Another Case Study: Joc Pederson v. Kyle Schwarber
Kyle Schwarber gets double-duty this week. Yesterday, Mike Podhorzer discussed Kyle Schwarber’s 2016 potential. He mentions he read a post in which the author allegedly considered Schwarber in the second round of a 2016 mock draft.
I found the whole thing intriguing, primarily because we’re working with a small sample — slightly more than 150 plate appearances. I tried to draw meaningful conclusions on a comparably small sample size for Carlos Gonzalez, and now I’m pretty sure hired assassins are tracking me. Alas, what follows is not a disagreement with Pod (because his analysis is excellent) but an unauthorized biography extension of his post.
In June, I compared Joc Pederson to George Springer, two blossoming young stars to each of whom I alluded as “evolving juggernauts.” In fact, I think Schwarber is not particularly dissimilar from Pederson. With another two months of baseball in the rear-view mirror, that comparison is especially illuminating, given we’ve seen just how tumultuous Pederson’s rookie campaign has been.
In the comments of Pod’s post, a commenter, Kevin, remarked:
Does Schwarber’s low Z-contact (75%) worry anyone? Among players with 150PAs it’s bottom 10, and the names around him don’t scream safe batting average. […] Or is this just a case of looking too much into one flaw?
Yo, Kevin. I’m with you on this one.
But first, let’s start with formalities. I isolated Pederson’s first 157 plate appearances of 2015 and compared them to Schwarber’s.
| PA | R | HR | RBI | SB | AVG | OBP | SLG | ISO | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Joc Pederson | 157 | 24 | 10 | 21 | 2 | 0.236 | 0.391 | 0.528 | 0.293 |
| Kyle Schwarber | 157 | 35 | 11 | 32 | 2 | 0.284 | 0.382 | 0.575 | 0.291 |
Through their first 157 PAs, Pederson and Schwarber generated almost identical production in terms of talent-controlled statistics: home runs (HRs), stolen bases (SBs), on-base percentage (OBP) and isolated power (ISO).
Schwarber’s batting average trumped Pederson’s by almost 50 points, but this can be attributed almost entirely to nearly 60 more points of batting average on balls in play (BABIP). (Is it sustainable? Hold that thought.) That probably explains a majority of the 11-RBI difference between the two.
Moreover, Pederson spent his first 18 starts batting out of the 8-hole, whereas Schwarber has started only five games outside the 2-hole. Again, that probably explains a majority of Schwarber’s 11-run margin, given Pederson had to rely on pitchers in the 9-hole and Jimmy Rollins at lead-off to drive him in.
| BABIP | K% | BB% | LD% | GB% | FB% | IFFB% | HR/FB | Pull% | Hard% | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Joc Pederson | 0.275 | 28.70% | 19.10% | 16.50% | 46.80% | 36.70% | 10.30% | 34.50% | 53.80% | 40.00% |
| Kyle Schwarber | 0.333 | 27.40% | 12.70% | 20.70% | 35.90% | 43.50% | 5.00% | 27.50% | 46.70% | 43.50% |
Each hitter bolsters his batted ball profile a little differently. Pederson pulled the heck out of the ball but didn’t hit it in the air, nor quite as hard, as often as Schwarber has. Overall, Schwarber edges Pederson (except in on-base skills), but each of them has the batted ball profile to support big-time power.
Their plate discipline similarities are what really intrigue me.
| O-Swing% | O-Contact% | Contact% | Zone% | SwStr% | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Joc Pederson | 26.50% | 51.00% | 66.20% | 40.30% | 14.20% |
| Kyle Schwarber | 32.40% | 57.60% | 68.30% | 40.90% | 14.50% |
Schwarber chases more often than Pederson did, although he does make a bit more contact, too. Still, they both chase(d) a lot as pitchers generally avoided the zone. Their contact (Contact%) and swinging strike (SwStr)% rates are almost identical.
Alas, Pederson, after a strong start despite shaky peripherals, crashed down to Earth, sitting on a not-horrible 23 homers, 58 runs, 47 RBI and 3 steals but also a yes-horrible .214 batting average. Naturally, the kid has regressed; his pull rate (Pull%) has dropped more than eight percentage points, his walk rate (BB%) almost three. And that’s the point I came here to make: This same kind of struggle can be reasonably expected for Schwarber, and it’s not pretty when it happens
In Pederson’s defense, he’s getting BABIPed worse than he was before. Even with a suppressed line drive rate (LD%), my xBABIP equation projects Pederson for a .293 BABIP. Then again, in defense of his current BABIP, Pederson is a lefty who hits the occasional ground ball. Still, line drive rate doesn’t correlate well year to year, so he could see a sizable boost in that department next year.
Moreover, Schwarber’s xBABIP stands at .331, almost perfectly aligning with his current .333 BABIP. However, the equation is enamored by his running (and not as much with Pederson’s), even though Kiley McDaniel grades Schwarber’s speed as below-average (and Pederson’s as at least average). And Schwarber, like Pederson, is a lefty who doesn’t spray the ball to all fields and is vulnerable to the shift.
I see Pederson’s season, where it stands now, as closer to both his and Schwarber’s floors. As it stands, ESPN ranks Pederson 66th of all outfielders. (Perhaps Schwarber is better now and long-term, but I don’t think he is profoundly so.) If Pederson were a catcher, however, his production would slot him 10th at the position, albeit comfortably above 11th-ranked A.J. Pierzynski, making him an easy top-10 catcher. (Wouldn’t that be fun, both in fantasy and real life?) Moreover, Schwarber’s current production is likely much closer to his ceiling than his average performance, what with the massive ratio of home runs to fly balls (HR/FB).
There’s also the possibility that Schwarber simply can’t sustain this kind of hot hitting through next year. Khris Davis teased us with a whopping 47.6-percent hard-hit rate (Hard%) through his first 153 plate appearances in 2013, which he followed up with a solid-but-not-quite-dominant 40.3-percent hard-hit rate in 2014. It has since dropped to 34.9 percent this year. Davis and Schwarber are not quite cut from the same cloth, but Davis’ trajectory illuminates the kinds of progressions — and digressions — that can be difficult to anticipate from young hitters.
Pod sums it up pretty well: Schwarber is basically Evan Gattis with upside, but drafting someone in the second round expecting him to performing near his ceiling is foolhardy. The striking similarities between Schwarber and Pederson gently remind us that Schwarber can, and probably will, struggle at some point, and perhaps for a prolonged period of time (or two).
The only cause for concern would depend on your league settings. So far, Schwarber has started 12 games behind the dish, which is good enough for most leagues, but he may not reach the 20-game threshold given his usage — five straight starts as the designated hitter, 12 of 13 at catcher, then 13 of 14 in left field, in that order. His value is very critically linked to his positional eligibility, so be wary if you play by some funky rules.
Were he strictly an outfielder, Schwarber would carry the Pedersonian risk of being merely average or perhaps below-average. But at catcher, he’s practically a no-doubt top-10 talent, barring injury. Thus, should he rightfully earn catcher eligibility in your league’s format, his potential struggles will be a lot more tolerable.
(P.S. I wrote this while watching Schwarber’s golden sombrero yesterday. His batting average dropped nine points.)
Good stuff Alex. Please don’t rain on us Cub fans parade! You do understand we have in Schwar, Bryant, Russell and eventually Baez the top four vote getters in the 2016 MVP race. Other than that I have nothing of value to say.
But I still enjoyed the write.
Thanks
I honestly thought I would bright more rain when I wrote it. The outlook is a pretty dang bring for Schwarbs.
Well, no, not necessarily. RBI is all about the guys on base ahead of you (except for HRs, partially). If Schwarber is coming to the plate with men in scoring position more frequently than Pederson, that could also explain the majority of the RBI difference. I’m too lazy to do the work to isolate Pederson’s first 157 PAs, but over his career 521 PAs there have been RISP in 112 of them (21%) and men on in 184 (35%). Compare that to Schwarber’s (now) career 161 PAs, in which there have been RISP in 40 (25%) and men on in 79 (42%). The difference is clearly in Schwarber’s favor. So that’s an alternate explanation for “a majority” of the 11 RBI difference, especially for players that hit a lot of dingers (where everybody scores whether they’re RISP or not).
I’m not saying you’re wrong. I’m saying either either explanation is plausible; it would require deeper digging into the numbers to determine which one better fits the facts.
Pederson not pedantry
So when I was writing this, I had told myself in my head “…or there were more men on base.” Because the math already doesn’t check out: 50 points of batting average is only about seven hits. And one of those hits is a home run. So there would have to have been 10 guys in scoring position that all scored on those six additional hits — a highly improbable scenario.
Promise I’m not that dumb! But I do appreciate you really digging into the on-base numbers. Good stuff.
Hey Alex, enjoyed the piece. You got me thinking about isolating BABIP as a potential explanation for differences in R and RBI between Pederson and Schwarber this year. Like joser, I don’t think different BABIP numbers explains it.
For example, take a comparison between Pederson’s first half (the better of the two for him) compared to Schwarber’s second half of the season. (Pederson: .282 BABIP; Schwarber: .275 BABIP) Schwarber has 43% of the PA, but only 36% of the BB, since Pederson is much better at walks than Schwarber. However, Schwarber has 55% as many HR, 67% as many R, and 73%(!) as many RBI.
Or take the most recent games going back to where each have about 100 PA (since 07/22 for Pederson; since 08/05 for Schwarber). They have almost identical BABIP: .190 vs. .191. Yet Pederson only has 9 R and 7 RBI, while Schwarber has 22 R and 22 RBI. Schwarber is putting up unsustainable counting stats with a sub-.200 BABIP.
Speculating irresponsibly, I almost wonder if the difference is partly injury or guidance from MLB coaching or a personal matter or something else completely outside what small samples can tease us about: Pederson’s scariest stat to me isn’t his BABIP or anything hitting related at all. It’s his SB, or rather, lack thereof. In his MLB career of 528 PA now, Pederson has a whopping 3 SB.
Somehow defying all explanation, that’s the exact same number as one Kyle Schwarber.
I’m not sure Schwarber’s average, 50 points higher, “can be attributed almost entirely to nearly 60 more points of BABIP.” This seems like a surprising oversimplification coming from a Fangraphs writer, especially when later you acknowledge his BABIP is perfectly aligned with his xBABIP. So if he has superior batted ball stats and metrics that show it’s not due to luck, why so down on him? This guys was the consensus #1 bat in the draft a little over 1 year ago, and destroyed minor league pitching so thoroughly they rushed him up despite not really being ready to catch. At what point are we going to acknowledge this guy is a just little more than Evan Gattis with upside?
I mentioned it above; the guy’s really not a speedster, and he has a Spd score of 5.5, higher than guys such as Altuve, Rizzo, Aoki, Wong… a slew of guys who actually run. That score powers a lot of hi xBABIP, so it just seems off And Schwarber’s baserunning value is only 0.9 runs, so hes arguably average in that department.
I don’t think I’m really being “down” on him. Dude’s gonna be great. I am simply broaching the possibility that he’s not a .330 BABIP guy long-term. Very few guys are. Perhaps he proves me wrong, but I’d err on the side of caution.
An aside: Pod ranked Evan Gattis #2 of all catchers last season. So I think Evan Gattis with upside is a compliment! If Schwarber’s hit tool pans out the way Kiley McDaniel sees it (FV 55, I think), he’ll start giving Posey a run for his money.
It’s an oversimplification, but don’t go too far in the other direction. Pederson is underperforming his xBABIP by 20 points.
In the small sample of last season, Pederson’s xBABIP was close to what Schwarber’s is now. Looking at the first three months of this season, Pederson has an xBABIP of .326, .301, and .312 (and BABIP of .406, .267, and .263).
Now, that doesn’t take into account projections from previous years and minor league stats, and it doesn’t mean that Schwarber is going to fall off a cliff like Pederson did, but it does show that we can’t really say CONFIDENTLY that Schwarber has significantly better batted ball skills. Yet.
Schwarber’s numbers aren’t particularly lucky, but Pederson’s are UNLUCKY, and his underlying numbers were closer to Schwarber’s up until part of the way through June.
Taken as a whole, Pederson’s first half BABIP and xBABIP were relatively in line (.282 BABIP, .286 xBABIP). Second half, both are way down, but he’s still below (.218 BABIP, .243 xBABIP). Dividing the season that way is a little arbitrary, but so is every other way.
The point is, we don’t know what Pederson’s numbers SHOULD be yet, and we don’t know what Schwarber’s WILL be yet. Saying that Schwarber is much better at BABIP requires making assumptions in both cases. Mabye Pederson’s results will be closer to his luck and Schwarber’s underlying numbers will regress. Maybe Schwarber really is a .330 BABIP player.
My guess would be that Pederson’s true level is quite a bit higher than his numbers so far, and Schwarber’s is a little lower than where it is but still higher than Pederson’s. While I doubt that takes about MOST of the difference in their batting averages, I’m confident it accounts for some of it.
Hi Majestic, I’m intrigued reading through these comments a few days later. I agree we can’t say Schwarber is a way better hitter than Pederson. But you are suggesting there is a large relative difference in the luck being experienced between them, and I don’t follow that. I’m curious for your thoughts on how that can be said confidently, especially given the small sample size?
Here’s my angle (as of 08/30/15):
In the second half of the year, Pederson has a .207 BABIP through 124 PA. UNLUCKY and SSS, yeah. But in Schwarber’s 107 August PA, his BABIP is .216. That seems more similar than different to me. Yet over that time period, Schwarber is slumping at a .220 BA while Pederson plummeted to .153. Schwarber also has more HR, R, and RBI even with 17 fewer PA. All while being the younger of the two.
Not saying any of this will continue, I’m just curious why we would look at Pederson’s plight as being notably unlucky relative to Schwarber’s.
Thanks for the shout out Alex! I sold Schwarber a week before he came back up (for Frazier and V-Mart), so I might be looking for any reason to justify my move but it’s good to know I’m not the only skeptic. That said, the optimistic point for Schwarber is what Mike already said: the BABIP is fully in line with his career numbers.
Baseball Savant has average exit velocity, which is fun to look at:
Schwarber @ 94.02
Joc @ 92.63
And average HR distance:
Schwarber @ 398.38
Joc @ 422.55
My thoughts regarding these two is that Joc is a better power hitter and Schwarber is a better contact hitter. Both are fun as hell to watch, and every baseball fan is a winner.
Where does Schwarbs rate on the TTOs scale? I know a few folks on this site have speculated that there is a direct relationship between the painfulness of adjusting to MLB pitching (and adjusting to their adjustments) and guys who have a high share of TTO plate appearances. I know the Pederson is high on the TTO scale, which led many folks to forecast a crash like this. I don’t know where Schwarber is on it, but if he’s lower maybe his adjustment period will be a little less dramatic.
48.4% after last night’s ghastly performance. Pederson was 54.4% at 157 PAs; currently at 50.5%.
Curious about how we’re seeing some skeptical Schwarber articles on fangraphs, a week after we’ve seen a bunch of ‘How awesome is Sano?!’ articles, while the latter has a significantly worse strikeout rate. Is there something in Sano’s batted ball profile (maybe his LD%?) that screams regression less than Schwarber’s? Schwarber’s BABIP is at least tenuously realistic, while Sano’s is absurd.
I have no axe to grind with this, I’m just interested 🙂
Re: Sano’s regression: not sure. He’s supposed to have Giancarlo-grade power, so the absurdly high hard-hit rate (48.9%) would be the first thing I’d expect to decline aside from BABIP. Maybe BB% and LD%, too.
But you’re right, Schwarber really isn’t that far behind. I guess it’s just because Sano has been a very highly-touted prospect for so long. Maybe?
Sano can’t hear you over the roaring crowd as he hits another home run.
I think this article could be replaced with a jumping to conclusions mat. Same result in the end.
Is Joc a keeper in a 12-team mixed with six keepers? I can’t tell. I feel like I could talk myself into it.
Depends on other keeper options and round penalties, if applicable. I’ve got a similar dilemma in a 12-team mixer with 5 keepers. My last two slots are up for grabs, keeping 2 out of 4 of: Corey Kluber (4th round), Joc Pederson (7th), Eric Hosmer (12th), and Xander Bogaerts (13th). Pederson’s recent benching makes the decision easier right now, but I would have placed him first in this list 6-8 weeks ago.
I’d be stunned if the Dodgers aren’t giving Pederson regular at bats again soon, which should help clarify his value heading into keeper season.
My keepers right now are Trout, Stanton, Votto, Arietta, Kang, Cano.
Pederson just got dropped and I have first waiver. Very tempted, but I’m in first and would have to drop one of Choo, Ozuna, Zimmerman (offence) or Eaton, all who should contribute to my H2H playoffs.
Probably still going to grab him and let Cano go.
Who else do you have to play second base? Cano seems to be playing better lately. If you look at the daily graphs on his player page you see his OBP, AVE, SLG, ISO, BB%, K%, and wOBA have all been trending the right direction in the second half.
I’d be hesitant to weaken your team’s chances in your playoffs for a flier on Pederson – who doesn’t have a starting gig right now. If you want to buy the lottery ticket, I’d keep Cano and dump Marcel Ozuna or Ryan Zimmerman. They’ve also been disappointing this year and haven’t shown the same signs of life that Cano has in the second half.
Oh for sure. I meant as a keeper, I love Cano for the rest of the year, bought him for pennies at the beginning of July.
Probably will take the flier, Joc’s first half was fun to watch.
I think the beginning and end of every Schwarber conversation has to center around his position. He’ll hit, he won’t hit like this but he’ll hit. Mike’s article suggested a .260 25-30 HR 85 RBI 80 R with a lot of walks as about where Schwarber settles, which seems reasonable. Maybe a couple steals thrown in there.
As a catcher, obviously that is elite. As a corner outfielder though, I’m not sure. With Montero and Ross both under contract for 2016 and the Cubs’ OF situation in flux with Fowler and Denorfia FA and Coghlan arb-eligible, the Cubs might be best served leaving Schwarber in LF permanently. In some leagues that won’t matter until 2017, but in ESPN where he needs 20 games to carry over he might not get there this season and he’ll be OF only for 2016.
Maybe he settles in somewhere around 2015 Carlos Gonzalez with a little less average and a little more OBP. ESPN’s Player Rater has CarGo at 18th best OF, figure the lesser average maybe puts Schwarber around the 20-25 range. That’s plenty valuable, but the name recognition and hope of catcher eligibility will drive his ADP wayyyy up.
The o-zone swing % of Evan Gattis is nearly 25% greater than Schwarber. Not sure about that comp.
I think another factor to consider when discussing Schwarber is his age. He’s only 22! His chance for growth both offensively and defensively is still fairly significant. I would bet he has a far greater chance of reaching his ceiling as a consequence of that. My 2 cents.