Billy Hamilton, the Absolute Freak
Some people track the passing of time through watching their children. Other people track the passing of time by looking at what time it is, and comparing that to a previous time, from back in the past. I tend to track the passing of time by thinking in baseball terms. I can’t really help it, and sometimes it takes me by surprise. It feels like just yesterday that Billy Hamilton was one of the most exciting and polarizing prospects in the sport. Now Hamilton is the subject of some trade rumors, because he’s entering his arbitration years and the Reds aren’t going to be good any time soon. Life comes at you fast. (Faster than Billy Hamilton!) (But not actually that fast.)
I don’t need to explain Hamilton to anybody. At least, not anybody on FanGraphs. Runs fast, doesn’t hit. It feels like a somewhat typical profile. Maybe thinking about Hamilton causes you to think about Willy Taveras. We’ve all seen players kind of like this. I’d like to demonstrate that Hamilton is particularly extreme. While Hamilton has maybe disappointed a few observers, he’s been his own sort of player.
You’re familiar with our baserunning metric, and because of that familiarity, you know that Hamilton excels in it. Two years in a row now, he’s easily cleared a full win of positive offensive value just with his legs. To put it another way, last season, Hamilton finished with a 78 wRC+. With the bat, he was 12 runs worse than average. Offensively, though, he was precisely league-average, because of what the running did for him. The baserunning success is the obvious part, the predictable part, but I want to show you another measure. A simpler measure! Baseball-Reference tracks run-scored rate, which is basically just runs per opportunity, expressed as a percentage. No, it’s of course not perfect, but it gets at the heart of why baserunning matters. Here are the highest rates for regulars or semi-regulars since 2013, the year Hamilton first came up:
| Player | Run% |
|---|---|
| Billy Hamilton | 43% |
| Eric Young | 42% |
| Rajai Davis | 40% |
| Chris Young | 40% |
| Ian Kinsler | 40% |
| Dee Gordon | 39% |
| A.J. Pollock | 39% |
| Jackie Bradley Jr. | 39% |
| Ender Inciarte | 38% |
| Jose Reyes | 38% |
A stat like this is going to have some noise, since, for one thing, it doesn’t account for the following hitters. Still, Hamilton’s first, and he deserves to be there. He’s first out of 299 players, and the average has come in at 29%. It’s worth noting that Hamilton’s first full season was his worst one on the bases, and he’s gotten even better since. Just for the sake of your own curiosity, Adam Dunn comes in last, at 17%. Tyler Flowers shows up at 19%, and then David Ortiz is at 20%. The stat isn’t very surprising, but it shows you why baserunning is valuable.
Now, moving on, many people recognize that Hamilton is great on the bases. Many people recognize that Hamilton is not great at the plate. Fewer people recognize that Hamilton has been defensively elite in center field. That’s what makes him more than just a skilled pinch-runner — he compares well in the field to just about anyone. It’s something we probably should’ve expected, given Hamilton’s footspeed and instantaneous reaction time. I got to wondering, how many players have had this sort of profile? I went to Baseball-Reference and looked at all the players with at least 1,000 plate appearances through age 25. I used a cutoff of 1961 because Baseball-Reference made that easy.
For every player, I focused on three numbers: batting value, baserunning value, and defensive value (including position). I expressed all those numbers on a per-600-PA basis, for consistency. In terms of batting, Hamilton ranks in the sixth percentile within the pool. In defensive value, he ranks in the 95th percentile. In baserunning value, he ranks in the very tippy-top percentile. I know old defensive numbers aren’t great, but it’s the best I could do. And I used Baseball-Reference’s baserunning numbers because they’re complete throughout recent history.
From there, it was a matter of finding similar players. So for the three stat categories, I calculated the standard deviations, and then I figured out z-score differences from Hamilton’s performance. Adding up the absolute values of those three z-scores yielded an overall similarity score. The lower the score, the more similar the player. Here’s the top 10, with Hamilton included for reference:
| Player | Sim Score |
|---|---|
| Billy Hamilton | 0.0 |
| Julio Cruz | 1.5 |
| Omar Moreno | 2.3 |
| Ozzie Smith | 2.4 |
| Willy Taveras | 2.5 |
| Milt Cuyler | 2.8 |
| Josh Barfield | 2.9 |
| Julian Javier | 2.9 |
| Carlos Gomez | 3.0 |
| Devon White | 3.0 |
| Cristian Guzman | 3.0 |
On its own, this doesn’t tell you very much. You’ve never seen these sim scores before, so you don’t know what they mean. All you see here is that Hamilton’s closest comp is a young Julio Cruz. But now look at that 1.5 sim score. What’s the significance of that? For reference, I compared Hamilton to Josh Reddick. I didn’t choose Reddick for any great reason, but he had an unremarkable, ordinary beginning, and I just happened to see his name in the spreadsheet while scrolling. So I did all the same math with Reddick as the comparison point instead of Hamilton. The most similar young player is Howie Kendrick, with a sim score of 0.3. Then there’s Robin Yount, also at 0.3. Cruz is closest to Hamilton, with a sim score of 1.5. There are 84 players with a lower sim score when compared to Reddick. And then, Omar Moreno is second-closest to Hamilton, with a sim score of 2.3. There are 250 players with a lower sim score when compared to Reddick.
This should make it clear that Hamilton is almost unprecedented. He’s taken a familiar profile, but he’s turned all of the traits up to 11. To go in a different way, Mike Trout has been super extreme, right? By the same method, his closest comp is Alex Rodriguez, with a sim score of 1.6. That’s a little greater than the difference between Hamilton and Cruz. But then, Hamilton has four players with a sim score no greater than 2.5. Trout has nine. Hamilton has been at least as exceptional as Trout, and possibly more so. He’s clearly not better than Trout, and he never will be, but he’s one of the most unusual players in the world.
That makes him exciting and a little bit risky. If you’re another team, you might not trust Hamilton’s legs to keep up. You might not see the running or the fielding as sustainable. It’s abundantly clear that Hamilton will never be much of a threat in the box. But then, between 23 – 25, Julio Cruz was worth about 7 WAR. Between 26 – 28, he was worth about 7 WAR. He didn’t really change; he stayed the same, and Hamilton shouldn’t be approaching any physical cliff. The intrigue is his extremity, and if you believe in it, he’s a quality everyday player. He’s a weird one, but weird is no antonym of important.
People grow tired of everything. I don’t know what was expected of Billy Hamilton, and freaks never live up to the highest of expectations. Billy Hamilton isn’t invincible on the bases, and he hasn’t progressed as hoped at the plate. But, quietly, he’s remained a total freak. Hamilton has panned out, in that he is an exceptional and extraordinary major-league baseball player. The normal ones are fine. The normal ones are boring. There is no excuse for being bored by Billy Hamilton, no matter where he’s playing his game. As a Red or as something else, he should go on to be nothing but completely himself.
Jeff made Lookout Landing a thing, but he does not still write there about the Mariners. He does write here, sometimes about the Mariners, but usually not.
Seeing Ozzie Smith’s name there is interesting. He’s sort of like Ozzie except with the baserunning and defense flipped.
Yes. Although Ozzie always had a good walk rate and a low strike-out rate. I daresay that Ozzie’s patience and ability to make contact were traits that helped him become a more productive hitter later in his career. I don’t think Billy Hamilton will get better at the plate with time.
Both great points. I remember how awful Ozzie’s hitting stats were in his Padre years, but even then he was walking more than he struck out. Hamilton’s K rate puts a cap on his offensive upside, even as he’s pushed his BB rate and BABIP to reasonable levels in the second half of 2016.
Great article. I’d love to see a list of the “most unusual” players. It’d be interesting to see who else made that list, if it were realistic to try to make one.
The player that immediately pops into my mind is Rob Deer. I recall one year he started out with something like eight of his first ten hits being home runs.
My first thought was Russ Ortiz, of all people. He had a 3-4 year stretch of plus pitching despite walking almost as many guys as he struck out. That rarely has happened in the last quarter-century or so.
I would love to see Billy take a step forward with the bat. He had solid walk rates in the minors, that’d be a huge asset to his game if he (re)develops an eye.
His O-Swing% was only 27.5 last season, which would be in the top 50 (he didn’t qualify.) He’s never going to walk a lot because he’ll never hit for power, but his walk rate last season was league average-ish. Can’t be too upset with that.
Seems like a season with a super high BABIP is possible. With even average hitting he’s obviously a monster.
For a good laugh, go look at Inside Edge “remote plays” for CFers. Last I checked, Hamilton had made as many as the rest of NL CFers combined.
In the final tally, the NL “field” rallied to beat Hamilton 9 remote plays to 8.
Still, neat tidbit that Hamilton made one-third of all the remote CF plays in the majors in 2016:
http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=cf&stats=fld&lg=all&qual=0&type=3&season=2016&month=0&season1=2016&ind=0&team=0&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0&sort=7,d
You write that Trout “by the same method” is 1.6 z-score units from his nearest comp, ARod. That seems to indicate that Trout is more freakish than Hamilton, yet in a very different way, since Trout is not close to Hamilton in z-score. In what way, though? I would think that by all three categories—batting, baserunning and defense—Trout and ARod would be fairly close. Using FG data, and comparing Trout’s full career with ARod to age 25, their rankings are:
Batting (wRC+): Trout 1st/ARod 18th
Baserunning: Trout 1st/ARod 18th
Defense: Trout 123d/ARod 26th
I understand these values are not exactly comparable to the ones you used at BBRef, but surely they’re close enough. The point is that neither player is very far from the top in any category, except Trout in defense where he’s about in the middle. It doesn’t make sense to me that Trout would be very far in z-score from ARod.
What makes Hamilton freakish is that he’s one of the very best in two categories, and one of the worst in another. Trout is not one of the worst in any category, so I don’t see how he could be as far from anyone else by this method as Hamilton.
I thought Hamilton could have been a very intriguing 26th man for the right team.
Thanks for writing this! I hope that Billy keeps being extraordinary, and that speed never disappears entirely from our game.
Good stuff, Maynard.
If Hamilton (who is 26) stayed healthy for a season and got on base a bit more, could he steal 100+ bags a la Rickey Henderson? Rickey did this three times by the age of 24 (but also was great at drawing walks). This is also a reminder to me that Hamilton’s defense is outstanding, too.
The gulf in OBP between Billy and Rickey is too wide to imagine ever crossing. Billy just topped .300 for the first time, with a modest .321. Rickey averaged .411 in his 100-SB years.
A better target would be Vince Coleman, who also had three years of 100 SB (his first three). Vince was the avatar of the low-OBP/high-SB guy, partly because Whitey Herzog loved the running game and just happened to have almost no power in his lineup.
But even Vince got on base far more often than Billy — .329 OBP those 3 years, with Billy at .297 career.
On top of that, Coleman’s 83% success rate in those years is fantastic for such volume. (Rickey was just under 80% for his 3 combined.) And, Vince tried a steal in 55% of his times on base, a rate reached by only 3 other guys in a year of 100+ SB attempts (one each for Rickey, Leflore and Moreno).
So, it would seem that Billy must get on base more often, run more often, and still keep a great success rate. That’s a tough ask, especially in today’s game. Steal attempts are held down by the data-based sense of their value and risk, plus the elevated HR rate and broader distribution of power throughout a lineup.
But dang, I’d love to see it!
It makes sense that he is without comp. He may have the worst bat-to-ball skills of any player ever to get full-time abs ever. In any previous era, he may not have been given a job. Advanced metrics have likely given him an opportunity that nobody before him had. The idea that his base-running and defense can cancel out his bat and even provide value is a new one…
Great article! As a Reds fan I love to watch Billy play but I think the Reds should trade him if they get good (but I wouldn’t wait for great) value back. When his speed declines in 3 or 4 years he’s not going to be worth much. Also, he’s one of those players who plays all out. I’d be surprised if he averaged more than 135 games played the next 3 years.
I’m curious if there’s a point of convergence in value between a high OBP and low runs/opportunity player vs a low OBP and high runs/opportunity player…
I’ve always been high on Hamilton.
Dreamed of seeing him in a Cubs uniform patrolling center. Cubs lack the speed, and I think he would be a perfect fit under Maddon.
Would the Reds trade to a division rival? What would it cost in prospects?
I’m not even sure how to gauge Billy’s trade value.