Lesser CLIFFORD Candidates

When I originally published my findings around CLIFFORD — my metric for predicting players that are at a higher risk of experiencing a collapse in their wOBA (defined as a drop of at least .30 points of wOBA) — I presented a limited number of players for 2013. The list only included six players that qualified under the criteria. As a reminder, players that experienced a significant decline in three out of four metrics (Z-Contact%, FA%, UBR, Spd) were tagged as CLIFFORD candidates. These players had 3.4 times the odds of collapse (53% versus 25% for non-CLIFFORD players).

The single largest driver of collapse was change in Z-Contact% — the percent of pitches in the strike zone that a batter swings and makes contact with. Hitters who saw their Z-Contact% decline by at least 1.4% had 1.68 times the odds of collapsing than those that did not experience such a decline. Since there were far more players that qualified with their Z-Contact% than the full CLIFFORD criteria I thought it would be helpful to share that data with everyone.

Behold!

Here are the 68 players who saw their Z-Contact% decline by at least 1.4% from 2011-2012 (sorted by the size of their decline):

One thing to note is that the relationship does not appear linear — meaning, as a hitter’s Z-Contact% declines his wOBA does not decline a lockstep.

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.

Some interesting names outside of the original that I highlighted (i.e. Robinson Cano and Curtis Granderson) appear on the list. Josh Hamilton is probably the highest-profile, in general and among the big name free-agents of this past off-season. His plate discipline was just atrocious last year, but adding in the fact that he also had problems making contact in the zone is yet another reason for the Angels to be concerned about their investment. Besides Hamilton, we also see two-thirds of the Braves outfield appear on the list, as Jason Hewyard and B.J. Upton saw their Z-Contact% decline by 4.7% an 4.3% respectively.

Based on my original research, 34% of hitters who saw similar declines in Z-Contact% experienced a wOBA decline of at least .30 points the following year. To some extent then, it appears that Z-Contact% could be a decent signal of trouble in hitters.

For one thing, it’s incredibly stable. In fact, Z-Contact% is one of the most stable of hitting metrics on a year-to-year basis. I originally found it had a correlation of .80, and Matt Klaassen’s replication of that analysis was very much in line with that finding (.82).

Furthermore, when we look at how a hitter’s Z-Contact% changes as they age we see that it generally climbs by a few percent until age-25. After that, it is relatively stable. There is some fluctuation, to be sure, but it is nothing compared to, say, O-Contact%, which falls dramatically starting at age-29.

AgingCurves_Hitters_Discipline_All

This suggests that when we see a drastic change in a hitter’s ability to make contact with pitches in the zone it should, if nothing else, spur us to dig deeper to understand why. Is the decline simply due to an injury? Will an off-season of rehab not only heal the injury, but allow the hitter to go back to their normal performance? Is it a mechanical issue? Or, is it a sign of accelerated aging? If a hitter has an injury that is likely to linger, it could signal a general change in ability that needs to be taken into account when projecting future performance. Relatedly, if the decline is the result of a slowing bat — one slowing at a faster rate than we would expect given age — that, too, is a significant issue. One way to get underneath that is to isolate Z-Contact% to just fastballs, or at least fastballs above, say, 93 mph. (This is something I am likely to look into in the coming weeks.)

The answer to these questions will determine how alarmed we should be about these kinds of large drops in Z-Contact%. In either case, it’s something else to keep your eye on.





Bill leads Predictive Modeling and Data Science consulting at Gallup. In his free time, he writes for The Hardball Times, speaks about baseball research and analytics, has consulted for a Major League Baseball team, and has appeared on MLB Network's Clubhouse Confidential as well as several MLB-produced documentaries. He is also the creator of the baseballr package for the R programming language. Along with Jeff Zimmerman, he won the 2013 SABR Analytics Research Award for Contemporary Analysis. Follow him on Twitter @BillPetti.

10 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Bodybuilder on Cam
13 years ago

Clifford is what I call my left pectoral when it’s all oiled up.

Rainja182
13 years ago

Is it just me or does that graph look like the hardest question on the SAT?

martin short
13 years ago

“At least 1.4% had 1.68 times the odds of collapsing than those that did not experience such a decline.”

Do the odds for those with greater than 1.4% increase exponentially? i.e. What do the odds go to for those with a 4% or higher decline

adam w
13 years ago
Reply to  martin short

I am guessing that Mr. Petti used a binary logistic regression to calculate this, which accounts for buckets but does not account for degrees (hence why it’s called binary). So there’s no way to be sure without completely re-running the analysis.

CJ in Austin Tx
13 years ago

Bill James used to identify collapse candidates by large declines in the BB:K ratio of hitters. BB:K rates tend to be very stable for most hitters. The frequency of collapse for hitters who met his threshold decline was startling, even though many of them continued to produce when the BB:K decline initially occurred. About 5 years ago, he identified Garrett Atkins as a collapse candidate…and, well, you know what happened. A fundamental change in plate discipline seems to foretell an erosion in baseball skill. Perhaps Z-contact% will be a more precise leading indicator.

Steve Staude
13 years ago

Very interesting, Bill. Looks like Z-Contact% is an underappreciated stat for both hitters and pitchers.

I’m very much interested in seeing your breakdown of what’s behind this Z-Contact% effect.

CJ in Austin TX
13 years ago
Reply to  Steve Staude

A question I wonder about is whether the ZContact% is a uniform indicator for all types of hitters. For example, is it a bust indicator for patient hitters but no so much for free swingers?

Steve Staude
13 years ago

Great point — definitely worth looking into.

I think one other possible cause for a steep decline in ZContact% is that pitchers have suddenly discovered a hole in a batter’s swing (or less ability to make contact with a certain type of pitch). So I hope Bill also looks at whether batters are being pitched to differently before vs. during the drop.

Ruki Motomiya
13 years ago

The big red dog?

Moonraker
13 years ago

Interesting, but it seems some of these candidates actually improved markedly despite a sizable drop in Z-contact%, Encarnacion and Pierzynski being the most prominent examples. Perhaps the drop in Z-contact% just means they are swinging harder?