Weaver: Better Stuff?
This morning, everyone’s trying to wrap their heads around what happened last night. The guy who entered the game with an ERA of 10.97 just threw a complete game shutout? It’s one of those things that makes no sense. After giving up a couple of hits per inning in his first eight starts, he gave up four hits in nine innings. What just happened?
Here’s Weaver’s take:
“I felt I was making too many quality pitches to get crushed the way I was,” he said. “The last three starts, I can tell the stuff’s got a lot of life, there’s a lot of sharpness on the off-speed stuff.”
Weaver’s three starts in June, he’s posting a 1.89 ERA and opposing hitters are only putting up a .225/.253/.352 line against him after destroying him in the first two months of the season. Has his stuff actually improved?
Lucky for us, all three of Jeff Weaver’s last three starts have come in ballparks that have MLB Advanced Media’s Pitch F/X system installed - essentially, there are a network of high speed cameras aimed at the plate and the mound, and they track the flight of the ball as it leaves the hand until it crosses the plate. The system measures velocity and break with significant accuracy, theoretically giving us the ability to quantify just how good a guy’s “stuff” was.
So, for comparison’s sake, I’ve pulled in the velocity and movement data for his last three starts, as well as the April 28th debacle against the Kansas City Royals where he gave up 6 runs and got 1 out. I’ve dropped the information into excel for an easy side by side comparison.
Let’s start with early game velocity.
Pitch 6/20 6/14 6/9 4/28 1 86.8 83.6 86.8 89.2 2 88.6 86.7 89 87.3 3 75 86.5 88.4 90.6 4 88 86.7 89.2 77.5 5 89.4 86.6 88.4 89.4 6 75.7 88.2 81.4 89.2 7 73.2 79.6 90.5 88.1 8 78.5 87.3 91.9 80 9 78.2 77.7 92.1 0 10 88.1 83.5 89.9 90.5
In the first 10 pitches of the game, his fastball velocity looks to be pretty much the same - 87 to 90 with a 91 or a 92 here or there. However, there is one clear difference - he threw a lot more breaking stuff early last night than he had in the other three starts. Against KC, SD, and CHN, he was pumping fastballs to start the game (where have we heard this before?). Last night, not so much.
But that’s just 10 pitches. Let’s look at his next 21 pitches, which will run us through the end of his horrible start against the Royals.
Pitch 6/20 6/14 6/9 4/28 10 88.1 83.5 89.9 90.5 11 90.2 85.6 81.3 90.9 12 78.8 76.2 0 89.9 13 74.5 87 0 75.3 14 80.4 77.3 90.6 74.6 15 74.6 78 88.4 85.6 16 90.4 0 90.8 85.8 17 74.3 83.4 88.8 88.2 18 0 83.6 90.7 79.2 19 86.8 83.5 81.8 89.3 20 73.8 87.1 81.7 87.8 21 87.3 86.6 75.1 89 22 86.8 73.5 80.7 77.9 23 87.2 71.8 79.7 77.6 24 88.2 87 89.9 79.1 25 89.8 87.7 86.3 88.2 26 73.1 79.7 90.2 88.4 27 88.3 88.9 77.6 89.9 28 73.9 74.7 90.1 89.7 29 81.1 78.2 90.9 80.1 30 78.9 77.8 89 79.7
As you can tell from the Royals start (4/28), he basically just pumped fastballs, one after another, with only an occassional breaking ball. There’s an awful lot of 88s and 89s in there. Only 8 of the 30 pitches recorded against KC were thrown at 80 MPH or less. Last night, 13 of his first 30 recorded pitches (gameday missed one pitch in each sample) were 80 MPH or less.
Of course, mixing your pitches only matters if you have major league breaking stuff. If Weaver was throwing meatball 78 MPH sliders, well, it doesn’t do him any good to mix those in and watch hitters tee-off on them. So, let’s look at the movement on his pitches in these four starts. Now, this is where the data gets somewhat confusing, because the PFX data in gameday measures things almost exactly backwards of how you’d expect - a higher PFX number means less break, and a lower PFX number means more break. It’s based off expected drop. Anyways, it’s complex, but I’ll interpret this at the end of the next chart.
Pitch 6/20 6/14 6/9 4/28 1 11.12 3.25 11.57 10.85 2 11.10 10.40 11.96 0.90 3 2.30 12.20 10.38 10.07 4 13.29 12.62 11.51 4.95 5 10.94 10.84 4.77 9.56 6 4.32 11.97 8.79 11.85 7 4.75 2.00 10.89 4.44 8 2.82 10.33 13.44 3.87 9 2.24 3.28 9.49 0.00 10 10.63 2.17 11.36 11.07 11 13.17 11.59 8.88 9.09 12 3.08 4.11 0.00 9.70 13 5.11 10.21 0.00 4.29 14 10.09 0.21 11.26 4.05 15 4.19 3.51 6.55 2.54 16 10.44 0.00 11.42 2.67 17 7.58 2.72 2.79 11.24 18 0.00 2.29 9.33 3.37 19 11.93 4.03 9.39 12.34 20 3.42 10.37 2.49 8.33 21 8.50 10.48 5.19 13.51 22 11.29 5.44 3.06 7.26 23 10.66 4.97 3.99 3.36 24 11.69 9.71 9.49 0.03 25 12.70 10.31 9.17 9.23 26 4.31 9.23 9.10 11.50 27 12.05 10.43 5.45 11.72 28 5.00 4.37 6.81 12.58 29 10.54 5.92 11.24 1.88 30 3.60 4.47 7.76 4.40
Okay, so, I know that’s just a bunch of numbers that really don’t mean anything. Here’s a basic guide - anything 9+ is almost certainly a fastball, while something in the 2-4 range is probably a slider. Those 5-7 pitches are probably crappy sliders that didn’t move as much as he wanted or maybe a change-up. The lower the number, the more movement the pitch had.
When you look at this data, combined with the velocity numbers from above, you can see that Weaver was really making an effort to mix his pitches last night. He started the game with fastball-fastball-slider-fastball-fastball, then dropped four straight sliders, then went fastball-fastball-slider-slider-fastball-slider-fastball-slider.
It might not be the most unique pitch sequence of all time, but it beats the heck out of how he started the game against the Cubs - 10 consecutive fastballs, then working in a slider that didn’t move very much.
Beyond the pitch selection, however, it doesn’t appear that his pitches moved much more last night than he did in any of the three starts. The average PFX record for the 13 breaking balls he threw in his first 30 pitches last night was 4.05. The average PFX record for the 9 breaking balls he threw in his start against Kansas City was 4.15. His breaking ball doesn’t appear that it was really diving any more than previously, but he was certainly using it more.
Now, none of this is conclusive evidence. We don’t have an historical record of the pitch f/x data to really understand how to interpret it into good versus bad stuff. This kind of analysis is completely in its infancy, and I’m really just offering this up as an interesting point in the conversation. I’m not blaming Weaver’s previous bad starts on pitch selection, nor am I suggesting that he throw more breaking balls in the future (because, honestly, his slider’s a hit-me pitch).
I just think it’s interesting that he clearly mixed his pitches better last night, after coming out in the other three starts with a heavy fastball pattern early in the game. Combined with the Charting Felix work, and the fact that the Mariners starters have almost all gotten torched in the first inning, I think the M’s may want to consider looking into how their starters begin the games.
As for Weaver, well, I’m thrilled that he helped the M’s win a game and gave the bullpen another night off. But this doesn’t really change my opinion about what he is - a guy who throws the ball over the plate with below average stuff and is at the mercy of the talent of the opposing hitters. I’m still afraid of what Boston is going to do to him in his next trip to the hill.
Can it really be that obvious that Mariner starters ‘always’ kickoff their day by ‘establishing the fastball’, and that every other team in the league now knows this and uses it to their advantage? And that even so, the Mariner brain trust continues to ignore be oblivious to this trend? I admit the data seems to support this, but it’s really hard to believe.
June 21st, 2007 at 8:59 am‘or’ be oblivious
June 21st, 2007 at 8:59 amIndeed, it was a good lesson on how to beat the Pirates. Mix in a lot of off-speed, breaking pitches and you’ll probably own them. With Jeff’s stuff, it worked for 4 hits.
I really, really, really hope Felix paid attention. I know I’m not alone. His performance today is important on so many levels. Surely he’s not going to be showed up by Jeff Weaver…
If Felix pitched like a pitcher — with his brain as much if not moreso than with his arm — he could give the ‘pen another much needed night off. And toss the M’s first perfecto.
June 21st, 2007 at 9:02 amThis is what I have come to expect from this website. Its nice to see something more concrete to look at, in terms of just what did Weaver have. Granted, it isn’t to the level where we can chart information, but this gives some good information on how hard is a pitcher throwing, and how much movement they have on the pitches. The next step in this information is to get some command data, where we would be able to tell where the pitcher put the ball, and the charting season begins. Thanks for the post Dave!
June 21st, 2007 at 9:08 amWhere can I find a description/definition of BRX and PFX? Since the numbers have a ” after them, I assumed that it was a calculation of horizontal and vertical movement in inches. That a lower PFX number signifies a higher break is completely counterintuitive.
June 21st, 2007 at 9:09 amBavasi should send a tape of that game to every GM in the bigs with a note attached that says: ‘All offers will be seriously considered’.
“A rookie league catcher with no power, a can of soup, and a sporty fedora? Sold”.
June 21st, 2007 at 9:15 amNice analysis. However, this was his 1-31 pitch. I’d love to see his pitch selection when he retired 16 in a row. Maybe his pitch quality didn’t change much. But from the game I saw last night to the KC game, his location was certainly better. I don’t remember seeing him getting to 3 balls much in the game last night. Stuff and location are equally important. I just feel that his location since he came off the DL was much better than before.
June 21st, 2007 at 9:19 amNothing wrong with a guy actually earning a paycheck, I say. We seem to be stuck with Weaver, so the least he could do is show up for a game.
So, does Weaver has any sort of change up that he throws? Or, is it all just fastballs and sliders?
June 21st, 2007 at 9:21 amListening to the after-game report they pretty much said the same thing. Nothing much changed tonight with Weaver, other than maybe his location was better. The more important thing was the Pirates were very aggressive in swinging…
June 21st, 2007 at 9:22 amAs long as it doesn’t make the Mariners think unrealistic things about what Jeff Weaver is…
Good for him.
And this is really interesting data, good find!
June 21st, 2007 at 9:22 amWhere can I find a description/definition of BRX and PFX?
You can’t, really. So, here’s where I have to be a little bit annoying, unfortunately - this data all belongs to MLB Advanced Media. For now, they’re letting people have access to the xml files, but it’s not a supported feature of their website, and it wasn’t intended to be publically distributed.
I’ve been fortunate enough to end up in a position where I’m somewhat in-the-loop on this kind of data and what it means, but it’s not really public information. That’s also part of the reason I didn’t put the full data up on the site.
So, I’ll be as helpful as I can in this thread, but that’s probably going to be less helpful than usual.
June 21st, 2007 at 9:23 amSo Gameday tracks and reports PFX and BRX for us, but they don’t tell us what the terms mean, or what’s actually being measured?
I don’t blame you for that. I blame MLBAM.
June 21st, 2007 at 9:26 amSafeco Field. National League opponent. Veteran Mariner righthander on the mound whose stuff is gone and has been getting lit up all year. He throws a bunch of slop for a complete-game four-hit shutout.
The scene I’m describing is from May 22, 2005, against San Diego. Aaron Sele was cut two months later in favor of Jorge Campillo.
June 21st, 2007 at 9:27 amI thought Weaver was, in fact, having a lot of success with a change up last night. I remember Krueger and Mentink bantering about it, and Krueger thought it was the key to Jeff’s success last night. Throwing them off-speed stuff for strike one really put Jeff in a good position.
Which is, of course, totally counter to what Krueger says why Felix is ineffective. Krueger rambles on that Felix needs to throw a first pitch fastball to have success, and toes the company line suggesting that it’s his command that gets him in trouble. Sure, he does have command issues. But I agree completely with what seems to be consensus around the sabermetric M’s community that it’s more his pitch selection…
June 21st, 2007 at 9:29 amSo Gameday tracks and reports PFX and BRX for us, but they don’t tell us what the terms mean, or what’s actually being measured?
They both measure break, just in different ways. PFX is better. Use that one.
I don’t blame you for that. I blame MLBAM.
The Pitch F/X setup is ridiculously expensive. They’re spending huge amounts of money to outfit the ballparks with the technology required to capture the data and they’re giving it away for free. I don’t know how you could possibly be mad at them. This is the kind of information that they could sell to the MLB clubs for huge money, but for now, as they roll it out, they’re giving fans the ability to get a free preview of a ridiculously awesome technology.
You shouldn’t have any bad feelings towards MLBAM at all.
June 21st, 2007 at 9:31 amJeff Weaver Big Game Pitcher?? Couldn’t have asked for a better time for a CG shutout from your prior to game time 10+ ERA pitcher. Fluke or skill we needed whatever happened last night.
Dave, great insight to the pitching of Jeff Weaver with that data, took a few reads to understand but I am excited to see some Felix data after tonights start! Happy Felix Day everyone!
June 21st, 2007 at 9:36 amDave should work in the M’s front office.
June 21st, 2007 at 9:44 amWould a reasonable next step be to match this data up with balls and strikes, or is that too facile? My impression of the games where he got destroyed is that he didn’t fool folks with those pitches on the hands, or low and away, because he didn’t really establish that he could throw pitches for strikes. Guys laid off everything until he grooved something.
I’m not a big brane when it comes to baseball analysis, of course, so this may be completely irrelevant.
June 21st, 2007 at 9:46 amWow, when I read the following headline in the Times: “Mariners want Felix to slow things down”, I thought for sure that it meant that they’ve finally caught on and want him to throw more off-speed stuff, considering how much success Weaver had with it last night.
Nope.
June 21st, 2007 at 9:48 amIs this philosophy of establishing the fastball early a general organizational philosophy rather than just something they’re pushing on Felix? I wondered that when I read the article in the PI a few days ago about how the M’s are getting beat in the first inning. I wonder if maybe they’re waking up to that problem and reassessing that approach?
June 21st, 2007 at 9:50 amWould a reasonable next step be to match this data up with balls and strikes, or is that too facile?
If I was going to do an in depth article, where I attempted to use the Pitch F/X data to draw some conclusions, absolutely, I’d look at the count that each pitch was thrown on, whether runners were on base, how many outs, etc…
That’s a lot of work, honestly. I’ve done it for Felix, because, well, it’s Felix. But, to commit that much effort to Jeff Weaver - someone would have to pay me to do that.
June 21st, 2007 at 9:55 amSomeone *should* pay you to do this. Like, say, Howard Lincoln.
June 21st, 2007 at 9:56 amIs this philosophy of establishing the fastball early a general organizational philosophy rather than just something they’re pushing on Felix?
It’s an organizational philosophy, but for what its worth, they claim that they’re not pushing it on Felix, and he can throw however he wants. They also claim his velocity isn’t down since returning from injury. I can prove that they’re wrong about the velocity, and I’m not very confident in their assertion about pitch selection either.
June 21st, 2007 at 9:56 amPer http://gameday.mlblogs.com/gameday/2007/04/gameday_faq_apr.html
Q: What is the PFX value?
A: The “Pitch-f/x” value is currently defined as the measurement of the distance between the location of the actual pitch thrown over the plate, and the calculated location of a ball thrown by the pitcher in the same way, with no spin; this is the value we provided in Enhanced Gameday last season as “Break”. The new Break value, which we feel is more appropriate for the common understanding of the term, is defined as the measurement of the greatest distance between the trajectory of the pitch at any point between the release point and the front of home plate, and the straight line path from the release point and the front of home plate. By this definition, a Barry Zito curveball will have a much greater Break value than a Brad Penny fastball.
June 21st, 2007 at 10:02 am“They also claim his velocity isn’t down since returning from injury. I can prove that they’re wrong about the velocity, and I’m not very confident in their assertion about pitch selection either.”
Oh Dave, you are so naive. Don’t you know, it’s merely about Felix rushing his delivery!! Pattern of what he’s throwing has nothing to do with it!
See?:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/sports/2003756428_marinotes21.html
“Hernandez and pitching coach Rafael Chaves have studied tapes of those two dominant games in April and compared them with the recent struggles. They think he has been rushing through his delivery.
‘We want maybe a little bit of hesitation at the balance point instead of rushing through it,’ Chaves said. ‘Get to the balance point, spend a little bit of time in it, then explode from there.’”
Don’t you see, pitch selection, for Weaver or Felix has nothing to do with it. Now, I may agree with some of the points in the Seattle Times article about Felix hesitation (hope it’s not a nagging injury issue), and he may be rushing his delivery a bit - I leave that to better trained eyes, but this is sort of like finding out your house is on fire and examining the grass in the backyard for moles, isn’t it? When people know what you are going to throw, doesn’t that create all kinds of problems, even for good pitchers?
June 21st, 2007 at 10:38 amI can totally believe that Felix isn’t following through with as much force, which is flattening out his stuff. That’s what we’ve seen in the gameday data since his return - his velocity is down, he’s not getting as much movement, and he’s throwing that 88 MPH meatball pitch a couple of times a game.
Chaves’ job is to work on mechanical adjustments like that, so, really, I’m glad they’re looking into it and making some changes. I wish they’d also look at pitch selection, but they shouldn’t focus only on pitch selection.
June 21st, 2007 at 10:42 amDave,
How would one go about trying to incorporate pitch location into this sort of analysis? It seems like velocity, break, and pitch sequence will only be able to get you so far when trying to evaluate pitching performance. Would it be possible to use some of this new data to track average deviation from the center of the strike zone given pitch type? Or, perhaps, deviation from a predetermined optimal pitch location would work better. Has anyone tried to do this sort of thing? It seems like effectiveness for a given pitch could be quantified using velocity, break, and location, which in turn would make it possible to derive a subjective measure of pitch quality by assessing a specific pitches’ deviation from these weighted variables. Of course, it’s possible that the importance of context and hitter factors may make this sort of analysis mostly uninformative, if not useless. But, it would be pretty freakin’ cool if we could get a “pitch quality” rating for every pitch thrown.
June 21st, 2007 at 10:43 amThat’s all in the plans for the future. Right now, as they’re still rolling out the system, they’re just focusing the cameras on velocity and break data. They have coordinates in the data, but nothing precise enough that we could draw any kind of conclusions about command.
June 21st, 2007 at 10:46 amI’m not saying exclusively look at pitch selection. I hate moles, but I’d put the fire out first. Maybe his tentativeness is more related to follow through, and fixing that will help his confidence enough to let go. I’d think not getting smacked around and looking completely human early in ballgames would do that too. I guess I don’t have a basis for saying which is more important to fix. I just find the mechanics issues are often cited when nothing else fits (is tipping pitches a mechanics issue?). I am sure they’re running every kind of analysis there is on Felix. At least the data will be there, should they choose to look at it. It’s a mystery that pitch selection isn’t up there on the list, though.
June 21st, 2007 at 10:49 am“The last three starts, I can tell the stuff’s got a lot of life, there’s a lot of sharpness on the off-speed stuff.” Everyone: Jeff Weaver. Jeff Weaver: Everyone.
Jeff is now officially a junkballer.
I think the analysis on Felix is a bit over-simplified. Pitch sequence is far less significant than pitch quality. A heavy (sinking) 96 MHP fastball on the lower outside corner might get flared for an opposite field single, but it won’t get pulled for a XBH. Felix can’t locate his fastball adequately. Establishing a bad pitch isn’t easy to do, but his “stuff” is so good that if he did have control of it in the strikezone, it would make him a much, much better pitcher.
Felix not being able to command (stuff + location) his fastball is not good. Everything else is set up off the fastball. You can’t throw a hitter’s timing off if you cannot establish the baseline timing.
June 21st, 2007 at 10:49 amEstablishing a bad pitch isn’t easy to do, but his “stuff” is so good that if he did have control of it in the strikezone, it would make him a much, much better pitcher.
And if Cha Seung Baek threw 98 MPH, he’d be awesome too.
This whole “fix Felix by giving him good command” thing is stupid. He’s never had good command. It’s a learned skill. To think that he’s just going to figure out how to commmand his fastball overnight is insane.
June 21st, 2007 at 10:52 amWhen looking at the sliders, knowing the absolute value of the break is nice but what we’d really like to know is the actual location. (Well, what we really want to know is where the ball appears to be headed initially — from the batter’s perspective — and where it actually ends up, which apparently are the two points that define the reported distance). Breaking nine inches or whatever is fine, but if it’s starting outside the strikezone and breaking to the center it’s going to get clobbered a lot more often than if it’s starting out looking like a meatball and then breaking in on the hands or to the corners. And that’s what I saw last night: a lot of pitches that left Weaver’s hand saying “hit me” but ended up at the edges of the strikezone or beyond. A pitcher can get away with a lot if he can do that consistently, but as soon as he throws one that doesn’t break like that it’ll get pounded over a wall — just like in Weaver’s first starts.
It’s probably also true that the amount of vertical motion and the amount of horizontal motion have differing effects on how hittable a pitch is, though of course that’s again going to depend on where the pitch ends up and some hitters probably will have more trouble with one than the other. But assuming that location data is actually available, there’s potential for some absolutely fascinating analysis of pitching effectiveness once enough of it is compiled. The more progressive organizations will use it to develop their young pitchers (keep an eye on which teams are first to install this equipment in their Dominican academies and minor league parks); they might even use it for scouting. Meanwhile, hitters will have access to the data as well and some might use it (along with video) to aid pitch recognition; the resulting arms race should be fun.
June 21st, 2007 at 10:53 amWeaver benefited from a lot of Maddux/Glavine-type called strikes off the plate last night.
June 21st, 2007 at 10:57 amI don’t know how important it is but I think Weaver varies his arm slot alot. Maybe he’s found a better one that has some more deception in it.
June 21st, 2007 at 10:59 am34.
The arm slot variation is vintage Weaver. That’s how he learned to pitch and how he is most comfortable. Coaches have tried to beat it out of him, including Rafael Chaves at the start of the season, but after the first few terrible starts, they took off the reins and have allowed him to pitch however he feels most comfortable.
June 21st, 2007 at 11:09 amWeaver benefited from a lot of Maddux/Glavine-type called strikes off the plate last night.
Yeah, I noticed that too. I wonder if the M’s can have that ump follow them around so he’s behind the plate for every Weaver start?
June 21st, 2007 at 11:54 amDave,
Read my post a little closer (and in its entirety). I was suggesting that pitch selection isn’t the reason for Felix’s struggles so much as it is the fact that his fastball isn’t good enough. He tries to establish it, and when he cannot, he struggles until he mixes in a heavy percentage of junk. Perhaps my allusion to management’s desire to see Felix establish his fastball early was a bit obscure, but there is a completely valid reason for wanting to see Felix establish the fastball. The fact that he (more) often (than not) cannot do so was not being argued. The fact that he has been able to do so (Boston, anyone?) sets the standard by which Felix is judged. Felix doesn’t succeed in spite of his fastball, he succeeds because of it. Felix not succeeding (to the level we all expect) means his fastball is failing him. How you managed to turn my post into a Baek comparison is beyond me, not to mention how you managed to extrapolate an argument of “fix Felix by giving him good command”…”overnight”. If we need to be kindergarten obvious with our own analysis, that can be obliged.
Felix won’t be King until he has command of his fastball, making all his other pitches that much better. Take that and run with it.
June 21st, 2007 at 12:57 pmYou can believe that if you want to. The M’s do, so you can be on their side on this one. I’d rather do analysis than wishcasting.
June 21st, 2007 at 1:04 pmMaybe I’m not reading this right:
It might not be the most unique pitch sequence of all time, but it beats the heck out of how he started the game against the Cubs - 10 consecutive fastballs, then working in a slider that didn’t move very much.
It looks to me that pitches 4 and 8 were around 80 mph, and pitch 9 wasn’t even recorded. So I’m not seeing how that is 10 straight fastballs.
It’s hard to spot trends in a column of numbers. So that might be my problem, maybe if I graphed the pitches in a run chart, or categorized them in a Pareto, then I could pick it up. but like you said, it’s Weaver so how much work do we want to do?
June 21st, 2007 at 1:55 pmThe Cubs game is the 6/9 start - you’re looking at the Royals start on 4/28.
June 21st, 2007 at 1:57 pmPaul B - You’re looking at the start against the Royals, not the Cubs.
June 21st, 2007 at 2:00 pmI should have known better than to try to beat Dave.
June 21st, 2007 at 2:01 pmAnalysis, Dave? So far you have demonstrated, via analysis, that Felix isn’t as effective when he over-relies on his fastball. The facts are indisputable. The reason, as you have stated, is that his fastball is his worst pitch. No one is arguing against that.
No one is disagreeing with you - other than to say that avoiding his worst pitch is not going to make Felix the King. Data analysis says that Felix can be hurt when he throws his fastball. Analysis of the game of baseball, leveraging the whole of our intuitive knowledge of the game tempered with experience, says that if you have to avoid your fastball, you are not going to dominate the game (unless you think that Felix can be another Maddux). Without his fastball, Felix is not a Cy Young candidate. If he learns to command his fastball, he will realize his potential.
There really isn’t an argument to support the idea that Felix will be a better pitcher if he reduces his exposure to failure by reducing the use of his worst pitch. OK. So maybe he won’t get raked as often. However, without the ability to spot his fastball or use the fastball to set his other pitches up, then Felix is doomed to a disappointing career. Felix MUST improve his fastball command to become the pitcher we all hope he will be.
Numbers mean nothing without context. You’ve lost perspective on this one, Dave. Felix just isn’t good enough - yet.
June 21st, 2007 at 2:17 pmIt seems to me that if it makes sense to establish the fastball early, it makes more sense to establish your best pitches early no matter what they are. It’s your best pitch that keeps batters off balance so you can get your lesser pitches by them.
June 21st, 2007 at 2:18 pmDave, is this information available to anyone? Could you point to where it can be downloaded if possible? I would be very interested in seeing the numbers from Felix’s starts (or just a breakdown). The only difference I could see was the fastball/offspeed selection. The previous starts had a 60%+ fastball selection, while last night was 50% (all rough estimates). Velocity wasn’t much different, and PFX variance doesn’t tell me anything right now, but it was only a preliminary look.
June 21st, 2007 at 2:19 pmHere is the XML file for Felix’s first start. Determining the URLs of his subsequent starts (and the metadata associated with the values) is left as an exercise for the reader.
June 21st, 2007 at 2:30 pmThanks for the link!
I think… wow… Thats a lot of data to sift through. Well, I did ask for it.
June 21st, 2007 at 2:53 pmThis is NOT what Dave is saying.
June 21st, 2007 at 3:46 pmWait, what, are you really seriously stating that minimizing the use of his worst pitch won’t make Felix a better pitcher?
I just can’t wrap my head around that.
June 21st, 2007 at 4:07 pmActually, that is what Dave is saying. Dave counters the idea of “establish” the fastball early (Dave makes the point that the fastball is Felix’s worst pitch), but isn’t addressing why “establishing the fastball early” is actually a valid concept - if the fastball is good enough for it. Throwing more off-speed pitches early will not make Felix a better pitcher in the long run. Some may consider the concept “old school”, but a fundamental tenant of effective pitching is to set up the pitch repertoire with the fastball. Felix’s fastball SHOULD be good enough that he can get outs even when the batter knows it is coming. He throws a heavy (sinking) fastball with mid-90’s velocity. That is the holy grail of all pitches in an ace’s arsenal. However, Felix’s lack of command - his inability to spot the pitch high or low, on the black inside or out, makes this pitch less effective. Worse, he has missed towards the middle of the plate in the upper half of the strikezone. That is why he gets hit hard - not because he is throwing a fastball and the hitter knows it it coming. He gets hit hard because his location with the fastball sucks.
Dave’s petition is for Felix to mask his fastball deficiency with more off-speed pitches. Data analysis supports this idea - it would minimize the damage Felix suffers when he throws too many fastballs. However, this solution has no long term merit - without command of his fastball, Felix is no Cy Young candidate. To dominate at his full potential, Felix needs the fastball. This argument is not the same as wishcasting for a magical solution (give me command!!!). It is a warning. It is not the same as pedantic if-then rationale: “And if Cha Seung Baek threw 98 MPH, he’d be awesome too”. Dave got nasty when someone challenged his simplistic solution for Felix’s troubles. He may not want to admit that Felix has to get better by improving his fastball command, but somehow he manages to call me stupid while agreeing with me: “He’s never had good command. It’s a learned skill.” No shit.
If he doesn’t learn it, mixing up his pitches at the beginning of the game isn’t going to help in the long run. Understanding that concept apparently requires more knowledge of the game than simple statistical analysis.
June 21st, 2007 at 4:08 pmOkay, so, that being the case, what can you give us other than “fundamental tenants” to convince us of the fact that the fastball is a unique pitch, which no pitcher can succeed without an effective version of?
By the way, Jamie Moyer says hello!
June 21st, 2007 at 4:12 pm50.
I agree with you that, in the long term, Felix won’t be as dominant as he was in the Boston game until he learns to command his two-seamer. But why is it so important that Felix rely on the fastball in the first inning, especially at this point in his pitching development? Command is something that comes with time and repetition, neither of which are contingent on Felix throwing 20 fastballs to start every game.
June 21st, 2007 at 4:25 pmA hundred fifty years of pitching belies that.
You are STILL repeating, over and over, to be dominant, Felix needs command of his fastball. Duh. Tell us something we DON’T know.
What I am getting from you is “establishing the fastball” is a necesary step to Felix getting that command. What??????? That doesn’t follow (or if it does, nobody else is following)
You ARE wishcasting a magical solution. Throwing the fastball over and over, at 80% of the time and watching get it over and over does not equate to Felix getting command over his fastball.
And what the heck is the problem of taking the fastball ratio down from 80% down to anywhere from 60 to 65%??? How is that abandoning the fastball?
June 21st, 2007 at 5:11 pm“Hernandez seemed to have little downward snap on his two-seam fastball in Houston, leading to the question of whether he is not “finishing” that pitch, either because of discomfort or tentativeness brought on by the forearm strain that sidelined him. . .”
Why couldn’t the above quote from the Seattle Times be accurate in describing Felix’ problem?
This is IN CONJUNCTION with Felix being told to establish his fastball at the beginning of games. If your fastball is ineffective it is probably not helpful to not mix your pitches at the beginning of the game.
I remember Weaver being quoted at a post game interview after being hammered in the 1st inning (sorry forgot which game) that he was trying to “establish his fastball” and the hitters were all over it. It seems pretty clear that this was the team strategy.
********************
16 June: Before the game, Geoff Baker asked Hargrove about Baek’s poor performance in the 1st inning of games. Hargrove says its sample size.
16 June - 19 June: Mariner starters give up 8 first inning runs in three games (2-4-2).
19 June: After game Hargrove has meeting with players and subsequently coaches including Chavez.
20 June: Weaver mixes his pitches better and has success, including in 1st innning.
*********************
Are we through with the “establish the fastball early” philosophy? Felix’ next start will be interesting to watch.
has a coaches meeting and the following day Weaver, at least, starts mixing in more off speed pitches in the first few innings.
June 21st, 2007 at 5:42 pmem, it would be helpful if you could explain why establishing the fastball is a necessary measure for a pitcher. You repeat it, you call it “old school”, you imply that anyone who disagrees lacks “knowledge of the game,” but you never actually give reasons.
I’m guessing that you will respond with condescension to my ignorance, but if you could include some reasons, I could accept that.
June 22nd, 2007 at 6:14 am