Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
Why wouldn't McCutchen "keep hitting for power at this level"?
He's really skinny. I know that isn't a real reason, but it does create cognitive dissonance when you see him hit the ball 400'. I suppose he'll gain some weight as he gets older.
McCutchen's riding a .420 BABIP vs a career number of .328. He's definitely fluking a bit.
On the other hand, he's also seeing a major power spike at age 25, which is a very normal development, especially for a five-tool athlete like McCutchen, and he'll probably retain quite a bit of that power. (Though I agree with Cameron, probably not all of it.) He's also probably going to start walking more as his babip declines.
He's really skinny. I know that isn't a real reason, but it does create cognitive dissonance when you see him hit the ball 400'. I suppose he'll gain some weight as he gets older.
BB-Ref lists McCutchen at 5'10", 185 lbs. The same source lists Willie Mays at 5'10", 170; Ernie Banks at 6'1", 180; and Hank Aaron at 6'0", 180.
when ryan ludwick had his crazy season he would lunge at pitches, like he is wont to do, and instead of missing them or popping up he would serve them into right-center. he would hit home runs on ridiculous swings.
andrew is controlling the strike zone and when he connects the ball is just exploding off his bat.
it looks like a step forward versus a guy just having everything break his way
it looks like a step forward versus a guy just having everything break his way
It's almost certainly both, right?
11.MM1f posted on July 24, 2012 at 12:46 PM #hit 0 | hit 0
It can be both a career year and not-a-fluke, you know.
There is a difference between flukey career years, where mediocrities go nuts (Ryan Ludwick), and stars having years that are exceptional even by their standards.
If you think this isn't a career year for McCutchen you're expecting him to a Hall of Famer, he is leading the league in average, slugging, OPS, and OPS+. He probably won't do that on a consistent basis. But that doesn't mean this kind of performance is far out of the norm for a toolsy 25 year old with a good track record. He is basically having a Matt Kemp-esque jump from excellence to stardom.
The focus on the home runs as being the thing unlikely to be "real", though, seems backwards. There's basically no chance that Andrew McCutchen will bat .370 for the next five seasons. Seeing McCutchen hit 35-40 home runs a year from here on out seems much more likely.
13.bunyon posted on July 24, 2012 at 12:53 PM #hit 0 | hit 0
BB-Ref lists McCutchen at 5'10", 185 lbs. The same source lists Willie Mays at 5'10", 170; Ernie Banks at 6'1", 180; and Hank Aaron at 6'0", 180.
I think the silly-ball era has really distorted what we think of when we think power hitter. However they got so big, we got used to seeing sluggers who looked like cartoon characters. Looking at the history of baseball, that clearly isn't necessary.
I'll defer to you guys on McCutchen. Unfortunately, I've only seen him play a handful of times. He looks excellent but it isn't much of a sample size. Hopefully, they'll start showing the Pirates more.
14.MM1f posted on July 24, 2012 at 12:58 PM #hit 0 | hit 0
As for McCutchen's size... he is pretty freakin cut. Not bulky, but pretty muscular. He has an NFL cornerback type build, lean with wiry strength. He was, IIRC, a D-I football prospect out of HS too.
15.AROM posted on July 24, 2012 at 12:58 PM #hit 0 | hit 0
BB-Ref lists McCutchen at 5'10", 185 lbs. The same source lists Willie Mays at 5'10", 170; Ernie Banks at 6'1", 180; and Hank Aaron at 6'0", 180.
I like that. It's a good counterpoint to the idea that Willie Mays would not be a big power hitter if he played today, just because all of today's big power hitters are 6'4 and 235.
Though Bonds was a good counterpoint himself before he went Baroids. He was a consistent 40 homer per year guy while weighing probably 185.
It can be both a career year and not-a-fluke, you know.
There is a difference between flukey career years, where mediocrities go nuts (Ryan Ludwick), and stars having years that are exceptional even by their standards.
I suspect that this is more about semantics than baseball. I think McCutchen's probably taken a major leap forward, and that his new level will be something like .310/.390/.530 ... let's suppose he does settle in at something like that over the next few years. Can't I call his 2012 a fluke? He's beating his career OPS by 250 points. He's only going to sustain some percentage of that.
17.bobm posted on July 24, 2012 at 01:18 PM #hit 0 | hit 0
I think the silly-ball era has really distorted what we think of when we think power hitter. However they got so big, we got used to seeing sluggers who looked like cartoon characters. Looking at the history of baseball, that clearly isn't necessary.
People, and athletes, have become larger in general. Mays and Aaron would probably weigh 20lbs more with modern diet and exercise techniques. You're right that it is possible to hit tons of homeruns without being huge, I was simply pointing out that it looks different when you see someone do it these days.
He's really skinny. I know that isn't a real reason, but it does create cognitive dissonance when you see him hit the ball 400'. I suppose he'll gain some weight as he gets older.
Eric Davis was pretty skinny, and he had monster power. All about bat speed and wrist strength.
20.bunyon posted on July 24, 2012 at 01:42 PM #hit 0 | hit 0
All about bat speed and wrist strength.
Timing first.
21.JRVJ posted on July 24, 2012 at 01:59 PM #hit 0 | hit 0
I may have missed him, but I would have thought Yoenis Cespedes would have been on this list.
Maybe. But "fluke" connotes something way out of line with what he is capable of. Truly great players have great years, year after year, with some years far more outstanding than others. I don't think of those as "flukes", so much as I think of them as being at the far edge of their abilities.
Davey Johnson hitting 42 homers feels like a fluke. Mickey Mantle winning the triple crown does not, even though he obviously did not win it every year. That is the difference for me.
"Fluke", I think, typically refers to something that was almost entirely random, or lucky. Andrew McCutchen's breakout season, in which he's clearly been hitting in good luck, but also hitting in knocking the snot out of the ball, doesn't really seem like a "fluke" in that sense. I think it's useful to save the word just for the true freak events, like Esteban Loaiza competing for a Cy Young or Brady Anderson hitting 50 homers.
Remember the young Darryl Strawberry? Or the Splendid Splinter?
As #13 suggests, I think it's something of a generational thing. I remember the young Darryl Strawberry and Eric Davis very well, and they're both excellent comps to Andrew McCutchen in terms of body type and athletic ability. There's a long and distinguished history of slim guys with super-fast bat speed and strong wrists who were elite major-league home run hitters. As noted upthread, McCutchen is also reminiscent of the young Barry Bonds. But if your memory of Barry Bonds is only to the 2001-04 model and your image of power hitters is Jim Thome, Mark McGwire, and Adam Dunn, then, yeah, McCutchen looks too "skinny" to be able to hit 40 homers a year.
26.Dan posted on July 24, 2012 at 02:12 PM #hit 0 | hit 0
How does a sabermetric writer boost Trout over Harper by the performance of the last few weeks and then not mention Trout's .412 BABIP anywhere in the writeup on him? Trout is obviously a fantastic player, but no one sustains anything near a .412 BABIP. And there's nothing wrong with preferring Trout, but when it's based on literally two or three weeks of divergent performance between the two players that doesn't really strike me as very thorough analysis. Cameron literally says that if he wrote this a few weeks ago Harper is #1.
I also think any comparison of Trout and Harper is negligent if it doesn't mention Trout's age 19 performance and how big of a jump he's made this year when Harper is some 14 months younger.
How does a sabermetric writer boost Trout over Harper by the performance of the last few weeks and then not mention Trout's .412 BABIP anywhere in the writeup on him? Trout is obviously a fantastic player, but no one sustains anything near a .412 BABIP. And there's nothing wrong with preferring Trout, but when it's based on literally two or three weeks of divergent performance between the two players that doesn't really strike me as very thorough analysis. Cameron literally says that if he wrote this a few weeks ago Harper is #1.
Cameron is as much a sabermetric writer as I am a mallard duck. He's a writer who cites to stats when convenient and writes for a sabermetrically inclined website, but has neither the temperment nor intelligence to actually analyze and draw conclusions from data.
What's the relative contract status? If I'm reading Cot's right Trout is on a fairly traditional rookie contract while Harper is inked through his first arb year at $1 million for that 2015 season. That arb year for Harper at such a low price looks like a huge point in his favor.
29.Dan posted on July 24, 2012 at 02:25 PM #hit 0 | hit 0
Harper can opt out of the contract when he hits arbitration and go to arbitration or get a new contract.
I remember the young Darryl Strawberry and Eric Davis very well, and they're both excellent comps to Andrew McCutchen in terms of body type and athletic ability.
Darryl Strawberry was 6'6". Eric Davis was 6'2". They were skinny, but neither was little. Strawberry especially was considered one of the most physically imposing players in the game at the time. I don't really see either of them as being physical comps for McCutchen.
Edit: If you want a mid-80s Met for a physical comp to McCutchen, Howard Johnson is your guy. I bring this up only because I like to take every opportunity I can to remind people of how awesome Howard Johnson was for a time.
Most contracts like Harper's include a clause allowing him to opt out of the contract and go to arbitration if he reaches arb before the end of the deal. I don't see anything about an arbitration opt-out at Cot's or after a cursory googling, but I would bet that Harper has that option.
Darryl Strawberry was 6'6". Eric Davis was 6'2". They were skinny, but neither was little. Strawberry especially was considered one of the most physically imposing players in the game at the time. I don't really see either of them as being physical comps for McCutchen.
I see a bit of Nomar Garciaparra in McCutchen. Not in their approach at the plate, but in the consistent line drive power they produce with their wrists. (Garciparra was about 5-11 185.)
Cameron is as much a sabermetric writer as I am a mallard duck. He's a writer who cites to stats when convenient and writes for a sabermetrically inclined website, but has neither the temperment nor intelligence to actually analyze and draw conclusions from data.
This is too harsh. Cameron, like many writers, has had a trajectory over time. He's gotten lazier with his analysis and conclusions in recent years. Then again, knowing what we now know about his life-threatening personal health struggles, I'm inclined to be a little lenient. Such things have a tendency to affect one's focus.
This is too harsh. Cameron, like many writers, has had a trajectory over time. He's gotten lazier with his analysis and conclusions in recent years. Then again, knowing what we now know about his life-threatening personal health struggles, I'm inclined to be a little lenient. Such things have a tendency to affect one's focus.
I think it's useful to save the word just for the true freak events, like Esteban Loaiza competing for a Cy Young or Brady Anderson hitting 50 homers.
You might be right. It's just that the annoying stats dork in me wants language to reflect mathematics, and if Loaiza's and Mantle's seasons are equally improbable (based on their "true talent" expectations, or what have you) I want to be able to use the same word to describe them.
zop's complaints about Cameron apply to his writing from long before he had any health issues. The guy is a poor analyst and a mediocre writer. It sucks that he has cancer, but it doesn't change any of that.
McCutcheon is not skinny, that's not a good description. But if he's really a 35-40 home run guy, he's the smallest in a generation. He's like Bagwell minus 20 lbs.
I'm not sure about your definition of "bat speed", but if what is meant is the linear velocity of the head of the bat, then taller players with a longer torque arm have an advantage.
Also, it is well-known that the mass of the bat is a factor in hitting for power. In addition, I'm pretty sure that if you do the Lagrangian for this you would also find that the mass of the hitters arms is non-negligible. (Lagrangian mechanics is a mathematical technique used to deal with, among other things, multi-hinged systems like this.) Mark McGwire really did have the optimum physique to hit for distance.
Somebody upthread had it: McCutchen's BA is a fluke (esp the BABIP), the power is probably for real (at least partly). But still -- if you whack 60 points off the BA (which still puts him 15 points above his career BA, 35 points above 2009-11) ... and that's going to take something like 90-100 points off the SLG ... and the guy's down about 160 points in OPS. His walk rate this year is low so he probably gains 20 of that back. Somebody suggested 310/390/530 which looks about right and puts him around a 155 OPS+ based on this season's league averages. Whether you want to consider 194 a fluke (assuming he maintains it) for a true 155 hitter is up to you.
The stuff about expecting McCutchen's power to decline is just not true. He has the quickest bat in the major leagues. I've said it before and will keep saying it, he's the closest thing to Hank Aaron's toolbox since Hank Aaron.
In my mind's eye McCutchen is a line drive hitter, and not the sort of guy that should be expected to hit 30+ homeruns. But jeeze, he hits the ball hard. And that impression is mostly from the last few years. This homerun is impressive.
Harveys: Touché. That's pretty good. I think Sheffield was a little bit bigger than those guys, though, even when he was young. You're right, though, it's the same skillset.
I like the Sheffield comp though; I can say "McCutchen's a lot like Gary Sheffield" and not be laughed at quite so loudly as if I compare him to Hank Aaron.
49.Danny posted on July 24, 2012 at 05:30 PM #hit 0 | hit 0
Josh Reddick is rail thin and is basically hitting for the same power as McCutchen this year.
I think the misperception that it requires being built like the Incredible Hunk to hit home runs is kind of a steroid era relic. Babe Ruth was huge but before the 1990s he was more exception than rule. Mel Ott was muscular but nowhere near at a Jimmie Foxx/Mark McGwire level. Frank Robinson wasn't huge, Willie Mays wasn't big, Ken Griffey Jr. didn't remind anyone of a pro wrestler, Barry Bonds was a great home run hitter before he juiced way up and he was skinnyish. Upper body strength is only one of a list of elements of generating bat speed.
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
Page 1 of 2 pages
1 2 >I did not RTFA but this must be hyperbole. "Several magnitudes more" means 100 or 1,000 times more. No way.
It's not like he's Brady Anderson - I mean - a ~180 jump in SLG is certainly a big number, but Barry Bonds took a big jump in his age 25 season, too.
Is McCutchen a 45 HR guy? Maybe not - but when I've seen him hit, there's nothing that screams to me 'career year'... He's good... really good.
He's really skinny. I know that isn't a real reason, but it does create cognitive dissonance when you see him hit the ball 400'. I suppose he'll gain some weight as he gets older.
The .373 average doesn't scream career year?
On the other hand, he's also seeing a major power spike at age 25, which is a very normal development, especially for a five-tool athlete like McCutchen, and he'll probably retain quite a bit of that power. (Though I agree with Cameron, probably not all of it.) He's also probably going to start walking more as his babip declines.
What does a guy having a career year look like?
BB-Ref lists McCutchen at 5'10", 185 lbs. The same source lists Willie Mays at 5'10", 170; Ernie Banks at 6'1", 180; and Hank Aaron at 6'0", 180.
when ryan ludwick had his crazy season he would lunge at pitches, like he is wont to do, and instead of missing them or popping up he would serve them into right-center. he would hit home runs on ridiculous swings.
andrew is controlling the strike zone and when he connects the ball is just exploding off his bat.
it looks like a step forward versus a guy just having everything break his way
It's almost certainly both, right?
There is a difference between flukey career years, where mediocrities go nuts (Ryan Ludwick), and stars having years that are exceptional even by their standards.
If you think this isn't a career year for McCutchen you're expecting him to a Hall of Famer, he is leading the league in average, slugging, OPS, and OPS+. He probably won't do that on a consistent basis. But that doesn't mean this kind of performance is far out of the norm for a toolsy 25 year old with a good track record. He is basically having a Matt Kemp-esque jump from excellence to stardom.
The focus on the home runs as being the thing unlikely to be "real", though, seems backwards. There's basically no chance that Andrew McCutchen will bat .370 for the next five seasons. Seeing McCutchen hit 35-40 home runs a year from here on out seems much more likely.
I think the silly-ball era has really distorted what we think of when we think power hitter. However they got so big, we got used to seeing sluggers who looked like cartoon characters. Looking at the history of baseball, that clearly isn't necessary.
I'll defer to you guys on McCutchen. Unfortunately, I've only seen him play a handful of times. He looks excellent but it isn't much of a sample size. Hopefully, they'll start showing the Pirates more.
I like that. It's a good counterpoint to the idea that Willie Mays would not be a big power hitter if he played today, just because all of today's big power hitters are 6'4 and 235.
Though Bonds was a good counterpoint himself before he went Baroids. He was a consistent 40 homer per year guy while weighing probably 185.
I suspect that this is more about semantics than baseball. I think McCutchen's probably taken a major leap forward, and that his new level will be something like .310/.390/.530 ... let's suppose he does settle in at something like that over the next few years. Can't I call his 2012 a fluke? He's beating his career OPS by 250 points. He's only going to sustain some percentage of that.
(Just kidding, it's Ryan Braun)
People, and athletes, have become larger in general. Mays and Aaron would probably weigh 20lbs more with modern diet and exercise techniques. You're right that it is possible to hit tons of homeruns without being huge, I was simply pointing out that it looks different when you see someone do it these days.
Eric Davis was pretty skinny, and he had monster power. All about bat speed and wrist strength.
All about bat speed and wrist strength.
Timing first.
Maybe. But "fluke" connotes something way out of line with what he is capable of. Truly great players have great years, year after year, with some years far more outstanding than others. I don't think of those as "flukes", so much as I think of them as being at the far edge of their abilities.
Davey Johnson hitting 42 homers feels like a fluke. Mickey Mantle winning the triple crown does not, even though he obviously did not win it every year. That is the difference for me.
Remember the young Darryl Strawberry? Or the Splendid Splinter?
As #13 suggests, I think it's something of a generational thing. I remember the young Darryl Strawberry and Eric Davis very well, and they're both excellent comps to Andrew McCutchen in terms of body type and athletic ability. There's a long and distinguished history of slim guys with super-fast bat speed and strong wrists who were elite major-league home run hitters. As noted upthread, McCutchen is also reminiscent of the young Barry Bonds. But if your memory of Barry Bonds is only to the 2001-04 model and your image of power hitters is Jim Thome, Mark McGwire, and Adam Dunn, then, yeah, McCutchen looks too "skinny" to be able to hit 40 homers a year.
I also think any comparison of Trout and Harper is negligent if it doesn't mention Trout's age 19 performance and how big of a jump he's made this year when Harper is some 14 months younger.
Cameron is as much a sabermetric writer as I am a mallard duck. He's a writer who cites to stats when convenient and writes for a sabermetrically inclined website, but has neither the temperment nor intelligence to actually analyze and draw conclusions from data.
Darryl Strawberry was 6'6". Eric Davis was 6'2". They were skinny, but neither was little. Strawberry especially was considered one of the most physically imposing players in the game at the time. I don't really see either of them as being physical comps for McCutchen.
Edit: If you want a mid-80s Met for a physical comp to McCutchen, Howard Johnson is your guy. I bring this up only because I like to take every opportunity I can to remind people of how awesome Howard Johnson was for a time.
EDIT: Coke to Dan.
Translated: "Too soon."
You might be right. It's just that the annoying stats dork in me wants language to reflect mathematics, and if Loaiza's and Mantle's seasons are equally improbable (based on their "true talent" expectations, or what have you) I want to be able to use the same word to describe them.
This is true, but it does not in any way imply that his analyses and conclusions weren't lazy years ago - just that they're even worse now.
And an insufferable #######, too.
I'm not sure about your definition of "bat speed", but if what is meant is the linear velocity of the head of the bat, then taller players with a longer torque arm have an advantage.
Also, it is well-known that the mass of the bat is a factor in hitting for power. In addition, I'm pretty sure that if you do the Lagrangian for this you would also find that the mass of the hitters arms is non-negligible. (Lagrangian mechanics is a mathematical technique used to deal with, among other things, multi-hinged systems like this.) Mark McGwire really did have the optimum physique to hit for distance.
no. gary sheffield.
you can argue but you are wrong.
Mays at age 23; it doesn't seem like he weighed 170.
he is generating more backspin. he hit one at miller park that cleared 430 feet
I like the Sheffield comp though; I can say "McCutchen's a lot like Gary Sheffield" and not be laughed at quite so loudly as if I compare him to Hank Aaron.
Page 1 of 2 pages
1 2 >You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.