Freddie Freeman and Embracing the Teases
People have expected big things from Freddie Freeman. I know this because Freeman is a professional baseball player, and all of those guys — each and every last one of them — was at one point considered a future star. The backup catcher, the disappointing first baseman, the 36-year-old in triple-A — former superstars, somewhere, thought to have the brightest of futures. Sometimes they fulfill their promise and most of the times they do not.
I know this also because, among professional baseball players, Freeman was and still is highly regarded. He was drafted 78th overall in 2007, two picks after Giancarlo Stanton, and before 2009 he cracked Baseball America’s top-100 list of prospects. Before 2010, he cracked the top-40; before 2011, he cracked the top-20. Freeman debuted in the majors before he turned 21, and he was established as a regular before he turned 22. Players who do that often become good players, relative to the other players, and unbelievably, inconceivably great players, relative to us.
Freeman is now just 23, nearly 1,300 plate appearances into his big-league career. For reference, he’s slightly younger than teammate Andrelton Simmons, and he’s also slightly younger than teammate Jason Heyward. Something something, and here’s this from Buster Olney Tuesday night:
I’d bet this guy is headed for a breakout season. baseball-reference.com/players/f/free… Fixed some eye issues midway through ’12 and had a good 2nd half.
— Buster Olney (@Buster_ESPN) January 2, 2013
Freeman has been pretty good. He’s young, so he’s supposed to get better still. Now, let’s step back for a quick moment. We’re all on FanGraphs, right now(!), so we’re all familiar with statistical analysis. Much of what we try to do is project future performance, for players or for teams. Even when we don’t think we’re attempting projections, we’re often attempting projections. When it comes to matters of projections, we’re frequently looking for signs of skillset changes. Otherwise, projections would be simple and dull. And with young players especially, we’re frequently looking for signs of improvement. We know that, on average, young players follow certain aging curves, and we’re always looking for hints of big things to come. A player advancing from the minors to the majors spoils some of the mystery, but the mystery isn’t entirely spoiled until the player’s past his peak.
Breakouts, basically. With young players, we love trying to identify breakout candidates. As if we could ever hope to predict the essentially unpredictable. Now we get back to Freddie Freeman. Look closely at Freeman’s numbers, and some things might jump out at you. Some encouraging things, if you like the Braves, or Freddie Freeman.
I’ll warn you now that we’re passing into Arbitrary Endpoints Territory. You won’t need a passport and don’t mind the armed guards. They’re more afraid of you than you are of them for some reason. Freeman debuted in September 2010, and through June 2012, he’d batted more than 900 times. Here is his line:
- .273/.332/.444
Not bad for someone so young. Freeman posted a .327 BABIP, and a .171 isolated slugging percentage. But there were issues. Freeman was aggressive, so he walked barely 7% of the time. He struck out 23% of the time, and in order for Freeman to take a step forward, this was something that would probably need to improve. His power, too, was fine, but unremarkable; for Freeman to approach his ceiling, he’d need the power to increase.
All right, you’re still with me. From July on last year, Freeman batted more than 300 times. Here is his line:
- .257/.362/.466
There’s actually a dip in batting average, but this could just be BABIP-related. Now look at the next two numbers. The OBP went up, and the slugging went up. The isolated slugging, of course, went up, to .209. More encouragingly, Freeman trimmed his strikeouts to 19%, and he boosted his walks to 13%. Down the stretch in 2012, Freddie Freeman just about doubled his previous walk rate, which is an uncommon thing for a player to do.
When Freddie Freeman was newer in the majors, he was productive, but he swung too much, he wasn’t selective enough, and his power was only all right. Over last year’s final three months, he swung less often, he was more selective, and his power got better. If we’re always looking for signs of young player improvement, then sure enough, Freeman does seem like he might be headed for a breakout. There’s evidence that he’s answered most of his questions.
And this is the tease. Go into the numbers looking for something, and you’ll subconsciously try your damnedest to find something and convince yourself it’s meaningful. With aging players, we believe with confidence we identify signs of decline. With young players, we believe with confidence we identify signs of improvement. We’re all aware of the possibility of randomness, noise, but seldom do we give it enough weight. As a rule of thumb, it’s usually noise. As another rule of thumb, we usually think it’s not.
When it comes to young players, you can think of it as being over-optimistic, because we all want for young players to blossom into the next young stars. We love thinking about talent ceilings, and talent medians are considerably less exciting. Look at Freeman. We can’t just ignore 2012’s first three months, even though for a time he was struggling with his vision. In the final month, he posted a .299 wOBA and struck out more than a quarter of the time. There are reasons to be bearish, but we like to believe in hope more than we like to believe in randomness or stagnancy. Down the stretch, Freeman reduced his swing rate, and increased his contact rate. That had to have been deliberate, right? And Freeman will keep it up in the future, yes?
Freeman very well might build on what might have been improvements. He might walk a lot more, now, being more selectively aggressive. I’m not trying to say that Freeman’s second-half numbers are just noise. Just that they might be, and we can’t dismiss that possibility just because Freeman is young and a former top prospect. Young players fluctuate just like older players do, and those fluctuations aren’t always predictive.
So Freeman is teasing something that might not come true. Many of us think it’s more likely to come true than we probably ought to. But to be honest, it’s probably better this way. If you’re trying to write a serious Freeman analysis, you should be as realistic as possible, but if it’s human nature to believe strongly in the improvement of youth, I’m not going to argue the alternative is preferable when it comes to being a baseball fan. Baseball, at its core, functions as entertainment; entertainment, at its core, functions to encourage positivity. Optimism and positivity are inextricably linked, and the experience of following baseball is better when you think about leaps and ceilings. Put simply, it’s more fun to think that Freddie Freeman is on the verge of a breakout. We’re in it for the fun, and we’re in it for the stars.
So there’s nothing wrong with getting ahead of yourself, just so long as you can understand that you’re probably getting ahead of yourself. Baseball should be an escape from the way you have to be in the rest of your day-to-day life. Baseball, after all, ultimately isn’t a big deal, for us. Young players are going to tease, and most of those young players are going to fall short of what they could have been, but if it brightens the day to think of a young player as being on the verge, who’s to say that’s irrational behavior? Right now, Freddie Freeman is a tease, and bless Freddie Freeman.
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.
I’d say he’s established his level. He’s a lot better than his brother, Choo Freeman.
God I love baseball for so many reasons. Because I’m at fangraphs it means I love numbers, projections, prospects, baseball all at the same time and all in the middle of a snowy January day.
I think the important thing is that Fredi Gonzalez keeps Freeman out of the three spot in the lineup until his OBP improves. Watching Freeman flail away at pitches in the three hole for almost the entire first half of the season while Jason Heyward wasted away in the 7 spot in the lineup was excruciating at times for this Braves fan last year.
But didn’t Freeman have a higher OBP than Heyward?
try being a padres fan for one day, man.
# first division problems
or a Padres fan in Detroit! the let down of not making the playoffs, and the let down of laying an egg in the World Series by the Tigs!
he had a .362 OBP, how much higher do you need it to be exactly because that’s not bad.
No, he had a .340 OBP. Still not bad, and not a terrible choice for the three spot depending on your options, but not .362.
Haven’t they done studies showing that the third spot in the batting order is actually the fifth most important? Assuming thats true, keep his slightly lower OBP in the 3 spot
How important is the spot in the lineup when you’re talking about approaches to pitching to certain players? If I’m the pitcher, and hitter A struggles hitting change ups, it shouldn’t matter at what point he comes up, the pitchers approach will be the same. If hitter A makes adjustments and starts hitting irrespective of the gameplan the pitcher has pitched to him, then there will be improvements. I don’t think it matters where certain hitters hit, if they have a high K% and a low BB%, then there will be frustration with his results so long has his ISO is below .185.
it matters because if you have a guy that can hit behind you, the pitcher’s approach may change as he may prefer to challenge you with a fastball in the zone rather than a less controlled pitch like a breaking ball that has a better chance of resulting in a ball thus leading to a walk risk and placing that batter on base for the next guy to drive in….likewise, if the hitter behind you sucks or is struggling the pitcher may throw less fastballs and take a chance of getting the hitter to reach. even if he walks the guy the next guy is slumping so the risk is less.,,,batting order DOES matter. also if you are hittign behind guys who have high OBP pitchers will be pitching from the stretch as opposed to the full whind-up, and they’ll be rushing more hittbale fastballs down the plate so the heywards and uptons can’t get great jumps. i mean you can go on and on, but batting order def matters.
Freeman did pretty well in the 3 spot at first, it was the eye issues that eventually affected his performance enough that Gonzalez finally dropped him in the order.
That said, I think Gonzalez has every plan to bat Heyward 3rd next year, likely followed by either Freeman or Upton.
Freeman looks to have a better OBP and ISO than Upton, so Hayward, Freeman, Upton might make sense on paper. However, once on base Upton is good at getting around to third, so hopefully they don’t set him up to get stranded there a lot.
A statistic giving % of Plate Appearances where the batter ended up in scoring position (by any means) might help them figure out which of the three to bat 3, 4, 5… unless such a statistic would be highly correlated with OBP, in which case I guess we already have our answer.
I would like this article if it were trimmed down to the analysis only. 12 of the 15 paragraphs written in this article were a literary exercise, leaving only a couple sentences of statistical analysis. I come for the numbers and analysis, not the high school writing style.
If you don’t like it, don’t read it.
How would he know he doesn’t like it if he doesn’t read it?
try the Hooked on Phoenics Baseball site douche bag!
If you click on Freddie Freeman’s name at the top of the first paragraph, you can have all of the numbers, none of the writing!
Still think he’s Adam LaRoche 2.0. Great scoops and a 30 hr power ceiling.
Also, both were guys a lot of teams preferred as hard throwing LHP as amateurs.
Freddie Freeman is a right-handed thrower.
Okay, I know I don’t have to read your articles etc.
But, I mean, come on. What is with the super annoying, faux-cutesy writing? Just write about baseball! The first two paragraphs were so annoying I skipped straight to the comment section to complain about it. So, there.
Like, what? A little bizarre musing about how Freeman has a bright future because all pro baseball players do? And then, JK LOL, it’s because he (as every reader of this site probably knows) is a well-regarded young player. So much filler. So un-charming.
epic troll Oscar, came across as such a grouch.
Does he have to be a troll? Is no criticism allowed?
Don’t get me wrong, I appreciate the word Jeff does and I appreciate that I can read it here for free, but we don’t all have to like his writing style. Fangraphs does make money from us being here, reading this after all. Why the down vote hordes have to come out in force when someone expresses a personal perfect or taste is beyond me.
I’m not trolling. I know that Jeff has a big following, and I’m not surprised to be downvoted etc. I just can’t understand how anyone can like his writing. I’m sure he’s a nice guy or whatever.
this is really, really refreshing to read.
everywhere else I look (and it’s not just baseball), I see people creating narratives to explain randomness. we humans just inherently do not understand randomness, or just fight against the idea that sometimes things just happen. the patterns and trends we sometimes perceive are nothing but a series of coin flips that happened to all land heads.
I’d say as humans it’s in our DNA to try to pull patterns out of the randomness as much as we can get away with. When your brain is too big for your own good, this is what you do..
A Beautiful Mind….
It’s called Type 1 pattern error. We are evolutionary predisposed to believe there is a pattern because our (surviving) ancestors did so. Those who heard a bush rustle and ran away because it could be a predator survived, because even though it wasn’t always a predator the ones who ignored the bush rustle were eaten.
Our ancestors who had sharpened points on sticks and stalked rustling noises in the bushes ate well and provided for the tribe.
Everyone is trying to be Nate Silver…Go Bengals
i picked double-F off of the waiver wire in my fantasy league after the owner who drafted him got frustrated with his weak start — benefited from the strong second half mentioned in the article — be interesting to see how he develops in 2013 and beyond — won my league for the second year in a row, btw
Freddie Freeman is a goofy man.
Little things like “right now(!)” are why I love Jeff Sullivan articles.
Have to agree with some of the other commenters: The third paragraph of this article is just plain weird.
Jeff Sullivan is the Kenny Mayne of baseball journalism. His comedic and insightful genius is under appreciated because it’s “weird”.
This is Jeff’s writing style for better or worse. It won’t make all of this articles compelling, but then again even Jay Leno misses from time to time and that’s not to say this article is a miss. He just means to point out that we take for granted that each and every player talented enough to reach the majors must have been, at one time or another, the baseball apple of someone’s eye, even if some of them end up Karim Garcia’s or Matt Bush’s. That said, you try writing something new every day for two different high-traffic websites. Sometimes you just need a niche, a way of writing that makes it so you’re not just throwing up numbers for a paragraph or two. We read to be informed. We also read to be entertained. I think Jeff does a great job at both. For reference, read his pieces on Greg Halman and Dave Niehaus. Very well done, particularly considering the events.
Jay Leno misses from time to time like Mark Reynolds misses a pitch from time to time.
I hear if he ever shouts “Captain Marvel” at the plate, he will gain superpowers.
Freddie has a very unique swing for a young player. It’s one of those swings you used to see years ago, when players would develop their own swing without the aid of “proper” hitting techniques. He really waits for a ball to get deep in the zone with two-strikes, though he does have hacktastic tendencies before two strikes. Some teams still haven’t figured how to get him out (look up his splits against the Rockies).
As for Freddie Freeman, I generally agree with his assertion that a breakout isn’t as likely as we might make it to be, given the late season numbers and in fact, he may have actually reached his ceiling, at least in terms of tools. Part of dreaming on a breakout is also based on what he did in the minors, namely .301/.363/.472 while significantly ahead of the age curve at every level. But based on his tools – BA had him as the same type of hitter from 2009-2011, which they consistently describe as “Mark Grace, with more power,” – he’s almost right where you’d expect. Once his defense catches up and he puts his power together with his solid plate skills, that’s probably the ceiling everyone was looking at all along. It’s not super-star glamorous and probably not “breakout” material, but it’s still a good player.
Then again, BA in 2011 had Mike Trout’s power at 55 (a tick above-average) before he went and clubbed 30 homers in 5 months, so who knows if Freeman can improve his tools somehow.
freddie or goldshmidt?
Stick to volcanoes.
They call me Freddie Freeman, I keep the ladies screaming , think you can defeat me your dreaming, they call me Freddie, Freddie Freeeman!
>disappointing first baseman
Brandon Belt. I can’t believe the Giants threw their stock in with a minor league one year wonder.
Don’t know that I’d give up on Belt *quite* yet… There’s an awful lot to like in his supporting numbers.
I think what’s overlooked here is Freeman led the league in bro hugs last year…
No, he finished second to teammate Dan Uggla, who really was the father of the whole “excessive bro-hug” thing going on with the Braves the last couple of years.
Freddie just got fingered. Good read Jeff.
Let’s not forget the game where Freeman went 0-4 and saw a total of 4 pitches. I think his first pitch swing% was somewhere extremely close to 50%. But that’s his style, and it works. Sure, it would be great to improve his contact% and his BB%, but he doesn’t exactly need to. If he merely maintains what he has been doing since he got to the majors, he will be an above average player. But seeing that he’s 23, I think it’s fair to expect that he will get better as he sees more pitches. But I guess he could just as easily not. Or could he? Or maybe not….
An article stating why Freeman has a great chance of breakout. http://www.talkingchop.com/2013/1/3/3829212/free-freeman
Jeff’s articles make me laugh, smile and think. I like those things. The standard baseball article is lucky if it accomplishes one of those things. Haters gon hate…
Excellent article.
Lest we all get too excited about Freddie’s 2013 potential based on his impressive second half in 2012, here are two words for you:
Ike Davis.
Remember how awesome he was going to be in 2012 after his impressive performance in a shortened 2011? Yeah.
on paper your ike davis remark makes sense. but the analysis you make doesn’t seem to factor in that ike had destroyed his ankle the year before and sat out for the entire year from baseball practically.
so then ike comes back and gets valley effing fever. look up the illness. yet even with the long off time and the valley fever obtained in spring training upon his return, ike still hit 30 HRS.
the real ike davis will show and be far more impressive in 2013.
….and as a result the average will be where it should be and far more respectable with solid power numbers. freeman and ike will be solid.
if you were going to try and diss freeman’s chances you would have been better served referencing hosmer from the royals.
Excellent article Jeff. The statistical analysis is great, but do you guys really think that statistical analysis without some personal input/creativity/feeling is the way to go? We are not robots and after reading a lot of stuff on this site, I feel like the Robot character from Lost in Space (dating myself). Ever watch Ken Burns’ “Baseball?” I love the analysis, but baseball is so much more than the numbers.