Early season stats are always fun. When else is Emilio Bonifacio going to be hitting .542/.577/.625? People know in general that there is no chance in heck that Bonifacio will be able to keep up that torrid pace (and that other similar streaks will come to an end as well), but Juan Lagares’ early season successes have largely been met with cautious optimism.
Perhaps it is because Lagares was so bad with the bat last year, and that he’s so young, it is easy to fall into the trap of chalking up the success to anything other than small sample size magic. Entering Sunday’s action, Lagares was hitting .353/.429/.765 with a 14.3% walk rate in 21 plate appearances.
Let’s start with that walk rate. Lagares has never posted a walk rate above 6.8% in any level since joining the organization in 2007. Last season at the major league level, Lagares walked in 4.8% of his plate appearances. While that number is pitiful, and you would hope should improve as he gains more major league experience, a 9.5 percentage point leap would be unprecedented from one season to another. A 6-7% walk rate probably isn’t out of the question, but anything more than that would be genuinely surprising (in a good way).
But for now we’ll operate under the assumption that Lagares actually may have improved his batting eye this offseason. Does the very small sample size that we have even show that?
His O-Swing% has decreased a statistically insignificant amount, but so has his Z-Swing% and overall Swing%. Lagares is swinging at fewer pitches overall, but not at a rate or way that indicates any great change has occurred.
Here is the hitter at-a-glance for Lagares from Brooks Baseball (numbers current as of Sunday afternoon):
Against All Fastballs (49 seen), he has had a poor eye (58% swing rate at pitches in the zone vs. 27% swing rate at pitches out of the zone) and a patient approach at the plate (0.21 c) with an exceptionally low likelihood to swing and miss (5% whiff/swing).
Against Breaking Pitches (24 seen), he has had a poor eye (44% swing rate at pitches in the zone vs. 27% swing rate at pitches out of the zone) and an exceptionally patient approach at the plate (0.38 c) with an above average likelihood to swing and miss (38% whiff/swing).
Against Offspeed Pitches (10 seen), he has had an exceptionally poor eye (40% swing rate at pitches in the zone vs. 60% swing rate at pitches out of the zone) and a very patient approach at the plate (0.00 c) with a low likelihood to swing and miss (20% whiff/swing).
Against all three broad categories of pitches, Lagares is categorized as having a poor eye or worse. That does not really bode well for our narrative of Lagares coming into 2014 with an improved eye at the plate.
But what about the batting average and slugging percentage? As you may have guessed, these too, shall not pass.
Lagares’ batting average is supported by a .385 BABIP, which has been done before, but is completely unsupported by his batted ball profile. His 21.4% line drive rate is good, but is not nearly enough to sustain a BABIP that high (see footnote for further explanation).[1]
So giving Lagares the benefit of the doubt that he can sustain this line drive rate while his groundball and fly ball rates adjust to somewhat normal levels (they are 14.3% and 64.3%, respectively), he is still due for some major regression. It is worth to note that under this assumption, Lagares’ numbers would take a significant step forward from 2013, it just won’t be an eye-popping improvement.
And you know what? There’s absolutely nothing wrong with that. It is the rare exception that a player goes from below average to good in a single aspect of his game in one offseason, and often times there is synthetic help involved.
If Lagares can take baby steps toward improving his offensive game, great. If not, he’s still a valuable piece for the Mets because of what he brings to the team with his glove. Just don’t allow a hot start set unrealistically high expectations for what Lagares will give the Mets at the plate.
Joe Vasile is the voice of the Fayetteville (NC) SwampDogs of the Coastal Plain League and is a play-by-play announcer for NJ.org Varsity.
[1] The general rule of thumb is that a rough indicator of xBABIP is LD% + 120, so in Lagares’ case, we can expect his LD% to support a BABIP of about .330, which is still an improvement over last year. On a personal level, I do have some qualms about this rule of thumb, mostly because the numbers don’t always line up. The average LD% is around 20, and the average BABIP is around .300. There are simply too many other factors at play to simplify everything down to this, but it is a useful rule of thumb to quickly determine if a player might be due for some regression. It is by no means a steadfast rule.
I just think the pitchers are concentrating more on Granderson and Wright leaving Lagares opportunities he has taken advantage of. I’ll take a 300 average with an OBP of 333 for the season any time.
You and me both, Pete. Honestly if the Mets could get .260/.320/.400 out of Lagares I’d be happy with the way he plays defense. I think your point about pitchers mostly focusing on Grandy and Wright is spot on as well. That would help to explain the ~6 percentage point jump in LD% by Lagares (unless it’s also just small sample size magic).
So would the Mets, Pete, so would the Mets. Probably when the dust settles he’ll hit 240 with a few homers and play great defense.
The problem is we’re not the Big Red Machine and can’t afford to let a Cesar Geronimo in our lineup without the corresponding, Rose, Morgan, Perez, Concepcion, Bench, etc. The Mets problems run far deeper than Juan Lagares who is only getting to play due to Chris Young’s injury. Collins’ infatuation with Eric Young would cement Lagares’ spot on the bench otherwise.
Hold your horses, pardner. Let me take the other view.
Last year, Juan made the difficult transition from minor leaguer to major leaguer. he sarted out in April and May going 7 for 47.
In Jun-Aug, he hit over .290, and in 250 official at bats, he had 16 doubles, 4 triples and 3 homers, a superb pace for a rookie or non-rookie. In September, he tailed off, going 16 for 95…I will attribute that to rookie fatigue, in his longest season ever. We’ve heard of many young atletes hitting the wall their first year.
In winter ball, he tore it up until he got hurt. This spring training, he hit nearly .300, with an on base % of nearly .350. So far this season, his on base % is .417, and while I did not see it, apparently over the weekend, he hit a ball that was nearly a grand slam, but was not doue to Citi’s spacious environs.
So you can study him all you want, but what I see is a guy who now has adjusted to the majors, will hit very well, and has filled out, so he will hit with more extra base power. I believe he will prove the naysayers wrong. A similar analysis in the early career of Carlos Gomez might have been similarly negative – he is now a star. I think Juan will be a star too.
I think you have me a little wrong. I love Lagares, and I think he’s going to be a valuable part of this team going forward. I don’t think that it’s unrealistic to say that he is going to improve his offensive game, what I don’t think is realistic is that in one offseason he goes from a .240/.281/.352 batter to a .300/.400/.500 batter. That just doesn’t happen except in the rarest of cases. If Lagares develops into a .260/.320/.400 batter, I’m more than happy and I think he’s more than capable than that.
hi Joe
I would be surprised if the .260/.320/.400 line you mention is nothing more than the floor for Juan for this year…and that he’ll do better this year, and in the future, perhaps much better. I recall Manny Sanguillen was a bad ball swinger, but nonetheless an excellent hitter – Juan may well be in that mold. Any guy who hits .350 for a season, as he did in the minors in 2011, has something special going on with the stick. Guys just don’t hit .350 unless there is an innate gift for hitting.
Another example of a guy who was impatient and swung at a lot of bad balls, but refined his approach, is Jose Reyes, whose walk rate his first 3 years was under 4%, but since then is over 8%, and whose strikeout rate improved too.
Case in point: Juan last year in April and May got up 50 times, during which he walked twice and K’d 14 times. This year, up 24 times, 3 walks and just 4 K’s. Small sample but dramatic improvement. i think it will continue.
I’ve noticed that Lagares’ patience seems to go down after the first AB. He seems to still swing at plenty of bad pitches
The biases with Lagares are going to continue even after his sample size becomes significant. Look, Joe, David, everyone else…early seasons starts mean very little. We have two articles telling us not to get excited about Lagares and not to worry about Travis d’Arnaud. Both of these things are true. You can anticipate improvements in facets of Lagares’ game that do look good. He’s shown more power and has walked more in the first eight games (and most/all of the spring) than all of last year. You also have to know that Lagares is and always has been a streaky hitter. He’s hot. Enjoy it. He has very good athleticism at the plate and is young so it’s not out of the question to think he can improve with the bat.
d’Arnaud as a young hitter still has adjustments to make but there’s no cause for concern there either. Let’s just relax and enjoy watching our young players.
I’m more of the persuasion to say, “Let’s enjoy the fact that Juan Lagares has done an excellent job so far.” The JL haters surprise me. He has the best week of any Met and the only thing we can come up with is “dont get used to it”. Of course with the sample size so small, no ones personal stats will look anything like what we presently have. You’re missing the forest for the trees.
That’s what I was thinking too. Setting the bar a little high aren’t we? No, of course he’s not going to sustain his first week numbers – what players are? But good god, everyone said going into the Spring that Lagares needed to hit to stay on the field, and all he did was hit better than anyone on the team, and it wasn’t even close. And that’s WITH Collins changing his spot in the lineup every other game. When CY comes back, I truly hope Juan gets set in the leadoff position and left there. Then we’ll see what he’s really capable of. I think it’s perfectly reasonable he finishes the year .280/.340/.400 and I will expect it thank you very much.
I’m hoping he hits 10 HRs and has 15 SBs and hits .260
I believe the approach has looked different thus far. He has made good choices when patience has been called for, and a good approach when hitting against pitchers’ counts. He has shown a greater talent level than suspected with both his strength in covering the plate and driving outer half pitches, and his ability to drive inside pitches.
He’s 24? He cannot be a success at a 633/650 ops—but 700 plus ops for a young improving player with a great defensive impact?…. I would both err and hope on that side of the ledger.
329/394/723
Any improvement offensively by Lagares over his 2013 numbers should keep him in centerfield. If he could offensively improve to be an average offensive NL centerfieler with a 329/394/723 then I would be ecstatic because his glove is that good.
Lagares problem is that the Mets did not improve the light hitting SS position, took a calculated risk on a rookie catcher, and play inconsistent production at first base. This does not provide a strong enough offense for Lagares to ease his way in. I am extremely happy he is performing at an accelerated level but it is unfair to expect him to continue at this level. The offensive expectation should be on the other players shoulders who have not performed offensively and only wished they could perform as well as Lagares defensively.
Good stuff Joe.
The problem with Lagares hitting so well is that it allows Terry to ignore that he has surrendered 37 plate appearances (none of them in the #8 spot, and half at leadoff) in order to get some two singles and a couple of walks. If that sounds familiar to you, its because we’re reliving the commitment last year to Ruben Tejada and Ike Davis.
The roster construction is for $hit. Just today, we had the opportunity to pick up a 93 MPH relief pitcher, with 70+ innings on a playoff team from a player that had results better than nearly our entire bullpen. Cost? Nothing, plus three years of control. Why pick him up? We have John Lannan after all.
There are players available, right now, that would make this team better. Professional hitters, waiting for a call. Fine bullpen pitchers. But we’ll commit to mediocrity and get surprised when it delivers an ERA of 14 or an OPS of 200.