Saturday’s news and rule changes
MLB tried to bury a set of rules by releasing the story late on Friday. I wrote something up on the Cheater’s Guide Blog anyway (and remember, if you like this kind of rules geekery and cheating, you can pre-order the book for $11).
MLB.com:
Aaron Small wants his shot.
Chaves wants the pitchers to throw strikes
MLB.com auto-playing super-loud ads on all their pages is amazingly annoying and unfriendly
Seattle Times:
Geoff Baker on Felix’s mound session and Felix’s conditioning, Lopez’s injury, and so on. Baker’s putting out some fairly substantial content in this blog thing of his, especially compared to what we’re used to from the company over at the PI.
Baker thinks the division is there for the Angels to take, and I… I don’t understand that, but it does seem to be a fairly common opinion. I like the Angels for fourth, but I’d have to admit I haven’t given it substantial consideration.
He also offers a pointer to a WSJ article which discusses, among other things, the M’s creation of the All-Star Suite, which we discussed here at the time of announcement as an ill sign for suite revenue. Ah hah! We have been validated.
The new All-Star Club is a bit short on intimacy — with a capacity of 140 people — but it is $100 to $125 per game versus at least $17,000 for a 10-game suite package. The lounge has the potential to generate well over $1 million annually, which the team says would be a net gain because on a typical night 10 to 14 suites were sitting vacant. “We’re smarter now than we were when we planned this facility,” says Mr. Aylward.
In a business sense, he means.
Seattle PI:
What’s Edgar doing?
Jaime Burke wants a spot
In the notebook, Baek and not getting a spot
Ted Miller wastes newsprint and electrons with a column pointing out that Bonds potentially breaking Aaron’s career home run record will be awkward. He doesn’t like Bonds, Selig’s no help, society’s in the downward spiral, being flushed down the drain of history, or something. No link.
Comments
50 Responses to “Saturday’s news and rule changes”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Damn I miss Edgar. Good to hear what he’s up to, and especially good to hear he might work with M’s players in spring training.
And Keith Foulke retired.
Down in the Hickey piece, there was this:
Was this a significant factor in 2006 and if so, how many extra strikes a season will Grover’s wisdom be worth to a pitching staff already fired up by Chavez “fight, fight, fight!” routine?
DMZ-Appreciate these post times. Last one 1:22 AM This one 1:34 PM. Thoughtful to take all time zones into account. Most of all nice to have a post here to keep the fans chatting.
Will Small get a real shot? Is Chaves actually an above average pitching coach? Or is a pitching coach more of a cheer leader?
Lastly as “The Cheater’s Guide” was mentioned. It seems a great sunny day would be an
opportunity ride your bike to local bookshops for surprise signing. Your fans here will need to order from local bookstore, but they need help as well. First stop Langley’s Moonraker.
They are ordering a few more copies than my one. There are three good Pubs in walking distance.
MLB.com auto-playing super-loud ads on all their pages is amazingly annoying and unfriendly
This is such a pervasive problem on the internet that by default I keep the sound off on my computer. Basically the only time I can’t keep the sound off on my computer for extended periods of time is when I’m watching mlb.tv. So this is an unfortunate development, becuase sometimes it’s handy to pull up an mlb.com page if I’m watching a baseball game.
on a dropped third strike, if the batter leaves the dirt area around home plate, they’re out – the catcher doesn’t have to chase them
So, if the catcher drops strike three, no more trying to take first base — you’re out regardless? Is that what this means?
Larue talks Pentland, and about how out of shape Rivera was last year… Kirby Arnold says Foppert tweaked a hammy as the 1st ST injury, and looks at some other recovering players.
Derek, is it too late to tuck something about the rule changes in around the Rogers WS paragraphs?
6- I think its referring to when guys start walking back to the dougout.
It’s great that Rivera is in shape this spring. But why, if Rivera was so out of shape last spring, did he make the team and stay up (almost) all year?
wasn’t the other choice Corky Miller?
Guillermo Quiroz, who would have been a credible backup.
he wasn’t claimed off waivers until the start of the season– so, granted he could have come in during the year, but during spring it was Rivera or Miller.
Why did the rule change explicitly mention licorice? Has someone been hitting Trader Joes before the game?
But why did Quiroz make the club, start a game, and then get trashed?
I guess I am the 1 in 100, but I have followed Jaime Burke’s career. Anyone remember that collision he had at home plate with Tori Hunter? That cost him some time in the majors – and he was hitting OK. Also, he was a solid college kicker for OSU. He may have been able to kick in the pro’s. Somewhat of an odd combination of kicker/catcher.
I think he came through the minors at third base before being moved to catcher.
His spot probably is going to be determined if the M’s want to keep Rene long term with the other two waiting in the wings.
This would have been easier if Oliva would have been able to fit in better –
Quiroz was out of options, so when the M’s claimed him, they put him on the active roster for a few days, and then passed him through waivers (it is easier to get a player through a couple days into the season than before the season). Quiroz barely played in 2005, and needed playing time in the minors.
I had to go look it up. I think this is the timong…
Rene Rivera batted just .198 in spring and struggled behind the plate. The M’s claimed Quiroz (“He was good enough to claim,” said Bavasi, who accompanied the club here as the Mariners played the Triple-A Portland Beavers in their second-to-last exhibition game. “We’re trying to create some excess. In order to make a deal, you try to create some excess.”) and after some rumoring that they might indeed be trying to make a trade, they began the season by sending down Rivera (who still had options left), and keeping Quiroz. When Matt Lawton came off the suspended list, they outrighted Quiroz, and called Rivera back up.
16
As a diehard OSU Beaver fan, I cannot believe I never put together that this back up catcher was the same guy who indeed was an above average D-1 college kicker! So good call on that one.
I also cannot believe we’d rather have Rivera, who cannot hit even his “slimmed down” weight, as opposed to a veteran like Burke…who CAN hit.
Maybe someone else can enlighten me as to why Rivera in his early 20’s, needs to rot on the M’s bench with Jamie Moyer’s batting average. I mean if he’s worth keeping in the organization, doesn’t he need to be playing every day so he can (hopefully) get better?
There’s a para in this wire story that just disturbs me:
Gaah.
Nothing wrong with that at all, dw. 1 pitch groundouts are the ideal at-bat for a pitcher.
“Pitch to contact” makes me want to wretch. IMHO, K rate and K/BB are two of the more important aspects of pitching. Certainly they are two of the thigs most in the control of the pitcher. Why, why, why would you instruct your staff to concede that as a matter of organisational philosophy?
Yes, but there is absolutely no way to control that outcome so as a strategy its a bit lacking.
teh Times had the good sense to send Ted Lefton to talk to Ichiro
22, striking people out is purely a measurement of ability, not a goal. Daniel Cabrara’s high rates show he’s got lots of potential, but he’s still obviously not a good pitcher. Watching felix last year, he was most sucessful when he was cruising through linups inducing 1st, 2nd, 3rd pitch grounders with less strikouts. Pitching to contact is just throwing strikes,making the necessary adjustments in order to have the necessary level of control, something all pitchers must learn to do, and many don’t. After that, measure his K-rate to see how good he is.
K rate and K/BB are obviously a measure of ability and avoiding modifications to make them worse SHOULD be a goal…
I’m not suggesting it’s wise to encourage a pitcher to overthrow or do things that effect his ability to throw strikes. I’m arguing that suggesting to forgo “making ’em miss” in favor of “pitch so they can hit it” is absolutely silly if the pitcher has a choice. Once again, a pitcher has little control over the outcome of a batted ball….
Pitching to contact is at best an empty platitude at worst it’s an organisational philosophy that dooms your staff to forever suck…
Ahh, but if Felix is throwing more strikes, his K/9 may go down, but his K/BB won’t necessarily do the same, because he should also be walking fewer people. And if his P/IP goes down as well, enabling him to go farther into games, I’ll take that tradeoff.
Roy Halladay said a couple of years ago that he was going to pitch to contact and stop going for strikeouts. He wanted to do this in order to retire guys on fewer pitches so he could through more innings. And ever since then, his K rates have been falling but so has his BABIP.
I don’t think “pitch to contact” or “strike’em out” have much substance as actual pitching strategies. Pitchers still try to hit the catcher’s glove…It seems more psychological, pitch to contact basically says it’s okay to trust your ability, it’s okay if they make contact, because (as we saw last year) they probably won’t, or it won’t be solid contact. Felix only got in trouble when he ran his pitch count high with a lot of balls, overthrew and left stuff up. If pitching to contact means simply don’t overthrow, trust your stuff, that seems alright. I still say it’s all about optimizing the balance between velocity and command, and after that strikeout rate is a good measurement of ability. Trying to strike people out is what skews that balance.
neither one of those assertions is true…
Speaking of the Baker blog, Jeff at Lookout Landing today this hysterical aside on Baker’s note that Ramirez is picking up the nickname “Ho’ because various Ms can’t prounce “Horatio” properly:
If we didn’t have graveyard humor, we’d never smile at all around here.
neither one of those assertions is true
Of course, if Halladay stopped going for strikeouts (and he did make statements to that effect) and his K rate didn’t fall, it rather suggests that your alarmism on this point re: Felix is unfounded. Let’s face it, focusing on throwing strikes rather than throwing balls to set up the K isn’t going to turn Felix el Rey y Cartuelo into Ryan Franklin.
Roy Halladay’s BABIP:
2006: .279
2003: .286
.007 doesn’t strike me as statistically significant.
THT doesn’t list 2003 xFIP, but based on the Davenport Translations and “real stats” I would say that Halladay pitched better in 2003 — when he had 72 more strikeouts than in 2006.
Let’s face it, focusing on throwing strikes rather than throwing balls to set up the K isn’t going to turn Felix el Rey y Cartuelo into Ryan Franklin.
It’s more about the idea that you can “pitch to contact.” You can’t. And the theory is that one a pitch leaves a pitcher’s hand, he ceases to have any control over the situation. All Felix can do is throw hard, throw down, and mix in that curveball from hell of his.
I think the problem with the pitch to contact theory is that it’s, well, Bull Durham.
Since when is stating fact alarmism?
The more likely interpretation is simply that he didn’t change anything at all…
What part of that statement pertains to pitch to contact? All pitchers focus on throwing strikes rather than balls. Pitching to contact has nothing to do with setting up the K.
What exactly is “pitching to contact?” I do now realize there is a difference between throwing less hard in order to better locate (whether in the strike zone or slightly out) and serving up pitches to tempt contact. Yes, I believe throwing an unncessary rate of hittable pitches is stupid when a well located non strike can K a hitter.
All pitchers focus on throwing strikes rather than balls.
In general, yes. In specific, no. Part of going for the strikeout is intentionally throwing balls — to set up other pitches, to get batters to chase, etc. A large part of the whole “pitch to contact” idea is not to do that.
The more likely interpretation is simply that he didn’t change anything at all.
This isn’t a matter of interpretation, it’s a matter of Halladay’s own statements that he did. Interpretation has to do with what you make of the data in consequence — and denying the data (without evidence to actually refute it) doesn’t qualify.
It never ceases to amaze me that with all the great analysis that’s been done over the past couple of decades, it’s idiotic anti-ideas like “pitching to contact” that gain traction. It’s borne out of the same kind of lazy, false logic that avoids anything concrete or verifiable or true, and spreads like a mind-virus amongst sportscasters and people who think like sportscasters. “Pitching to contact” is the EXACT OPPOSITE of thinking about baseball as far as I can tell. But people repeat it and repeat as if it means something and as if it’s a good idea.
I’m with you. I’ve already looked over the AL West and I don’t see how the Angels are automatic locks for the division. In fact, I can’t find anybody who is. Oakland certainly has the talent to do so, but part of what helped them out last year was a resurgent Frank Thomas and… well Mike Piazza is no Frank Thomas. No matter how you look at the A’s they got worse. They have just as many question marks now as anybody else does. Can Harden stay healthy, can Piazza hit anywhere close to Frank Thomas’ 2006, can Dan Johnson get over whatever is preventing him from hitting at the major league level, can Eric Chavez turn around this replacement level downward trend he’s on? Etc.
As for the Angels, you have Bartolo Colon who is probably going to be done after his injury. The inevitable will be delayed on reputation, but he is probably toast. The rest of the starting rotation is relatively solid and their bullpen looks as good as usual, but their offense is abysmal. Except for Vlad the Impaler, possibly Napoli, and maybe (MAYBE) Matthews, everybody else is replacement level or worse. Sure, the Angels have a ton of young talent but unless they play what good is it?
And Texas? McCarthy I like. McCarthy wont like Arlington tho. So you’ll have a great home hitting team and probably not much else… again.
Nobody’s a lock at this point.
Does acting like you have data (so you can pretend to posit an argument) qualify????????????
You can induce ground balls by throwing barely hittable low sinking fastballs.
You do that, you’re a good pitcher. Pitching to contact can work as long as you do so correctly.
I’m inclined to agree that “pitching to contact” is idiotic because it doesn’t make any sense, what does it mean to “pitch to contact”? It seems to reverse a fundemental goal of pitching, which is to miss bats.
From what I’ve seen in previous implementations, pitch to contact means that the pitcher should strive to throw strikes early in the count, particularly with the first pitch and given the choice between a curve ball that might induce a swing-and-miss or be called a ball and a fastball that can be thrown for a strike, pick the latter.
It often means that pitchers are told to throw their fastball, which is the pitch they can most consistently get a strike with, at least 66% and into 75%-80% of total pitches.
The data, terry, would be Halladay’s own statements, which he’s made in a couple of places. A couple minutes’ worth of searching found these references to said statements:
http://tinyurl.com/3yegfn
http://tinyurl.com/33sody
http://tinyurl.com/352sbn
#42: exactly, the pitcher essentially concedes his stuff in favor of the defense behind him
#43: you’re completely missing the point….
Re #44: one, not necessarily (at least if you have the kind of stuff Felix does); and two, either that, or you are.
#45: no….its definately you…
Pitch to contact is a buzz phrase that means whatever you want it to in theory-thats why its often used… but in normal practice it means lots more hits and lots more runs against.
I’m down with, “Felix, don’t overthrow and try to blow everyone away…instead pitch intelligently”.
I have no stomach for “pitch to contact”. In fact, I have even less faith in that phrase when it’s coming out of Hargrove’s mouth.
This is a ridiculous straw man argument. “Pitch to contact” means trust your stuff and don’t nibble. If they make contact so be it, if they miss so much the better. But challenge the hitters.
It means keeping pitch counts down and going deeper into games.
His BABIP went up again late in 2006, but I did an analysis of him at mid-season and he had falling BABIP numbers ever season from 2002 to 2006, except 2004 when he was injured (and injuries do tend to inflate BABIP – there’s solid data on that).
No it is not a straw man argument. That’s what “pitch to contact” means to YOU. That’s the point.
This is the same organisation that:
1. recently offered Zito a long term contract worth about $100M;
2. recently traded Soriano for Ho;
3. traded a cheap Snelling in order to take on a huge commitment to a spent Vidro;
4. turned Lopez into a worm killer;
5. preaches excessive aggression at the plate and adopted a kamikaze approach to base running until it was painfully obvious that such a strategy was unsustainable..
6. OK, you get the idea…
Now excuse me if I’m not as comfortable as Jeff at Lookout Landing in assuming the Ms have a certain interpretation of pitch to contact because it is the most logical interpretation…
What, pray tell, do you think is going to happen to Felix?