Comments on: Projecting Jay Bruce

By: R M

R M — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 22:17:05 +0000

Bruce is going to be 23 this season….meaning he put up a near league average season as a 22 year old with a .223 BABIP. Unless he gets injured or becomes possessed by Alex Gonzalez, the chance of him merely sustaining previous production is so low that I’m not sure it’s even worth considering. Bruce had a .298 BABIP in 2008, and one season of depressed BABIP isn’t nearly enough to suggest that he might be one of those players who perennially puts up low BABIPS.

By: Bobby Boden

Bobby Boden — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 18:44:32 +0000

Jay Bruce is a curious case. His minor league .382 BABIP suggests that he has hit a massive number of line drives in his past. Then you look at his 2009, where he’s suddenly an extreme flyball hitter (48.5%) with a microscopic LD%( 13% ). So who’s the real Jay Bruce? The 2009 fly ball/low BABIP version of himself? Or the pre-2009 version, that drives the ball more, and posts a better average? Seems hard to tell, with such a young player.

Still, using my xBABIP calculator, and his 2009 batted ball data, I still peg him at a .280 xBABIP, not great, but a big improvement over his actual 2009 BABIP. So where does the true xBABIP lie? Anywhere between .222(2009) and .382(career minor league) seems within the realm of feasibility. I think between .280(xBABIP 2009) and .332 (his career (major/minor combined) seems more feasible, which would be a big improvement over his 2009 numbers.

By: Paul

Paul — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 18:35:07 +0000

In the linked story you open by stating that he had a “near-normal” BABIP. You were right then since it was .298. The numbers are clearly inconclusive and I’m betting on the upside. A young LH hitter with a huge platoon split, trying to take advantage of a bandbox is more likely to show these kinds of outliers before settling into a consistent approach.

By: Paul

Paul — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 18:31:35 +0000

Thanks for the correction, after his return he raked to improve the overall numbers. Which actually brings up an even more striking reason to support a correction: in the months where he had the most ABs last season his BABIPs were .195 and .177. Wild fluctuations and extreme outliers like this in a young player with his pedigree beg to be almost completely dismissed.

By: joser

joser — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 18:11:56 +0000

Jay Bruce — just unlucky, or the anti-Ichiro?
(You know there has to be one, or the universe spins off its axis.)

By: Jack Moore

Jack Moore — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 17:59:26 +0000

He did not have a normal BABIP in 2008 – check out the linked story. He hit a ton of line drives and had a below average BABIP on all types of batted balls in 2008 just as he did in 2009. We just see it more in 2009 because his LD% dropped and so his BABIP troubles were more pronounced.

By: Jason461

Jason461 — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 17:48:03 +0000

Bruce’s wrist injury occurred after he put up almost all of his at bats for the season.

By: CJ

CJ — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 17:39:29 +0000

The projection systems are incorporating Bruce’s minor league performance. For young players with only a couple of major league seasons, their minor league record continues to influence their projected stat line.

By: Paul

Paul — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 17:27:39 +0000

I think this is a complete non-story. You left out his 2008, in which he had a normal BABIP in many more ABs than last season. While it has been noted that he intentionally tried to hit more fly balls last season, the guy had a fractured wrist. Not only was there not a chance for those extreme rates to normalize over the course of the season, but a wrist injury in particular should cast serious doubt on that extreme outlier, especially since it is such a departure from previous seasons. It’s pretty simple, one of these things ain’t like the others, and it’s the wrist injury. James’ projection could be conservative.

By: Matt Klaassen

Matt Klaassen — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 16:58:43 +0000

The James projections are always… interesting. But in this case, check out the CHONE line:

http://www.baseballprojection.com/2010/CIN2010.htm

.275/.342/.516

pretty close

I’d say a lot of it has to do with Bruce’s age, but also keep in mind that the three-slash (for CHONE, anyway) reflects Bruce’s home park and the NL. The park- and league- neutral lwts/150 for Bruce are projected at +10… so I’m guessing (go to Sean for the real schoop) that the projection is affected by him being in the NL and in a hitter’s park.