More On Early 2019 Statcast Hitting Trends
On Tuesday, I shared some early Statcast statistic trends and compared them with historical marks going back to 2015. Unfortunately, I compared April 2019 numbers to full season marks from previous seasons, which wasn’t exactly apples to apples. I have corrected that error and spent some time collecting data only through the end of April for all previous seasons. So let’s try this again.
| Season | Avg Exit Velocity (MPH) | Avg Fly Ball Exit Velocity (MPH) | Avg Fly Ball Distance (ft) | HR/FB |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2015* | 87.4 | 90.2 | 316 | 11.4% |
| 2016* | 87.7 | 91.1 | 316 | 12.8% |
| 2017* | 87.1 | 91.6 | 320 | 13.7% |
| 2018* | 88.4 | 92.4 | 318 | 12.7% |
| 2019 | 88.3 | 92.3 | 321 | 14.6% |
On Tuesday, it appeared that overall exit velocity and fly ball exit velocity had spiked this year versus last. When cutting off the data to just through April though, we actually learn that both marks peaked last season and are down ever so slightly from that mark. What this means is that oddly exit velocity declined after April last season, which is opposite of what we expected to see.
This April, batters are essentially hitting it just as hard as last April, but their fly balls are traveling three feet further. That’s strange. Adding to the weirdness is that last April, batters posted an exit velocity 0.8 MPH higher than in 2017, yet the ball traveled two feet less. Was this the effects of the juiced ball in 2017?
Looking at the combination of fly ball exit velocity and distance, they generally match the HR/FB rate trends. However, the changes between the EV and distance marks from season to seasons are pretty minor, which you wouldn’t expect to drive such dramatic changes in HR/FB rate. If it’s not just fly ball exit velocity and distance, what else could it be?
| Season | Avg Barrel Exit Velocity (MPH) | Avg Barrel Distance (ft) |
|---|---|---|
| 2015* | 102.9 | 394 |
| 2016* | 103.4 | 395 |
| 2017* | 103.6 | 399 |
| 2018* | 104.1 | 392 |
| 2019 | 104.0 | 398 |
We found out on Tuesday that batters were barreling their fly balls at a significantly higher rate this year, a mark that has risen each season since 2015. But perhaps those barrels weren’t as “barrely” as previous years, so the exit velocity and distance have barely budged? There are more of them, resulting in a higher HR/FB rate, but they are of lower quality, resulting in similar exit velocity in distance marks. That’s the hypothesis.
I isolated the exit velocity and distance on just barreled fly balls to find out if this was the case. Nope! These numbers showed the exact same trends as the previous table using all fly balls. Exit velocity here is down ever so slightly from last year, while distance is back up (though this time it’s just below the 2017 distance).
There’s one more piece to the puzzle which I shared in last week’s hitting trends post.
| Season | Pulled Fly Ball% |
|---|---|
| 2015* | 21.5% |
| 2016* | 21.8% |
| 2017* | 24.3% |
| 2018* | 23.5% |
| 2019 | 25.4% |
So while I still can’t figure out how batters are barreling up their flies far more frequently, and yet exit velocity and distance have barely budged, this table is key. Batters are pulling a higher rate of their fly balls, which is the batted ball direction that easily leads to the highest HR/FB rate. So they are certainly making the most of those fly balls and actually don’t need as high an exit velocity or distance to hit the ball out.
All my questions haven’t been answered, but this is a better start to understanding what’s going on with homers over the first month of the 2019 season.
Mike Podhorzer is the founder of ProjectingX IQ, an advanced fantasy baseball analytics platform that transforms projection data and in-season performance signals into actionable intelligence. He is the 2015 Fantasy Sports Writers Association Baseball Writer of the Year and three-time Tout Wars champion. He is the author of the eBook Projecting X 2.0: How to Forecast Baseball Player Performance, which teaches you how to project players yourself. Follow Mike on X@MikePodhorzer and contact him via email.
Is there any reason to believe weather has something to do with it? In such a small sample size, a few warmer or colder (or wetter or dryer) games could easily swing things, couldn’t they?
So perhaps batters are making better contact but the weather is depressing how fast it goes off the bat and also distance?
That was my initial thought as well. I wouldn’t know where to find the quick data, but I remember more rainouts/delays in April last year (I realize a rainout would cancel the game, but the effects were obviously present in the atmosphere in the area.)
This is a very off the beaten path way of associating it, but I own an ice cream shop in Cincinnati. Our sales from this March/April are destroying our sales figures from last year, and it’s mostly due to the weather we experienced last year. (We’ve literally doubled-our sales for April–weather was significant last year.)
Ice cream sales are up? Oh, no, here comes the crime.
I agree, this needs to normalized for temperature
FWIW:
2015 April temperature 53.1
2016 April temperature 53.2
2017 April temperature 53.8
2018 April temperature 48.9!
Pulled from National Climate Report/NOAA
I believe we are going to find out that the ball has changed…again – so less drag and more distance. Here is an article referenced this week of some early work on the subject
https://www.baseballprospectus.com/news/article/48260/moonshot-the-baseball-is-juiced-again/
Another article on the de-juiced ball last year here. I was planning on an update at the end of the month.
https://community.fangraphs.com/the-mystery-continues-has-the-2018-ball-been-de-juiced/
If I remember correctly during the “juiced” ball analysis of past years there was talk about the seam height on the ball and the effect on the drag co-efficient. A ball with lower seams would in theory fly a bit farther at the same exit speed/launch angle due to a decrease in drag. Or just ask Alan Nathan .
Good work DBall. This is exactly what I was thinking through this entire article. Remember all the articles of pitchers not being able to get a good grip on the ball and having blister issues like crazy, most likely from having to grip the ball harder)? Normalizing for temperature would be good, but I think having the data all the way back to 2015 kind of decreases the need for doing that. The two years that are truly different from the eyeball test are 2017 (Juiced Ball Year) and 2019. If the drag co-efficient is lower on the juiced ball, that would definitely make the ball fly farther when hit (on average) the same. As Pod notes, fly balls are also being pulled at a higher rate this year too, which also ought to increase the chance of hammering a HR.
Could lower seams also make it easier to barrel the ball (e.g. more optimal launch angles, and decreased popups and worm-burners)? In other words, more forgiving for less-than-optimal contact. Watching games, it sure seems like a lot of not-so-impressive hacks from players not known as power hitters are surprisingly clearing the fences.
That’s a great point too DDD. You’d think that it would have to make a difference.
Good discussion here. A few thoughts I had … exit velocity should continue to slowly trend up (over multiple year samples) as we see average pitcher fastball velocity continue to increase, right? Also, does the league wide increased usage of off-speed pitches make it easier to turn on a pitch and pull it? Perhaps that helps explain the increase in pulled flyballs.
What’s the fantasy impact of all these trends? What are the actionable steps we should take?
I have a hard time coming up with any solutions.
1) Power is up … everywhere. You need more power, but more guys are giving you power, so is that net zero?
2) Pitchers are getting hit hard. Ok. How do you fix that? MRs maybe, but a juiced ball or optimized launch angle or whatever, that impacts MRs too. Hader got hit twice this weekend. You still need wins.
3) maybe focus in on high-K pitchers who will be less impacted by flyballs… but it’s not like high-K pitchers are undervalued. Big K’s are *already* a sought-after resource.
This mostly feels like a “rising tide lifts all boats” situation.