The Cure for the Home-Run Era

Home runs were everywhere last season! You might have heard. Conveniently, just as baseball was beginning to express concern that hitters didn’t have enough of a chance, balls started leaving the ballparks in record number. This was, naturally, examined over and over. One popular explanation is that baseball arranged to have the actual ball manufactured differently. A related and popular explanation is that the ball was manufactured differently kind of by accident. And then there’s the theory that hitters simply tried to hit more homers. You can see how that could lead to more homers.

That last theory gets tied into all the various swing-changers we’ve seen over the past few years. What if there are just more hitters than ever trying to hit the ball both hard and in the air? Anecdotally, it passes the smell test, and I should say I love being able to follow a relevant Travis Sawchik post. Travis just spoke with J.D. Martinez, one of the more well-known swing-changers. Martinez tries to hit the ball in the air every single time, which he didn’t used to do. Martinez seems to hold ground balls in contempt. This is, in short, the story of how Martinez turned around his own big-league career.

Travis tucked something in toward the bottom of his article. An excerpt:

While Martinez believes there is being progress made league wide, he already sees pitchers trying to combat his hitting philosophy.

“Pitchers are countering it right now. The pitchers are always ahead,” Martinez said.

What exactly are the adjustments being made to his swing path? Martinez and I had not, apparently, reached that level of trust.

“That’s one of things you don’t want to tell anyone,” Martinez said.

While Martinez would not reveal what he believes to be counter measures to his swing path, it appears pitchers are trying to elevate their fastballs against Martinez.

Travis is right, and while Martinez might prefer not to share his vulnerability with a writer, you can’t hide something like this from the competition. Over the past three years, Martinez has slugged .752 against pitches in the lower or middle thirds of the strike zone. He’s slugged .424 against pitches in the upper third of the strike zone. That gives him a difference of 328 points, which ranks sixth-biggest. He’s sandwiched by fly-ball-hitting Yoenis Cespedes, swing-changer Marlon Byrd, and swing-changer Justin Turner.

Let’s step back from discussing specific players. So many of these swing-changers have been engineering their adjusted swings to do better against pitches down. This recalls that discovery that was published in The Book, that fly-ball hitters do better against ground-ball pitchers. Ground-ball pitchers generally throw sinkers and two-seamers, and those pitches are generally low. Fly-ball hitters swing up to a certain extent. They don’t have level planes. It follows that it’s easier for a fly-ball hitter to make his desired contact when a pitch is down around the knees or the thighs.

All right. Let’s look at this very simply. Where did all those extra home runs come from last season? In this plot, home runs per swing, on pitches in the strike zone, where the zone is divided into thirds.

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.

Homers on pitches in the lower third took off. Homers on pitches in the middle third also increased. Homers on pitches in the upper third…stayed the same. All that extra good contact was coming from the zone’s lowest 66%. In this table, a further simplified comparison:

Home Runs per Swing, In-Zone
Year(s) Low Medium High
2008 – 2015 1.72% 2.44% 1.96%
2016 2.32% 2.83% 1.90%
Difference 0.60% 0.40% -0.06%
SOURCE: Baseball Savant

In the table, I’m using 2008 – 2015 as the baseline. Relative to that, homers in the lower third went up 0.6 percentage points. Homers in the middle third went up 0.4 percentage points. Homers in the upper third went ever so slightly down. My suspicion is that, if the home-run spike were all about the ball, we’d see more even distributions in places like this. The fact that the evidence is instead what it is suggests that, at least in part, this comes from a collectively different approach.

It makes sense for more hitters to be trying to get better at hitting low pitches. There are plenty of pitches down there.

Yet look in here at how contact rates have changed.

Contact was down against pitches in all three of the upper in-zone boxes. Contact held more steady against pitches in the other six in-zone boxes. This plot of slugging percentages also shows a similar pattern:

This was basically already demonstrated by the earlier plot. Slugging went down against pitches up. It went up against pitches down. It’s not proof of anything much, but it’s strongly suggested there was a broad adjustment being made, broad enough to show up in league-wide statistics. The power spike came from production against pitches in the middle and lower thirds. Those are the pitches easiest to drive for hitters with uppercut swing paths. Those same hitters, with that same approach, have more trouble against pitches up. The pitches are harder to hit, and harder to hit well, because the bat has more distance to travel, and big-league pitches move quick.

So for pitchers feeling spooked, there’s the hint of a solution in here. And it’s something we’ve discussed before, with regard to the big picture, and with regard to Mike Trout. Conventional wisdom has said the best swing is a level one. In truth, the best swing is a swing up. And, conventional wisdom has said the best way to avoid a home run is to pitch down. In truth, at least now, it’s probably to pitch up. High fastballs are associated with homers, but they should really be associated with pop-ups and empty whiffs. The swing-changers, the power-hitting revolution — it’s all designed to combat how pitchers have gone on the attack. Pitchers can change how they attack if they want. The more a hitter swings up, the more he can probably be exploited around the belt. Baseball can seemingly never just stand in one place.





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.

20 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
BrianInWI
9 years ago

This is good stuff. I love this kind of give and take that results in changes to how the game is played. It’s like predator-prey co-evolution in population ecology.

I wonder if all the infield shifts and overall improvements in defense have encouraged hitters to start lofting the ball more, too.

kbn
9 years ago
Reply to  BrianInWI

Ortiz mentioned this (can’t remember exactly where right now) sometime in late 2015 in regards to the shift. Basically, he gave up on an opposite field strategy for beating the shift and instead decided to just “hit it hard, and off the ground”. Seemed to work pretty well for him in the year that followed.

Oblarg
9 years ago

Yes, this is the obvious result of a shift in hitter approach towards fly-balls. Hitter and pitcher effects on launch angle are nearly additive, and it’s just as possible to end up with launch angles that are *above* the range that corresponds to good outcomes as it is to end up *below* that range. So, this is the adjustment that is going to happen, if this hitting approach becomes widespread.

The real question, I think, is where the “equilibrium” here is, or if there’s an equilibrium at all (seems to me entirely possible the system could just oscillate as pitchers and hitters “chase each other’s tails,” so to speak). I’m not a game theorist, so I’ve no idea how to actually answer this, but it’s an interesting question.

mike sixelMember since 2016
9 years ago

Pitchers try to adjust all the time, and they KNOW what Dozier does well, and not well, and yet they still threw him pullable pitches. I think it’s harder to pitch (and hit) than we realize….

lesmashMember since 2017
9 years ago
Reply to  mike sixel

I agree, Mike. The pitcher might know the best way to get Dozier out, but that pitcher still needs to execute his pitches throughout the whole at bat or else he risks putting something right in Dozier’s wheelhouse.

I have often wondered about how frequently a pitcher “misses” his intended location. Does it happen once per at bat? Once per inning? A couple of times per game? Would love to see some research / theories on this.

Morris Buttermaker
9 years ago
Reply to  lesmash

If you just look at where the catcher sets up you can get a pretty good idea.

Lou BrownMember since 2017
9 years ago
Reply to  mike sixel

The modern era seems to be less about hitters being able to handle as many pitches and zones as possible, and more about being able to do extra damage to mistakes. Since a soft fly ball and soft ground ball are both about as useful (or useless) as a strikeout it makes sense to focus on punishing bad pitches. This is so counter-intuitive to what we know about lower levels of baseball growing up where even a decent high school shortstop will make an error on 20% of balls hit to him.

Jetsy Extrano
9 years ago
Reply to  mike sixel

Right, we shouldn’t be thinking of of “what spot is best for the pitcher to hit” but “where should he place the middle of his distribution”. Centering it on a hitting cold spot doesn’t matter if your command means you’ll just as likely leak into a hot spot (which includes as takeable ball).

johnsnot20
9 years ago

this is the reason high spin 4-seamers are the new hotness.

bosoxforlifeMember since 2016
9 years ago
Reply to  johnsnot20

“Baseball can seemingly never just stand in one place.” How true! Or perhaps it should be said “Everything that goes around, comes around”. When I was playing the top of the strike zone was the letters and the best pitch in the pitcher’s arsenal was the proverbial “high-hard one”. Sounds like a high spin 4-seamer to me. Almost impossible to hit, then Richie Phillips and the umpires dropped the zone and the great letter high fastball simply became a ball.

Sabometrics
9 years ago

“Baseball should really be called ‘adjustments.'”
– Eddie Murray

Psychic... Powerless...
9 years ago

Great stuff. Note that the bottom row of the table shows percentage points, not percentage.

Joseph MeyerMember since 2016
9 years ago

More articles on baseball’s metagame please.

swingofthings
9 years ago
Reply to  Joseph Meyer

I can’t believe I’ve never applied that term to baseball. It’s a perfect fit.

drew_willyMember since 2020
9 years ago

Is there someplace to get a heatmap for an entire team or bullpen? After watching a ton of LAD games the last few years, several times in 2016 I was struck by their relievers (Jansen and Dayton specifically come to mind) pitching to a catcher who would set his target really high (like Grandal would be standing up) on a two-strike count. Can I find a heatmap that’d help me see if this was a team-wide strategy being put into use?

Also, how can I find heatmaps in this fancy animated form rather than the side-by-side setup I see on the player pages?

Thanks!

RonnieDobbs
9 years ago

You got it right in the first paragraph! If the balls are in fact flying better, then putting the ball in the air would work a lot better than it ever had before. In the past, you wouldn’t want to try to elevate a ball that is down. In fact, there are two things a hitter tries not to do – pull a ball that is away and lift a ball that is down. Maybe now players have realized that it is not so tough to lift a juiced low ball. What used to be an embarrassing lazy fly ball now has a chance to sail over the fence. That is exactly where a juiced ball would show up in the outcomes.

In reality, most BP is with balls that are down. I find it highly unlikely that players are getting better at hitting pitches that are down. That is where most pitchers try to work most of the time. Everyone likes hitting pitches that are in the lower third, not just guys with upper cuts.

Jetsy Extrano
9 years ago

Hitting question: do some hitters always match their swing plane to the incoming ball, versus others who are more stubborn like “I keep my uppercut even on high pitches”?

If you look at a hitter’s swing angle, it’s probably more uppercut (positive) for low pitches than for high, just by geometry. I.e. he has some low-high swing angle difference. The question is if some guys have a bigger or smaller difference.

It seems like matching the plane would be a contact approach, but biasing upward might improve production.