Curtis Granderson sucks lately. I don’t believe I’ve ever described a player that way before, at least in writing. Especially a Yankee player. When it boils down to it, the centerfielder was supposed to carry this team. After all, the Grandyman can. Yet since June 1st, he’s hit just .214/.300/.430. Matt I. broke the news to us yesterday, and ex-TYA writer Eric Shultz had a nice breakdown at River Ave Blues. Please go read it, I’ll wait for you.
Ok, so as Eric concludes, Granderson is making less contact. It’s a great point, and it certainly passes the eye test. I couldn’t tell you how many times I’ve seen the 2011 MVP candidate swing and miss at breaking pitches a couple feet outside the zone. But there is another part of the story too, and that’s BABIP.
From April 6th to May 30th, Granderson hit .259/.359/.549 with a BABIP of .283. These numbers were right on track with his 2011 season. The BABIP has sharply declined since then, and from June 1st on he’s owning just a .254 BABIP. Before we start discussing whether he’s been lucky or unlucky, BABIP has to pass a few tests. The first one being speed, and although he has less stolen bases, there’s no reason to think speed has cost him a considerable number of hits. The second is contact, and in there lies the problem.
The early season sample had Granderson hitting 16.5% line drives, 40.9% groundballs, and 42.6% flyballs. Since then, the BABIP has dropped, and Granderson has hit 18.8% linedrives, 32.0% groundballs, and 49.2% flyballs. Both numbers fall on either extremes of his career batted ball rates, (20.6% LD, 35.3% GB, 44.1% FB) but there’s no wonder to why his BABIP has dropped with a significant increase in flyballs.
When you consider the decrease in contact that Eric spoke of, and the increase in flyballs, I’m left here wondering if he’s changed his hitting approach. We always used to hear that he didn’t consider himself a homerun hitter, but I don’t think we’ve heard him say that in a while. When swinging for the fences, you’re certainly aiming for more flyball contact, rather than groundball, and you should expect more whiffs. I decided to break down his swing, taking a look at hits from April, August, and yesterday.
This is a gif for ants, so I made a much larger version that you can find by simply clicking it above. At half speed, you’ll see that Granderson’s swing has remained exactly the same. There’s no difference whatsoever. So what is going on?
And now I feel much safer in saying it, this might be bad luck. Over his career, he’s hitting .741 on line drives, .239 on groundballs, and .263 on flyballs. Since June, he’s hit .811 on linedrives, .206 on groundballs, and just .075 on flyballs. That means he’s seen a .188 drop in batting average on flyballs, and considering half his batted balls are flies, of course he’s hitting just .214.
I agree with Eric in that his contact rates are a huge concern, but when looking at his BABIP, there are reasons to be optimistic. Granderson hasn’t changed his approach at the plate, which means we can expect batting average on flyballs to increase at some point. Hopefully that means quite a few extra-base hits in September and October.
If you enjoyed this article, please consider sharing it!
12 Responses to Analyzing The Grandy-Slump
Leave a Reply
TIQ IQ
It looks an awful lot to me like he is having pitch recognition issues as he is often caught swinging for a fastball on breaking pitches or change ups and lets hittable fastballs in the zone go by while flailing away at off-speed stuff. I really have difficulty attributing his slump to “bad luck”. He has had a poor approach at the plate and is getting fooled consistently. Those are certainly correctable problems but the question is how long will it take?
Granderson and Swisher have lately become the WhiffenPoof Boys, as each swings for HR’s regardless of the count. If both contracts expire, both should be jettisoned. And to think the Yankees gave up yet another 0.300-hitting prospect (Jackson) for Granderson, another one of Cashman’s brilliant moves (like Pineda-Montero). HR’s are nice, but lots of K’s offset them. A steadier 0.300 hitter is preferable. At least ownership has given the “vote of confidence” to Girardi and Cashman.
Yeah, and they don’t bunt enough – right?
All I have to point out is your bit regarding the Montero-Pineda trade to disregard everything. To judge that deal now, especially when Montero has not done well this year in Seattle, is ridiculous.
Right. A sacrifice bunt, even if successful only 50% of the time, which would be low, beats a whiff or a poof. But with this type of pitching, nothing is going to help.
Sure, but a walk, base-hit or extra-base hit is a lot better than a sac bunt and you’re pre-emptively giving up any chance for those things to happen PLUS giving away an out when you choose to bunt. That’s why sacrifice bunting is almost always a dumb, rally-killing play.
Grandy should drop bunts for base hits down third base line until teams take the shift off. He has lost a lot of hits because he hits into the shift (mid right field, and center) as he is a pull hitter.
Another idea that sounds good but is actually dumb. When teams play an exaggerated shift it’s because the hitter either lacks the ability to hit the ball the other way or if he does is much less likely to do anything they’re worried about. Translation – it would be playing right into their hands. I don’t see Granderson losing a lot of hits to the shift. I see him striking out and hitting weak fly balls because he’s getting fooled on pitches. I’m all for him trying to use the whole field when swinging away but having him bunt would be foolish and would not cause teams to abandon the shift.
When the WhiffenPoofers start walking or getting hits, then take off the bunt sign (assuming someone’s on the proper base with the proper number of outs). At least a sacrifice advances a runner with the inevitable out, while a K does not. We’re not talking 0.300 hitters here. But, as I said, it’s all moot, since there is rarely anyone on base when they usually K, so continue to swing away freely but futilely.
So sacrifice bunts should be inevitable when there are men on base with “the proper number of outs” (which is always none since I doubt even you would advocate such a play with one out and it’s obviously senseless to do it with two outs)?
That’s dumb strategy, first of all because 1) sacrifice bunts don’t always work 2) many players are not good at it 3) the expected follow up hits don’t always happen 4) you’ve precluded something better happening (i.e, advancing the runner(s) without making an out) 5) if used too often, bunting is very easy for pitchers and fielders to defense.
This is all stuff you would know if you actually paid attention to ball games and weren’t fixated on a silly, discredited, “Puritan ethic” ideology of baseball strategy that makes no sense except in a very few situations.
One of the problems with this team is that they have too many streaky hitters – Tex, Swisher, Granderson, Ibanez, Cano come to mind. All can completely carry a team when they are hot but are also prone to long slumps.
Granderson looks terrible right now and mostly has since the all star break. I’m not that inclined to attribute much of it to luck as he’s striking out 1/3 of the time since the all star break. I think some of it is just a slump that he could come out of, some of it is fatigue from being played so much with Gardner out, and some of it is pressing and trying to do too much with so many others slumping or out with injuries. Granderson, Cano and to a lesser extent Swisher are all expanding the strike zone too much probably because they feel the need to come up with big hits. With A-Rod back in the lineup, Tex hopefully soon, and perhaps some other bats coming to life more, they’ll trust their team mates more and be more willing to take a walk and force the pitcher to throw strikes.
That seems to me like the best hope for getting Granderson and others to start performing up to expectations.
Eureka, I have been enlightened! First of all, I only lamented on all the useless strikeouts, not bunts. But since the issue was raised, the entire point was missed, namely that sacrificing (from second to third with no outs or third to home with one out, not first to second anytime) is preferable to striking out, which is what the guys who are futilely swinging away are doing at an unacceptably high rate (they can’t even bring in runners from third with a measly ground out or sacrifice fly). If these guys were hitting 0.300, or even 0.280, then sacrifices and such would not be recommended. But they aren’t. They’re whiffing and just adding a useless out without advancing anyone. If that’s Puritan, then so be it. I have followed baseball for 50 years, so remember when the game was played “in the Puritan way.” No automatic closers, starters finishing games, four-man rotations, managers with strategies other than “swing away and hope for the three-run HR” (which only worked for Earl Weaver because of the team he had). These current Yankees are mostly soloists at best. Obviously this “Puritanism” fell by the wayside thanks to the LaRussas of the world and steroids. Such “modern” thinking still prevails, considering the impending Strasburg shutdown for a team that WILL be in the post-season. But with a team playing like the current Yankees, a return to fundamentals could not hurt.