Swing, Michael, Swing
by APV on Jan 29, 2012 11:04 PM EST
Email
PrintA little over a year ago, as part of an off-season series covering some of the key young players on the Tribe's roster, I wrote a review of Michael Brantley's 2010 season with a prescriptive outlook to his 2011 campaign. In that piece, I suggested one of Brantley's problems as a hitter is that his elite contact abilities (he was on top of the league in that category in 2010) translate too often in poor outcomes on balls in play. I came to this conclusion by looking fairly closely at Brantley's ball-in-play data from the 2010 season. In the end, I came up with the following list of positive indicators for Brantley for the 2011 season.
| Measure | 2010 | 2011 |
| Increased BB-rate (>10%) | 6.8% | 6.9% |
| Lower IFFB% (<10%) | 13.4% | 8.5% |
| Increased ISO (>.125) | .081 | .118 |
| Better contact/outcome | see | below |
| Production on fly-balls (OPS>.450 ) | .239 | .635 |
| Excellent base-running (SB:CS > 5:1) | 5.0 | 2.6 |
| More doubles and triples (>20% of hits) | 16.4% | 23.3% |
| Above-average defense (UZR) | -22.6 | -1.6 |
Looking at my prescription, Brantley actually performed quite well. Brantley did appear to give up some contact percentage, and did see a better result on his balls-in-play, particularly on his balls in the air. Part of this is because he was pulling a greater percentage of balls in the air and therefore getting a better outcome. This is actually something TribeJay identified in the comments to my piece a year ago quite astutely. This seems to me to be a very positive indicator. Brantley can still improve some of the peripheral parts of his game, base-running and defense in particular, but there remains reason to be hopeful about his progress as a hitter.
What now appears to be holding Brantley back is not his contact/outcome issues, but rather his willingness to let strikes go right past him. Michael Brantley does not swing enough. He lets too many hittable pitches get called against him. 39% of the strikes on Brantley last year were called strikes, down slightly from the 41% he saw in 2010. The major league average is 28%. Brantley's tendency to give away free strikes seemingly goes hand-in-hand with his inability to replicate his great BB/K minor league numbers at the major league level. Brantley had more walks than strikeouts at every level in the minors, with a 1.34 BB/K ratio at AA and AAA. In the majors, that number has inverted to 0.48. I think Brantley has struggled to adjust to the major league strike zone and the proficiency with which major league pitchers hit the corners. It is great that Brantley is getting better results on his balls-in-play, now he needs to swing at more of the strikes he sees. I think Brantley still has a very intriguing ceiling and has shown steady, though subtle improvements in his batting approach and outcome each season. If Brantley's wrist troubles (hamate surgery) are behind him, I actually think he is a decent breakout candidate for 2012.
38 comments
|
5 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Love Brantley
I’ve wondered if his transition to big league command is more cerebral than physiological, and your analysis is an interesting insight into this. I’m also very big on Brantley.
I think his range is Johnny Damon upside to Mark Kotsay downside, which is great for a 24 year old player.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Jan 30, 2012 12:58 AM EST reply actions
You can also forget about the second half of last year, hamate injuries are extremely painful. Agree on the Damon ceiling, but can I change the lower one to Wayne Kirby?
by Aussie Wahoo on Jan 30, 2012 2:50 AM EST via mobile reply actions
Your point is valid. Given the difference in athleticism and age at which they were promoted, I’d say you are being harsh with the Kirby comparison, but I’d agree there is a non-zero probability that his career plays out that way.
Kirby is a better comp than Kotsay as an absolute floor. My projection is more along the lines of 1 standard deviation from where I think he is.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Jan 30, 2012 3:38 AM EST up reply actions
Am I imagining things or is this title a reference to “Rudie Can’t Fail” by The Clash?
by tribefan2510 on Jan 30, 2012 7:33 AM EST via mobile reply actions
I didn’t put all the numbers into the piece, but Brantley has made incremental improvements each season in the percentage of balls hit towards center and right, the outcome on those balls (particularly balls in the air), his percentage of called strikes, and several other measures. I was actually surprised, given how terrible he was the second half, and especially August, of last season. Even in July he struggled, after missing a game in late June with shoulder soreness. His injuries are a big negative flag, but there is still a lot to like underneath.
Also, if you look at Brantley’s day by day plate discipline numbers for a year ago, he actually got off to a great start in April and the early part of May, putting up numbers like he had in the minors. Then the numbers basically collapse in mid-May and go on to gradually decline further throughout the season, reflected in both a decreasing BB-rate and increasing K-rate. Brantley started off the season basically playing everyday. His first game missed because of anything injury related was a game in late May where his listed reason for being out of the lineup was “shoulder stiffness.” That day came about 10 days after his plate discipline collapse, he returned to play most of the rest of May and June, and never went to the DL. I haven’t been able to figure out what that shoulder injury was related to (on the field), and it is impossible to say if it is related to his subsequent struggles at the plate. Just thought it was worth noting, however.
I appreciate your work here and I’m prepared to be wrong on Brantley. However, this feels a little like emphasizing minutiae over the loud, noisy, in-your-face storyline. Brantley’s about to enter his age-25 season and he has a career AAA line of .286/.367/.385 (844 PA’s) and a career majors line of .265/.316/.359 (942 PA’s). That’s everything he’s done since 2009. Worse, he’s coming off age-23/age-24 seasons in which he’s only played a total of 253 games.
Again, I love the piece—I rec’d it and everything. But, at some point, we’re looking at a young player who’s not an elite defender, hasn’t hit in three seasons, and has missed a ton of developmental time at a point where he really needed it. And, not that you’re doing this, I just can’t give him any credit for being injured—that’s a flat negative as opposed to an opportunity to throw out part of the sample.
Maybe another way to put this: this kind of deep dive into performance is really fascinating, but if we focused this kind of attention on any one player would the signs of hope be more or less convincing than they are for Brantley?
I think that is certainly a valid criticism. I went into this substantially pessimistic about Brantley. As I looked at the numbers I was legitimately impressed by the differences in Brantley’s ball-in-play numbers from a year ago, and his general improvements (despite his decline from June onwards) in driving the ball. For me the issue then becomes a question of what tools Brantley has and how they are likely to develop as he ages. He has elite bat to ball abilities. He has weak power. He has a track record of excellent plate discipline at the minor league level. After looking at these numbers, I see (in contrast to someone like LaPorta) a package of tools that if they don’t get side-tracked by injury, have a chance to age very well. Again, if he’s healthy, there’s no reason to think his contact skills will decline substantially during his mid-late 20s. There is reason to think his plate discipline and power will improve, both of which showed subtle changes in that direction this past season. I don’t know how to evaluate his defense. His numbers from last year were substantially better than a season ago, and the front office seems ok with what he provides on that side of the ledger.
He has a huge opportunity with the organization given the lack of qualified outfielders behind him in the organization, the questionable health of Grady, and Choo’s sudden concerns. This is his year to take advantage of that opportunity.
The comparison I continue to be intrigued by is Brantley and Bernie Williams. It is a wildly unfair comparison, because Bernie Williams went on to have a near HoF career, but it is fun comparing what Williams did in his first three years in the league (as an old 22, 23 and 24-year old) with what Brantley has done (as a young 22, 23 and 24-year old). Bernie is 9 months older than Brantley and may have benefited from being in a better lineup, but their cumulative line across those three seasons are as follows:
.262/.339/.388 – Bernie Williams
.265/.316/.359 – Michael Brantley
Brantley started off in his first two seasons with much less power than Williams, but his numbers last year were very comparable to what Williams did in his third season. In his 3rd season, Williams ISO was .132, 7.5% of his plate appearances were extra-base hits, 31% of his hits overall went for extra-bases and he had twice as many Ks and BBs. Brantley last year had an ISO of .118, 7.1% of his plate appearances resulted in extra-base hits, 29% of his hits went for extra-bases, and he had a 2.24 SO/BB ratio. The similarities continue if you look at their ball-in-play data (with the exception of Williams handling lefties better as a switch hitter). The biggest difference in their overall line is Brantley walks a lot less (6.9% vs. 8.4%) and got a had a much larger percentage of called strikes on him (39% vs. 24%). Bernie’s real breakout, in terms of power, BB-rate, and overall production came in his fourth season as a 25-year old. Brantley’s overall trajectory is a positive one, and when compared to a guy with a similar overall makeup, still has time to make a significant stride forward.
There are 44 outfielders since expansion who, over their first three seasons, a minimum of 200 games, had OBP’s between .315 and .350 and SLG between .350 and .400 over their first three seasons, between 21 and 25.
There is more reason to hope here than I would’ve anticipated (Marquis Grissom, Shane Victorino, Melky Cabrera, Bernie Williams, Kirby Puckett, etc), but it’s also got guys who had a lot of Brantley-like ‘positive indicators’—decent ISO’s, minor league plate discipline, etc.
For my money, Brantley is as much like Jeremy Reed as he is like Bernie Williams. Obviously, I’d love to be wrong. Also worth noting that Williams’ first three years was good for a 100 OPS+, while MB is at an 88.
Interesting to see how few of these guys, at least to my eye, appear to have played in the last ten to fifteen years. This looks like a ‘type’ that’s in a lull (which is something we’ve heard about Brantley before—rarity of true ‘leadoff’).
Reed, particularly his 2005 season, does make for an interesting comp. Reed never showed any signs of life after that year, though, likely owing to the injuries that derailed him in 2006. And it is interesting to note that going into 2005 Reed was in his second year of being considered a top-40 prospect in baseball, something Brantley has never sniffed at. It also should be noted that Brantley was a much better pull hitter than Reed displayed at any point.
Agreed. Good discussion.
"Mixed emotions. Rather see him hit PEDroia [with that pitch]. I don’t care if he is in the dugout"
by Gradysmanldy on Jan 31, 2012 12:38 PM EST up reply actions
I will stop talking to myself after this…but as one last statement. I’d feel differently if Brantley had never shown above average plate discipline during his minor league development. Then I would think he simply doesn’t have a very good eye, poor pitch recognition, or some other basic tool deficit. But that isn’t the case. Brantley had excellent plate discipline numbers, both in terms of Ks and BBs, at every level of his development prior to the majors.
I really appreciate this type of quantitative analysis.
I made a general observation in another thread that we may be overly optimistic about Chisenhall and Kipnis having really productive years because of their short time in the majors. I’m aware of the concept of arc where really elite players get to the majors at a younger age, and maintain their skills to an older age than the average MLB player. I’m wondering what is normal for the time players who eventually have above average careers to transition from top minor league prospect to solid major league contributor. My impression is that it takes about 3 to 4 years, but I haven’t done the quantitative research to back that up.
It seems that Williams career supports that assertion. I’d be interested to see more analysis on this.
by Pa tribefan on Jan 30, 2012 10:34 AM EST up reply actions
He also has a good opportunity because the FO has an extra incentive for him to establish himself. He might end up being the only real thing of worth we got in the CC trade.
by Aussie Wahoo on Jan 30, 2012 5:59 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
At the moment, Brantley and LaPorta have similar opportunities available to them given the organizational holes at corner OF and 1B. Brantley clearly sits in better standing with the FO, though.
…..Because Brantley isn’t determined to ruin at least a dozen individual nights of my summer by crapping himself in key situations.
I got the feeling by mid-August that Laporta was just screwing with me. I’d be listening to a game on the radio on the way home from a late night shift at work, and the Indians would be down one in a late inning with 0-1 outs and a runner at third and Laporta stepping in……so i’d rush from the car to the house, just to arrive in time for him to CRUSH MY SOUL AGAIN.
Sorry, /rant. I hate Matt Laporta. I hate his face.
"Mixed emotions. Rather see him hit PEDroia [with that pitch]. I don’t care if he is in the dugout"
by Gradysmanldy on Jan 31, 2012 12:41 PM EST up reply actions
According to MLBTR, Oswalt turned down the Indians too. I would’ve loved to have added Oz.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Jan 30, 2012 11:12 AM EST reply actions
Yea, saw on Twitter that he basically informed us and Toronto that there was zero interest on his part.
I wonder if this is all just posturing, and that he is vying to pad his stats on a 1 year deal in the NL. (if the Rangers talks are true, then he would be using them to drive up the price for the Cardinals)
Think he wants to score one more multi-year contract that will take him into his late 30s, before he rides off into the sunset. Doubt he wants any part of the stacked AL.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Jan 30, 2012 1:52 PM EST up reply actions
It’s always seemed to me that he wants to be a career NL guy. If an NL team offers >85% of what Boston does next winter, I bet he takes it instead.
St Louis also seems like a great place to go to revive your career. Teams are leery of his back issues, but a solid, healthy season in the weak NL Central could change a lot of minds next winter. I can’t say I’d expect the same results in Texas with that stadium, that division, and the league in general.
St Louis also seems like a great place to go to revive your career.
We’ll see what happens without Dave Duncan, though.
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Feb 1, 2012 6:35 PM EST up reply actions
If you believe in history, then Oz will not end up in St Louis, Boston or Texas. It seems the most useful way to use the media is to eliminate any team they report is “talking” to said player.
Based on what Heyman’s reported, I’m guessing he ends up with the Hiroshima Carp.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Jan 31, 2012 12:13 AM EST up reply actions
Started looking at LaPorta’s numbers from this season and my piece on him from last off-season. The good news is he did a much better job hitting the ball to all fields last year. In 2010 he basically never got anything off balls hit to the right side. Last year he was able to drive the ball to right field, but instead just seemed to get unlucky on balls hit to center. The bad news is pretty much everything else. Still struggles with major league breaking and offspeed pitches (which is bad, since he sees more of those pitches than just about anyone in the league), although he improved on sliders last year. Also, his walk-rate collapsed and he hit a huge number of infield pop-ups.
I completely agree that both Brantley and Laporta can do better – they just haven’t yet. If this was a rebuilding year, I’d have no prob giving them first shot at nailing down starting positions. The big “but” is that we’re aiming for contention right now, starting opening day 2012, and if there’s a route to make production from those spots less of a question mark, it should be taken.
They offered Pena more than he got from TB. They wanted Beltran, but he refuses to DH. Oswalt isn’t interested unless the Indians overpay.
This is only what’s reported. I imagine there’s been more failed attempts to improve due to non-$ issues, or personal preference by players. If the FO overpays to compensate for not being “sexy” (Detroit), they get lambasted by the media. If they don’t, some say they aren’t trying hard enough.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Jan 31, 2012 1:21 AM EST up reply actions
I agree with you on this, Adam. I haven’t gotten onto the site a whole lot lately, but I was looking for a good post to comment about Brantley, and this certainly is it. I don’t really think his ceiling is that high, but I do think he’s the best candidate to be a “nice surprise.” The reason for it is totally subjective – I tend to think that hitters that show good fundamentals (ability and willingness to go to the opposite field) when they are young can turn into pretty good hitters when they realize that they need to pull the ball with authority in certain situations.
As Adam notes, Brantley made progress in that area last year…he was good at going the opposite way, but to a fault. Hopefully he can make a similar stride this year in taking fewer called strikes. He doesn’t have “good” power, but he does have some pull-field power, and it won’t shock me to see him hit 15-20 homers at some point with this home ballpark.
But the injuries are a concern.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Let's Go Tribe
Related FanShots on Let's Go Tribe
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Featured Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
- Benches clear at Fenway as Red Sox-Rays rivalry heats up
- Keeping good company: Albert Pujols becomes fourth-youngest player to hit 450 home runs
- Giancarlo Stanton misses cutoff man, and Logan Morrison is thankful he did (Video)
- Snoop Dogg delivers memorable first pitch at U.S. Cellular Field
