FanSided

Defending the Cleveland Indians’ Carlos Santana’s Offense

By Andrew Schmid |
1 of 3
Next

The Cleveland Indians’ first-baseman has wrongfully drawn criticism for his offense

Over the past few weeks, battles have raged in the comments sections over Carlos Santana and whether or not he helps the team to create runs and such. Many people have argued “walks do not produce runs” and that his “swing for the fences” mentality has hurt the team.

This post is less of an analysis as much as it is an argument defending Santana’s style of play and debunking a few myths created about him. Most of the attacks on his offensive game have no factual basis, and most of the criticisms grounded in fact either misuse statistics or misinterpret statistics.

This is not an attack on any commentators or fans, and I do not mean to challenge you on a personal level. I just want to make a much-needed case defending a player who performed at an All-Star level for many years and has provided the Cleveland Indians with plenty of value.

First up, does Santana’s low batting average devalue his performance?

Next: Low Average = Bad Batter?

May 24, 2015; Cleveland, OH, USA; Cleveland Indians first baseman Carlos Santana (41) hits an RBI single during the eighth inning against the Cincinnati Reds at Progressive Field. Mandatory Credit: Ken Blaze-USA TODAY Sports

Has Santana’s low batting average made him a bad hitter?

Many Indians fans have argued that Santana does not provide the Indians with any value due to his low batting average. This is completely false, as batting average is not a great indicator of a player’s contributions to a team. It’s not even a good indicator. Countless amounts of studies have shown that on-base percentage is more valuable than batting average, and they have used correlations between team success and the two statistics to prove this.

Rather than source a whole bunch of studies, it might be easier to show this point with a simple thought process. Each team is given 27 outs to score more runs than the other team. When a batter gets to the plate, any outcome that does not result in an out allows the rest of the team to continue batting, and thus provides the team with more opportunities to score runs. The main ways to avoid creating an out are through a walk, a hit-by-pitch, or a base hit.

Since Santana has walked roughly 17% of the time and has got a base hit roughly 17% of the time this season, he has allowed the Indians to continue batting about 35% of the time. This 35% number is also known as on-base percentage, which we prefer to display in a .346 format. For comparison, the average American League batter has allowed his team to continue batting roughly 31% of the time, which is significantly lower than Santana’s career mark of 37%.

Now, don’t get me wrong: a walk is not as valuable as a single. Walks are, however, a lot more valuable than one might think. This season, a walk has been worth roughly 78% of a single, meaning that singles have only been marginally more valuable than walks. When these adjustments are taken into account, a new statistic emerges: wOBA.

Jun 14, 2015; Detroit, MI, USA; Cleveland Indians first baseman Carlos Santana (41) at bat against the Detroit Tigers at Comerica Park. Mandatory Credit: Rick Osentoski-USA TODAY Sports

Many readers may be complaining that we don’t need new statistics to measure the game; and if you are one of those people right now, you might be in for a pleasant surprise. wOBA isn’t really a crazy statistic that does mysterious things. In fact, if you are okay with slugging percentage, then there is no reason to dislike wOBA.

So what is wOBA?

wOBA stands for Weighted On-Base Average, and it is essentially a more accurate version of slugging percentage. Each outcome – a walk, hit-by-pitch, single, double, triple, and home run – is assigned a weight based on how frequently it created runs. That means that a walk and single are not equal, which should make many walk-hating fans very happy.

It turns out that Santana’s wOBA of .319 this season is nowhere near as good as his on-base percentage. In fact, it is marginally better than the AL average of .313. This season has been a down year for the switch-hitter, and nearly any statistic will show that. Throughout his career, he has tended to post wOBAs over .350 and even posted a wOBA of .364 just two years ago. These results are vastly superior to the league average.

Next, does his “swing for the fences” approach with men in scoring position cost the team?

Next: Does he 'swing for the fences' with RISP?

Jun 13, 2015; Detroit, MI, USA; Cleveland Indians first baseman Carlos Santana (41) at bat in the fifth inning against the Detroit Tigers at Comerica Park. Mandatory Credit: Rick Osentoski-USA TODAY Sports

Has Santana hurt the team by swinging for the fences?

Another big complaint that has aroused in the comment section has been Santana’s “swing for the fence” mentality that leads to too many strikeouts when the game is on the line. One fan pointed out that Santana strikes-out over 100 times a season, and that a strikeout machine isn’t going to “get it done”. While striking-out over 100 times in a season may seem like a lot, it actually isn’t. In fact, Santana has struck-out at a rate lower than the league average in all but one of his seasons.

More from Cleveland Guardians News

And as for Santana’s swing for the fence mentality with runners in scoring position, there is little evidence to support this claim. Between a quarter and a third of his plate appearances come with runners in scoring position, and Santana has hit roughly the same amount of his home runs in those situations. Even further, aside from this season, Santana has struck-out less frequently with runners in scoring position than his seasonal average, something that one would not expect if a batter were swinging for the fences.

Not only do outcome statistics suggest that Santana is not swinging for the fences with runners in scoring position, but his batted ball statistics agree with this conclusion. His career fly ball rate is identical to his fly ball rate with runners in scoring position, and he has hit fly balls at a lower rate with runners in scoring position this year than with runners not in scoring position. Finally, Santana has walked more frequently with men in scoring position than without men in scoring position, showing that he isn’t going to swing at junk to try and go deep.

To be fair, the results with runners in scoring position have been less than desirable so far this season. He has posted a .183/.340/.280 slash-line with runners in scoring position, and his wRC+ of 81 says that he has created runs at a rate 19% worse than league average. While his .217 BABIP with men in scoring position would certainly suggest luck as the culprit for his struggles, his 45.2% pull rate and 46.8% groundball rate make me think that he is just hitting into defensive shifts.

Conclusion:

I’m not arguing that Santana is perfect, and I’m not afraid to criticize a player for his weaknesses. What I am arguing is that Carlos Santana provides the Cleveland Indians with offensive value, and that many things of which fans accuse him are factually incorrect. Anyone who wants to pick on Santana’s game should be criticizing him for his defense or base running, not his offensive skills.

Next: Four Reasons the Tribe Should Buy at the Deadline

Next
Home / Cleveland Guardians News

Schedule