A Dip in Delmon Young’s Consistent BABIP
On the whole, last season represented another disappointment for former No. 1 prospect Delmon Young. He struck out more often than ever before in his career, and walked at a lesser rate. For the second straight year he produced negative WAR, largely because of his fielding components, but also in part because of negative batting components. It represented the second straight year in which the Twins regretted sending Matt Garza to the Rays.
Yet not all was lost for the young Delmon. It’s easy to forget, because he had been such a hyped prospect for so long, that he was just 23 years old for most of last year. He did show an improvement in his power, posting a .142 ISO, his highest mark since his brief 30-game appearance in 2006. He also showed improvement in the second half. Both his ISO and his K% improved. His batting average also shot up 34 points, despite a BABIP 44 points lower. Even more encouragingly, he capped his season with a monster September, .340/.364/.544.
As R.J. warned us late last year, we shouldn’t look too much into Delmon’s season splits. Plenty of players have posted excellent second half numbers only to revert to their disappointing selves the next year. This is even more true of September performances. The circumstances change that month — benches, especially bullpens, are much longer, and many teams have little left to play for. We’d be better off weighing a September performance in proportion to the player’s career, rather than taking it as a sign of turnaround.
That appears to be the case for Delmon this year upon first glance. Even though he’s producing at a slightly above league average level, a 102 wRC+, he’s still not coming close to his potential. That’s just a look at the results, though. In terms of process, Delmon has showed signs of life. What stands out the most: his walk rate currently sits at a career high level, while his strikeout rate falls far below his career norm. His ISO, .176, also sits comfortably above his career mark. The next stat to the right on his Dashboard also tells a story. His BABIP, .266, is not only generally low, but low for Delmon, who has had a .338 BABIP in each of the past three seasons.
Part of this drop is his balls in play rate. Strikeouts, fly outs, and ground outs are just forms of outs. The only difference is that the latter two count against a player’s BABIP, while the strikeouts do not. It is therefore not very surprising that Delmon’s BABIP has dropped. That drop, however, seems to be a bit disproportionate. If he were merely, say, grounding out where he formerly struck out, his batting average would hardly see an effect. In those terms, an out is an out regardless of how a player makes it. Yet Delmon’s .264 batting average is the lowest of his career.
According to the xBABIP calculator, Delmon should be at around a .314 mark for the season. That’s lower than his normal, but again that’s expected considering his lower strikeout total. At that BABIP, even if all the additional hits were singles, Delmon would be hitting .304/.355/.472. That offensive production, combined with his much improved defense, would provide the Twins with some semblance of the value they thought they were getting in the winter of 2007-2008.
Even as it stands, Delmon has produced positive WAR, 0.5. That includes positive batting and fielding components, the first time Delmon has accomplished that since 2006. If he continues what he’s doing right now — displaying more patience and hitting for power — he might even out some of his early season poor luck and start to approach his potential. The Twins have been patient. It just might pay off with Delmon.
Joe also writes about the Yankees at River Ave. Blues.
I hope I don’t get killed for asking this question but this article seems like the perfect forum to post it…
Isn’t the Replacement component Fangraphs uses for WAR giving credit to the player for staying on the field and keeping a replacement level player off it? If that is the case then why do players who post numbers that are negative in all other components of WAR still credited with Replacement points even if they themselves are playing at a level less than replacement level? Should WAR discount their Replacement value in these cases? Hope someone is able to help because I’ve often wondered about that. Thanks in advance.
The batting and fielding components of WAR are calculated against average players, not replacement-level players (batting is calculated against league average, fielding against positional average; then the positional adjustment corrects for relative value of different defensive positions). The “replacement” column essentially corrects this, setting the baseline for comparison to replacement level instead of average.
So a player can have negative values everywhere if he’s below league-average as a hitter, a below-average fielder at his position, and plays a below-average difficulty position. He still gets positive credit for his playing time to adjust the baseline from average to replacement-level, and can still wind up with a positive WAR overall if he’s played enough and his other components are not too negative.
Good lookin’ out man. I always wondered about that and never found the appropriate place to really post the question and have it be relevant to the article. That makes sense though I just always thought it was strange that Yunieski Betancourt got credit for being on the field when he’s freakin’ awful. Thanks again for the info.
You should also reference this guy http://www.fangraphs.com/community/index.php/is-delmon-young-about-to-break-out/
as supporting what you’re saying or something…
I know everyone hate’s the “he’s in the best shape of his life” line, but Delmon was noticeably skinnier this year. He allegedly lost 30 lbs, but I believe it. Just looking at him it jumps out at you.
Not sure what effect that would have on his hitting, but his fielding is apparently better based on UZR (extremely small sample alert!). I haven’t watched a ton of baseball this year, but he’s still making the head-scratching bad plays, but maybe he’s getting to more balls with the lost weight.
When I read that he had lost the weight at the beginning of the year I just rolled my eyes. Then I went to a game and saw him on the field and noticed he was much thinner. For once the article told the truth, he has actually lost the weight.
By the time he’s any good at all (at ths pace) he’ll be outrageously expensive, and not on the Twins. He’s not Span, and with Hicks, Benson, Revere (over-rated), Morales, and even Tosoni in the minors, why would you pay to keep a guy that in 2 years will be league average, but making waaaaaaaaay too much money thanks to arbitration? Horrible, horrible, horrible trade. Brutal. Oh, and they compounded the stupidity by signing Harris to a two year deal…..
Hicks is still a long ways away. He’s striking out a ton in Low-A, as is Morales. Benson was just demoted to Single-A. Revere has his defense to work and is similar to Denard Span. No need to have both in the same lineup. Tosoni is probably the one that could possible take Delmon’s spot the earliest, but I wouldn’t count on it. Also, hopefully Revere is trade bait if anything. The lack of XBH is troublesome. Unless Delmon earns it, he won’t be outrageously expensive.
I think it’s time to get over that trade. It is what it is.
Young is likely an average player already, as this article (sort of indirectly) attests.
Why would more or less strikeouts affect a player’s BABIP? I don’t get that part. As you said, strikeouts aren’t counted in BABIP. If a player gets fewer K’s, they’re still not counted in his BABIP. It affects the number of balls in play, but I can’t see how it would affect his BABIP.
BABIP:
H-HR
——–
AB-K-HR+SF
Clearly, the number of strikeouts is going to affect a stat that includes Ks in the denominator.
Only if those PAs that previously would have ended in Ks exclusively end in other types of outs, which seems like a strange contention. Otherwise hits would increase and BABIP could go up, or down, or stay the same.
So fewer K’s means the denominator will be a greater number. And fewer K’s means more balls are put into the field of play, resulting in more hits. So you have a higher number of hits divided by a higher number of balls in play.
Still don’t see why a difference in K’s menas a difference in BABIP, unless you’re assuming that the extra contact a player is making is weak contact, which may (or may not) result in fewer hits.
Perhaps that was poor phrasing on my part. Ks are not balls in play.
You’re saying that more balls in play will lower his BABIP. That’s like saying someone’s AVG will be lower with more ABs.
As for Delmon’s “improved” discipline, he is swinging at the same pitches he always has, he’s just making a lot more contact than he did last season. Is that really sustainable?
This is what I’m having trouble with. I’ve already conceded the BABIP will be lower because Delmon’s almost certainly not crushing the pitches he missed last year.
I’m not sure when Batted Ball statistics are updated, but it actually seems as though Delmon’s seeing fewer pitches per AB this year which just seems counter-intuitive.
You just hope that Delmon’s improved contact rate will allow him to see more *mistakes*
He’s not swinging at as many of the same bad pitches he did in the past. Most of his improvement has been in his range in the OF, but he’s also chasing fewer BAD pitches than he did in prior years. He’s had fewer of his classic Delmon AB’s (foul off first two pitches, chase pitch in the dirt for strike three). His May level of performance (.306/.348/.500) seems pretty sustainable, since his BABIP is at a fairly normal level for him – 23 points lower than his career level.
Delmon has hit .375/.395/.611 since this article was posted. The average, power and extreme ball in play tendencies (88%) make for a bizarre combination as he has ten times as many extra base hits (31) as unintentional walks (3) and his hit to UBB ratio is an unfathomable 27 to 1. Good golly Miss Molly.
Only want to say your article is impressive. The clarity in your post is simply striking and i can take for granted you are an expert on this subject. Well with your permission allow me to grab your rss feed to keep up to date with succeeding post. Thanks a million and please keep up the a uthentic work.