A few minutes ago, I noticed that “Padres” was trending on Twitter. Imagine knowing that, and only that, several months ago. If I told you last June that “Padres” would be trending in the middle of February, you probably would’ve assumed one of two things. One, perhaps the San Diego Padres had been officially contracted. Or two, perhaps some citizen investigator had discovered that the Padres still exist. But we know the astonishing reality with which we’re growing accustomed: the Padres are a thing, and with all the moves they’ve made, there’s no question the team wants to win as soon as this season. They don’t want to win just this season, but it stands to reason the Padres would like to make this team as good as they can.

OK, perfect, keep that in mind. The Padres want to be good, right? How could they optimize the team? I’m going to blockquote some of you.

Read the rest of this entry »

Yesterday, inspired by a morning chat participant, I drew some parallels between Felix Hernandez‘s changeup and Henderson Alvarez’s changeup. While Felix’s changeup is better than Alvarez’s changeup, in terms of its effectiveness, the actual pitches themselves aren’t too different; the pitchers just have different levels of command of them. I made use of the Baseball Prospectus PITCHf/x leaderboards to calculate good comps for Felix’s changeup, and Alvarez’s change came out in the lead by a wide margin. I considered just average velocity, horizontal movement, and vertical movement, and then I used z-scores to come up with a comparison rating.

I found the exercise fun enough to try again today. Yesterday, I found that Alvarez’s changeup is the best comp for Felix’s changeup, and Felix’s change is a signature pitch. How about some comps for some other signature pitches? That’s what you’re going to find below. Granted, I’ve selected just five signature pitches, and there are a whole lot more of them. That part of this was subjective and kind of random. But, there’s no turning back now. Those pitches examined:

• Clayton Kershaw’s slider
• Adam Wainwright’s cutter
• Sonny Gray’s curveball
• Cole Hamels‘ changeup
• Aroldis Chapman’s fastball

I considered 2014 only, and I compared just righties to righties and lefties to lefties, and starters to starters and relievers to relievers. I set a minimum of 50 pitches thrown, of the given pitch type. Remember that this isn’t necessarily giving you comparisons of pitch quality; just, pitch characteristics. This just looks at averages, so it doesn’t consider variability in velocity or movement, nor does it consider command. In some cases, a good pitch is compared to a good pitch. In other cases, not so much. But the results, at least, are interesting and fun. One last note: for comparison purposes, I combined sliders and cutters, because they’re thrown similarly and sometimes they’re hard to separate. Onward!

Read the rest of this entry »

Felix Hernandez’s changeup is one of the best pitches in baseball. How can we actually know this? You could, if you wanted, look at the assigned run values. Those’ll tell you what happened on Felix’s changeups, specifically. But, those run values get complicated, since all pitches are inter-related. One pitch has an effect on another pitch, even if it’s of a different type. Yet there’s a very simple solution to this. How do we know Felix’s changeup is amazing? Felix is amazing, and he uses his changeup a third of the time. So it stands to reason the latter has a lot to do with the former.

A year ago, I was talking to a major leaguer, and when we somehow got to the topic of Henderson Alvarez, the player remarked that Alvarez seemed like he was one little tweak away from becoming a superstar. That much is easy to understand — Alvarez is still very young and he still throws very hard, and all of his pitches have life. It’s easy to see the upside in Alvarez’s repertoire. Maybe he’ll never reach his ceiling, but because of his ability, his ceiling is higher than almost all others.

I was reminded in my chat earlier today that Alvarez has something in common with Felix. Actually, he has a lot of things in common with Felix. That would be another indication of Alvarez’s upside. If you’ve watched Alvarez, and thought to yourself he has an ace’s arsenal of pitches, you haven’t been wrong. He just hasn’t yet made the most of it.

Read the rest of this entry »

Read the rest of this entry »

It’s safe to say that Dustin Pedroia has never been lacking for confidence. And remember, Pedroia’s confidence stands out among other major-league baseball players, who are already some of the most confident individuals around, by necessity. So it’s not just that Pedroia has 80-grade self-confidence; it’s that he has 80-grade self-confidence even out of the population pool limited to people with 80-grade self-confidence relative to the general populace. Pedroia is three standard deviations above the mean of those who are three standard deviations above the mean. Related: Pedroia’s 2014 ended with wrist surgery, and these days he’s feeling really good about things.

Read the rest of this entry »

Let’s ignore, for a moment, James Shields‘ actual major-league track record in what one might consider to be big games. We’ve all had fun at his expense, and the playoff ERA over 5 makes the nickname seem ironic. What’s interesting is that Shields has pitched a lot of big games in the first place. He debuted for a team that had never won more than 70 games, and the (Devil) Rays shortly blossomed into something of a second-tier powerhouse. And when Shields got dealt, he got dealt to a team that hadn’t been good since 1994.

The idea was to return the Royals to glory, and after a promising first year, in the second Shields got to start twice in the World Series. Now Shields has joined the Padres, signing for a four-year term, and the Padres’ hope is similar to what the Royals were looking to do: the organization wants to graduate from irrelevance. The Padres haven’t even been sufficiently relevant to be a laughingstock, but a whirlwind offseason has put the team on everyone’s radar, and in that way signing Shields is in large part symbolic. You don’t sign Big Game James unless you figure he’s going to start some. These Padres ain’t the Padres no more. Not the way you knew them.

Read the rest of this entry »

I’ve got Coors Field on the mind. And while usually I’m able to flit from one subject to another — probably too easily, to be honest — when I think about Coors, it tends to stick, because the Rockies are one of baseball’s greatest experiments and we still aren’t quite sure what to make of them or what to make of baseball at altitude. The game that’s played within Coors Field is recognizably baseball, of that there’s no question, but it’s the oddest brand of baseball that exists in the major leagues, so it’s fascinating to consider as many angles as is possible. Just what is it really like to play there?

For this post, I want to examine pitch selection. And not just for pitch-selection’s sake; this should, in theory, reflect what effects people think Coors has on pitching. There’s a thought out there that Coors is bad news for breaking balls. What would we expect, then? A reduction in breaking-ball rate in Colorado, because teams and pitchers aren’t idiots. Let’s say Pitcher B has an optimal mix of 60% fastballs, 20% breaking balls, and 20% offspeed pitches. Let’s say he senses that he doesn’t have a good breaking pitch on a particular day. Then we might expect, I don’t know, 65% fastballs, 10% breaking balls, and 25% offspeed pitches. That’s the theory. So what do we see in Colorado? That’s what these big giant tables are for.

Read the rest of this entry »

Did you know the Rockies tend to put up big home and road splits? Of course you did. The Rockies are the very most important example of why park effects matter. Also, the most obvious. Over the past decade, the Rockies rank first in baseball in total runs scored at home, by more than 200. Over the same period, the Rockies rank last in baseball in total runs scored away from home, by more than 100. Hitting in Coors is easy! Hitting not in Coors is hard. Or so the Rockies make it look, at least.

Coors Field just does strange things to baseball. It’s not an unsolvable problem, and it might not necessarily be a problem, but, it’s something. Again, over a decade, the Rockies rank 14th in winning percentage at home. Meanwhile, they rank 28th in winning percentage on the road. If you observe the following table, you’ll note that the Rockies are exceptional in this way. They experience either a home-field advantage, a road-field disadvantage, or both.

It’s the Rockies, then the Pirates, some distance away. It’s pretty obvious the Rockies haven’t been as comfortable on the road as they have been in Colorado. Every team plays worse in other places, but the Rockies perform especially so, and because this is so consistent year to year, that causes people to theorize. Everyone wants to figure out why the Rockies have been so lousy away from home. Answer that, and maybe one could find a solution.

I remember reading, many many years ago, about a proposed Coors Field hangover. This was supposed to affect the bats, and the idea was that, upon reaching sea level, Rockies hitters would have to get re-accustomed to seeing pitches break normally. That is, in Colorado, pitches don’t move like they do in other places, and Rockies players get used to that. So when they go on the road, normal movement looks like abnormal movement, and then it takes time to adjust. Time that the Rockies don’t always have. I remember thinking the evidence was pretty compelling. Unfortunately I don’t have a link, but what I do have is a re-examination. I wanted to look at this for myself. Have Rockies hitters just taken a few days to get used to conventional pitching on road trips?

Read the rest on Just a Bit Outside.

To be honest, this might be a post I’ve already written before. It feels like that sort of thing. But I’ve got pitch-framing on my mind, again, and even if I have done this before, at least now we’ve got more data. Why not revisit something whenever you have more data?

When we talk about framing, so often the focus is on the catchers. This is appropriate because it’s the catchers who are doing the framing — sometimes with a little assistance from other sources. But it’s the pitchers who are actually affected, because it’s the pitchers throwing the balls, and the catchers are involved only after the rest of the play has been carried out. It’s not entirely clear how pitchers are impacted by their receivers. We have estimates, we have some pretty good ideas, but the reality is complex. In this post, I try to examine something simple: What happens when a pitcher goes from better receiving to worse receiving? What happens when a pitcher goes from worse receiving to better receiving? As is literally always the case when I run an investigation, there are better and more thorough ways to do this, but I’m woefully limited by my own lack of ability, and if I don’t have the quick-and-easy stabs, I don’t have anything.

Read the rest of this entry »

By request:

@based_ball Hey Jeff, because you’re great at this stuff, can you write an article GIFing all of Ben Revere’s outfield assists? It’d be fun!

— David Shemie (@dshemie8) January 28, 2015

Ben Revere has 19 career outfield assists. Please understand what you’re getting into: this post is going to have .gifs, so many .gifs. Probably too many .gifs. It was absolutely too many .gifs for me to try to make in a morning, with a fussy and very particular MLB.tv. Also, many of the .gifs are flat-out bad, either because the streaming was going poorly, or because the play was too long and I had to take some shortcuts. Close this window right now if you’re not into what’s coming. If you haven’t closed the window yet, hi there. These are Ben Revere’s 19 outfield assists.

Read the rest of this entry »