Texas Rangers Ian Desmond Bounce Back Season Explored

Ian Desmond always had a great deal of talent. Now, in his new home with the Texas Rangers, he seems to have finally found success.

Paramount to any player’s success is the environment in which they reside. Anyone who follows baseball, or more simply just lives their life, knows that the right situation, the proper fit, can make all the difference in the world. Sometimes, it goes both ways, as a player’s positive or negative impact on a team is mirrored by their impact on him. Over the past two seasons perhaps no player has been more emblematic of their club’s overall narrative and trajectory than Ian Desmond.

Last season, he was the most appropriate anecdote for the larger calamity that was the Nationals failed 2015 campaign. They were considered one of the deepest and most talented rosters, on paper, in baseball. Having come off three straight winning seasons that included two NL East crowns, they were a trendy World Series pick until a barrage of unfortunate injuries, puzzling regression in productivity, and disengaged and ineffective leadership culminated in a final result on the field that was matched in its degree of disappointment only by that which their team chemistry had devolved into.

Desmond, more than any other player on that team, left the baseball world scratching its collective head. Seemingly healthy, in shape, and presumably motivated heading into free agency, the former All-Star, in his age 29 season, took a sudden, shocking deviation from his usual level of performance. By season’s end both were looking forward to the opportunity of a fresh start. The Nationals were content to shift Danny Espinosa from second to short, and then fill that hole with Daniel Murphy. While that move and others, along with some much improved health, have served the NL East leading Nationals well, Desmond has found new life in his new home down in Texas.

Next: A match born of necessity

It was a match born out of necessity and mild reluctance. The Texas Rangers, who never got much involved in the pursuit of more prominent free agent outfielders this past winter, played the long-game when searching for an upgrade at the position.

Meanwhile, Desmond made a disastrous miscalculation in declining the Nationals 15.8 million dollar qualifying offer. Injury was added to insult when that qualifying offer limited Desmond’s negotiating leverage, as few were willing to give up the compensatory draft pick and international signing money that adorned his price tag. While a slew of other teams including the Rockies and White Sox are now ruing their inaction on Desmond, the Rangers are happy they ultimately pulled the trigger.

The most noteworthy aspect of the signing at the time, aside from its shocking proximity to their spring training opener, was the position change Desmond had agreed to. A shortstop his entire professional career, he was now headed to the outfield.  It is, in hindsight, a move that may have served him well had it been made earlier in his career.

For while Desmond always seemed to possess the raw tools to be a reliably fielding shortstop, what he provided in athleticism and instincts he more than gave back in shoddy hands and inconsistent throwing precision. The outfield has proven to be a more fortuitous dwelling for the still-athletic 30 year old. For the first time in his career he is a plus defender across all metrics. Despite a shift from left to center earlier this spring, Desmond has remained consistent; entering play Friday he was a +4 in defensive runs saved, and +5.9 in UZR. By contrast, he was a collective -20 DFS and -7.3 UZR during his six plus years as the Nationals shortstop.

Next: The Personification of the Rangers

Desmond’s play encompasses much of what the Rangers thus far successful season has been all about. While they were projected to be good, they’ve gone about it in a quiet and unexpected manner.

The likes of Sin Soo-Choo, Prince Fielder, Mitch Moreland, and Rougned Odor have all experienced relatively tumultuous and inconsistent seasons, both on and off the field. Even Adrian Beltre has seemingly begun to lose his proprietary claim to the fountain of youth, and Cole Hamels’ deeper stats suggest his solid surface numbers are primarily an optical illusion. In their place, the Rangers have relied more heavily upon a combination of youthful and resurgent characters. Colby Lewis, Jurickson Profar, and Nomar Mazara, amongst others, represent this trend, but none as well as Desmond.

While it’s tempting to rationalize Desmond’s bounce back campaign as a multifaceted change of scenery gone right, with the aid of some regression to a career mean, it is worthwhile to take a deeper examination of his precipitous rebirth. When perusing through Desmond’s numbers one is struck by the roller coaster, although symmetrical, nature of his career arc.

The Texas Rangers’ Ian Desmond is the fourth incarnation of the player. Desmond 1.0 existed from 2010-11 (we are excluding his 2009 September call-up). Desmond 2.0 reigned from 2012-2014. Then, Desmond 3.0 fell hard and fast in 2015, with the aforementioned newest and current model now existing in Texas.

Next: A look at the numbers

DESMOND 1.0
.261/.303/.374
wOBA: .297
wRC+: 82

52.3/16.7/31.0 (hit type; GB/LD/FB)
6.8% FB/HR
35.2/38.3/26.5 (hit direction; pull/center/oppo)
22.5/53.4/24.1 (batted ball; soft/medium/hard)

58.3 fast, 18.5 slider, 5.0 cutter, 7.8 curve, 7.9 changeup (pitch frequency)
91.4, 83.1, 87.9, 76.5, 82.0 (pitch velocity)
-0.7 fast, -7.4 slider, -3.0 cutter, -0.3 changeup, +2.3 curve (pitch values)

0-swing: 31.3; Z-swing: 63.7; O-Contact: 63.4%; Z-Contact: 89.7%
Swing: 46.2% Contact: 80.1%

DESMOND 2.0
.275/.326/.462
wOBA: .343
wRC+: 116

46.9/19.5/33.6 (hit type; GB/LD/FB)
16.3% FB/HR
34.5/35.5/30.0 (hit direction; pull/center/oppo)
16.2/51.5/32.3 (batted ball; soft/medium/hard)

54.7 fast, 19.1 slider, 6.2 cutter, 9.9 curve, 8.4 changeup (pitch frequency)
92.2, 83.7, 87.5, 77.6, 82.8 (pitch velocity)
6.5 fast, 6.4 slider, 8.6 cutter, -2.5 curve, 15.1 changeup (pitch values)

O-swing: 35.0; Z-swing: 70.4 O-Contact: 58.9; Z-Contact: 84.6
Swing: 51.0 Contact: 75.0

DESMOND 3.0
.233/.290/.384
wOBA: .294
wRC+: 83

53.4/15.6/31.0 (hit type; GB/LD/FB)
15.4% FB/HR
34.7/36.0/29.3 (hit direction; pull/center/oppo)
20.9/51.0/28.1 (batted ball; soft/medium/hard)

55.6 fast, 19.5 slider, 6.3 cutter, 9.9 curve, 7.8 changeup (pitch frequency)
92.5, 84.5, 87.6, 78.6, 83.0 (pitch velocity)
-6.7 fast, -3.2 slider, 2.5 cutter, 1.8 curve, 0.6 changeup (pitch value)

O-swing: 34.1; Z-swing: 70.1; O-Contact: 56.7; Z-contact: 84.0
Swing: 49.5 Contact: 73.3

DESMOND 4.0
.314/.364/.504
.370 wOBA
128 wRC+

50.0/21.3/28.7 (hit type; GB/LD/FB)
17.2% HR/FB
29.1/40.4/30.5 (hit direction; pull/center/oppo)
16.8/49.8/33.5 (batted ball; soft/medium/hard)

53.4 fast, 16.9 slider, 7.2 cutter, 7.2 curve, 10.9 changeup (pitch frequency)
91.6, 83.5, 87.2, 77.9, 82.1 (pitch velocity)
6.0 fast, -1.6 slider, 3.1 cutter, 3.0 curve, 2.2 changeup (pitch value)

O-Swing: 26.5; Z-swing: 67.8; O-Contact: 51.9; Z-Contact: 79.9
Swing: 47.2 Contact: 72.1

Next: So, what does this mean?

Desmond’s first transition is rather easy to explain: he physically matured. While the way he was pitched and his plate approach saw little change, his ability to make more hard contact, while getting more elevation on the balls he hit, vastly improved.

He saw his slash line go from .261/.303/.374, with a wOBA of .297 and wRC+ of 82 in 2010-11 to .275/.326/.462 with a .343 wOBA and an RC+ of 116 in 2012-14, largely because he hit far fewer ground balls (46.9% from 52.3%), more line drives (19.5% from 16.7%), and saw more of his fly balls leave the yard (FB/HR increased from 6.8% to 16.3%). He also generated significantly more hard contact (32.3% from 26.5%), and far less soft contact (16.2% from 22.5%).

This was despite the fact the average velocity of all major pitches thrown to him increased from 10-11 to 12-14, while his out of zone swing rate actually increased (although this may have been due to an overall more confident and aggressive approach, as his swing rates of all varieties went up and contact rates of all varieties went down).

His regression last season is more difficult to explain. In many respects, he reverted back to his youthful tendencies. Desmond hit more ground balls, and made more soft contact, despite having an almost identical plate approach, with swing and contact rates that replicated those seen during his most productive seasons. Also of note was the fact that the power was seemingly not gone when he did put good swings on the ball. His HR/FB% of 15.4% was far closer to Desmond 2.0 than Desmond 1.0.

It seemed he was simply putting fewer good swings on balls, despite still having the physical tools to produce his usual amount of damage when he did.

This year’s resurgence is in some ways even more puzzling, although some would say it is an expected result. His second half OPS of .771 was more in line with his career numbers than his dreadful first half. Furthermore, his average exit velocity suggested he was still producing the necessary bat speed to retain power. He was seemingly off the charts unlikely when plotted along the usually reliable wOBA to exit velocity axis.

However, there are still some interesting, or, for some, concerning, findings within this year’s numbers. First, he’s still hitting a lot of balls (50.0% to be exact) on the ground. Second, the average velocity on every major pitch he’s faced this year is about a full mph down from the way he was pitched back in the National League (for example, 91.9 fastball to 92.8 last year, and 83.7 slider to 84.7 slider last year) Third, he’s still very vulnerable to the slider, it being the only major pitch where he’s currently producing a negative value (w/SL -1.6).

General Findings Pertaining to his 2016 Rebound
1.) He’s still hitting a lot of balls on the ground, although not quite as many as 10-11
2.) He’s hitting more balls on a line again
3.) His power on fly balls never really diminished at any point since 2012
4.) For the first time in his career he’s going up the middle more, pulling less
5.) He’s once again minimizing soft contact, just like his best years
6.) The quality of pitching this year, at least velocity, is down
7.) He’s still vulnerable on the slider, but teams shouldn’t throw him so many off-speed pitches
8.) His eye at the plate is vastly improved to a career best
9.) He’s actually making less contact both in and out of zone, but quality of contact is up
10.) His heat maps show he is now successfully covering more vertical ground in the strike zone.

Next: What can we expect going forward?