Thursday, April 17, 2008

For the Want of a Ball, the Kingdom Was Lost

To the non-scout eye, it certainly seems like Ryan Zimmerman's pressing. His first swing against Joe Smith last night, when he hacked at a slider three feet outside the zone -- up there with Soriano's most embarrassing swings -- is emblematic of the difficulties he's had all year. I used to think that last year's aggressiveness was because he felt that he had to carry the team, but with the deeper lineup -- even if it's slumping -- he hasn't relaxed any, and he's still swinging early and often. Bad approach? Poor pitch recognition? Probably a bit of both. FIRE LENNY!!!

Anyway, Manny Acta says he's not concerned. Zimmerman says he's not slumping. Fine, I guess. I just know what my lyin' eyes are telling me.

And I can see what the lyin' stats are sayin' too.

There's a section on his BBREF profile that says "Pitch Data Summary". Clicking on that brings up a wealth of stats -- plenty meaningless -- that show some of those aggressiveness problems.

He's seeing about .5 a pitch less per plate appearance than last season. That doesn't sound like much, but it's a huge total. (The difference between Zimmerman last year and Nick Johnson's career is only about .2, and we drool over NJ's approach)

He's seeing far fewer balls thrown against him, down about 4%. That could be pitchers pitching around him, but given who's batting behind him -- our one effective bat -- that seems less likely to me.

He's dramatically improved his contact rate. When he swings the bat, he makes contact 85% of the time, up from the 80-81% range for his career. Consequently, the number of swinging strikes he's had has dropped. Now making contact isn't a bad thing in and of itself. But it entirely depends on the type of contact that's being made.

His line-drive percentage has dropped for the third straight season (though it's essentially unchanged from last year). The biggest change is that he's hitting a lot more flyballs than in the past. (45% versus 37% for his career) Worse, a great number of those are the dreaded infield flyballs -- popups. An ungodly high 17% of the time he puts the ball in play, he's hitting a fly to the infield. Not good.

He's making more contact, but it's poor contact. (Duh, huh? Anyone can tell that!)

Few other interesting nuggets:

He's swinging at about 10% more first pitches this year than last year, almost a third of the time he comes to the plate, he's hacking at that first pitch.

He's had just one 3-0 count all year. He had 38 and 44 for the last two years, and we're about a tenth of the way into the season.

This one's even more stunning. He's not even getting to 2-0 counts. He's had just three all year, about 5% of his plate appearances, down from 15% and 18% the last two seasons. After a 2-0 count, the league feasts, hitting an .295/ .520/ .501. If you get in a position where the pitcher HAS to throw you a strike, the advantage swings to the batter, big time! But he's not letting the pitcher fall behind, and he's playing into their hands.

Same thing with 3-1 counts. He's had one. ONE! NJ has already had 7!

Swinging at the first pitch isn't a bad thing in and of itself, especially when it's a get-me-over fastball. But too often, as he did against Joe Smith last night, he's swinging because, oh, it feel sooooo good. Well, he needs to knock it off! Don't worry about making contact or missing the occasional pitch.

He needs to wait for the pitches he likes in the zones he likes 'em. When he gets it, swing from the heels. Your #3 batter should not be concerned with productive outs. Drive the runners in with a double! He's done it in the past, and he CAN do it again. He just needs to get this "be aggressive, go the other way, and get the ball in play" crap out of his mind. That's not his strength, and it's not what one of the team's biggest offensive threats should be doing.

10 Comments:

  • Amen, brother.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 4/17/2008 2:40 PM  

  • Did it ever occur to you Chris that he just might not be all that good...

    By Blogger Unknown, at 4/17/2008 2:51 PM  

  • He's not in slump, he just ain't hitting.

    By Blogger WFY, at 4/17/2008 2:51 PM  

  • Well, he might not be David Wright. But he's not THIS bad either.

    By Blogger Chris Needham, at 4/17/2008 2:52 PM  

  • Chris you just said more about the state of this franchise than I think you mean to. Our poster child, our great hope, our leader and face of our franchise is...

    ::drum roll::

    "Well, he might not be David Wright. But he's not THIS bad either."

    Jesus up a pole it's depressing!

    By Blogger Unknown, at 4/17/2008 3:09 PM  

  • For the umpteenth time, fire Lenny Harris! When we've got two players with an established history of being fairly good hitters (Kearns and Zim) who both have mysteriously forgotten how to put the ball in play the right way, it's got to be a coaching problem.

    It's not like there aren't useful replacement out there. Even if they can't find an established coach to replace him, there's this guy named Bonds who's still unemployed last time I checked. He only hit a few hundred home runs and holds the major league record for walks. He might be a little controversial as a player, but I can't think of anyone better to teach the Nats how to hit. Plus, with Paul the Pusher on the team, he'd have some kindred spirits.

    By Blogger Michael Taylor, at 4/17/2008 3:11 PM  

  • I don't care so much about the .200 batting average, that's just a slump. But, his approach at the plate just looks bad. He is continually making outs on the pitcher's pitch, and isn't getting into hitter's counts or taking advantage of mistakes. That's a lot worse than just fighting a .200 batting average.

    By Blogger Natsfan74, at 4/17/2008 3:13 PM  

  • One concern I've had is whether Zim's development is undermined by The Plan. Per The Plan, we as fans are supposed to accept (hopefully only) a few bad years now in exchange for dramatically better years down the road. But is Zim our sacrificial lamb, being dragged down by a series of bad teams early in his career? Ok, I'm mixing metaphors, but you get the idea. He just seems to be regressing at the plate, when the opposite should be occurring.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 4/17/2008 5:04 PM  

  • There are strikeouts and there are strikeouts. Last night RZ looked as though he had never batted in the majors before. "Hacked" is far too generous to describe the desultory wave he gave to the Smith pitches. Hacked implies some energy and maybe some purpose. He swung randomly at the first one, looked at the rest, and shuffled back to the dugout looking at his shoes. I like Manny, but he's pulling a Lerner (describe something obviously terrible as somehow OK) on this one.

    By Blogger Rick D, at 4/17/2008 5:55 PM  

  • Jim, I wouldn't worry about Zimmerman's development being harmed by playing for a (very) bad team like the Nats. He's not going to get used differently, or feel more physical stress. Perhaps he'll be expected to "carry" a bad team. But a good position player will put up the numbers if he's hitting 3rd for the Nats or 8th for Mets. See the early careers of Carlos Beltran, Carlos Delgado, Derrek Lee, and ... um ... I can't think of other examples at the moment.

    (I don't think this logic necessarily applies to young pitchers -- especially relievers -- who can be overused on poor teams.)

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 4/17/2008 6:18 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home