700 Clark St.

In Jayson Stark’s chat today, someone asks about Pujols’ MVP candidacy, and Stark says this:

Albert Pujols is having an amazing year, on every level. One stat I keep checking on Albert is: Percent of pitches thrown to him that are in the strike zone. He’s still under 50 percent — and he’s slugging over .600! No team wants to pitch to him in a big spot, or let him beat them, and he continues to find ways to keep that offense rolling.

Okay, to begin with, two disclaimers: 1) I support Albert’s MVP candidacy whole-heartedly—he’s meant more to his team’s success than any player since the ‘01-’04 Bonds; and 2) his strike percentage is 54%, so I’m not sure what Stark is talking about. But in any case, citing strike percentage vs. slugging percentage as a measure of a hitter’s ability seems bizarre to me. They don’t have anything to do with each other.

Remember that slugging percentage is measured only in reference to a player’s At Bats—which always end in a strike—and not Plate Appearances, which can end in either a strike or a ball. In other words, every time Albert walks, it decreases the percentage of strikes he sees but has no impact at all on his SLG. Moreover, remember that the hitter has some control over how many strikes he sees (if he swings at a ball out of the zone, it’s still recorded as a strike), and that not all strikes are created equal (fouls on two-strike counts, balls put in play, etc.). If anything, Pujols does his part to “keep that offense rolling” by remaining patient and letting the opposing pitcher walk him—these walks often lead to runs later; see my earlier post on the impact of Pujols’ underappreciated walks.

In the broader perspective, I’m not sure that percentage of strikes seen tells us much about a hitter’s ability. As an example, let’s take a look at a game-in-the-life of two hypothetical players A and B, both of whom go 1-3 with a double and a walk.

In his first plate appearance, Player A gets a two-strike count, fouls off a pitch, then strikes out looking. In his second PA, he strikes out on three pitches. In his third PA, he goes 0-2, then lines the next pitch for a double, and in his fourth PA, he walks on a full count.

By contrast, in his first PA, Player B swings on a 3-0 count and pops out. In his second PA, again on a 3-0 count, he grounds into a double play. Swinging on 3-0 yet again, in his third PA he doubles. Finally, he walks on four straight pitches in his last PA.

Here’s how their balls and strikes break down:

Player A saw 75% strikes, while Player B saw 18.75%—but who had the better day? Sure, Player A was terribly impatient while Player B needs to learn to keep his bat on his shoulder on 3-0 counts, but I think it’s hard to argue either one of them did better than the other.

Now of course, this comparison is deliberately artificial, but I’m just trying to illustrate my point that strike percentage may or may not actually mean much about a hitter’s performance. As another illustration, here are the top-10 Major League OPS leaders this year, together with their strike percentage:

• Albert Pujols: 54%
• Milton Bradley: 56%
• Chipper Jones: 54%
• Matt Holliday: 60%
• Lance Berkman: 57%
• Ryan Ludwick: 62%
• Carlos Quentin: 61%
• Alex Rodriguez: 61%
• Manny Ramirez: 60%
• Kevin Youkilis: 63%

As we see, Albert and Chipper lead this group, but not dramatically. So I remain unconvinced that Pujols’ strike percentage is a measure of his (immense) value as a hitter. But I’m open to hearing competing perspectives, so bring ‘em on.

This entry was posted on Friday, August 22nd, 2008 at 8:52 pm and is filed under Albert Pujols, Current Players, Statistical Analysis. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.