2019 Braves Hitters Projections: Ronald Acuna

E

Enscheff

Well-known member
For an explanation of the projection process, take a look at the Freeman projection: http://www.chopcountry.com/forums/showthread.php?t=8758

Acuna is also expected to play every day, so a break down vs RHP and LHP is of no concern.

What is of concern is his limited MLB track record, and his undeniable potential to improve, perhaps greatly improve, the values representing his "true skills". I will attempt to project his 2019 values like K%, BB%, LD% and FB% based on the trends of those values over the course of the season. It won't be the most scientific exercise, but I don't have any other method to reliably project those values for young players (that's the main flaw with all projection systems).

Here is his 15 game rolling average for K%:

HEbdPEB.jpg


We see a lot of Ks early, fewer Ks later, and an overall trend of less Ks. I am going to mentally take the midpoint between the peak around game 60 and the valley around game 80 as his projected 2019 K%...23%.

Next is BB rate...here's the 2018 plot:

kC0TYwZ.jpg


Again, we see 2 different Acunas. The Acuna before game ~70 oscillated around 7%. The Acuna after game ~70 oscillated around something closer to 11% or better. I'm going to let the late season dip in BBs keep me at 11% for 2019.

Moving to batted ball profile, we look at his FB%:

bVe161s.jpg


We see his FB% oscillating right around his season value of 39.4%, so that's what I'm going with for 2019.

Looking at his LD%:

Ecm4cJh.jpg


Prior to game 20 we see Acuna being terrible, and after game 20 oscillating at a value a bit above his season average of 18.3%. I'm going to assume the Acuna we saw after game 20 is the real Acuna, and go with a 2019 LD% of 20%.

When projecting his HR/FB rate, I look at his LD/FB EV and his Barrels/BBE values. They are:

2018 Brls/PA% = 8.6% (19 of 332)
2018 FB/LD EV = 95.3 mph (49 of 332)

Those correspond to HR/FB rates of 23.4% and 19.7%, so I'll use the midpoint of 21.6%.

Plugging all those values in...

The resulting 2019 projection for Ronald Acuna:

600 PAs, .313 BABIP, .276 BA, .364 OBP, .545 SLG, .909 OPS, 34 HRs, 32 2B

Why the low BABIP compared to his 2019 value of .352? His batted ball profile of 39% FB and only 20% LDs simply doesn't support a high BABIP. For reference, Freeman sports a LD% in the high 20s, which allows him to sustain a high BABIP. Looking at the difference between Acuna's 2018 BA (.293) and xBA (.264) of 0.029 shows he had the 43rd luckiest BA of 313 players with 250 or more PAs (Culberson was #2). Unless he hits a lot more LDs, it is unlikely for him to sustain a lofty BABIP.

Regardless, I expect Acuna to be a middle of the order monster next year. He needs to be hitting in a run producing spot of the lineup.
 
Acuna put up some great BABIP numbers in the minors in 2017 (around .400 at three different levels)

for young players like him it is worth giving some weight to those numbers from the minors
 
I have seen zero work done correlating MiLB BABIP to MLB BABIP, and a lot of work done correlating measurable MLB stats to BABIP.

If such work exists I’d love to roll it into my projections, especially for young hitters.
 
Perhaps Acuna is a Kris Bryant type od hitter and can sustain a .340+ BABIP. Increasing his to .340 returns a slash of .295/.380/.563 (.943 OPS).
 
For reference, Steamer600 from FG:

600 PA, 28 2B, 26 HR, .278 BA, .346 OBP, .488 SLG, .833 OPS

Looks like they are projecting Acuna with a BABIP closer to the .313 value I came up with than the .353 value he posted in 2018. They also don't seem to like his HR projection as much as I do
 
Enscheff said:
For reference, Steamer600 from FG:

600 PA, 28 2B, 26 HR, .278 BA, .346 OBP, .488 SLG, .833 OPS

Looks like they are projecting Acuna with a BABIP closer to the .313 value I came up with than the .353 value he posted in 2018. They also don't seem to like his HR projection as much as I do
Click to expand...

It will be fascinating to see if he continues to adjust and improve as he has consistently thus far. It makes him so hard to project because that progresion is so rare
 
zbhargrove said:
It will be fascinating to see if he continues to adjust and improve as he has consistently thus far. It makes him so hard to project because that progresion is so rare
Click to expand...

Young phenoms like Acuna are almost pointless to project. All projection models for players like him come up with what’s called a bi-modal curve, meaning it is quite likely he struggles, and it is also likely he takes off and becomes a monster. The single projection is somewhere between those 2 outcomes, and isn’t a very likely outcome itself.
 
Enscheff said:
Young phenoms like Acuna are almost pointless to project. All projection models for players like him come up with what’s called a bi-modal curve, meaning it is quite likely he struggles, and it is also likely he takes off and becomes a monster. The single projection is somewhere between those 2 outcomes, and isn’t a very likely outcome itself.
Click to expand...

Yup same reason model blending is the latest craze in the meteorology world. Most of the time it will probably end up close blending all the solutions but for the extreme historical events, any blend will the worst solution no matter what.
 
Enscheff said:
Young phenoms like Acuna are almost pointless to project. All projection models for players like him come up with what’s called a bi-modal curve, meaning it is quite likely he struggles, and it is also likely he takes off and becomes a monster. The single projection is somewhere between those 2 outcomes, and isn’t a very likely outcome itself.
Click to expand...

Geez I almost blew a load in my eye when you said bi-modal curve. I thought you said bi model's curves.
 
Enscheff said:
Young phenoms like Acuna are almost pointless to project. All projection models for players like him come up with what’s called a bi-modal curve, meaning it is quite likely he struggles, and it is also likely he takes off and becomes a monster. The single projection is somewhere between those 2 outcomes, and isn’t a very likely outcome itself.
Click to expand...

Whuh....jk. Actually pretty well and concisely said.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top