The Ian Kinsler Question
Joey Matschulat
Let's shove all of the equivocations aside for a moment and cut right to the chase: as the active roster currently stands, Ian Kinsler is the Texas Rangers' best player. He's a sensational talent, a success story of the highest magnitude for the amateur scouting department -- and, even more specifically, for Rangers crosschecker Mike Grouse -- and one of the single biggest reasons why Texas has clearly transitioned from "rebuilding" to "win-now" mode.
And yet, if you take a moment to reflect back upon the summarized basics of what Grouse once wrote about Kinsler (via Mike Hindman), you'll find something that just might resonate a little bit: "Great feel for the game, athleticism, solid defensive actions, intensity. [Kinsler] had leadership qualities. It was mostly just a matter of waiting for the physical part of his game to catch up to the mental part of the game."
Six years after the fact, might the case be that the tables have completely turned and the mental aspect of his game is now lagging behind the physical aspect? Forget his controversial mid-September remarks about attendance and fan support; those aren't relevant to his on-field production. What is relevant is, of course, the widely held belief that Kinsler's adoption of a more pronounced uppercut swinging motion was a prime contributer to his offensive downfall in 2009, as well as Kinsler's insistence that no facet of his hitting mechanics had materially changed.
The reason I mention all of this is because there appears to be an existing school of thought positing that Kinsler's abysmal batted-ball statistics -- including line drive/fly ball/ground ball rate and BABIP -- will naturally regress back towards the mean, and that with that regression will come a pronounced offensive rebound. Perhaps that is exactly what will end up coming to pass, but here's the million-dollar question: if that perceived, albeit subtle change in his swing plane isn't corrected, is he going to remain exactly where he is right now production-wise, or (even worse) begin to emulate Hank Blalock's career path?
Once upon a time, Blalock was a fantastic pure hitter capable of lacing the ball to all fields and posting sky-high line drive rates ... but something happened. Something that the Rangers evidently never foresaw. Something that probably, but not certainly, could have been prevented.
Opinions vary on exactly when Blalock began to lose "it," and frankly, I'm not sure he ever did lose "it," because there were those oh-so-tantalizing moments when he made you forget about his teeth-grinding hacks at pitches in the dirt and would lock in, shorten up and drive the ball with authority the other way. It's just that "it" was no longer happening enough, and there were times in 2009 when Kinsler resembled present-day Blalock in much that same way. It was unnerving, to say the least.
The Hardball Times' Mitchel Lichtman recently published an in-depth study indicating that the year-to-year offensive performance of the modern-day baseball player typically crests around age 27-28, followed by gradual decline until around age 33 and then a slowly steepening decline in the seasons thereafter. Kinsler is entering an extremely pivotal year -- that is, his age-28 season -- in which we should logically be expecting some of his best work to date, but I'm not sure that anybody can state with utter conviction that it's actually going to happen.
If anybody was looking for an important early-tenure litmus test for new hitting coach Clint Hurdle, his forthcoming one-on-one work with Kinsler and his ability to modify his swing for the better -- to the extent that it can actually be improved, or that Kinsler will accept and incorporate his teachings -- stands out in my mind as an potential leading indicator of how he's going to be perceived by the fan base. And, hey, if Kinsler ends up remaining what he is right now (a 30-homer, 30-steal, .350-.355 wOBA second baseman with above-average defense), that's still very, very good, because 4½-win players are extremely valuable properties.
And yet in spite of that bright side, I simply cannot shake the feeling that Kinsler could be something even bigger and better than what he is right now. It seems like it's right there within his grasp, and yet he hasn't managed to reach out and grab it. Being right on the cusp of superstardom is great and wonderful, but to be so close and yet so far away ... well, I can't fathom too many things more maddening than that.
Reader Comments (22)
I couldn't agree more. Fine article.
A very interesting article......we all know what Ian said about nothing changing with his approach and swing this past season but it was there for all of us to see and extremely frustrating watching this young man who can and should achieve much more in his MLB career going backwards simply to hit more home runs. I would rather have him hit .350 than have 30 homers! Get on base, score more runs, etc. Ian Kinsler has the ability to be a Hall of Fame second baseman........it's up to him to reach for it and MAKE IT!! Come on Ian open your mind, see what Clint Hurdle has to say and make us fans a lot more prouder of you than we already are!!
He'll be fine. It appears he' started lowering his shoulder and dropping his hands simultaneously last year. Very fixable. A bit difficult to incorporate the fix in season, particularly when motivation is mitigated by success in other forms, eg. power #s. I'm sure he's already working on it. Further, in my view he doesn't owe any of us any explanation. He'll be fine.
I agree with all that is said in the article and the above comments with the exception of "he doesn't owe any of us any explanation." We ARE the Texas Rangers, they just play FOR the Texas Rangers. Players, no matter how much you love them will come and go and come and go again (Pudge). We fans are the only constant here. Damn, right he owes us an explanation and RESULTS!
Kinsler did improve quite a bit in one area last year - defense. If he can regress towards 2008 with the bat and keep that defense he'll be a 5 or 6-win player. As it was, he was slightly more valuable in 2009 because of his dramatic improvement on defense.
The Hank Blalock comparisons had occurred to me as well, let us all hope that doesn't turn out to be the case. I'm more of the mind that those numbers will regress closer to the mean and as a Ranger homer (and, necessarily, an eternal optimist), I have to think Ian will bounce back with his fly ball rates coming down.
Now if we can just get Josh right...
Great article..... a daring contention that is possible because BBTIA is independent of the Texas Rangers. Joey, thank you for writing what many fans suspect about Ian Kinsler. We hope continued maturity will lead to greatness.
Nice article. I truly hope Ian figures it out. Having been a Rangers fan since 1974 and living near Tulsa where Blalock played his double A ball, it was sad to watch his regression as a hitter. I have to admit I wondered if Rudy's value of the homerun played a role in Hank's demise. Ian has the abilty to be a complete player. Lets hope for his and our sake that he figues it out. Also, as to the comment that he does not owe us anything, I want to relate a story. I have a 12 year old son that plays 1st base. His hero is Chris Davis. We got an oppertunity to see CD live during his rehab at OKC. After a big game for CD, he did an on field interview for a local station. Lots of kids waited around the dugout hoping for a word or maybe even an autograph from Chris. After the interview he walked passed them shrugging his shoulders and stating "what do you want from me?" Please understand, I realize they can't always accomidate and we won't let this one incident shape our overall opinion of CD. But as a parent watching my disappointed 12 year old, I gota tell ya. When we shell out lots of money to go to game, purchase jerseys and caps, TV packages, etc.....hell ya they owe us. They have been blessed in a way few will ever be. Ian's comments at the end of the year are a warning sign. They need to stay humble and appreciate their blessings. Need some examples - See Cal Ripken and Nolan Ryan.
I think 2008 was Ian's career year. He still has some very good years (~.850 OPS) in him, but don't expect a .900 OPS. IMHO.
Good article. Statheads would incorrectly categorize a bounce-back year as a reversion to the mean, when people who actually know something about baseball would understand that it would be a result of a change in the approach and/or mechanics of hitting. We all know Kinsler has the ability to be the Rangers' best player. But the question is will his ego get in the way. It will be interesting to see if he admits there's a problem with his mechanics. Early signs don't look good.
@ Rf1974
Your point that a little courtesy and appreciation of the fans who monetize their careers isn't too much to ask, is legitimate. I'm guessing that Davis' behavior that day is the exception rather than the rule. Hopefully your son gets a chance to interact with him and others in the future.
My point about Kinsler not owing us an explanation was relative to his approach to his performance. A major league player who has spent the better part of his life working on baseball skills, who has the the very best teaching and evaluation resources at his disposal, who is accountable to his team mates and management, whose very livelihood at the highest level demands an ability to respond to adjustments being made against him by opponents, doesn't need to listen to, or explain himself to me or anyone else doing internet blog flyby's.
A personal note you may appreciate. I've a 12yr old stepson, who's been playing all star, travel, and tournament ball since he was 6. He has been identified with true 5 tool ability. He plays 60 to 80 games a year. His hitting coach is a former ML player and a minor league instructor with a NL team. His pitching coach is a scout for a different NL team, whose son was drafted by 2 AL teams. Physically, the game is easy for him. The biggest concerns my wife and I have for him is the treatment he may get from strangers who know absolutely nothing about him or his preparation passing judgment with unfounded criticisms, based on a belief that because someone is performing for their benefit, they're entitled to become part of the equation. I submit that they're not, outside of my own player, that includes me.
To Ryan and Ripken, yes 2 of the games best ambassadors. But they didn't acknowledge every specific performance critique voiced by a fan somewhere, and then publicly explain how they would address it. In my opinion, that's perfectly fine.
I also consider Hurdle's challenge with Hamilton a huge issue. When Josh is selective, he's a beast. When he's in that "swing at anything" mode, he's an easy out. It's gonna be fascinating to watch this play out.
You correctly point out the shortcomings in Kinsler's batting, but how can you say if spite of it, he is the Rangers' best player? Michael Young is the Rangers' best hitter because he hits the ball where it is pitched and hits line drives.
Point in fact I think Kinsler or Hamilton is the best player on the Rangers team. Michael is a good hitter, with solid D at 3rd. But he has limited range and he does not have the speed, or power that the other two have. Kinsler has great range at 2b, 30 homer power, when he is right hits for a high average, and has good speed. I love MY and he is the ture leader on this team but he just doesn't posses the physical tools that a Kinsler or Hamilton do.
As far as accountability. I think to a point he doesn't have to be accountable to fans. In response to A Stephens comments though this is not your kid playing baseball in torney, this is a player in the MLB that is being paid millions of dollars which in the end are paid for by the fans. So if he hits a rough patch that is fine but when it is for half a year I think he does need to explain what is going through his mind in an at bat, or why he is tomahawking at pitches, or what the approach is.
I think we'd all agree that players owe fans the aim of playing & publically living up to the pedestal we tend to put them on, and then the humility to admit it insofar as they a) aren't there yet; or b) fall off.
I think AStephen's point is that they don't owe us insight into how they are doing that. After the fact of fixing something they may want to enlighten us, but even that disclosure might help pitchers adjust to hitters' adjustments. So part of Kinsler's poker face (part of his making opposing pitchers complacent) might be pretending he's not making any adjustments.
Think of JD. He keeps us informed insofar as it's harmless, but (wisely) leaves us in the dark about major moves until he surprises us by pulling the string.
If our team is truly a team (and I think it is, from equipment manager to potential owners) it's almost pointless to think in terms of "most valuable" or "best" because, for the most part, no one can bring what the next guy can. That's why I was happy we were spared the "voting" process. Kinsler has the potential to be amazing. Feliz & Andrus are amazing for being so good while so young; Oliver for being so good while so relatively old... pitchers for being able to throw like that; hitters for "succeeding" even 30% of the time... JD for keeping us guessing about a trade of Wilson, Kiker, Inglett & Gentry for Callaspo & Meier...
Just kidding, Joey. I won't hijack this thread, too.
Merry Christmas, Y'all!
@ Michael Gleason
thanks, you got what I was saying. I think it's ingrained in these guys to keep things within their own sphere of influence. I respect those who disagree but I believe that's what they should do.
@ Tadow
I mention my stepsons experience to make the point that as young players advance, more and more is expected of them. An enormous amount of time and resources are spent on expert instruction and exposure to high competition levels. They are taught to focus on what they've learned, what they know, and to block out unsolicited commentary from sources outside that sphere of influence. Think about it, with all the opinion out there, anyone trying to react to every criticism or suggestion, no matter how well intentioned, would end up chasing their tail all the time. Not a likely formula for success.
As for acknowledging their fans, signing autographs, making themselves available etc, I agree that they should do that.
This isn't news.
Come on! Get with the program. I want to see action. Movement.
Tell me bout some rumors!
:-D
Heck, let's start some! I think I know how this works...
"Did y'all hear the Rangers are close to dealing Wilson, Kiker,Gentry & German to KC for Callaspo & Meier?"
I wouldn't do that deal (true or untrue rumor)
I say Jorge Cantu for Wilson & Kiker
"Kinsler did improve quite a bit in one area last year - defense. If he can regress towards 2008 with the bat and keep that defense he'll be a 5 or 6-win player. As it was, he was slightly more valuable in 2009 because of his dramatic improvement on defense."
I think this drills down to exactly what I was getting at -- in '08 he was tremendous with the bat and a liability with the glove, whereas in '09 he was tremendous with the glove and good, but not great with the bat. He obviously has the requisite talent and drive to be the best overall second baseman in the American League, even if the task of knocking Dustin Pedroia down a peg figures to be an arduous one.
He hasn't done so yet, and that's okay, because he's still an excellent ballplayer (and yes, there are much bigger problems on this team than its All-Star second baseman), but putting the whole package together in the same year ... that's the sort of thing that could help propel Texas straight into the ALDS, even if everything doesn't go exactly right.
Some excellent commentary/praise in here, all of which is greatly appreciated. To address a few other random issues in here: Young might be a better "pure" hitter than Kinsler, but when you take a holistic approach to player evaluation (e.g. defense, offense, baserunning and positional adjustments), Kinsler is the superior player with the skins on the wall; I suspect Hamilton is the most TALENTED player on the roster, but one good season followed by a stinker just isn't enough to overtake Kinsler ...
... and regarding the accountability discussion, Kinsler clearly doesn't owe US an explanation, but I believe it's valid to bring these issues up and kick them around ATCQ-style when it's clear that something has changed with his swing that's undermining his production, and his response indicates that he thinks there's nothing wrong. As Mike and A. Stephens allude to, it may be in the best interest of the team for Kinsler to maintain that facade (that is, if it IS a facade), but it's something that I feel comfortable discussing at length nevertheless, because ... well, I believe he's going to get himself straightened out, but there's always that chance that he doesn't.
[By the way, much love to Adam Morris, David Pinto and the BBTF gang for picking this post up. With all of this newfound traffic, the site might actually start breaking even revenue-wise!]
Which is better, achieving success or pursuing success? I like Kinsler but I am not overwhelmed by his abilities as of yet. One of the best games ever played by a player occurred last year when Kinsler went 6 for 6 and hitting for the cycle. If you watched the following games he began to struggle and his approach at the plate did change. The success he achieved that night is not repeatable but the pursuit of it is. His game and approach changed from that game. Ian made a statement that he wanted to have an impact on every game he played. His pursuit of that goal is more important than the achievement he had in the Baltimore game going 6 for 6. It got to the point where I didn't want to watch him hit because it often turned into a one pitch pop up to shallow center field. That's not impacting the game! That's letting your team down because you're hitting for yourself not setting the table for the players behind you. Every time he popped up it took the advantage away from MY and JH. Pitchers were pitching to their strength instead of avoiding ours. When pitchers try to avoid a mistake that is when they more often make a mistake. Maybe Hurdle can convince Kinsler the impact he can have by stretching a pitcher in count so to allow the guys behind them to see more pitches and have an increased opportunity to be effective. Lead off hitters should not be homerun hitters. Put guys like Kinsler 5 or 6 in the order. A leadoff homer scores one run and the pitcher knows he has nine innings left. A 3 run dinger is different.
Can Kinsler pursue success again or does he think he's achieved it?
I agree Kinsler's problem at the plate is mental. After the 2008 season he realized that if he hadn't gotten hurt, he could have been the league MVP. So the next year he went out trying to hit a three-run homer every AB. We all know what that leads to: see Hank Blalock. I think Rudy was part of the problem because apparently he's as not much help with the mental side. Hopefully Hurdle can convince Kinsler to take what they give him and try to be more of one in a succession of hitters.