Jason Heyward’s Meaningless, Spectacular Defense

The biggest play of last night’s Game Six was a defensive one, but not in a positive manner: a miscommunication between Tyler Naquin in center field and Lonnie Chisenhall in right failed to result in a catch. Two runs scored for Chicago, and the Cubs took a 3-0 lead in just the first inning. The biggest strategic decision, meanwhile, concerned the use of Aroldis Chapman by Joe Maddon, as Chicago’s manager went to his closer in the seventh inning of a 7-2 game. It’s hard to discount the the implications either of Cleveland’s defensive misplay or Maddon’s bullpen management on the outcome of this World Series.

However, Game Six of the World Series also featured an unimportant strategic decision that facilitated some unimportant defensive plays. Even though he scored no runs and recorded zero hits, the decision to start Jason Heyward was likely worth several runs for the Cubs. And even if those runs didn’t ultimately represent the difference between a win and a loss, Heyward’s presence in the game nevertheless revealed how an offensively struggling but defensively forceful player can impact a result.

In the fourth inning of last night’s contest, right after Mike Napoli singled in Jason Kipnis to make the game 7-1, the Chicago Cubs possessed a 94.8% chance of victory. The leverage index was a fairly low 0.47, so even a positive result for Cleveland was unlikely to influence the game greatly. Facing Jake Arrieta, Jose Ramirez struck a ball that lands for a hit 56.8% of the time and goes for extra bases 20% of the time.

Here’s the end of that play:

At first glance, the play appears challenging for Heyward but hardly impossible. As mentioned above, batted balls with similar exit velocity and launch angles were caught around 43% of the time. Nearly half, in other words. What that figure doesn’t account for, however, is Heyward’s position at the start of the play relative to the location of the ball in the field. We can go a little further with the Statcast data.

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.

By doing a few calculations, we can determine that, if he were running in a 40-yard dash in this case, Heyward would have recorded a time of roughly 9.9 seconds, which is really slow for a 40-yard dash. Of course, when Jason Heyward hears the ball off the bat, he doesn’t simply get to sprint straight forward in a line. He has no idea in which direction he might have to run — backwards, forwards, left, right. He decides where to run by looking at a small white object that begins its trajectory roughly 300 feet away while also traveling at 98 mph.

We rarely see an outfielder’s first step when watching the game because both our own eyes and also the cameras themsleves are focused on the batter-pitcher matchup. Heyward is very good at making quick decisions, though: the first step on his acrobatic play near the wall in Game Five occurred within 0.17 seconds.

In the case of this play from Game Six, we know how long the ball was in the air and we also know how far Heyward had to run. As a result, it’s possible to find out how often this play is made. The graph below from Baseball Savant shows how often balls are caught given hang time and distance.

screenshot-2016-11-02-at-9-26-26-am

The graph at Baseball Savant itself is interactive, so you can hover over any number of points. You should notice that Heyward’s play isn’t featured in the chart as he had just 2.9 seconds. When players have an extra tenth of a second, they have made the play just 34% of the time. That tenth is significant. Given the same distance, but 3.1 seconds, the play is made 64% of the time. Add five feet to 3.0 seconds hang time, and the play is made just 18% of the time.

This play wasn’t impossible, but it’s one that’s converted only rarely. Not only was the play difficult, but Heyward took a route designed to limit damage. Look at Heyward’s body as he makes the catch.

Heyward is able to come directly in on the ball because his first step was toward the gap. If the ball were hit slightly harder, slightly deeper, or closer to the gap between himself and Fowler, Heyward would probably not have made the catch; he likely would have prevented extra bases by cutting the ball off, however. With that step toward the gap, Heyward was able to run straight at the ball, allowing his body to prevent the ball from getting past him in case of a missed catch.

Ultimately, he was able to make the catch, anyway, closing on the ball quickly enough to get his glove out in the best possible position not only to catch the ball but also use two hands while doing so. Heyward makes a catch that would take a miraculous dive from the few players who could even get to the ball, and he makes it in a fundamentally sound way.

The difficulty of the catch wasn’t lost on Arrieta, who responds, “Well done, sir. I repeat: well done.”

Instead of two runners on and one out, the Cubs now faced a situation featuring two out and a runner at first base, the run expectancy dropping from 0.9 (1.1 if 1st and 3rd and 1.4 if 2nd and 3rd) to 0.2 in that inning. Arrieta would hit the next batter, then walk Coco Crisp. While the Cubs still probably win if Heyward isn’t in the outfield, that inning also had a chance of unraveling quickly.

Then, in the ninth inning, Jason Heyward added a meaningless throw. A meaningless and spectacular throw.

A runner shouldn’t take an extra base down by multiple runs unless he’s sure he’ll be safe. Perez was pretty sure he would be safe. Not only did Perez likely think he’d be safe, but so did the FOX production team. Here’s where the camera was pointed as Perez arrived at second:

screenshot-2016-11-02-at-10-22-41-am

With some back-of-the-envelope math, Heyward’s throw traveled around 240 feet in a direct path to second base. The ball was a little high — if allowed to travel further, it would have gone a good deal further. And while it ultimately represented little difference between a win and loss, it might have saved a run as well, the run expectancy dropping from 0.7 to 0.2 as a result of the play.

In a six-run game, Heyward’s two defensive runs didn’t really amount to a whole lot, but if you think he really did save two runs — or maybe you’re feeling generous and credit him with three, given the results of the fourth inning — and also factor in the two runs the Cleveland defense allowed, a six-run deficit becomes a one-run deficit based almost solely on defensive play. In a recent chat, someone asked Dave Cameron why FanGraphs was so obsessed with Jason Heyward. A lot of Heyward articles have appeared on these pages. Cameron’s response was essentially that Heyward is a very good player having a very bad year, which is true.

Heyward also tends to do interesting things, like steal third, perhaps needlessly, hit unlikely playoff home runs, suffer a 50-point drop in wRC+ in one season due to a glaring hole in his swing — and yet still produce a nearly average season due to elite defense — and finally, get benched in the playoffs despite his position in the first year of a $184 million contract. The valuation of defense tends to confound us perhaps a little more than it should. A run saved is as good as a run scored, but we all have difficulty, like Joe Maddon has, applying that maxim. We point to factors–things like sample size–but when the numbers are there, and the eye test confirms what the numbers say, playing an elite defensive player shouldn’t be that hard.

Hitters come up four or five times a game with the opportunity to impact a game — guaranteed chances to do something. The scale isn’t the same on defense. Sure Joe Maddon doesn’t know if Kris Bryant is going to go 0-for-5 or 3-for-4 with a couple doubles and a walk to get to a hypothetical .300/.400/.500 stat line, but he knows by putting him in the lineup, he is going to get those opportunities and over the course of the season it evens out. Opportunities aren’t uniform on defense. Jason Heyward got two fantastic opportunities to save runs in a win-or-go-home game of the World Series. It just so happened that the game was a blowout, and those saved runs weren’t as important as they might otherwise have been. He might not get those opportunities again tonight, but the possibility is good enough and the impact great enough that starting Heyward in the most important game of the year is a no-brainer, regardless of his hitting line.





Craig Edwards can be found on twitter @craigjedwards.

20 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
John B M
9 years ago

Given how Arrieta faltered in that 4th inning, and the ramifications for the Cubs’ bullpen if they’d had to pull him there, I think the Heyward catch was not meaningless. Of course, I wish I could be writing about how the cushion allowed them to only use Chapman for 1 batter in the 7th, but I guess I’m not the manager.

Jerry1983
9 years ago
Reply to  John B M

Heyward’s play saved a single in a 7-0 game when the chances of the Indians coming back were less than 5% – and that assumes all things are equal as in a regular game, when in fact Maddon would have pulled out all the stops (and did regardless) including pitching his closer for multiple innings.

Johnston
9 years ago

Heyward’s defense is truly amazing, but he really needs to get his swing back.

Jerry1983
9 years ago
Reply to  Johnston

Jason Heyward is a not the “out of this world” defender the media PR companies like Fangraphs make him out to be.

He never has been.

Even if you believe Fangraph’s assertions that Heyward could hit 200 points lower than Trout’s OPS and still be worth more as a player, Heyward is only a “Great” defender in Right field. Again, even assuming that Fangraphs doens’t cook its books like any other PR outfit (and that’s all Fangraphs is, because they never publish their raw defensive data for peer review and repeatability of results and conclusions), they are comparing Heyward to the baseline Right fielders.

Who are the comparisons for Heyward in the outfield to reference a baseline for his “greatness”?

Beltran (the old version), Trumbo, Cruz, Tomas, etc.

Trout’s defense is barely passable, while Heyward’s is “out of this world”.

That’s why Heyward is worth paying so much more than Trout.

In reality, there are dozens of minor leaguers who have better range than Heyward and have just as good an arm.

I don’t need to delve into Fangraph’s statisctics (which until published for review, are officially “unverifiable” which for all practical purposes means “fake”) to know this smells of horse manure.

JoserMember since 2021
9 years ago
Reply to  Jerry1983

Until you publish your real name, I’m going to consider you to be fake. I mean, I’ve been on the internet long enough to know there’s no limit to the angry little men stomping their angry little feet about some meaningless thing that for some ineffable reason gets their angry little minds so wery, wery, angwy; but really: where did this come from? Where did you come from?

There’s definitely a whiff of horse manure in this “conversation” you’re trying to have between you and Fangraphs, but it’s not emanating from the latter.

ChippersJonesing
9 years ago
Reply to  Jerry1983

“Even if you believe Fangraph’s assertions that Heyward could hit 200 points lower than Trout’s OPS and still be worth more as a player, Heyward is only a “Great” defender in Right field. Again, even assuming that Fangraphs doens’t cook its books like any other PR outfit (and that’s all Fangraphs is, because they never publish their raw defensive data for peer review and repeatability of results and conclusions), they are comparing Heyward to the baseline Right fielders.”

What even is this? There’s just so much wrong.

ChippersJonesing
9 years ago

The rest of the post doesn’t make much more sense…

bananas
9 years ago

I would love to see the same analysis on the Zobrist play when napoli hit the ball to the corner and then stretched a double into a single. Everyone was raving about Zobrist’s ability to get that ball in quickly. How special is that?

bananas
9 years ago

It would be interesting to add “closing angle” to your hangtime / distance chart. I imagine it’s a lot easier to make a play on a ball 35′ in front of you than on a ball that drops in over your glove shoulder.

bananas
9 years ago
Reply to  bananas

That chart is beautiful, by the way. GG baseball savant.

Michael Carpenter
9 years ago

“Well done, sir, well done.”

Arrieta adds a lot of F’s to his words. It’s a really weird, uncommon lisp.

JoserMember since 2021
9 years ago

I confess I tried to fit “Well done” to his lips in my head through two repetitions of the GIF before I realized that quote was, uh, euphemistic. It really looks like he’s saying “F–” …oh. Sometimes I am not a smart man.

JediHoyer
9 years ago

I think this is more what arrietta said
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=IhnUgAaea4M

Jerry1983
9 years ago

And once again Fangraphs tries to use fake statistics and unverifiable “Defensive WAR” to try to make Jason Heyward look like he’s worth anything close to Mike Trout (he’s certainly getting paid better than Trout).

On a night when there were real superstars winning the game, Fangraph’s first instinct is to (A) lionize a worthless play in a 7-0 game when the outcome had been 95% decided in favor of the Cubs and (B) cast aspersions on other players’ defense, except those who have been really atrocious (there have been plenty of botched plays by supposedly “great” defensive players, including Lindor leaking hits like a sieve, but that would destroy Fangraph’s narratives).

So Lindor and Heyward are going to be the heroes of the World Series. Meanwhile, let’s focus how all the rest of the other players suck, ignore the contributions of the real superstars in the game, and talk about why the non-factors like Corey Kluber might not suck but could really blow it for Lindor.

Jason Heyward has been terrible this entire season, World Series included. Trying to invert the reality with fake statistics and phony narratives doesn’t change that.

Take your affirmative action lenses off anytime now.

mfyg
9 years ago
Reply to  Jerry1983

Finally someone on this site has the strength to defend Mike Trout.

AlabamaShake
9 years ago
Reply to  Jerry1983

**And once again Fangraphs tries to use fake statistics and unverifiable “Defensive WAR” to try to make Jason Heyward look like he’s worth anything close to Mike Trout (he’s certainly getting paid better than Trout).**

Huh? No one actually said that. Or anything close to that. At. All.

Not quite sure what you think that you’re a victim of, but you definitely don’t play it well.

JoserMember since 2021
9 years ago
Reply to  Jerry1983

Fangraph’s first instinct is to (A) lionize a worthless play

This, in response to an article that actually has “Meaningless” in the title

Take your affirmative action lenses off anytime now.

Oh, not just a troll, but a racist troll.

ChippersJonesing
9 years ago
Reply to  Joser

Ah, that’s what’s going on here.

JaysSaskatchewan
9 years ago

How likely is it that Heyward would have caught Crisp’s RBI single in the Cubs’ 1-0 game 3 loss?

ChippersJonesing
9 years ago

“The difficulty of the catch wasn’t lost on Arrieta, who responds, “Well done, sir. I repeat: well done.””

Accurately transcribed.