Adam Eaton’s Defensive Numbers Keep Getting Even Crazier

In 2017, I am probably more interested in Adam Eaton than I am any other player in baseball. As the centerpiece of a controversial blockbuster, coming off a monster season where a lot of his value was tied a huge swing in his defensive value, Eaton was always going to be a fascinating experiment for paying a perceived premium price for outfield defense. But it gets even more interesting, because the Nationals are switching him from right field back to center field, so we throw a position switch in the mix as well, and get another data point on whether his weird splits between RF and CF actually mean anything.

So when the MLBAM guys released their outfield catch probability leaderboard last weekend, Eaton was naturally one of the first players to examine. And when Jeff took an early look at the published 2015-2016 data, he found that Eaton ranked seventh in Catch+, or whatever we might want to call plays made above the averages of the buckets they had opportunities in. And when he looked at the catch data relative to the range portions of UZR and DRS, he actually found that the Statcast data showed that Eaton had the largest positive difference, suggesting that, by hang time and distance traveled variables, Eaton may have been even better defensively than the public defensive metrics thought.

So yeah, Eaton is really interesting. But the more I dig into Eaton’s defensive data, the more remarkable it all gets.

If you use the catch probability leaderboard and sort by “one star” opportunities, you’ll find Eaton at the top of the list, with 65 chances to catch a ball with an estimated catch probability of between 91-95%. If you sort by “two star” opportunities (76-90%), he’s tied for third, with 30 such chances. He’s not anywhere near the top on “three star” plays, but then, on “four star” plays (26-50%), he’s #1 again, with 35 opportunities. And on the hardest “five star” plays, the ones with a catch probability below 25%, he’s ninth, with 37 such chances to make a spectacular catch.

Of the five catch probability bins, Eaton is first in opportunities in two of them and third in another, with a top-ten also thrown in just for fun. So, if you simply add up all the binned plays on the leaderboard, Eaton had far more chances to add defensive value than any other outfielder last year, with 186 Statcast-tracked opportunities with a catch probability of 95% or less. That’s 15 more opportunities than the next highest guy, Odubel Herrera, and when you compare Eaton’s opportunities to players with a similarly high number of innings (1,362), he still comes out way ahead; Jackie Bradley Jr had 156 tracked opportunities in 1,375 innings, for reference.

You Aren't a FanGraphs Member
It looks like you aren't yet a FanGraphs Member (or aren't logged in). We aren't mad, just disappointed.
We get it. You want to read this article. But before we let you get back to it, we'd like to point out a few of the good reasons why you should become a Member.
1. Ad Free viewing! We won't bug you with this ad, or any other.
2. Unlimited articles! Non-Members only get to read 10 free articles a month. Members never get cut off.
3. Dark mode and Classic mode!
4. Custom player page dashboards! Choose the player cards you want, in the order you want them.
5. One-click data exports! Export our projections and leaderboards for your personal projects.
6. Remove the photos on the home page! (Honestly, this doesn't sound so great to us, but some people wanted it, and we like to give our Members what they want.)
7. Even more Steamer projections! We have handedness, percentile, and context neutral projections available for Members only.
8. Get FanGraphs Walk-Off, a customized year end review! Find out exactly how you used FanGraphs this year, and how that compares to other Members. Don't be a victim of FOMO.
9. A weekly mailbag column, exclusively for Members.
10. Help support FanGraphs and our entire staff! Our Members provide us with critical resources to improve the site and deliver new features!
We hope you'll consider a Membership today, for yourself or as a gift! And we realize this has been an awfully long sales pitch, so we've also removed all the other ads in this article. We didn't want to overdo it.

In thinking through how Eaton would end up with so many chances, there seemed to be two obvious possible explanations:

1. He happened to play on a team with a bad pitching staff who gave up a lot of hard-hit fly balls.

2. He was exceptionally unusual at positioning, so that a larger percentage of his overall opportunities were graded out at higher difficulty levels.

The first one is the easier of the two things to check, so let’s start there. To begin with, we can just look at the distribution of balls in play for each team last year, thanks to the leaderboards here on FanGraphs. We don’t really care about the difference between an FB and a LD, since both could be chances for Eaton to make a play, but we do want to get rid of infield flies, which are not plays in which he would be involved, so I simply totaled up every team’s FB+LD-IFFB in order to see if the White Sox just gave him an inordinate amount of balls to work with.

The answer? Not really. With 2,282 outfield air balls, the White Sox did rank fifth highest in MLB in that category, but the league average for a team in 2016 was 2,193 outfield air balls, so they only allowed 89 more total outfield catch opportunities than average, and clearly not all of those were hit to right field. If just total team outfield air ball rates were a huge factor, we’d expect to see some Twins with a lot of chances here, since they led the league with 2,447 balls hit to their outfielders in the air. But we don’t really see that, as Max Kepler (the OF who played the most for MIN last year) grades out fairly run of the mill in terms of opportunities per inning played.

But maybe the White Sox pitchers just gave up harder-than-average airball contact, thus shifting more of Eaton’s plays to the <95% buckets? Nope, that’s not true either. Baseball Savant has the White Sox pitching staff allowing a 92.7 mph average exit velocity on air balls to the outfield, the sixth-lowest total of any pitching staff last year. And if we just look at balls hit to the OF over 100 mph, they allowed a below-average number of crushed balls to the outfield as well.

So it doesn’t seem to be a White Sox thing. They allowed more balls in the air than average, but not more well-struck balls than average, so we may actually suspect that their outfielders distribution of opportunities would skew more towards the higher catch probabilities. Since the catch probability leaderboard doesn’t show total chances, I asked Mike Petriello where Eaton ranked in terms of “zero star” plays, the ones with >95% catch probability. Perhaps we shouldn’t be surprised that Eaton ranks first overall here either, with 20 more such plays than Mike Trout and 24 more than Jackie Bradley Jr.

In other words, Eaton had the most opportunities to make both routine and non-routine catches last year. For whatever reason, the ball seemingly just found him far more often than it found any other outfielder in 2016.

That leads into the positioning question. Perhaps the White Sox started Eaton in places where he’d be more likely to track down balls than other right fielders, and he was stealing balls that might otherwise go to the team’s center fielders. After all, both Austin Jackson and J.B. Schuck posted lousy UZR/DRS numbers last year in their time in CF for the White Sox, and if Eaton was getting lined up to catch balls that they might have otherwise gotten themselves, he could have been effectively stealing their chances to rank well by our defensive numbers.

Thankfully, Tom Tango is also obsessed with Adam Eaton, and used him as an example of a number of Statcast ideas he was working last year. And last July, he wrote about Eaton’s positioning over at his blog. The pictures are worth looking at, so you should follow the link, but I’ll quote his summary here.

On the left, you will see where MLB RF position themselves. That top image is the angle relative to home plate. Zero is up the middle (home to 2B bag to the wall). +45 degrees is the RF foul line. We can see therefore that RF position themselves at around 25-28 degrees. The bottom image is distance to home plate, and we can see MLB RF are around 285 to 300 feet from home plate. Not shown here is the split between v LHH and v RHH. I’ll talk about that in the future, as there’s something interesting there, in addition to the CF.

Adam Eaton matches the mode of the league, at 26-27 degrees, and rarely ventures outside that zone. How does that compare to other outfielders? I don’t know yet! But doing this for all RF is one of the next items on the agenda, not to mention seeing differences by park. Distance to home plate shows that Eaton definitely plays a bit shallower, at 275-290 feet, about 10 feet shallower than the league RF. Given the results that Daren tweeted the other day (see image below), those ten feet might be what he needs. Still too early for conclusions, but we’ll get there.

If Eaton was shading towards center field in order to catch more balls that Jackson/Schuck were theoretically responsible for, well, it didn’t show up in the data before the middle of July. The only unique positioning thing about Eaton is that he plays shallower than most RFs, which you wouldn’t think would allow him to steal balls hit to other OFs; the extra balls he’d be catching would be ones that would probably drop otherwise, at the expense of maybe having more balls hit over his head.

So the White Sox didn’t really give up way more outfield opportunities than most teams, they didn’t give up harder contact to the OF than most teams, and Eaton didn’t shade towards center field in order to steal balls from his teammates. No one else playing behind that pitching staff seems to have benefited from some undiagnosed team-wide bias towards more opportunities. But yet, Eaton led the league in both easy and non-routine chances, and because of that, he converted a center fielder’s level of putouts while playing mostly right field.

As always, there is still far more we don’t know about this topic than that we do know. But in the end, perhaps this is just one of those weird things that happens. In 2016, maybe the ball just got hit to Adam Eaton a lot for no reason whatsoever. Maybe this was just the year where the good defensive outfielder got a crazy number of chances, and that combination turned into one of the best defensive seasons we’ve seen from a corner outfielder.

Moving back to center field, he should get more opportunities in 2017 just due to the nature of the position. If he again gets more balls to try and catch than anyone else, then we’ll have a real mystery on our hands.





Dave is the Managing Editor of FanGraphs.

19 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
MattabattacolaMember since 2026
9 years ago

As a Sox fan I am lucky to have the “eye-test” for Eaton, and obviously it confirms that Eaton was really good, and the ball went to him all the time. In Center the previous years, from what I have seen, his mistakes in the outfield seemed somewhat mental, not really rooted in ability. SOOO, I think he’ll be fine in the shift back to center, and this season provided the Nationals with the data to show how good Eaton could be, if given the opportunities.

Rational FanMember since 2025
9 years ago
Reply to  Mattabattacola

Not sure I agree on the mental part in center – Eaton’s jumps were poor, and he continually let the ball beat him in center. His angles were poor and rounded in center, and he was consistently shallow on his routes.

Being someone who played CF and RF for 20 years of my life, I can say that I hated right field and loved center and the reads off the bat are very different. The tailing of the ball in right is something I didn’t like, and the angle the ball popped off the bat compared to center made early jumps more difficult for me. It’s very possible that the direct angle, and the depth perception aspects of center could be a weakness of Eaton while he gets great reads off the bat in right. Going back on a ball in right is more easily seen – imo – and I thought the ball was more likely to knuckle on you in center than right.

I don’t think Eaton being a below average CF’er was a fluke or something that was corrected last year. I think it’s possible that’s just who he is out there, and the Nats would be better off playing a position he’s proven to be very very good at instead of moving him back and seeing what he’s learned.

marc wMember since 2020
9 years ago

I’m guessing it has something to do with the fact that they faced the most RHHs, and many fly balls go to the opposite field. This might be why his average positioning was slightly less deep than average: I’d imagine oppo fly balls don’t go as far.

Lots of RHHs plus a fly-ball heavy staff, plus really tough lefties like Sale/Quintana apparently equals a really odd distribution. The White Sox had more chances/putouts from RF than from CF. Can’t find another team with a distribution like that.

jianadaren
9 years ago
Reply to  marc w

That’s an interesting line: against RHHs the White Sox led the Majors in TBF and FB, were 2nd in LD, were 7th-lowest in GB%, 10th-lowest in K%, and 7th-highest in Oppo%. That’s a huge amount of balls in play, a huge amount of those balls in the air, and a very high proportion to the right side. There’s even a very small HR/FB (6th-lowest in the majors) and slightly below-average IFFB% (15th-lowest) to ensure that a disproportionately high number of those fly balls were not unplayable by outfielders.

http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=pit&lg=all&qual=0&type=c,6,16,17,18,55,37,44,39,40&season=2016&month=14&season1=2016&ind=0&team=0,ts&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0&sort=3,d

Six Ten
9 years ago
Reply to  marc w

What’s more, you’d think that with RHHs at the plate they’d shade the center fielder toward left, which means Eaton is playing largely on his own over there. Even if, as jianadaren notes, they got a lot of balls going the opposite way, you might still shade center to pull because of how much harder a ball to the pull field is likely to be hit. If so, he’d get a lot of less-hard-hit balls to his side, and he is solely responsible for them. That’s a lot of chances.

And I expect there’s a psychological aspect to this, too. Take a hard-hit ball and a soft-hit ball that, because of other factors like angle and speed, are equally playable. I wonder if you’re more likely to make a risky attempt at the softly-hit ball than the hard-hit ball because of the disparate post-landing damage each ball carries with it.

MikeSMember since 2020
9 years ago

Even more curious, the White Sox probably started a lefty 100 times last year (Sale, Quintana, Rodon and misc.) which should mean more RH hitters and fewer FB to RF.

Mule
9 years ago
Reply to  MikeS

96 times to be exact.

Lee TrocinskiMember since 2016
9 years ago
Reply to  MikeS

Flyballs are actually hit oppo more often than pulled. Only 24% of flyballs were pulled by RHH last year, with 37% hit to CF and 39% to RF. LHH had a similar Pull/Oppo ratio.

London Yank
9 years ago

The extra chances probably makes his defensive value from last year less likely to be repeated since the extra opportunities are likely to be a function of the White Sox pitching staff that he is no longer playing behind.

zjgifford
9 years ago

This might be something to do with his opportunities… Lefties had a Pull% of 43.7% against CHW (highest in MLB) and righties had an oppo% of 26.3% against them (7th highest in MLB). If you sum those percentages, the White Sox are the highest in the league – they gave up the most batted balls toward RF.

Obviously, summing isn’t the best method to use here but it was quick and maybe gives an idea of what was going on.

GG_huson
9 years ago
Reply to  zjgifford

“Why did the White Sox right fielder get the most defensive opportunities? My analysis uncovered a weird explanation: Batters facing the White Sox hit the ball in his direction most often!!”

I see where you’re getting at – it’s a good start and definitely worth looking into a little deeper (marc w started doing this above)…just found this amusing and wanted to poke a little fun 🙂

rockymountainhigh
9 years ago
Reply to  GG_huson

comment image

zjgifford
9 years ago
Reply to  GG_huson

Yeah, by no means was this supposed to be more than a simple, high level observation. Like Dave said at the end, maybe they got hit his way for no reason. Just thought it was worth pointing out that, yes, they actually did get hit his way more often.

Doesn’t explain in any way why he did so well, and isn’t supposed to. But the article spends a bunch of time wondering why he had so many opportunities looking at positioning, depth, and the (FB+LD-IFBB) rate, but didn’t just look to see how many of those (FB+LD-IFBB)’s happened to be hit to RF

jw757Member since 2024
9 years ago

Was something just odd about RF last year for the Sox? Even Avisail Garcia, not well known for defensive prowess, pulled off a 17.0 UZR/150 in ~380 innings out there in RF.

http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=rf&stats=fld&lg=all&qual=0&type=1&season=2016&month=0&season1=2016&ind=0&team=4&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0&sort=23,d

sadtrombone
9 years ago
Reply to  jw757

What about the *visiting* team to Chicago? Can we pull that too? Are there massive gusts of wind or something?

mikecws91
9 years ago

I noticed a big improvement in Adam Eaton’s throwing last year too. He’s always had a strong arm, but would often spike the ball into the ground. A significant portion of his defensive value last year was because he threw out a TON of baserunners. Not sure he’ll have as many opportunities this season.

Rational FanMember since 2025
9 years ago
Reply to  mikecws91

Had arm surgery to repair his arm before last year. Seemed to do wonders.

NATS FanMember since 2018
9 years ago

I am hoping for a gold Glove this season from Eaton!

MGL
9 years ago

If you’re getting more difficult to catch balls relative to easy ones that likely means you are OUT of position more often, relative to the average OF’er. It might be correct for you, I don’t know.

Just by virtue of him playing shallower than the average outfielder suggests he’ll get more balls in the tough to catch bin, I think (not for sure).

I’m not sure what “stealing balls from other outfielders” has to do with anything. Part of the confusion is the Statcast data. What constitutes a “catchable” ball in any of the bins? If a ball is caught by the CF’er and the RF could have caught it 25% of the time (or whatever) is it included in the RF’ers data set?

I’m pretty sure the L/R thing explains just about everything though.