Szymborski’s 2021 Breakout Candidates: Hitters
One of my favorite yearly preseason pieces is also my most dreaded: the breakout list. I’ve been doing this exercise since 2014, and while I’ve had the occasional triumph (hello, Christian Yelich), the low-probability nature of trying to project who will beat expectations means that every time you look smart, you’re also bound to look dumb for some other reason. Looking back at last season’s breakout list, there were a number of selections I was happy with once the season ended — Eloy Jiménez, Dinelson Lamet, Dansby Swanson, Dylan Bundy — but then I remember Mitch Keller’s walkalicious 2020 and Victor Robles dropping 27 points of wRC+ and my cringe-sense starts to tingle. Since I’m doing separate lists of hitters and pitchers this year, let’s waste no more time with the opening spiel. To the hitters!
Vladimir Guerrero Jr., Toronto Blue Jays
Perhaps not the gutsiest call, but it feels to me like people have soured way too much on Vladito. A 112 wRC+ won’t win any Silver Sluggers, but we have to remember he was just 21 last season. Let’s imagine that Guerrero Jr. wasn’t part of the imperial-Vlad bloodline and was just a guy in Triple-A in 2020 (in an alternate universe where the minor league season existed). If we translate Guerrero’s actual major league performance into a Triple-A Buffalo line, ZiPS estimates that he would’ve been hitting .288/.370/.526 as a 21-year-old in the International League. Would anyone be disappointed with this line? There would be cries of Free Vlad! echoing through the streets by June. I think players like Juan Soto and Fernando Tatis Jr. have spoiled us for normal awesome prospects.
While I don’t usually fall for the whole “best shape of his life” stories in spring, I think I’ve fallen for it this time. Guerrero was carrying a lot of weight for a 21-year-old; I weighed less at 21, and my main aerobic exercise was hauling cases of beer into my house. He dropped a lot of weight this winter, so I take this one more seriously than the usual stories, which involve a guy losing 10 pounds or having some secret abs that people gush about.
| Percentile | BA | OBP | SLG | AB | R | H | 2B | 3B | HR | RBI | BB | SO | SB | OPS+ | WAR |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 90% | .289 | .368 | .572 | 537 | 84 | 155 | 38 | 6 | 34 | 111 | 64 | 78 | 4 | 150 | 4.7 |
| 80% | .284 | .357 | .540 | 543 | 82 | 154 | 36 | 5 | 31 | 107 | 58 | 85 | 3 | 139 | 4.0 |
| 70% | .279 | .350 | .521 | 545 | 80 | 152 | 35 | 5 | 29 | 103 | 56 | 88 | 2 | 133 | 3.5 |
| 60% | .278 | .347 | .506 | 547 | 78 | 152 | 34 | 5 | 27 | 99 | 54 | 93 | 2 | 128 | 3.2 |
| 50% | .275 | .342 | .486 | 549 | 77 | 151 | 33 | 4 | 25 | 96 | 52 | 96 | 2 | 122 | 2.7 |
| 40% | .274 | .339 | .472 | 551 | 77 | 151 | 32 | 4 | 23 | 93 | 50 | 99 | 1 | 117 | 2.3 |
| 30% | .272 | .336 | .457 | 552 | 75 | 150 | 31 | 4 | 21 | 89 | 49 | 103 | 1 | 113 | 2.0 |
| 20% | .267 | .327 | .440 | 555 | 73 | 148 | 30 | 3 | 20 | 87 | 46 | 109 | 1 | 106 | 1.5 |
| 10% | .266 | .324 | .425 | 557 | 72 | 148 | 29 | 3 | 18 | 84 | 44 | 119 | 1 | 102 | 1.2 |
Alex Kirilloff, Minnesota Twins
The projection systems are low on Kirilloff, generally speaking, and it’s something I think is a mistake. From working with ZiPS over the years, I’m aware that there are certain things a projection system is going to struggle with, one of which is playing through nagging injuries. If Kirilloff had missed 100 games in 2019 with his wrist injury, the projection system would have understood that to an extent. But rather than a dramatic season-ending tear, the injury was more of the nagging type, and I think his poor Double-A numbers have a lot to do with him swinging at less than 100%.
The 2018 season is the only time Kirilloff has been healthy in a full season professionally, and he absolutely torched the ball in environments not conducive to offense. Given that he missed 2017 with Tommy John surgery, I was disappointed that the Twins didn’t get him into a game in 2020 until the playoffs. He’s too low on the ZiPS Top 100, and it wouldn’t surprise me if he hit 30 homers in 2021. ZiPS only says 3.6% for that, but I think it’s closer to 25%.
| Percentile | BA | OBP | SLG | AB | R | H | 2B | 3B | HR | RBI | BB | SO | SB | OPS+ | WAR |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 90% | .301 | .352 | .543 | 495 | 67 | 149 | 33 | 6 | 25 | 68 | 35 | 84 | 14 | 137 | 3.1 |
| 80% | .295 | .341 | .515 | 499 | 65 | 147 | 31 | 5 | 23 | 66 | 31 | 90 | 11 | 127 | 2.5 |
| 70% | .293 | .337 | .499 | 501 | 64 | 147 | 30 | 5 | 21 | 63 | 29 | 94 | 8 | 122 | 2.2 |
| 60% | .289 | .333 | .483 | 501 | 61 | 145 | 29 | 4 | 20 | 60 | 29 | 98 | 7 | 117 | 1.9 |
| 50% | .287 | .330 | .460 | 502 | 60 | 144 | 27 | 3 | 18 | 58 | 28 | 102 | 7 | 111 | 1.5 |
| 40% | .286 | .328 | .445 | 503 | 59 | 144 | 26 | 3 | 16 | 56 | 27 | 106 | 6 | 106 | 1.3 |
| 30% | .282 | .322 | .435 | 504 | 58 | 142 | 26 | 3 | 15 | 54 | 26 | 112 | 6 | 102 | 1.0 |
| 20% | .281 | .320 | .426 | 505 | 57 | 142 | 25 | 3 | 14 | 53 | 25 | 118 | 5 | 100 | 0.8 |
| 10% | .279 | .317 | .403 | 506 | 55 | 141 | 23 | 2 | 12 | 50 | 24 | 126 | 4 | 93 | 0.3 |
Kyle Schwarber, Washington Nationals
Schwarber has had some decent offensive seasons, but nothing that’s matched the crazy power potential we thought was possible after his major league debut in 2015. He’s regularly among the league leaders in exit velocity, and while he hasn’t made any great strides in terms of plate discipline, he also didn’t fall into any new bad habits while he struggled in 2020. That was a weird season for Schwarber, as pitchers had a lot of success facing him by throwing hard down in the zone. That’s an almost retro failing at this point: The league slugged .418 in 2020 against balls in the low “shadow zone” as defined by StatCast, but he only slugged .161. In fact, he’s never match that .418 slugging percentage against those pitches!
The Nats are quite aware of this problem, and given that they’re trying to address a specific weakness, this might be the best year for Schwarber to hit his upside. They should go with the reverse Willie Mays Hayes regimen and extract 100 pushups from him every time he hits a grounder.
| Percentile | BA | OBP | SLG | AB | R | H | 2B | 3B | HR | RBI | BB | SO | SB | OPS+ | WAR |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 90% | .243 | .362 | .543 | 449 | 78 | 109 | 21 | 3 | 36 | 87 | 80 | 124 | 3 | 133 | 3.7 |
| 80% | .238 | .351 | .520 | 454 | 76 | 108 | 20 | 3 | 34 | 83 | 75 | 135 | 3 | 124 | 3.2 |
| 70% | .235 | .347 | .503 | 455 | 75 | 107 | 19 | 2 | 33 | 82 | 74 | 144 | 3 | 120 | 2.9 |
| 60% | .232 | .343 | .493 | 456 | 74 | 106 | 19 | 2 | 32 | 81 | 73 | 149 | 2 | 116 | 2.6 |
| 50% | .230 | .340 | .484 | 457 | 73 | 105 | 19 | 2 | 31 | 79 | 72 | 152 | 2 | 113 | 2.4 |
| 40% | .227 | .336 | .472 | 458 | 72 | 104 | 18 | 2 | 30 | 77 | 71 | 156 | 2 | 109 | 2.1 |
| 30% | .226 | .332 | .459 | 460 | 72 | 104 | 18 | 1 | 29 | 75 | 69 | 160 | 2 | 105 | 1.9 |
| 20% | .222 | .325 | .447 | 463 | 70 | 103 | 18 | 1 | 28 | 74 | 66 | 166 | 2 | 100 | 1.6 |
| 10% | .221 | .319 | .429 | 466 | 69 | 103 | 17 | 1 | 26 | 71 | 63 | 177 | 1 | 94 | 1.2 |
Gary Sánchez, New York Yankees
I swear I’m not just trolling Yankees fans. While he technically had a breakout already in the past, Sánchez has been down in the depths enough the last couple of seasons that I think I can justify predicting a re-breakout. What it comes down to for me is that no hitter in the majors is a .159 BABIP “true talent” hitter, and most pitchers aren’t, either. On that last point, 712 pitchers have made 200 plate appearances in the majors since 1950, and 672 of them had a career BABIP better than Sánchez’s .159 from 2020.
ZiPS sees Sánchez as one of the biggest outliers in Statcast data versus reality for both batting average and slugging percentage and feels that someone with his level of power has a BABIP upside higher than his career .256. The defense will be unexciting, but I think offensively, there’s still hope that he can get back to where he was in 2017. Amusingly, Sánchez had his career-best season at avoiding swinging at bad pitches in his miserable 2020!
| Percentile | BA | OBP | SLG | AB | R | H | 2B | 3B | HR | RBI | BB | SO | SB | OPS+ | WAR |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 90% | .227 | .322 | .536 | 392 | 64 | 89 | 17 | 1 | 34 | 100 | 48 | 120 | 1 | 125 | 2.4 |
| 80% | .221 | .313 | .508 | 394 | 63 | 87 | 17 | 0 | 32 | 95 | 46 | 128 | 1 | 116 | 2.0 |
| 70% | .218 | .309 | .494 | 395 | 61 | 86 | 16 | 0 | 31 | 92 | 45 | 134 | 0 | 111 | 1.7 |
| 60% | .212 | .302 | .472 | 396 | 60 | 84 | 16 | 0 | 29 | 89 | 44 | 137 | 0 | 104 | 1.3 |
| 50% | .211 | .298 | .460 | 398 | 59 | 84 | 15 | 0 | 28 | 87 | 42 | 141 | 0 | 100 | 1.1 |
| 40% | .208 | .293 | .456 | 399 | 59 | 83 | 15 | 0 | 28 | 85 | 41 | 144 | 0 | 98 | 1.0 |
| 30% | .208 | .293 | .441 | 399 | 58 | 83 | 15 | 0 | 26 | 82 | 41 | 149 | 0 | 94 | 0.8 |
| 20% | .202 | .284 | .424 | 401 | 56 | 81 | 14 | 0 | 25 | 79 | 39 | 153 | 0 | 88 | 0.4 |
| 10% | .199 | .278 | .397 | 403 | 55 | 80 | 14 | 0 | 22 | 75 | 37 | 162 | 0 | 79 | 0.0 |
J.P. Crawford, Seattle Mariners
Crawford’s one of those tweeners who is now far too experienced to be called a prospect, but it still doesn’t feel like he’s hit anywhere near his peak in the majors. His contact numbers continue to improve year-after-year, and the 2020 gain is probably even bigger than it looked: He hit for more contact despite offering at a higher percentage of out-of-zone pitches but a lower percentage of zone pitches. I think he’s someone who could benefit from being more aggressive at the plate; he’s as good a bad-ball hitter as Tim Anderson. ZiPS might also be underrating Crawford’s defense, which has improved considerably since the Mariners just left him at short — a better situation than when the Phillies seemed more concerned with playing Scott Kingery at the position. I still think Crawford can be the three to four-win player that ZiPS saw his peak back when he was a prospect. At 26, he’s in his prime, and I think there’s another gear remaining.
| Percentile | BA | OBP | SLG | AB | R | H | 2B | 3B | HR | RBI | BB | SO | SB | OPS+ | WAR |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 90% | .255 | .349 | .425 | 487 | 70 | 124 | 25 | 8 | 14 | 65 | 66 | 99 | 13 | 114 | 3.5 |
| 80% | .249 | .342 | .403 | 489 | 69 | 122 | 23 | 8 | 12 | 62 | 64 | 106 | 11 | 106 | 3.0 |
| 70% | .248 | .338 | .383 | 491 | 69 | 122 | 22 | 7 | 10 | 60 | 62 | 112 | 10 | 100 | 2.7 |
| 60% | .246 | .335 | .380 | 492 | 68 | 121 | 22 | 7 | 10 | 59 | 61 | 116 | 9 | 98 | 2.5 |
| 50% | .243 | .331 | .371 | 493 | 68 | 120 | 21 | 6 | 10 | 58 | 60 | 119 | 9 | 95 | 2.3 |
| 40% | .242 | .327 | .364 | 495 | 67 | 120 | 21 | 6 | 9 | 57 | 58 | 124 | 8 | 92 | 2.1 |
| 30% | .241 | .324 | .354 | 497 | 66 | 120 | 20 | 6 | 8 | 56 | 56 | 130 | 8 | 89 | 1.9 |
| 20% | .238 | .319 | .339 | 499 | 65 | 119 | 19 | 5 | 7 | 54 | 54 | 137 | 7 | 83 | 1.5 |
| 10% | .233 | .308 | .324 | 503 | 65 | 117 | 18 | 5 | 6 | 52 | 50 | 144 | 6 | 76 | 1.0 |
Nate Lowe, Texas Rangers
The move to Texas is beneficial for Lowe: While the Rangers’ new park doesn’t appear to be anywhere near as hitter-friendly as the old one, it’s likely to be a better one than the Trop. He also has a much easier path to playing time with Texas, a team with a poor recent track record at developing hitters; only Ronald Guzmán provides likely competition.
Lowe has power, but it’s still inconsistent at this point. His sweet spot percentage, as measured by Statcast based on balls hit between eight and 32 degrees, is considerably higher than league-average, but he still hits way too many grounders for a guy who can get loft from his swing. When he does hit that sweet spot, he’s been one of the best in baseball, hitting .732 and slugging 1.446, the former number the ninth-best for players with 50 balls hit into play in 2019 and ’20.
| Percentile | BA | OBP | SLG | AB | R | H | 2B | 3B | HR | RBI | BB | SO | SB | OPS+ | WAR |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 90% | .269 | .365 | .529 | 454 | 71 | 122 | 26 | 1 | 30 | 73 | 67 | 116 | 6 | 139 | 3.3 |
| 80% | .265 | .357 | .499 | 457 | 70 | 121 | 24 | 1 | 27 | 69 | 64 | 122 | 4 | 130 | 2.7 |
| 70% | .263 | .352 | .480 | 460 | 68 | 121 | 23 | 1 | 25 | 67 | 61 | 129 | 4 | 124 | 2.4 |
| 60% | .260 | .348 | .469 | 461 | 68 | 120 | 22 | 1 | 24 | 66 | 60 | 133 | 3 | 120 | 2.1 |
| 50% | .259 | .344 | .460 | 463 | 67 | 120 | 22 | 1 | 23 | 64 | 58 | 137 | 3 | 117 | 1.9 |
| 40% | .256 | .340 | .448 | 464 | 67 | 119 | 21 | 1 | 22 | 62 | 57 | 142 | 3 | 113 | 1.6 |
| 30% | .255 | .337 | .438 | 466 | 65 | 119 | 20 | 1 | 21 | 61 | 55 | 149 | 3 | 109 | 1.4 |
| 20% | .253 | .333 | .426 | 467 | 64 | 118 | 19 | 1 | 20 | 59 | 54 | 156 | 2 | 105 | 1.1 |
| 10% | .249 | .327 | .403 | 469 | 63 | 117 | 18 | 0 | 18 | 56 | 52 | 165 | 2 | 98 | 0.7 |
Ryan McMahon, Colorado Rockies
McMahon was a legitimately solid prospect a few years ago who was ill-served by the Rockies, who jerked him up and down from the minors and from position to position, resulting in him getting spotty playing time during two key developmental seasons. In fact, his plate discipline has gone in the wrong direction, and he’s been much more of a groundball hitter in the majors than he was in the minors. Now, thanks to the Nolan Arenado trade, the Rockies have the opportunity to stick McMahon at third and leave him there, at least until Chris Owings has a hot week or something.
Going into 2018, ZiPS saw McMahon as a 115–120 wRC+ hitter in his prime — highly useful if he could play a respectable second or third base in the majors. ZiPS has completely soured on him, but I’m an optimist about players who have had to work against their team’s efforts in trying to succeed. I actually think the 90th-percentile projection is still obtainable.
| Percentile | BA | OBP | SLG | AB | R | H | 2B | 3B | HR | RBI | BB | SO | SB | OPS+ | WAR |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 90% | .258 | .340 | .509 | 462 | 68 | 119 | 27 | 4 | 27 | 82 | 56 | 138 | 9 | 107 | 2.1 |
| 80% | .256 | .334 | .490 | 465 | 67 | 119 | 26 | 4 | 25 | 78 | 53 | 148 | 6 | 102 | 1.7 |
| 70% | .255 | .330 | .469 | 467 | 67 | 119 | 25 | 3 | 23 | 75 | 51 | 156 | 6 | 96 | 1.4 |
| 60% | .253 | .328 | .465 | 467 | 66 | 118 | 24 | 3 | 23 | 74 | 51 | 159 | 5 | 94 | 1.3 |
| 50% | .252 | .324 | .456 | 469 | 65 | 118 | 24 | 3 | 22 | 73 | 49 | 162 | 5 | 92 | 1.1 |
| 40% | .251 | .323 | .447 | 470 | 65 | 118 | 23 | 3 | 21 | 72 | 48 | 166 | 5 | 89 | 0.9 |
| 30% | .248 | .317 | .428 | 472 | 64 | 117 | 22 | 3 | 19 | 69 | 46 | 172 | 4 | 83 | 0.6 |
| 20% | .247 | .313 | .414 | 474 | 63 | 117 | 21 | 2 | 18 | 67 | 44 | 176 | 4 | 79 | 0.3 |
| 10% | .241 | .302 | .393 | 478 | 60 | 115 | 21 | 2 | 16 | 63 | 40 | 190 | 3 | 71 | -0.2 |
Luis Urías, Milwaukee Brewers
Urías already made my list in 2020 and put up one of the worst results of any of last year’s breakout picks, hitting .238/.308/.294 in 41 games for the Brewers. Since I’m clearly not afraid of being aggressively wrong about a young player over and over again — I had Nomar Mazara on my list for three consecutive seasons — I don’t mind sticking up for him one more time.
As lackluster as Urías’ performance in the majors has been, we’re also talking about a middle infielder with a .397 on-base percentage in the minors, a number earned while regularly playing at a high level for his age. Given the short 2020 season — preparation for which was interrupted by a positive COVID-19 diagnosis — and his recovery from a broken wrist from winter ball, I’m willing to give him a mulligan for the season. The Brewers are also prioritizing getting him playing time at short, the position where has the most upside value.
This spring, the Brewers are going back to their original plan for Urias and put him at shortstop while Arcia, who accepted a pay cut to remain with the team over the winter, will get a look at third base.
“We need to see it,” Brewers manager Craig Counsell said of Urias’ ability at shortstop. “We traded for him, and it’s something we want to do.”
Unlike with McMahon, ZiPS is mostly on board with this idea.
| Percentile | BA | OBP | SLG | AB | R | H | 2B | 3B | HR | RBI | BB | SO | SB | OPS+ | WAR |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 90% | .257 | .349 | .443 | 474 | 68 | 122 | 29 | 7 | 15 | 68 | 58 | 106 | 11 | 108 | 3.3 |
| 80% | .253 | .344 | .419 | 475 | 66 | 120 | 26 | 7 | 13 | 64 | 57 | 113 | 8 | 101 | 2.8 |
| 70% | .249 | .338 | .403 | 477 | 65 | 119 | 25 | 6 | 12 | 62 | 55 | 121 | 7 | 95 | 2.5 |
| 60% | .249 | .336 | .395 | 478 | 65 | 119 | 25 | 6 | 11 | 61 | 54 | 125 | 7 | 93 | 2.4 |
| 50% | .246 | .333 | .386 | 479 | 64 | 118 | 24 | 5 | 11 | 60 | 53 | 128 | 6 | 90 | 2.1 |
| 40% | .243 | .327 | .374 | 481 | 63 | 117 | 23 | 5 | 10 | 59 | 51 | 132 | 6 | 85 | 1.9 |
| 30% | .241 | .324 | .369 | 482 | 62 | 116 | 22 | 5 | 10 | 58 | 50 | 136 | 6 | 83 | 1.7 |
| 20% | .238 | .318 | .353 | 484 | 62 | 115 | 21 | 4 | 9 | 56 | 48 | 142 | 5 | 78 | 1.3 |
| 10% | .234 | .309 | .336 | 488 | 61 | 114 | 20 | 3 | 8 | 54 | 44 | 152 | 4 | 71 | 0.9 |
Dan Szymborski is a senior writer for FanGraphs and the developer of the ZiPS projection system. He was a writer for ESPN.com from 2010-2018, a regular guest on a number of radio shows and podcasts, and a voting BBWAA member. He also maintains a terrible Twitter account at @DSzymborski.
Thank you Dan, very cool!
Thanks for sharing this.
You’re welcome Monika.
This might be cheating a little bit, but my guy to absolutely blow by his projections is Carter Kieboom. He’s had less than 200 ABs and the story is that he got LASIK over the winter and looks like his making much better contact this year.
Looks like you say?
Crawford is not a Philly and more.
Hey, I *did* talk about him on the Mariners! I just kinda flubbed it when I went back through and did the headers quickly.
He’s not a Filly and mare.
Just neighing.
Crawford is on the Mariners now btw.
By definition, any call on Vladdy Jr. is a “gutsy” call.
I’ve got plenty of gut to spare.
Thanks, and I look for to revisiting this and laughing at you at season’s end!
Hey Dan! I friggin’ LOVE your ZiPS Projection Percentiles charts. Is there a way to see these types of charts besides from when you post them in articles? Thanks!
Still figuring out the best way to implement.
Pitchers still in beta. I’m just not 100% confident in the calibration yet.
Percentiles are always difficult because a percentile for an overall line can have such different shape. But I’m convinced that the benefits of being able to easily show the projected uncertainty outweigh the inherent awkwardness.
I second the post from Ecoflux, and understand your reservations, but I think people understand the unpredictability of baseball predictions…. I’ve always wanted to see a ZIPS90 (percentile) in the projections on player’s pages.
An article going over what you can share would be a fun read. The shapes of the distributions and how they are effected would be neat.
Sorry, but I’m not in on any of Vlad’s projections (not just yours). It makes very little sense that a guy with an MLB sample of 750 PAs of 107 wRC+ is projected to have a much higher wRC+ as his median outcome. Zips is the least bad offender (119), whereas every other system is at 125 or above. The systems that project WAR say anywhere from 2.6 (Zips) to 3.1 (Steamer) as a median despite a career of 0.6 WAR in 750 PAs.
Of course he might be that good at some point, or it might be an 80th or 90th percentile outcome for 2021, but for every projection system to have those numbers as median outcomes? Feels like AAA data and/or age is heavily overweighted in these projections.
Since WWII, there have been 143 guys who accumulated 500 PA through their age 21 season. Vlad is 59th on that list with a 107 wRC+ so I get what you’re saying. But prospect growth is not linear. As Dan pointed out, Soto and Tatis have us all thinking top prospects come out ripping the cover off the ball but that’s not always the case. Look through the list of those 143 guys and you can find a lot of guys who had (or are having) great careers who were the roughly the same or worse than Vlad through age 21:
Ripken 108 wRC+
Machado 103
Beltre 103
Gary Sheffield 102
Devers 97
Clemente 90
Molitor 88
Yaz (grandpa Carl, not Mike) 87
Sosa 87
TRammell 85
Yount 84
Baines 82
Bogaerts 82
Brett 81
Brooks Robinson 67
(& I focused on more recognizable names. There are tons of other guys who had fantastic careers that I left out – Jack Clark, Rick Monday as 2 examples)
and that’s just looking down from what he has done. If you go just a little above him you see some more legends:
Bench 114
Mays 116
Carew 117
That’s fine and all that, although the aging curves have changed a bit to where peak performance is typically in the early 20s. Of course debuting early enough to get 500 PAs by 21 is indicative of potential. But “potential” does not mean “absurd 50th percentile outcome based on 2018 minor league data.” Having that as a median outcome means something is wrong with the inputs. Having it as a 70th or 80th or 90th percentile outcome is fine. But theses systems are wildly overrating old minor league data as opposed to over a year of major league adequacy.
you should check out Rafael Devers
What about Devers? Vlad has a higher wRC+!than Devers in his first 2 seasons. However, in a few less games Devers accumulated 1.8 fWAR to Vlads .6. Also Devers 2020 was very similar to his rookie season. As of now Devers 2019 stands out as an extreme outlier in his young career.
So are you just switching between wRC+ and WAR to whatever fits your current argument?
> But theses systems are wildly overrating old minor league data as opposed to over a year of major league adequacy
These systems are calibrated using historical data. What are you basing your claims on?
Just eyeballing it but I think every single guy I posted ended up posting a peak wRC+ season of at least 40 to as many as 117 points (Brett’s 1980 of 198 was 117 points over his 81 thru age 21) over what they did through age 21, and that’s including the guys who are still early in their careers like Devers. Beyond that, almost all of them ended up with extended peaks of 5 to 15 years that were 30-50 points better than what they did through age 21 (using Brett again, he posted a 142 wRC+ from age 22 through 37)
You can find some counter examples (Curt Blefary and Tom Brunansky as 2) but guys tend to perform a lot better after age 21 than they do through age 21.
This whole thing made me look up everyone between ages 20 and 22 who qualified for the batting title in this century, just to see what their wRC+’s look like. Most guys in that 100-125 wRC+ range got better. I don’t think many got worse. Starlin Castro, Sean Burroughs, and Rougned Odor got worse, and Nick Markakis never really got better at the plate, but mostly it’s guys like Yelich, Freddie Freeman, Hanley Ramirez, Eric Chavez, etc. I think it’s a fairly safe bet that Vlad Jr will improve as a hitter in the next couple of years, although it may not be as much as we hoped for.
The biggest reason to be down on Vlad’s career now compared to before is that he looks like he very well could be a DH-only guy. I guess it’s also unlikely that he’s a Pujols or Cabrera-like masher but guys like that are so rare it’s hard to say it was likely before.
Random thought: is Rougned Odor the worst player ever to have three 30 HR seasons? I couldn’t figure out a way to look it up on b-ref but he has a career 86 wRC+ despite having three 30 HR seasons. That has to be hard to do, right? His 30 HR 2017 season is EASILY the worst 30 HR season ever with a 56 wRC+. The next worst is Tony Batista’s 76 wRC+ despite 32 HR in 2004. (Followed closely by Odor’s 30 HR 2019 season with a 77 wRC+)
Most HR in a sub-100 wRC+ season? Dave Kingman in 1982 with a 97 wRC+ despite 37 HR. Kingman managed to do that twice with 35 HR and a 86 wRC+ in 1986, his final season and even with that Kingman ended up with a career 113 wRC+.
Dante “the Butcher” Bichette says hello
I thought about Bichette but for as much grief as he gets for Colorado inflated numbers, he was still an above average hitter with a career 104 wRC+. He did only end up with 8.9 WAR but that is almost entirely due to his horrendous defense.
I look forward to writing my Odor based follow up article in a few years….haha
https://community.fangraphs.com/someone-give-juan-uribe-a-job/
Can you link the studies that support that statement? There’s definitely been a shift down in age but you’re asserting it’s 6 or 7 years which is massive. I’ve not read anything suggesting that great a change for hitters, but I’m not familiar with all the studies in this area and you clearly are so can you point me to them?
Peak year for hitters used to be 27. It seems to have drifted down to maybe 26. Peak years early 20s for MLB hitters overall? No.
Okay, but how many of those guys had breakout years the very next year in their Age 22 seasons? We’re talking about breakout hitters for 2021, not guys who may eventually become All-Stars.
Well. . . .let’s see:
Player thru 21 / age 22
Ripken 108 / 146
Machado 103 / 135
Beltre 103 / 90 (such a weird example – he didn’t really become a great hitter until age 31)
Gary Sheffield 102 / 67 (very partial season with only 50 PA, will assume he was hurt and note that he put up a 172 at age 23 and a just utterly stupid 153 from ages 23-36)
Devers 97 / 133
Clemente 90 / 72
Molitor 88 / 127
Yaz 87 / 118
Sosa 87 / 58
TRammell 85 / 115
Yount 84 / 111
Baines 82 / 126
Bogaerts 82 / 111
Brett 81 / 124
Brooks Robinson 67 / 96
Bench 114 / 144
Mays 116 / in the military at 22, put up a 173 in his age 23 season
Carew 117 / 96
So, if you exclude Sheffield and Mays you get an average of 94 through age 21 and 112.6 at age 22. If you include Sheffield and Mays’ age 23 seasons to account for the lost age 22 seasons, you get 94 and 119.
So 18-25 points depending on how you adjust. Add 18 points to Vlad’s 107 and you get 125. Dan has listed OPS+ and not wRC+ but the 50% OPS+ projection for Vlad is . . . .122. Sounds about right. (I would assume ZiPS has a much more exhaustive adjustment based on not just a few select HOFers but all players)
Fun fact: best age 22 season since WWII? Bryce Harper’s insane 2015 when he put up a 197 wRC+. Best by almost 20 points over Yordan Alvarez’s 2019 and Boog Powell’s 1964.
It’s hard to ignore how many of those guys were much better defensive players than Vlady before breaking out
“But prospect growth is not linear” Exactly why people don’t necessarily think Vladdy is going to improve.
All of these guys started off their careers skinny.
I’m not a fan of open-ended comps… sure both Vlad Guerrero Jr and Robin Yount accumulated 500+ PA through age 21, but Yount was at 2324 (literally the most in MLB history).
Also not a fan of setting parameters where you get a large number of results (and specifically then only hand-pick a subset).
Lets start with PA– I pulled down to 500 PA through age 21, so lets go with symmetrical and keep everything up to 1014. N=215
Next lets dump anyone not within 10 points of wRC+… n=61
And next, +/- 1 win of his fWAR/600PA rate, n=12
Eliminating any players who debuted before 1945 leaves us with 7 comps. The numbers are wRC+ through age 21, wRC+ age 22 and the difference:
107 176 +69 Boog Powell
97 133 +36 Rafael Devers
101 115 +14 Sixto Lezcano
107 118 +11 Clint Hurdle
105 104 -1 Dick Kokos
117 115 -2 Freddie Freeman
113 80 -33 Eric Hosmer
If we go with roughly the average of those (+13 points), then I guess a ~120 wRC+ projection probably seems fair as a 50th percentile projection, which is roughly what was in the table.
Vlad laid waste to every level of the minor leagues and he did it with a crazy low strikeout rate. And even though his power numbers have yet to reach their full potential in the MLB, he’s still running a really good strikeout rate while making solid contact. He’s a pretty safe bet to break out with the bat.
It’s old data that should be trumped by more recent data of actual MLB performance. Let’s just crown Brandon Wood the mvp while we’re at it because he had laid waste to the minors. There’s no surface validity to the idea that a vlad jr breakout is a 50th percentile outcome, but I know thinking is hard sometimes. Perfectly plausible as a 70th percentile or greater outcome, not at all as a 50th. Saying a breakout is a “safe bet” because of 2+ year old data is absurd for a guy who has has all of 0.6 fWAR in 750 PAs.
His WAR is 0.6 because he can’t field or run the bases haha. He’s been an above average hitter for 750 PAs. An above average MLB hitter when most guys his age are duking it out in the SALLY league haha.
Except Wood ran K rates at least twice as high as Guerrero’s, at older ages. Obviously you can’t just say that Guerrero showed elite skills in the minors, ergo he will be an elite major league player, but it is totally reasonable to say that, unlike Wood, Guerrero has the skillset that should reliably translate well into the majors.
But then, I am on the same page about the ‘breakout’ question, if we’re talking about him becoming a star. I don’t know why you’d bet on a breakout as a 50th percentile outcome…my 50th percentile outcome would be incremental yet meaningful improvements.
No one is saying a breakout is Vlad’s 50% outcome. Dan is just pointing out in the article that he thinks Zips is low on his projection for reason X, Y, Z. It’s called a breakout because its relatively unexpected. There are just other reasons to say why Vlad is a good bet to do it.
have you considered that if you make your points without acting like a jerk people will want to talk to you about them more
Last year my top two break out candidates were Kyle Lewis and Edwin Rios. I’m happy with my prediction, but saddened that I couldn’t utilize the information as both of my fantasy leagues were suspended for the year.
I find the first half of the list pretty compelling, but once we hit JP Crawford I find it less convincing.
What you’re suggesting for JP Crawford is something that I call the “Erick Aybar zone”. The Erick Aybar zone is what happens when you get a more or less league average hitter playing more or less league-average defense at shortstop, plus a little bit of baserunning thrown in for seasoning. A player who does this can regularly can somehow manage to put up 3-4 win seasons despite not actually having much power or on-base potential. But it’s a pretty thin line between the Erick Aybar zone and the Freddy Galvis zone.
I think there are some similar concerns with Luis Urias, but the other guy who would give me heartburn is McMahon. The guy strikes out a lot for a guy who plays half his games in an environment where almost any ball in play is good. For that reason, among others, I think he needs a change of scenery. (To a lesser extent, I feel the same way about Nate Lowe).
All that said, I think it is pretty hard to pick a guy who is a “breakout” candidate because it has to be someone who really hasn’t performed well so far. So someone like Jake Cronenworth–could he be a breakout candidate? He was pretty good in 2020. If he’s eligible, he’d be my pick, but I suspect he wouldn’t qualify. For real dark-horse guys, I could go with Danny Jansen.
Crawford’s fielding is bordering on elite though – third most UZR at SS in 2020 and has always passed the eye test with flying colors. Elite SS defense with .330+ OBP is a sneaky nice player. Galvis never approached those on base skills.
OAA likes his defense too but more “above average” than “elite”–more like the #10 shortstop. But I’m looking at his barrel rate right now and it was 1.8%. That is real, real bad. Like, “good for a pitcher” level bad. I think he’s a player, but expecting him to break out, I don’t know…if anything I’d expect him to take a step back from what he did in 2020 (which was legitimately an above-average starter).
IMO anyway, and that’s sacred, Jansen is a good choice for a breakout player
Also forgot…Disagree on Crawford/Aybar…Crawford’s got an 11% walk rate 853 PAs into his ML career, Aybar never topped 8% and finished at 5%….That said…Aybar was a good player overall and there’s worse than playing an above average all around SS for a half decade+? Crawford’s glove and LH bat will get him plenty of work after his starting days are over too so long as healthy
I’m as frustrated with Gary Sanchez as anyone, but I don’t get how the projections can be so bad for his offense. His 80% outcome is a 116 OPS+ when his most recent full season was a 118 OPS+. I get that there is potential for his offense to crater like ’18 and ’20, but there is potential for excellent offense as well – his ’16 and ’17 seasons both beat his 90% projection. His career OPS+ is 116 and his 50% outcome is 100?
I believe Yankee fans at this stage will be happy with 2019 Sanchez, when he hit 34 HRs in a little over 100 games with a 116 wRC+. I agree with Dan’s view overall, but with a caveat. His BAPiPs have been low for three straight years, which is why he hasn’t approached 2016 and 2017 production. He in some ways is almost a righty pull hitter and is defensed accordingly, and those type of hitters will run low BAPiP’s. That said, there is no way he will repeat that low of a BAPiP, so I think there’s a good chance the Yankees will get 2019 Sanchez back, and if he somehow decides to stop trying to pull everything, the breakout could be huge.
I understand the baseball value of losing weight, but does it really help you hit? It’ll help Vladito in the field, as the seasons pile up it’ll help his knees and back. But are their any historical grounds for thinking it’ll help him in the batter’s box?
Hmm. So Dan’s addressed a post after mine, but not mine. So either he’s
A), quick rerunning ZIPs to see if there is any actual “he’s lost weight!” hitting value there, or
B), hiding from the fact that he has no idea if losing weight actually helps hitting in the short run.
It’s B), isn’t it, Dan? ISN’T IT!?!?!
Else C), he’s ignoring me ‘cuz I quit membering (due to the uber-politicizing; not that anyone cares ‘Why?’). Which I’d actually understand. (also no one caring ‘Why?’)
I don’t necessarily reply in order. Generally, I’ll see a notice happen to hit my email when I’m in there.
I’ve found that there’s a slight-advantage to lower BMI late in long seasons. Also fatigue issues and being a bit quicker should help with the BABIP a bit as speed is a component. He literally had Mo Vaughn’s infield hit rate last year.
I stay out of the politics stuff. I don’t tell my colleagues what to do and I don’t tell you guys what to like or not like. I rarely venture into even slight political territory, with the exception of COVID-19. That’s my value and I only speak for myself.
Hmmph. A LIKELY! explanation. As in, that sounds like a pretty likely explanation.
So you have 2 logical factors, fatigue and BMI induced quickness, to think weight loss will help hitting. I have empirical examples like Matt Stairs, John Kruk, and so many big-butted guys throughout baseball history who’ve hit very well. Mo Vaughn, for example. Cecils I + II. Also Vladito in the minors. And that a huge heinie seems to help you generate power in so many athletic endeavors. I could not care less about your intuitive opinions which counter my intuitive opinions.
You then have empirical evidence that ‘lower BMI late in long seasons has generated a slight advantage’. Ergo, you win. Hands down. I will expect Vladito to show extra improvement late in the season. At least figure it (more) likely, thanks to you and your research. 🙂
I also greatly respect your political nonopinioning. Inideal in that that would entail supporting my political opinions. But still very worthy of respect. 🙂
Hey, it’s not the ONLY reason I like Vlad. I’m not even saying he can’t break out if he *didn’t* lose weight. And Kruk may have been better if he had been able to control his weight later after all. But it takes a lot of work to lose weight, so if he’s willing to put that much effort into this, I think it’s a good sign. Or at least better than the opposite; I doubt any would be excited if he had *gained* 40 pounds and a had a t-shirt that said “bugger off, Szymborski, I can eat more Oreos than you, fatass.”
Dan, can you clarify whether these breakouts are identified by you or by ZiPS? Are these guys that ZiPS is higher on than the consensus (or where their 80th-90th percentile shows more upside than people think), or guys who you personally think have a good chance to beat their projections?
These are mostly mine! My feelings aren’t determined by MEAN COMPUTER!
Nice article Dan, and thank you for leaving politics out of it, unlike Jay Jaffe. To the person running Fangraphs: I cancelled my membership renewal today for the end of this month. If you ever get around to seeing the value in editing that sticks to baseball instead of spreading hate and division, you might have more luck next time you go around with hat in hand begging for money.
You are totally correct, but you are still supporting the site by viewing and commenting, because ads and user engagement help them. You should totally show the FG community what you think and not visit the site anymore.
grow up dude and put on your big boy pants. if the mere mention of anything political in an article is enough to turn you off to an entire site of content with a plethora of different insights and opinions than clearly you weren’t that into the site in the first place.
It’s this sort of response I don’t quite understand. It appears to suggest “Keep silent/leave, or if you do express a thought, agree with our consensus.” Let’s think and speak independently and the best we can.
Can we all have, like, a truce in my comments? I’m just a harmless little fat boy trying to twirls some numbers and make dad jokes.
I really like your pieces. As a contrarian asshole, the only time I feel bad is dragging this stuff into them.
But when other authors write politicized pieces, and then pre-emptively shut down the comments on them(!!!), this is how the site loses the Mandate of Heaven.
I’ll obey this truce, out of respect for you. But this is going to come out SOMEWHERE. As someone who’s been reading Fangraphs since it was created—by, I might add, the ultimate contrarian asshole—it’s freakish to watch dissenting opinions no longer get argued down, but prevented from even taking place.
I honestly don’t understand what you’re getting at. Fangraphs is simultaneously preventing contrarian opinions from taking place, but is also now too open to having opinions published? Do you just take the contrarian opinion always, or are you just assuming everything you think is already contrarian? Either way, that’s really unhealthy.
For someone who had been reading Fangraphs for over a decade and is apparently very into it, you’d think you could cough up $20 a year to help them out, especially when the owner has come out and stated that they desperately need it.
It’s hilarious that they preemptively closed the comments on that one. An admission they knew they were printing a lecture. Sorry, plebs, no talking back!
Indeed, this site has made their political preferences evident over the last few years. It’s been the reason why I’ve opted against making any financial contributions since 2019. While I still do visit the site (obviously ha), my readership is down and tend to avoid certain authors’ posts. I wonder if there are only a few, or many, turned off by the ongoing infusion of social/political commentary on fangraphs.
Anyways, good article, Dan, looking forward to the pitchers version.
I both personally concur with your opinion and professionally disagree with it. Agree as in, I’ve also opted against membership as I don’t like people telling me I’m morally inferior if I don’t share their really valued political opinions. Even when and where I do share them. (which tbh I usually don’t, being very apartisan, and highly partisan folks do most all of the opinionating)
Professionally, I think their diving head, feet and ego first into SJW proselytizing may actually have kept the site going, by engendering more money from like-minded customers. Anyways, it’s absolutely Appelman’s right to mix politics and baseball on his web site if he thinks it’ll help business. Or for whatever reason he wants.
And given that Dan is about the only writer other than the rotograph guys that doesn’t clonk us over the head re the evils of white male international capitalism, I definitely think one and all should honor his request to keep it out of his comment boards.
Fully agreed. On Dan’s stuff, I’ll stick to Dan’s stuff.
I no longer will on the others.
Once you come across “SJW” you can freely ignore anything that comes after, it’s a sure sign of arguing in bad faith…
Don’t forget Longenhagen, Wolfe, Mailhot, Laurila and others stick to baseball too 🙂
I’m also planning to let my membership expire this month for this reason. I don’t even particularly disagree with most of the writers’ sentiments (though I wouldn’t say I wholeheartedly agree either, and I just don’t read any article that’s obvious social commentary). But the writers taking a stance encourages readers to take a stance, and there are few things less pleasant than political comments. I don’t want to read an article on HOF voting and have to wade through a 100-comment flame war to find the three insightful comments (props to those three guys, though)
Baseball is supposed to be fun. Politics =/= Fun. There are plenty of other places on the internet to dive into that pit of raw sewage.
Even if McMahon doesn’t break out, that’s still some decent power and counting stats eligible at one of the weakest fantasy positions. A 90 wrc+ hitter in Coors is a useful fantasy player with how bad 2B is this year. I’m sold on a late round dart throw.
Better than Bowdens list from The Athletic who chose a bunch of guys who mostly have already broken out including:
Vlad jr
Yordan Alvarez
Eloy Jimenez
Zac Gallen
A mondesi (im ok with this one )
L Gurriel Jr
Miguel sano
Framber Valdez
Keston Hiura
Austin Riley
I love the 1 triple for Sanchez, only if he hits 90% protection. He must be hitting so well he just says screw it and runs for 3rd.
Whither 3yr ZiPS tho
So Schwarber’s breakout… Is what he normally hits…?
Bold call Szymborski.
I think my list of breakouts is mostly rebreakouts:
Matt Olson 1B
Kris Bryant 3B
Francisco Lindor SS
Javier Baez SS
Joey Gallo LF
Ketel Marte 2B
Carter Kieboom 3B
Pavin Smith 1B?
Kyle Tucker OF
Josh Naylor LF
Luis Torrens C
Joc Pederson LF
Right on…I selected Trout, Tatis, Bellinger, Freeman, Soto, Acuna, and Betts as my breakout candidates for 2021
TBF these are guys who:
– get paid lots of money
– have Aged, we’re talking multiple players pushing 30+
– in Olson’s case doesn’t play a position of Value
Olson is an elite first base defender in a stadium with huge foul ground. He certainly plays a position of value when you play it as well as he does.
is it a breakout if they’ve already done it?
I think that “breakout” isn’t the best word for what you’re trying to convey. Maybe a better way to describe it is that these are players you are “high on” compared to general expectations?
Urias is a guy who everyone loved as a prospect. When he first appeared in SD, I could not believe THIS was the guy everyone was raving about as a can’t-miss hitter. He didn’t seem to have a good approach and he seemed to sulk after making outs. He reminded me of the Pirates’ former “can’t miss, blue chip” prospect Carlos Garcia who never figured out how to hit effectively in Pittsburgh. Perhaps this is the year Urias figures it out, but I was thrilled when the Padres sold Urias before his value bottomed out.
Dan, I notice that Kirilloff’s 10% projection comes with a .349 BABIP, and a K% at basically exactly 2020 league average. I know he’s had strong BABIP/K% marks in the minors, but that seems weird? I guess you’re not really projecting BABIP, but it doesn’t seem like it would be surprising for Kirilloff to K higher than league average in his debut. Could you clarify?
I wouldn’t say Crawford is a good bad ball hitter. .214 wOBA & .206 xwOBA on balls in play on pitches out of the zone, which is near the 20th percentile.
If you did this on Savant and searched balls out of the zone sorted by wOBA, he’s pretty high up the list (and near Tim Anderson). But that search includes the results from all plate appearances where he saw a pitch out of the zone, and in many of those plate appearances he drew a walk. If you include all the “batted ball types,” that should give you the results of just the balls in play.
He was actually pretty good at putting balls out of the zone in play (28 out of 103 swings is 27.2%, or around 65th percentile). But only 2 were hard hit (2nd percentile) and only 7 were in the sweet spot (25th percentile).
Or perhaps you did this a different way! I’ve just been doing research on Crawford specifically and the Savant query function always involves a lot of “OK what the hell did I just search.”
I do agree with you, though. Crawford is due for breakout, but because he’s maybe one of the most disciplined and selective hitters in the pitch tracking era. If he maintains it (pretty consistent over all four short seasons) and improves his quality of contact to even just league average, he’s going to easily make that 90th percentile projection. And if he adds above average quality of contact, he’s 2019 Marcus Semien.
There’s a lot of interesting plate discipline numbers on the Mariners roster right now between JP, Kyle Lewis, Ty France and Dylan Moore.