all those bases, either.

 

[gg2224]

I like the interesting approach on determining the credibility of the SB.

I agree that SB (like AVE, ERA and their derivitives) is a statistic that require both unbaised judgement and knowledge of the rules to be scored correctly. Sadly there are too many teams that either out of ignorance, laziness or deliberate intent, artificially inflate these numbers. There are also teams that keep very good stats. Unfortunately, the the error introduced by the former make comparisions between teams almost meaningless.

That's why I try to stay with hard stats like strikeouts, walks, hit by pitch, runs scored and other measurements that require no judgement to score.

Still, the stolen base numbers listed on quikstat, whether 'true' stolen bases or not, represent the advancement of a runner. For some reason, beginning the year BBCOR was introduced, 1A reported 'stolen bases' for the top scoring teams have jumped 30% from the two years prior to BBCOR. In addition, the top scoring peers in the other three classes experienced SB declines.

As I see it,
1) either the quality of play has dropped significantly in the past two seasons for 1A from previous two years resulting in many, many more opportunities to advance
or
2) teams are taking advantage of a greater percentage of the misques to advance a base and/or they are stealling more bases outright.

While I think there can be variations in the quality of play in a class over time, I don't think it could vary to such an extent to account for the wild swing in the SB numbers for the schools examined.

I think #2 is the more likely cause, which is an indicator of a more aggressive approach on the basepaths.