Adam Eaton had a tremendous season last year.

 

Overall he hit .300, .362 OBP, .401 SLG.

 

But in the second half, those numbers went to .347, .396, .447. Incredible!

 

If you just go off the idea that a lead off hitter's job is to get on base, then Eaton's .362 OBP was the best lead off number in the American League for pure lead off guys. Jose Altuve was slightly better at .377, but he led off only about half of his ABs.

 

Even if you add in National League lead off hitters, only Christian Yelich at Miami is able to tie Eaton's .362 clip. And you have to wonder if we are more likely to see Eaton's torrid second half going forward than his weaker first half.

 

Sure, Eaton doesn't run much. 15 SB and 9 CS. That's bad. But with 10 triples, which only Dee Gordon exceeded, he seems to have plenty of speed.

 

So where do you think Eaton stands. Is it possible he's already the best lead off hitter in the game? If not, who is better?

 

(And in case you are thinking Mike Trout, he didn't lead off even once last year.)

Lets see Eaton do it again before we start ranking him.

Edited February 18, 201511 yr by woods of ypres

Lets see Eaton do it again before we start ranking him.

More important, let's see him do it for >123 games.

It's really hard to rank him relative to other other leadoff hitters as there aren't many pure leadoff hitters today. Trout, McCutchen, Gomez, and Ellsbury are definitely your best leadoff hitters when they are leading off full time.

 

If you are only looking at the full time lead off hitters, there's only a handful of them; Revere, Hamilton, Gordon, Span, Jose Reyes, are guys on top of my head that I would put over Eaton at the moment.

 

It's also hard to rank him based on half a season of sample size, not to mention rank him as the best in the league. FWIW, he fared extremely poor in Fangraph's BsR (baserunning rating), which combines uBR (baserunning excluding stealing bases) and wSB (value from stolen base). Let's see how he does in his second full season.

It's really hard to rank him relative to other other leadoff hitters as there aren't many pure leadoff hitters today. Trout, McCutchen, Gomez, and Ellsbury are definitely your best leadoff hitters when they are leading off full time.

 

If you are only looking at the full time lead off hitters, there's only a handful of them; Revere, Hamilton, Gordon, Span, Jose Reyes, are guys on top of my head that I would put over Eaton at the moment.

 

It's also hard to rank him based on half a season of sample size, not to mention rank him as the best in the league. FWIW, he fared extremely poor in Fangraph's BsR (baserunning rating), which combines uBR (baserunning excluding stealing bases) and wSB (value from stolen base). Let's see how he does in his second full season.

 

Trout didn't have a single lead-off AB last year.

 

McCutcheon hit 3rd in the lineup every game he played last year. By that measure, we'd be debating Jose Abreu as a lead off hitter.

 

Carlos Gomez hit #1 for 418 ABs, and posted an excellent .358 OBP. He also hit clean up for 150 ABs.

 

Jacoby Ellsbury led off 202 ABs last year, and posted a sub .300 OBP (.298). The Yankees moved him to #3 for 365 ABs, where he posted a more respectable .342 OBP.

 

I understand the reluctance to rate Eaton on only one season. But only Gomez really rates as lead-off competition.

 

As for the others:

 

Revere - .325 OBP

Hamilton - .292 OBP

Span - .355 OBP

Reyes - .328 OBP

Gordon - .326 OBP

 

Over 600 plate appearances, Eaton's .362 OBP leads to 20+ more times on base than Revere, Reyes, or Gordon. Of course, they all have more steals. But they also don't have Eaton's slugging percentage, as all come in under .400 SLG. Span gives you steals and over .400 SLG.

 

So I think there is a fair debate here.

 

 

 

What separates Adam Eaton from #2 hitters though? That he hit #1?

 

I know it's an especially slow period in baseball at this time of year, but I just don't particularly worry about his rankings. All that matters to me is that if he continues hitting like he did last year, then he's going to be a good tablesetter for the Sox. Then he needs to stay healthy.

Guys with more than 300 plate appearances at leadoff last season, sorted by total offensive runs. Threw baserunning runs in there too to show that Eaton is near the bottom, to nobody's surprise.

 

Why 300 PA's? I don't know, seemed appropriate. It really depends on how you want to define what a leadoff hitter is. If you want to reject a bunch of other guys because they didn't hit first in a high enough percentage of AB's, what's even the point? I see a few guys on that list that did a better job than Eaton but as long as he shows last year wasn't a fluke, we'll be happy.

Guys with more than 300 plate appearances at leadoff last season, sorted by total offensive runs. Threw baserunning runs in there too to show that Eaton is near the bottom, to nobody's surprise.

 

Why 300 PA's? I don't know, seemed appropriate. It really depends on how you want to define what a leadoff hitter is. If you want to reject a bunch of other guys because they didn't hit first in a high enough percentage of AB's, what's even the point? I see a few guys on that list that did a better job than Eaton but as long as he shows last year wasn't a fluke, we'll be happy.

 

Agreed with everything.

 

I'd personally like to see Eaton gap a few more, but if gets on at a .360 clip and can only do so with a .100 Iso, then I'm OK with it.

Guys with more than 300 plate appearances at leadoff last season, sorted by total offensive runs. Threw baserunning runs in there too to show that Eaton is near the bottom, to nobody's surprise.

 

Why 300 PA's? I don't know, seemed appropriate. It really depends on how you want to define what a leadoff hitter is. If you want to reject a bunch of other guys because they didn't hit first in a high enough percentage of AB's, what's even the point? I see a few guys on that list that did a better job than Eaton but as long as he shows last year wasn't a fluke, we'll be happy.

 

Thanks for the chart. Nice addition.

 

As for rejecting guys who don't hit leadoff enough, someone else is filling the leadoff slot for that team, so why not try comparing apples and apples? Eaton is never going to be one of the best hitters in the game. But he could become one of the best leadoff guys. Obviously, he has to stay on the field first.

Thanks for the chart. Nice addition.

 

As for rejecting guys who don't hit leadoff enough, someone else is filling the leadoff slot for that team, so why not try comparing apples and apples? Eaton is never going to be one of the best hitters in the game. But he could become one of the best leadoff guys. Obviously, he has to stay on the field first.

 

For me, it's because I just don't buy into the idea of a "leadoff hitter." Yes, someone has to hit leadoff because they have to be the first hitter of the game for their team, but it's really just a guy in the lineup after the first inning. I want someone who can get on base in front of the power hitters. Adam Eaton does a pretty good job of that. I'm hopeful Melky will do that too.

 

Why can't we just genuinely compare hitters to hitters? Adam Eaton is a good hitter because he gets on base, but he doesn't hit for much power. That's OK. Frankly, Jose Abreu would be a good leadoff hitter too.

 

Other people may be able to give an opinion on where they feel Eaton ends up, but I personally can't. He's a good player and I'm glad the Sox have him.

Thanks for the chart. Nice addition.

 

As for rejecting guys who don't hit leadoff enough, someone else is filling the leadoff slot for that team, so why not try comparing apples and apples? Eaton is never going to be one of the best hitters in the game. But he could become one of the best leadoff guys. Obviously, he has to stay on the field first.

Here's another way of looking at it - team stats out of the leadoff spot. The Sox come in around the middle but they'd be much closer to the top if Eaton got, say, 90% of the plate appearances there instead of about 73%. We did quite well in OBP, as you've pointed out.

 

Here are the other players the Sox used at leadoff. The lesson, as always - Leury Garcia is terrible.

I'd like to see him get better at stealing bases. He's got the speed, but he definitely needs to work on better reads and quicker jumps. If he can repeat (or come close to) his performance last year and steal more bases (and get caught a lot less), he'll be in the conversation for one of the top lead-off hitters.

I'd like to see him get better at stealing bases. He's got the speed, but he definitely needs to work on better reads and quicker jumps. If he can repeat (or come close to) his performance last year and steal more bases (and get caught a lot less), he'll be in the conversation for one of the top lead-off hitters.

Perhaps that's the very reason Vince Coleman is working with the team this off-season/ST?

Here's another way of looking at it - team stats out of the leadoff spot. The Sox come in around the middle but they'd be much closer to the top if Eaton got, say, 90% of the plate appearances there instead of about 73%. We did quite well in OBP, as you've pointed out.

 

Here are the other players the Sox used at leadoff. The lesson, as always - Leury Garcia is terrible.

 

That's a big IF.

That's a big IF.

 

Yeah, the whole thing with Eaton is health.

That's a big IF.

 

Yeah, the whole thing with Eaton is health.

When healthy, he is about as ideal of a lead-off hitter as they come.

 

I'd love to see him flirt with a .400 OBP this year, and I don't think that is totally out of realm of possibility.

When healthy, he is about as ideal of a lead-off hitter as they come.

 

I'd love to see him flirt with a .400 OBP this year, and I don't think that is totally out of realm of possibility.

 

Plus having a real hitter behind him is going to help him out a lot.

My biggest fear with Eaton is his BABIP. Pretty much everywhere he's gone, he's had extremely high BABIPs, and that was no exception last year with a .359. Given his tendency to drive the ball into the ground (59.7% GB rate last year), that's likely going to be elevated to some extent, but .359 is a bit extreme. However, it's not impossible for players to maintain a high BABIP. Looking just from 2010 through 2014 and attempting to control by taking out elite hitters (Trout, Cabrera, et al), we can see that Starling Marte is at .363 over 1293 PAs, Dexter Fowler is at .355 over 2090 PAs, Michael Bourn is at .350 over 2487 PAs, and Chris Johnson (yes, Chris Johnson) is at .355 over 2091 PAs.

 

(for your own fun: http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=...&sort=12,d. Also, you will have to click the BABIP tab again to sort again)

 

So a high BABIP is not necessarily a bad thing or an omen of regression, especially if he continues showing an ability to spray the ball around the field. A quick look:

 

Balls hit to LF: 160 (44.9% GB)

Balls hit to CF: 127 (62.2% GB)

Balls hit to RF: 120 (77.2% GB)

 

We don't have ball-off-bat speed, but having seen enough of Eaton, he hits a lot of worm burners, and if he continues hitting the ball on the ground extremely hard, he should be able to maintain a high BABIP.

 

To get to a .400 OBP though, I think he'll either have to significantly increase his BB%, decrease his K%, hit fewer fly balls and more line drives or ground balls, or some combination of all of that. The last two are sort of self-explanatory (and a decreased K% assumes that he's making the same sort of contact on those balls, which ultimately may actually detract from his BB%, not add to it, which may be for the worst). Last year, he walked 8% of the time, which resulted in a .362 OBP. Using his line from last year, here's what he'd need to get to the prospective round number goals,:

 

.375 - 9.3% BB rate (50 walks in 538 PAs)

.400 - 11.9% BB rate (64 walks in 538 PAs)

 

It's an incredibly daunting task, especially when you consider that, among players with 500 plate appearances last year, only 3 (!!!!!) had an OBP over .400. You may recognize their names: Andrew McCutcheon, Victor Martinez, and Jose Bautista.

 

I'll be happy with .360 and I'd be ecstatic with .375.

I don't think BABIP is a one size fits all stat. I think once on CC Brain Kenny even said if a player continuously has a high BABIP its okay because its "his line", or something like that.

 

 

I don't think BABIP is a one size fits all stat. I think once on CC Brain Kenny even said if a player continuously has a high BABIP its okay because its "his line", or something like that.

 

Right, BABIP isn't a one size fits all thing. I'm basically saying that, even after 538 plate appearances last year, we can't be certain that his true talent BABIP is .359. It certainly COULD be, but he also had 380 plate appearances with the DBacks too, and his BABIP with them was nowhere near as good with them, thus lowering his career BABIP to .333. That is something that will take a long time to establish properly and that it will still fluctuate season to season. Austin Jackson has a career BABIP of .353 but the past two seasons it's been about .330.

Gotcha.

Eaton has the 8th-highest GB% of anybody with as many PA's as him since he reached the majors, he doesn't pop up, and he runs well. If there's a player whose .359 BABIP I wouldn't be worried about, it's his.

I don't think BABIP is a one size fits all stat. I think once on CC Brain Kenny even said if a player continuously has a high BABIP its okay because its "his line", or something like that.

 

Still though, .350 is about as high as anybody can sustain. And people that have done so over long careers are usually hall of famers or close.

Thanks for the comments. I've enjoyed them, and learned quite a bit as well.