Fangraphs: Edwin Encarnacion Could Be Special Next Year

[Angrioter]

Over the past couple years, Edwin Encarnacion has transformed himself into a legitimate offensive superstar in Major League Baseball. He was the Reds’ top prospect when he made his major-league debut in 2005, but he ultimately wore out his welcome in Cincinnati with poor defense and inconsistent performance. The 30-year-old even scuffled for a couple years in Toronto before busting out in 2012 by launching 42 homers.

 

Now, he has become a mainstay atop the home run leaderboards. Since the beginning of the 2012 season, only two sluggers have compiled as many home runs as Edwin Encarnacion...........................................

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/fantasy/edwin-encarnacion-could-be-special-next-year/

[G-Snarls]

He is special

 

And he's ours

[G-Snarls]

Good read

 

"The most abrupt change for Encarnacion over the last two seasons wasn’t the increased power production. He’s always possessed massive raw power. It was simply an issue of consistently tapping into that power. He made some mechanical adjustments to shorten his swing — and they’ve been well-publicized — but perhaps the most intriguing aspect of his meteoric rise the past two seasons has been his incredible improvement in his plate discipline.

 

His walk rate jumped dramatically to 13.0% in 2012 and remained consistent at 13.2% this past season. Simultaneously, his strikeout rate decreased and he was one of only four qualified hitters to walk more than he struck out in 2013. What makes Encarnacion unique is that he’s the only one in that group who can be considered a power hitter. Norichika Aoki, Marco Scutaro and Alberto Callaspo don’t even cumulatively come close to Encarnacion’s home run total this year (20 to 36, respectively)."

[Atothe]

Snippet from an article I have yet to complete:

 

Edwin Encarnacion

 

.272/.370/.534, .387 wOBA, 4.1 WAR with a .247 BABIP

 

That BABIP looks extremely low compared to other hitters who are performing well this year. The average of the 98 qualified batters with a wRC+ greater that 100 is .319. 72 of those 98 are above .300. Edwin’s .247 is the remarkably low compared to his production. Ironically, the next lowest is also a Blue Jay (Bautista’s .259). However, Edwin’s career BABIP is also fairly low at .275. Let’s look at his year-to-year xBABIP to see if he has changed his true skill.

 

2005: .331

2006: .289

2007: .271

2008: .255

2009: .258

2010: .258

2011: .273

2012: .289

2013: .296

Career: .278

 

Looking at this we can see that his career BABIP is close to his career xBABIP (they would be even closer if there wasn’t such a discrepancy this year). However, EE has increased his true skill BABIP in the last two years. Unfortunately for him, his actual BABIP does not show this. This is a case where it is likely better to use his xBABIP as opposed to his career BABIP because he appears to have changed his true talent. For simplicity I am going to take that .296 value as my regression BABIP. Here are his numbers with a .296 BABIP. Warning, you may fall off your chair.

 

.313/.405/.571, .419 wOBA, 5.7 WAR

 

Over a full season this would be 6.5 WAR. Which is very, very good.

 

That wOBA value would put him third this year behind Cabrera and Trout. Edwin Encarnacion had a very good season, in which he was also very unlucky. Is it unreasonable to say Edwin could have a .296 BABIP? I really don’t think so and here’s why. League average this year is .297. Is it unreasonable to put one of the game’s best hitters at league average? He also hits the ball very hard, and can run fairly well for a slugger. Why should Chris Davis be allowed to have a BABIP over .340 while EE sits at over .240? It is definitely not unreasonable to suggest Encarnacion could have a .296 BABIP, and when he does, he should be an unstoppable force (he should be a top 10 fantasy pick). In terms of wRAA difference due to xBABIP and BABIP disagreement, Edwin has been the 4th unluckiest player this year. Those ahead are Ichiro, Darwin Barney, and Alcides Escobar. The difference here being Edwin hits the ball a lot harder then these three. I am expecting a monster year from Encarnacion next year if his BABIP keeps up with him.

 

 

peripheral stats are cool until you actually factor in the reality of the situation, defensive shifts and defensive allignments (batted ball charts being the driving force) make it tough to actually think Eddy will at all improve on anything

[dineke]

Omg not the protection ******** again.

[eastcoastjaysfan]

"The 30-year-old even scuffled for a couple years in Toronto before busting out in 2012 by launching 42 homers."

 

When did Edwin ever scuffle with the Jays?

[G-Snarls]

"The 30-year-old even scuffled for a couple years in Toronto before busting out in 2012 by launching 42 homers."

 

When did Edwin ever scuffle with the Jays?

 

Playing 3B maybe

 

But not at the plate

[jaysblue]

His low strikeout rate is very rare and special especially for the type of power hitter he is. Especially with the contract he is on, he's one of the best bargains/value in baseball right now.

[Nox]

When did Edwin ever scuffle with the Jays?

 

Well he did get sent to the minors AND got claimed by the As at separate points. Though that might just point to AA's incompetence more than Edwin's.

[KingKat]

********??

 

If you think Edwin wouldn't see more strikes if he had an M.Cabrera Ortiz or Votto, hitting behind him instead of Lind , Derosa or Arencibia .........I really don't have anything else to say to you.

 

Ignoring the question of whether or not that's true, would that even be an advantage? If you're JPA and you swing through everything then yes getting more strikes would be to your advantage (not that you ever would because there's little risk to pitching out of the strikezone to you since you'll still swing.) but if you're EE and you have impeccable plate discipline, what's the problem exactly? He hits the strikes, he takes the balls. You can't ask for more. I mean the fact that's it's so hard to get a strike passed EE probably has a lot more to do with how many balls he gets than who is hitting behind him anyways.

[Nox]

You're not breaking new ground with a protection debate. I doubt you'll find anyone who gives a s*** enough to explain things to you.

[DuckDuckGose]

peripheral stats are cool until you actually factor in the reality of the situation, defensive shifts and defensive allignments (batted ball charts being the driving force) make it tough to actually think Eddy will at all improve on anything

 

Given the amount of video watched and the number of adjustments made over the course of a major league season I believe most/all teams have already adjusted to Edwin's new consistency. There is no reason to believe that the opposition will change their approach against Edwin, unless a weakness is exposed mid-season.

[gruber92]

Ignoring the question of whether or not that's true, would that even be an advantage? If you're JPA and you swing through everything then yes getting more strikes would be to your advantage (not that you ever would because there's little risk to pitching out of the strikezone to you since you'll still swing.) but if you're EE and you have impeccable plate discipline, what's the problem exactly? He hits the strikes, he takes the balls. You can't ask for more. I mean the fact that's it's so hard to get a strike passed EE probably has a lot more to do with how many balls he gets than who is hitting behind him anyways.

 

The 1-0 or 2-0 pitches EE got this year vs what he would of got if there were a legit bat behind him is night and day. He would received way more pitches to drive if he had protection. EE just had a monster discipline / pitch recognition type year which in turn helped protect his numbers. If you think its a s simple as "see the ball,hit the ball", then you're a fool. EE's numbers would of been crazy good this year if he had a legit hitter batting after him,especially in the power department.

[Stangstag]

I can't even believe there's an argument.........There is no argument.Strikes are easier to hit than balls. Hits are better than walks. No??

 

Yes, but hitting a strike does not equal getting a hit.

[GD]

I'd bet more hits are made off pitches in the zone than out.

 

That's some groundbreaking s***, yo.

[KingKat]

I'd bet more hits are made off pitches in the zone than out.

 

Sure but that's totally a moot point when you're dealing with a hitter like EE who recognizes the pitches out of the zone and doesn't swing at them. We're talking about a guy who doesn't make outs on bad pitches, a guy who is basically guaranteed to get on base if you give him four balls and you are arguing that he would have more success with more strikes thrown. You give him more strikes, yes he would get more hits but he would definitely get on base less. That's just basic math.

[GD]

You give him more strikes, yes he would get more hits but he would definitely get on base less. That's just basic math.

 

But walks r 4 teh nerdz lel

[Convo]

Regression to the mean is more likely.

 

/Thread

[GD]

Regression to the mean is more likely.

 

/Thread

 

Mike Wilner spotted.

[Olerud363]

********??

 

If you think Edwin wouldn't see more strikes if he had an M.Cabrera Ortiz or Votto, hitting behind him instead of Lind , Derosa or Arencibia .........I really don't have anything else to say to you.

 

he would see more strikes, get less walks, and get more rbis. This wouldn't change the amount of runs the Jays score at all... beyond what was added by Edwin's "protector"

[Olerud363]

Sure but that's totally a moot point when you're dealing with a hitter like EE who recognizes the pitches out of the zone and doesn't swing at them. We're talking about a guy who doesn't make outs on bad pitches, a guy who is basically guaranteed to get on base if you give him four balls and you are arguing that he would have more success with more strikes thrown. You give him more strikes, yes he would get more hits but he would definitely get on base less. That's just basic math.

 

Exactly. We've been through this argument a million times on the old board.

 

So lets say there is a "pitch pattern" that makes Edwin a worse hitter. Wouldn't it make sense to use this pattern all the time?? I mean if he is worse, when you throw out of the strike zone... well why not throw out of the strike zone all the time??

[GD]

As funny as i'm sure you think you are......you just aren't.

 

That hurts, y'know. :'(

[GD]

Still not funny.

 

I thought we were friends, man.

 

I haven't actually commented on the article yet. Really good article, liked it. The thought that we might not have seen the best from Edwin is crazy when you think about how close we've been on multiple times to losing him.

[DuckDuckGose]

As funny as i'm sure you think you are......you just aren't.

 

And what would you call that pathetic attempt at wit our king of comedy, judge of humour and holier-than-thou ass-hat?

[DuckDuckGose]

Realist.

 

 

I'd bet more hits are made off pitches in the zone than out.

 

Edwin's career zone stats through 2013;

 

[TABLE=class: rgMasterTable, width: 978]

[TR]

[TH=class: rgHeader, bgcolor: gray]Season[/TH]

[TH=class: rgHeader, bgcolor: gray]Team[/TH]

[TH=class: rgHeader, bgcolor: gray, align: right]O-Swing%[/TH]

[TH=class: rgHeader, bgcolor: gray, align: right]Z-Swing%[/TH]

[TH=class: rgHeader, bgcolor: gray, align: right]Swing%[/TH]

[TH=class: rgHeader, bgcolor: gray, align: right]O-Contact%[/TH]

[TH=class: rgHeader, bgcolor: gray, align: right]Z-Contact%[/TH]

[TH=class: rgHeader, bgcolor: gray, align: right]Contact%[/TH]

[TH=class: rgHeader, bgcolor: gray, align: right]Zone%[/TH]

[TH=class: rgHeader, bgcolor: gray, align: right]F-Strike%[/TH]

[TH=class: rgHeader, bgcolor: gray, align: right]SwStr%[/TH]

[/TR]

[TR=class: rgRow]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular]2005[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular]Reds[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]23.3 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]67.4 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]44.7 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]44.8 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]87.0 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]75.7 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]48.6 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]56.0 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]10.6 %[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR=class: rgAltRow]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular]2006[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular]Reds[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]20.6 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]69.6 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]46.1 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]48.3 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]88.7 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]80.1 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]52.0 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]59.3 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]8.7 %[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR=class: rgRow]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular]2007[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular]Reds[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]27.8 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]73.4 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]51.3 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]57.0 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]88.8 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]80.4 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]51.6 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]58.2 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]9.8 %[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR=class: rgRow]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular]2008[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular]Reds[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]25.3 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]66.4 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]46.1 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]62.0 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]87.6 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]80.7 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]50.6 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]58.4 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]8.7 %[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR=class: rgAltRow]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular]2009[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular]2 Teams[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]21.6 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]66.9 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]43.1 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]64.0 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]87.1 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]81.0 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]47.4 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]54.7 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]7.9 %[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR=class: rgAltRow]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular]2010[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular]Blue Jays[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]30.5 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]69.8 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]48.6 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]68.2 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]90.0 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]82.6 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]46.2 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]64.9 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]8.3 %[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR=class: rgAltRow]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular]2011[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular]Blue Jays[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]29.3 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]68.2 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]47.3 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]74.0 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]89.7 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]84.5 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]46.2 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]59.3 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]7.1 %[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR=class: rgAltRow]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular]2012[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular]Blue Jays[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]24.5 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]62.2 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]41.6 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]72.4 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]87.0 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]82.2 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]45.2 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]55.4 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]7.2 %[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR=class: rgAltRow]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular]2013[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular]Blue Jays[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]26.0 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]63.1 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]41.9 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]74.2 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]90.3 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]84.6 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]42.9 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]59.9 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]6.3 %[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR=class: rgRow grid_total, bgcolor: #E7E7E7]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular]Total[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular]- - -[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]25.6 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]67.2 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]45.4 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]65.6 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]88.5 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]81.8 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]47.7 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]58.5 %[/TD]

[TD=class: grid_line_regular, align: right]8.1 %

 

[/TD]

[/TR]

[/TABLE]

 

Swung at more pitches in the zone than outside of it, made contact on more pitches inside the zone than outside of it. What part of that makes you think more hits are made inside the zone than outside of it? Consider that "hits" is a counting stat and more swings = more hits. Therefore the far greater number of swings on pitches inside the zone makes your premise false for a variety of painfully obvious reasons.

 

"I can't even believe there's an argument.........There is no argument.Strikes are easier to hit than balls. Hits are better than walks. No??"

 

Hits are better than walks but not making an out is most important. Some hits result in outs and you aren't even talking about hits as what swings actually produce is balls in play which, often result in outs.

 

"Ok ,hypothetically, there's runners on first and second , two outs, LHP on the mound. Do you intentionally/unintentionally walk EE to get to..."

 

Stupid question as it depends on a variety of factors like the inning and the score.

 

Realist.

[DuckDuckGose]

"Swung at more pitches in the zone than outside of it, made contact on more pitches inside the zone than outside of it. What part of that makes you think more hits are made inside the zone than outside of it? Consider that "hits" is a counting stat and more swings = more hits. Therefore the far greater number of swings on pitches inside the zone makes your premise false for a variety of painfully obvious reasons."

 

I must be reading that wrong because to me it sounds like you're trying to argue that more hits come off balls outside the zone?? Maybe if you're Vladdy but otherwise I doubt that's the case.

 

Sorry but there aren't any stats out there that'll get me to think that if a pitcher is forced to throw strikes to your best hitters it's a bad thing. Just old school that way I guess.

 

Ya, sorry I misread your original post. Either way you are confusing a hit with a ball in play, they are very different things.

[Convo]

I might have to crack a bag of popcorn!!

 

Hhuhuh you said crack

[Boxcar]

Why do you have water on the brain?

 

Going to the ad-hominems a bit early, no? Do you think this makes you look smart?

[EdelweissBouquet]

I can't even believe there's an argument.........There is no argument.Strikes are easier to hit than balls. Hits are better than walks. No??

 

You are arguing with people who worship OBP. And this is fine, but not at the expense of your best power hitter getting on base via the walk,

especially when there's a JPA type on deck.

In the NL it's routinely done to the #8 batter to get at the pitcher, but hey he's on base..whoooohooo, come on Greinke hit er over the fence !

[EdelweissBouquet]

For a pitcher, and they still walk batter to get

to him,because the best hitting pitcher is still

hitting 9th.

Question, has there ever been a pitcher in modern

day baseball that hit in a spot other than 9th ?

Just asking, it wouldn't surprise me if the answer

is yes.