Can You Count On Cano?

Batting average is a fickle statistic. Perhaps more than any other metric in the game, batting average is subject to the caprices of lucky (or unlucky) bounces here or there. A player with the skill level of a .300 hitter may find himself hitting 20 to 30 points above or below that number, and it wouldn’t really be considered all that unusual. A player may seem to be experiencing a “down” season, but it might be more the product of poor luck on balls in play than any massive downturn in talent level.

Which brings us to Robinson Cano. Over his four seasons in the major leagues, the Yankees second baseman has seen his performance vary by a considerable amount. Here are his WPA/LI numbers from 2005-2008, with his rank among second baseman in parentheses:

2005: -0.19 (14/15 among qualified 2B)
2006: 1.08 (4/23)
2007: 0.38 (13/26)
2008: -1.31 (17/18)

Cano’s performance has taken over a two-win swing since 2006, from a win above average to 1.3 below this past season. This would be suggestive of a change in skill level, but when we dig a little deeper into Cano’s numbers, not all that much has changed. Below are his batting lines over the past four seasons. Pay particularly close attention to the last number listed:

2005: .297/.320/.458, 3 BB%, 13 K%, .161 ISO, 20.6 LD%, .320 BABIP
2006: .342/.365/.525, 3.6 BB%, 11.2 K%, .183 ISO, 19.9 LD%, .363 BABIP
2007: .306/.353/.488, 5.9 BB%, 13.8 K%, .182 ISO, 16.9 LD%, .331 BABIP
2008: .271/.305/.410, 4.2 BB%, 10.9 K%, .139 ISO, 19.4 LD%, .286 BABIP

In terms of his controllable skills, there’s not a whole lot of difference between these four years, save for a bit of a dip in ISO this past season. Cano has established himself as a player who very rarely walks, makes a lot of contact and has a little more pop that the average middle infielder. What has fueled Cano’s varied performances is his batting average on balls in play (BABIP). Cano had a ton of bounces go his way during his .342 year in 2006, but very few auspicious hops this past season, when he batted just .271.

Given Cano’s 19.4 LD% in 2008, we would expect his BABIP to come in around .314 instead of his actual .286 mark (LD% + .120 gives us expected BABIP; .194 + .120= .314). Adjusting for that difference, Cano’s 2008 line “should” have been about .299/.333/.438. If we adjust for the BABIP variance in his other seasons as well, we can get a more approximate level of Cano’s talent:

2005: .320 BABIP, .326 Expected BABIP. Revised Line: .303/.326/.464, .790 OPS (.778 actual)
2006: .363 BABIP, .319 Expected BABIP. Revised Line: .298/.321/.481, .802 OPS (.890 actual)
2007: .331 BABIP, .289 Expected BABIP. Revised Line: .264/.311/.446, .757 OPS (.841 actual)
2008: .286 BABIP, .314 Expected BABIP. Revised Line: .299/.333/.438, .771 OPS (.715 actual)

Over this four-year period, the difference Between Cano’s highest and lowest actual OPS is 175 points. Once we adjust for the vagaries of balls put in play, however, the gap between his largest and smallest OPS is 45 points. In other words, Cano’s skill level hasn’t really varied all that much over this time frame: he’s about a .300/.325/.460-type hitter.

This exercise with Cano is an example of why batting average-dependent players are so risky. When a player derives a significant portion of his value from his average (which can vary drastically from year-to-year), it becomes extremely difficult to predict what sort of season that player will have. As we have seen with Cano, a .300-level hitter can show similar controllable skills yet have his batting average swing from .342 to .271. Unfortunately, it appears as though fantasy owners are going to have to continue to ride this roller coaster with Cano, as his plate discipline hasn’t shown much improvement through the years:

Outside Swing Percentage (O-Swing%), 2005-2008:

2005: 25.6%
2006: 30.8%
2007: 34.4%
2008: 30.7%

One of our new statistical toys, First Pitch Strike Percentage (F-Swing%), also serves to show Cano’s iffy plate approach. Cano had a first-pitch strike called against him 62.6% of the time in 2008, 11th-highest in the majors among qualified batters.

Such are the perils of drafting Robinson Cano. He’s plenty valuable if he’s hitting .300+, but he’s a cipher if he bats .270. If you’re going to invest in Cano, just realize that predicting his performance level is much trickier than it is for most other batters.





A recent graduate of Duquesne University, David Golebiewski is a contributing writer for Fangraphs, The Pittsburgh Sports Report and Baseball Analytics. His work for Inside Edge Scouting Services has appeared on ESPN.com and Yahoo.com, and he was a fantasy baseball columnist for Rotoworld from 2009-2010. He recently contributed an article on Mike Stanton's slugging to The Hardball Times Annual 2012. Contact David at david.golebiewski@gmail.com and check out his work at Journalist For Hire.

2 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Jim
15 years ago

Not all hitters who hit for average are that inconsistent. There are plenty of guys who are always in the .290-.300 range and they aren’t all over the place like Cano. What makes them different from him? Is it because most of them have more power or more speed so BABIP fluctuations don’t affect them as much?