The Mets made a four year, $60 million commitment to Curtis Granderson last winter. It was a signing that was agreed by most to be the right thing to do as the Mets were in desperate need for outfield help. With nine games left in the season, Granderson has posted the worst OPS of his major league career (outside of a nine game stretch in his first exposure to major league baseball in 2004). So this begs the question; is Granderson in decline.
The obvious answer appears to be yes, but that actually isn’t the case. Granderson’s poor numbers are the result of two historically bad stretches of play. In April, March and August, Granderson posted a 440 OPS over 224 plate appearances. For the rest of the season, Granderson posted an 849 OPS over 394 plate appearances. He has also posted a 12.1% walk rate this season, only eclipsed once in his career by the 12.3% rate he achieved as a Yankee in 2011. On top of that, Granderson has posted a 21.7% strike out rate, the lowest such rate since he was a Tiger in 2009. Normally a player in an extreme decline will not see strike out rates dip as much as Granderson’s has this year (nearly seven percent from his previous 929 plate appearances), while also achieving basically the highest walk rate of his career. So then how do we explain the poor OPS number and not think that this is Jason Bay mach two.
Some statistical analysis helps. Conceptually in statistics, especially for a player like Granderson who is finishing his 11th season, there are both statistical norms and outliers that can be established. Using OPS as our statistical standard we can determine what those norms are for Granderson.
Granderson’s first time period as a full time player was in September and October of 2005. From that time period until his injury plagued 2013 season, Granderson played full time (excluding months in which he played a minority amount of games due to injury) in 40 months or time periods (combining games in March and April as well as September and October). Granderson’s most common OPS production over that those 40 time periods was between 801 and 850, which occurred 25% of the time. His next two most common OPS’ were between 751 and 800 and between 901 and 1000, which each occurred 17.5% of the time. Since 751 to 800 and 801 to 850 are congruent, it is safe to assume that Granderson’s norm regarding OPS is that range, which occurred 42.5% of the time over the course of his career.
Using such a norm, it’s logical that a player in decline would fall outside of his normal range. In 2014 Granderson produced two of six potential OPS’ in that range, posting a 753 in July and an 838 in May. His next most common range of OPS’ over his career is from 851 to 1000, which took place 30% of the time. Granderson also posted twice within that range, with a 933 OPS in June and, with nine games left (potentially subject to change), an 846 OPS in September. To summarize, Granderson has been by far a player that has produced an OPS between 751 and 1000, combining to occur over 72.5% of his career, which perfectly matches the time period of the 394 plate appearances in 2014.
The outliers statistically over his career are an OPS above 1000, which occurred 7.5% of the time and even more so, an OPS under 600, which occurred 5% of the time. Basically, Granderson has been an extremely productive player over his career, very rarely posting an OPS in the low ranges where he would be considered below a replacement level player. That did occur this year, over that stretch of combined at bat’s in March, April and August.
What does all of this mean? Well, that Granderson’s season is a statistical anomaly. If Granderson were in decline, it would be much more likely that he would be regularly posting OPS’ in the 600 to 750 range, which he’s done 22.5% of the time over the course of his career. Granderson didn’t post one OPS in that range in 2014 (obviously pending the results of these last nine games), yet did post four OPS’ in his statistically normal range of 751 to 1000 (again, pending the last nine games). Statistically speaking, a baseball player that falls off of the proverbial cliff would be posting regularly in ranges that are outliers. Since he posted two historically low OPS’, but posted in his normal range outside of that, he hasn’t fallen off of the cliff. That means that he should be in decline, since he’s had the worst season of his career. However, he doesn’t fall into that category either as he hasn’t posted one OPS in the range that would indicate decline, 600 to 750.
None of this is to say that Granderson is the player he used to be, but for all of those who are deeming this a poor signing because of the season he’s had, one needs to look at the complete picture. In 2014, approximately 64% of the time, Granderson was the player he’s most often been over the course of his career as that 849 OPS not only falls in his normal range, but also in his statistically greatest range, 800 to 850 which occurred more often than any of the other nine statistical ranges that were analyzed (under 500, 501 to 600, 601 to 700, 701 to 750, 751 to 800, 801 to 850, 851 to 900, 901 to 1000 and over 1001).
The Mets needed two outfielders last offseason and they still require one today. Granderson was not a bad signing and he’s not a player we’re going to regret having at least through next year. It isn’t out of the realm of possibility to expect a nice bounce back season for Granderson next year, especially if they keep him in the fifth or sixth slot in the batting order where he belongs. Sure, one could argue for this player or that player that the Mets could have signed, and some of those arguments would be valid while others wouldn’t, but in the end, none of us were behind closed doors, so we really don’t know how far any such negotiations got. The Mets got the player they wanted and needed. Despite the overall numbers, just think where the Mets would be without Granderson. Now that is a tragic scenario to think about.
Possibly one of the best posts I’ve seen here.
Good work.
Without having spent any time at all investigating this, but assessing things by eye,it seems pretty common that players who change leagues (in particular) suffer a bit of a downfall as they adjust to new stadiums, new pitchers, new line ups and new everything. I know Granny didnt rock our world this year, and this analysis gives us a reason to think its not a “sign”, and so lets reconvene this time next year and see if Granny has answered the call a bit better…and with a shorter right field fence (can we finally just do away with the preposterous indent and make a straight wall?).
Enjoyed the read Scott. Thanks.
Granderson is having a very similar season to the first season (2010) he put up in pinstripes.
2010 – .247/.324/.468/.792, 110 wRC+, 10.0% BB rate 22.0% K rate, .277 BABIP
2014 – .220/.320/.374/.694, 102 wRC+ 12.1 % BB rate 21.7% K rate, .257 BABIP
HR/FB ratio. It was 14.5% in that ridiculous stadium, and it’s just 9.5% in Citi Field.
2010 – 47.2% FB , 19.9% LD
2014 – 47.4% FB, 18.5% LD
Look at his home and away splits. He has 2x as many homers on the road. (12 vs 6). However, at home, he hits 2x as many doubles (16 vs 8). Are there many balls in which would have probably been a HR in another park? No doubt. When Curtis hits a fly ball this season, his batting average is just .187. For his career its .279. That a tremendous difference.
Amazin Avenue did a fantastic review on his spray chart here (http://www.amazinavenue.com/2014/9/2/6063185/new-york-mets-curtis-granderson).
Your excellent article, along with Marc Melton’s input and linked article eases my mind to conclude that Granderson is just in the usual decline due to his age and that he still possesses his skills. Granderson’s 18 home runs would best serve the Mets in the 6th spot rather than in the lead off position therefore maximizing his run producing potential. I think Granderson is an example of TC not putting his players in the right position to succeed. In the beginning he batted him cleanup for too long and then rode him too long at the leadoff spot. I also agree with Chris F that the right center jog shoulder be altered as it would also play fairer for Wright also.
You say “None of this is to say that Granderson is the player he used to be….” …. OK..so if he was a good player, but he’s not the player he used to be…….. doesn’t that define “In Decline”???
I guess what you’re saying is that the stats neither tell you that he’s In Decline or Not In Decline.
That leaves me to “The Eye Test”… My Eyes. He appears healthy, and he obviously has struggled for consistent hard contact. That pretty much indicates that he’s either lapsed into a Bad Physical Habit with his Bat, or that he can No Longer Successfully Repeat the sort of Swing attack he’s used in the past.
I believe he’s declined…and I believe he will recover to a productive level after some adjustments to his new norm. He’s a well skilled enough player to milk a few more nice years…with adjustments.
Almost every player is in decline. I hate that word. Mike Trout is in decline….but does that make him worse? Absolutely not.
Marc… Grab a dictionary and look up “Decline”. ….
…or a thesaurus… http://www.thesaurus.com/browse/declining The thesaurus says “lessen, becoming Less”.
“Almost every player” Is Not in Decline!!! Mike Trout is not in Decline!!! C’mon!!!
You don’t agree that CG is In Decline…Fine.
I understand what people are saying about decline. Granderson not being the same player he used to be means that he’s not going to put up way above his own career avg numbers. Remember, averages are the products of up and down seasons. Since the majority of his 2014 season was squarely in his normal range, it’s hard to say he’s in decline.
Granderson hit 40 homeruns a couple of times a couple of years ago.
Is he less than that? Of course he is.
Is he in decline? How could one think otherwise?
You watch him play and you see a dignified guy who hasn’t got much game or confidence. He was not a good signing and I’d love to have his position and his salary back in play to do something more compelling and interesting with.
At least we’ve cleared out some of the other stinky signings like Chris Young because they were short term but this one is a sausage that’s gonna keep repeating for a while to remind you of what we foolishly swallowed when we were hungry.
I love all these guys using sabermetrics to bolster their case but don’t look at some key stats. Two or three days ago, I looked at BA with RISP numbers. For those with at least 100 AB’s with RISP, Granderson ranked 54th out of 55 in the NL, and with 2 out, his RISP number for those with over 50 AB’s in the NL put him 61st out of 65. Batting cleanup, he was the absolute lowest in RISP in the league, batting 1st, he had the lowest OBP in the league. In short, he’s terrible, and probably one of the most unclutch players I’ve ever seen. He’s batting .290 in September, when it doesn’t matter. Yes, while he’s only had 2 bad months, bad they were .135 one month and .147 in August, the latter just when his bat was needed. And 7 stretches of 0-17? Unacceptable. I’d rather see den Dekker out there. I hope the Mets move him and while they may have to eat half his salary, it’s worth it. They can give it to Murphy, a solid, dependable and reliable hitter.
It’s hard to use RISP to determine value. Duda is the perfect example. He’s hit over 290 this year in those situations and over 300 with 2 outs. Last year he hit 145 with RISP and 125 with 2 outs. Imagine if the Mets had given up on Duda. He still has a shot to go 30 and 90 for the year.
All statistics provide at least some value. The key is to know what they show and how reliable they are.
WPA is a great stat but if you’re looking for a number to use to predict future performance — it’s not the one to use.
Numbers with RISP is the same thing. It’s descriptive, not predictive. Granderson was bad overall this year because he was bad in these situations. But just because he was bad this year doesn’t mean he’s going to be bad next year.
In 2013, Lucas Duda batted .145 and had a .541 OPS with RISP. This year those numbers are .293 and 1.054
Pick any player you want and over a multi-year stretch you’ll find their numbers with RISP to be all over the map. Wright’s OPS numbers in this category range all the way from .687 to 1.060 and only once have his numbers in this category been within 75 points of each other from one season to the next.
Granderson may or may not be done as a productive player but RISP is not the number to use to prove that particular point.
.199 at Citifield.Mets house of horrors,this stadium has been an albatross around their necks since they moved there,
Great discussion!
Can anybody tell me why Granderson and his wimpy arm has been playing RF instead of LF? With Kirk and MdD on board it is a puzzle to me why either of the two is not in RF and Grandy on the other side.
I believe they wanted to make Grandy comfortable..perhaps he chose RF. Also, RF is the larger (versus Left). Grandy is a dependable fielder—-easier to reserve LF as a Platoon spot. For instance, it would be hard to place Campbell in that Huge RF in Spot duty.
My guess is he will move to LF in 2015.
I think he played RF this year because they expected to move CY to center and have EY in LF
I agree with Brian that I can see Granny moving to LF. Also, I know we mentioned this when he was signed, but he man didn’t play at all in 2013. Coming back after a year away from the game, and switching leagues if tough. That doesn’t excuse the numbers. But factoring in everything, I think it’s really hard to say that Granderson won’t be more productive next year than this.
Nice article Scott. I think most people would give Granderson a pass on this season, but if he bombs again next year, then all bets are off. I felt that he can still be a productive player, but now a $15MM difference maker, if $15MM still buys you a difference maker.
Stats aside, the only way the Granderson signing could be viewed positively is if it coincided with an increase in payroll. Unfortunately, that’s not the case.
The Mets instead will spend nearly 20% of payroll on Granderson in 2015. That’s a terrible use of resources.