Jake Mangum is impressing as a 29-year-old rookie. Seven years after being drafted by the New York Mets out of Mississippi State University following four collegiate seasons, the switch-hitting outfielder has slashed .303/.346/.370 with a 109 wRC+ over 128 plate appearances with the Tampa Bay Rays. Moreover, Mangum has swiped 10 bags without being caught.
His path to pro ball included being bypassed in the draft out of high school, then opting not to sign after being a low-round pick following his sophomore and junior seasons. One of the teams that called his name didn’t make an offer so much as wish him well. “Good luck with school next year,” was their message to the high-average, low-power Bulldog.
Mangum went to finish his college career with a .357/.420/.457 slash line, as well as a Southeastern Conference-record 383 hits. He also finished with a degree in business administration — although that’s not something he expects to take advantage of down the road. Paying days have a shelf life, but he plans to “stay around the game forever.”
A lack of balls over fences contributed heavily to the limited interest he received from scouts. When he finally inked a contract, the 2019 fourth-rounder had gone deep just five times in 1,200 plate appearances.
“It was always the power piece,” explained Mangum, whose ledger now includes 24 home runs in the minors and one in the majors. “They just didn’t see it playing in professional baseball, my not having enough power. I’m stronger now, but to be honest with you, I don’t try to hit home runs. I try to hit for a high average and help the team with good defense and base running.”
If you played baseball as a kid, you’re familiar with the phrase “a walk’s as good as a hit.” Your coaches probably shouted it at you. You probably shouted it yourself when your friend was at the plate with a three-ball count. Shouting a bromide is one thing, but believing it is another. We didn’t really buy it as kids, and for a while now, we’ve been able to quantify the difference. This season, hits have a wOBA of 1.129, while walks have a wOBA of .694. A walk, it turns out, is 61.5% as good as a hit. All of our coaches were liars.
On Wednesday, I was checking to see where Alejandro Kirk’s wOBAcon – his wOBA when he makes contact – ranked in relation to the rest of the league. The top of the list caught my eye. It couldn’t help but catch my eye. Aaron Judge is so far ahead of the pack he may as well be playing a different sport. He’s currently running a .685 wOBAcon. The difference between Judge and Cal Raleigh in second place is the same as the difference between Raleigh and Brandon Lowe in 47th place. Here’s the most shocking way I can find to express just how absurd Aaron Judge’s wOBAcon is right now: When Aaron Judge puts the ball in play, he’s nearly as good as a walk.
I know that may not sound particularly sexy, but that number is remarkable. A walk is a sure thing. It’s a bird in the hand. Putting the ball in play is a gamble. The league as a whole has a .362 wOBA on batted balls. A walk is nearly twice as valuable. This is why every couple years we write a whole mess of articles about how if batters were really smart, they’d juststopswinging. But there’s Aaron Judge, so, so, very close to having his batted balls be as valuable as a walk. He’s just nine points of wOBA away. That’s nothing. It’s the value of a popup to the second baseman.
If all this talk about Judge and the value of a walk is giving you déjà vu, that’s because just about a month ago, Ben Clemens wrote a whole article about when it makes sense to walk Judge intentionally. We’ll circle back to that point, but the first thing I did when I saw that number was try to figure out just how special it was. Turns out it’s pretty special.
I checked the pitch tracking era first. Since 2008, Judge is the only player in baseball to break a .600 wOBAcon. He’s done it three times, going .600 in 2017, .602 in 2022, and .617 in 2024. Mike Trout’s never done it. Shohei Ohtani, Yordan Alvarez, no one but Aaron Judge has done it, and this season he’s surpassing his 2024 mark by, at present, 68 points. Judge will likely cool off at some point, and over at MLB.com, Mike Petriello has addressed how much of his sky-high BABIP is the result of luck and how much is just coming from the fact that it’s really hard to field a ball that’s been hit at the speed of sound.
Still, this made me really curious. I started wondering whether anyone had ever been as valuable as a walk when they put the ball in play. That meant a lot of math, because wOBAcon isn’t readily available for players who preceded the pitch tracking era. I wanted to go all the way back to 1901, so I had to reverse engineer it by myself (and when I say “by myself,” I mean “with the help of Ben Clemens because he’s good at math”). I pulled the stats for every qualified player-season since 1901, so I had everybody’s wOBA and counting stats. I split each player’s plate appearances into three sections: balls in play, strikeouts, and walks/hit by pitches. To calculate the number of balls in play, I took at-bats, subtracted strikeouts, then added the number of sacrifices. Then I got to the algebra and set up an equation that looked like this:
Total wOBA = (BIPwOBA x BIP%) + (BBwOBA x BB%) + (KwOBA x K%)
(Since strikeouts have a wOBA of zero, I didn’t actually need the third part. It would always equal zero.) At that point, my numbers didn’t look quite right, so I went to Ben, who taught me that for arcane reasons, hit by pitches have a different wOBA from walks and intentional walks don’t count toward wOBA at all, so I had to rework my calculations some.
The numbers still weren’t perfect, sometimes because of rounding issues, but more often because we don’t have all the data, like intentional walks and sacrifices, for older players. With the help of Stathead’s Katie Sharp, I incorporated intentional walk data from Retrosheet to the players in the top 20. The Retrosheet data isn’t official, but it made the numbers more accurate, and I care more about that. So keep in mind that this isn’t iron-clad, but here you go, the highest wOBAcons ever recorded in a qualified season:
Eight of the top spots belong to Aaron Judge and Babe Ruth; Ruth’s 1927 Murderer’s Row season also ranked 11th at .589. Judge is only one point above the all-time record, so he’ll almost certainly lose it at some point over the next 97 games, but he’s still 50 points above the third-place entry and 90 points above 10th place. He’s staying on this top 10 list unless something horrible happens.
More importantly, the answer to our question is “no.” Nobody’s has ever been as valuable as a walk when they put the ball in play. As a matter of fact, Judge is closer this season than anyone else has ever been. He may not beat Ruth in terms of overall wOBAcon, but keep in mind that wOBA is a seasonal constant. It changes every year based on the run-scoring environment. Back in 1920, walks had a wOBA of .741. This season, Judge’s wOBAcon is 98.7% the value of a walk. Ruth was at 92.3% in 1920, and that was the only season when anyone had ever reached 90%. If we look at things that way, Judge has two of the top three seasons of all-time, plus his current campaign, which is in first place and will likely stay there even after his BABIP luck runs out:
Judge still has a shot at reaching the magic number, though he’d have to hit even better to do so. I don’t think that’s really something we can ask of Judge right now. It’d kind of be like if you were an Athenian and Pheidippides had just run all the way from Marathon and shouted, “We win!” and collapsed and died, and then you started nudging him with your sandal and saying, “That’s great buddy, but now that you’re back, could you run and get me a sandwich?”
Still, let’s get back to Ben’s article. Ben combined Judge’s stats over the last four seasons with a run expectancy matrix and win expectancy numbers to figure out when it was smarter to put Judge on than to let him hit. Ben allowed for a wider range, but the math indicated that the answer was very narrow: in the ninth inning of a one-run game, with two outs and a runner on second or third. That’s it. Other than that situation, it’s smarter to pitch to Judge than to walk him. A lot of this discussion is centered around risk aversion. It’s scary to give up a 500-foot homer to Aaron Judge, and that makes you overreact, giving him a free base when the numbers say that’s not the smart move. But maybe we’re right to be scared of Aaron Judge. First of all, he’s run a ludicrous 239 wRC+ since that article came out. That’s somehow worse than the comical 248 mark he had at the time, but it also represented an improvement on the numbers that Ben was running. Those numbers went back to 2022, when Judge ran a pathetic 206 wRC+. It makes more sense to walk Judge intentionally now than it did back in May.
Knowing all this, I’d like to run a quick scenario by you. Say you’re a pitcher facing down Aaron Judge. First of all, I’m so sorry. No one deserves to be in this position, and you should check and see whether you have any legal recourse against whoever got you into this mess. Second, take a moment to ask yourself a question: Can I strike out Aaron Judge? Seriously. Judge strikes out at a roughly average rate, which means that nearly 77% of the time that he comes to the plate, he doesn’t strike out. So be honest with yourself. Do you have it today? Is the slider biting? Does the ball feel good in your hand, or are the seams a little flatter than you’d like them to be? Did you sleep OK last night? If your answer to any of those questions is something other than, “Hell yeah, let me at him,” then it’s a very firm “no.” If you can strike out Aaron Judge, then by all means, pitch to him. You’ve got a 51% chance of getting him out and just a 15% chance of giving up extra bases. But if you don’t feel like you can strike him out, if your choice is either a walk or a batted ball, then you should probably just put him on. He’s 99% as good as a walk anyway.
NEW YORK — Carlos Rodón was cruising until he wasn’t. After shutting out the Red Sox for the first four innings on Sunday night in the Bronx, Rodón scuffled while facing Boston’s hitters a third time, serving up two homers and allowing five runs before making an abrupt departure in the sixth inning of what became an 11-7 loss. It was a rare bum note from the 32-year-old lefty, who has stepped up to help the Yankees overcome the losses of Gerrit Cole and Luis Gil, pitching well enough to merit All-Star consideration.
Through four innings of an AL East rubber match between the first-place Yankees (39-25) and fourth-place Red Sox (32-35), Rodón had allowed only one hit and one walk while striking out four. He hadn’t thrown more than 16 pitches in any inning, had gotten first-pitch strikes against nine out of 14 hitters, and had allowed just one hard-hit ball: a 109.9-mph grounder by Ceddanne Rafaela that became an infield hit in the third. That play was compounded by a Jazz Chisholm Jr. throwing error, but it turned out to be of no consequence.
In the fourth inning, Rodón issued a two-out walk to Carlos Narváez, who to that point was just the second hitter he’d fallen behind 2-0 all night. It was the start of a trend. He went 2-0 against Abraham Toro before getting him to pop out to lead off the fifth, and after falling behind Trevor Story, induced him to pop out as well. To that point, he had retired 14 out of 16 batters, but he would get just one of the next five. Rafaela, the owner of a 42.7% chase rate (fourth-highest in the majors) wouldn’t bite at any of Rodón’s first three pitches, all well outside the zone, and ended up drawing a rare walk. Two pitches later, Kristian Campbell sent an up-and-away fastball just to the left of the foul pole in Yankee Stadium’s short right field, a towering 99-mph, 38-degree drive that didn’t slice. The runs snapped Rodón’s 18-inning scoreless streak, which dated back to the final inning of his May 16 start against the Mets. The homer was much less emphatic than Aaron Judge’s 108.6-mph, 436-foot blast off Red Sox starter Hunter Dobbins in the first inning, but it tied the game nonetheless. Rodón then struck out Jarren Duran chasing a low-and-away slider to end the frame. It was his 15th whiff on the night (six via his slider, five on his sinker, three on his four-seamer, and one on his change-up), and his fifth and final strikeout. Read the rest of this entry »
Tireless reporter Jeff Passan of ESPN reported late Monday night that the hamstring pain that caused Yankees closer Luke Weaver to be held out of Sunday night’s game against the Dodgers would land him on the IL, for as long as 4-6 weeks, with a more specific timetable to be presented at a later time. The extent of Weaver’s injury was previously unknown, as he was still in the trainer’s room well after the final pitch, through the end of postgame media access.
Weaver has been nearly flawless all season — allowing just three runs in 25 2/3 innings across his 24 appearances, though two of those runs have come in his last three games — and in late April, he took over as the team’s closer for Devin Williams, who was removed from the role after his atrocious start. While Weaver’s microscopic 1.05 ERA probably isn’t for real, given his more “normal” 3.04 FIP, even the latter number makes him one of the most important members of the New York relief corps, and losing him for a significant amount of time is a blow. Weaver represents one of the most successful rotation-to-bullpen conversions in recent memory, going from a struggling journeyman starter, who was released and then later claimed on waivers in 2023, to being a candidate for his first All-Star appearance this July. Since his transitioning to the bullpen, which also came with a reinvention of his delivery that featured a minimalist windup, Weaver has put up a 2.46 ERA and a 3.26 FIP over 109 2/3 innings. He also gave up just one hit across his four World Series appearances last October.
While this can hardly be considered good news, the impact of the bad news is mitigated by a couple of factors. First, Weaver’s injury comes at a time when the Yankees have a 5 1/2-game lead in the AL East. That’s certainly not an insurmountable lead, but it’s a comfortable one at this point of the season. Back in April, our preseason projections had the Yankees with only a 31% chance of winning the division, and ZiPS was even less confident, at 24%. As of Tuesday morning, these divisional probabilities are at 89% and 86%, respectively. The ZiPS number factors in Weaver’s injury, projecting him to miss a full six weeks as the worst-case scenario, in order to illustrate this point: The Yankees only get a 0.8% percentage bump if he happens to miss the minimum amount of time before he can come off the IL, meaning they’re in fairly strong shape either way. Read the rest of this entry »
Will Aaron Judge win the Triple Crown? If you were hanging around on FanGraphs three years ago, this question might sound familiar. If you don’t want to click the link, back at the end of 2022, both Judge and Paul Goldschmidt were within earshot of a Triple Crown in the final weeks of the season. The projected probabilities were firmly against either of them winning it (about 4% for Judge and 3% for Goldschmidt), the bank won as it tends to do, and Miguel Cabrera remained the only Triple Crown winner of the last half-century. There’s a lot of 2025 left to go, but the man sometimes known as Arson Judge is once again setting fire to the league. And this time, some of the factors weighing against his potentially performing the feat are no longer present.
Triple Crown stats have lost their luster as tools for evaluating overall performance, especially batting average and runs batted in, but not everything has to be an optimized evaluative tool to be cool. Bo Jackson was not even close to the best baseball players of the late 1980s, but I dare someone to say he wasn’t one of the [insert superlative used by kids today that Dan totally doesn’t know because he’s old] players of his time. Triple Crowns are fun in a way that some sabermetric Triple Crown, perhaps wRC+/sprint speed/FRV, is not. Judge is, of course, also having an insanely good season by our more nerdy numbers, but today, we’re old school. And what could possibly be more old school and sepia toned than projection algorithms? Read the rest of this entry »
Every time I watch Oneil Cruz hit, I end up thinking about pull rate. It seems like he’s always using his long arms to yank a ball into right field even though the pitch came in all the way on the outside corner. I’m not quite right, though. According to our leaderboards, Cruz ranks 35th among all qualified players in pull rate. According to Statcast, he’s at 55th, not even in the top third. Maybe it’s just that seeing someone do something as bonkers as this can warp your perspective:
But there is more than one way to think about pull rate. Sometimes you get jammed. Sometimes you have to hit the ball where it’s pitched. Sometimes the situation demands that you shorten up and sell out for contact. Those three examples might tell us a bit less about the intent behind your swing, because you didn’t get to execute your plan. We have ways to throw them out. Today, we’ll look into players whose overall pull rate is notably different from their pull rate when they square up the ball. As a refresher, Statcast plugs the respective speeds of the ball and the bat into a formula to determine the maximum possible exit velocity, and if the actual EV is at least 80% of that number, it’s considered squared up.
I pulled numbers from 2023 through 2025 for each player who has squared up at least 250 balls during that stretch. As you’d expect, the numbers are mostly pretty similar. Of the 219 players in the sample, 165 of them have a difference between their overall pull rate and their squared-up pull rate that’s below three percentage points. No player has a pull rate when squaring the ball up that’s more than 6.5 percentage points off their overall pull rate, but there are a few interesting names here. Read the rest of this entry »
They say that the first step to fixing a problem is admitting that you have one. In that spirit, I’d like to start today’s article with a confession: I have a Trent Grisham evaluation problem. It feels good to say it! I’ve had this problem for years. Ever since he burst onto the scene in San Diego with two straight seasons of good hitting and great fielding, I’ve consistently overestimated his future trajectory. I put him on the first cut of my trade value list every year. I think of him as a starter even when the teams that employ him don’t.
I know all of this. When I’ve looked at Grisham in the past, I’ve seen an excellent player even when others haven’t, and I understand that this bias shades my evaluation. But just when I thought I was kicking the habit, Grisham goes and does something like this and pulls me right back in. Through Monday’s action, the first quarter of the season, he’s hitting a ludicrous .288/.373/.663, and while that’s not any reasonable hitter’s slugging percentage, he’s absolutely tattooing the ball, posting career high marks in barrel rate, hard-hit rate, xwOBACON, xSLG, average exit velocity… You get the idea, he’s just hitting everything very hard at the moment.
Now, as a reformed Grishamite, I have to tell you that hitting the ball hard isn’t one of Grisham’s shortcomings. Not quite like this, of course, because the only person who regularly hits like this is Aaron Judge, but he’s always been a threat to go deep. Grisham might have a low-ish wRC+ over the past three years, but the problem has been the quantity of his hits rather than the quality. Even while he scuffled mightily, he slugged roughly 20 homers per 600 plate appearances. He doesn’t always put the ball in play, but when he does, he makes it count.
Grisham also forces pitchers to come to him. He’s among the league’s best when it comes to chase rate, and he’s walking at a double digit clip. Again, though, I have to tell you that this isn’t new. Grisham’s chase rate is higher than it was last year, and his walk rate is below his career average. Unlike your typical outfielder with a below-average batting line, this isn’t an issue of Grisham never seeing a slider he doesn’t like. He’s quite willing to work a count if pitchers won’t challenge him in the zone. Read the rest of this entry »
If you’ve ever struck up a conversation with a stranger at the ballpark, you might have noticed that the FanGraphs readers are easy to spot. Let’s say you find yourself discussing the Yankees. A FanGraphs reader might ponder whether the 30-point gap between Paul Goldschmidt’s wOBA and xwOBA will catch up to him, while a non-reader is more likely to fret over whether Brian Cashman is too reliant on analytics when constructing the team’s roster. But sometimes, the two groups ask the same thing. So today, let’s consider one of those broad questions: Should teams be intentionally walking Aaron Judge more often?
Admit it. You’ve wondered. If you’re a Yankees fan, you’ve wondered just how long Judge is going to be allowed to hit in big spots. If you’re a fan of the team the Yankees are playing, you’ve wondered how your team’s manager ought to solve this impossible puzzle. And if you’re a neutral fan, well, Aaron Judge is the biggest story in baseball right now. He’s having one of the best offensive stretches in the history of the game. Don’t you want to know if there’s anything that can be done about it?
Ever since Barry Bonds broke the sport in the early 2000s, every hot streak in baseball comes with questions about the “Bonds treatment.” Now, that doesn’t necessarily mean 120 intentional walks, Bonds’ tally in 2004 and the single-season record. (It’s the single-season record by 52 walks. Second place? Barry Bonds. Third place? Barry Bonds.) The best non-Bonds total was Willie McCovey’s 45 in 1969. The most Judge has ever racked up in a single season is a measly 20. So the question isn’t whether teams should treat him like Bonds, because no, they shouldn’t. But should they treat him like McCovey? And more importantly, how should opposing managers handle Judge in a playoff game, when all the chips are on the table? Let’s do some math. Read the rest of this entry »
When the Yankees lost Gerrit Cole and Luis Gil before the season started, I thought they were screwed. Turns out, at least so far, that New York’s stripiest sports team is right where it ended last year: First place in the AL East. That’s because the Yankees, as of this writing, lead the league in home runs, OBP, SLG, and (by a pretty big margin) wRC+. It helps that the rest of the AL East (especially the Orioles) has started slow, but the best defense is a good offense and all that.
Joe Nicholson, Troy Taormina, Nick Turchiaro, Jeff Curry-Imagn Images
It is well known that analytics have changed the baseball landscape. Moreover, it is widely understood that the evolution is ongoing. Embracing innovation, especially within the technology realm, has increasingly become a must for teams looking to keep up with — and ideally get a step ahead of — the competition. For front offices across the game, it’s adapt or die.
What does that mean for the general managers and presidents of baseball operations who lead those front offices? In other words, how have the ever-continuing advancements impacted their jobs over the years? Wanting to find out, I asked four longtime executives for their perspectives.
———
On how analytics have impacted the job
John Mozeliak, St. Louis Cardinals
“When I first broke in, how you made decisions was basically based on scouting reports and traditional statistics. Now it’s much more analytically driven because of the advanced metrics. If you think about it, in the old days when people would invest in stocks… it’s the same kind of thinking now. The more information you have, the better your decisions are. That’s changed quite a bit over the last 25 years.
“Two things come to mind. One is understanding the longevity of a player. In other words, how long should you be investing in a player? The other thing is prospect evaluation; how much value someone might have, even though they’re still in the minor leagues. When you think back to 20-30 years ago, a lot of times minor league players didn’t have the same type of value that you’re seeing today.
“The economics of baseball have changed drastically. There is more revenue in the game, and higher payrolls, but there is also how you think about moving talent for talent. It’s much more based on economics than just pure ‘I think he’s a good baseball player.’”
