After Edinson Volquez last pitched, the Jays batters had a fair amount to say about his stuff. Yes, his velocity boost has been third-best this postseason, but Jose Bautista and Chris Colabello told Jordan Bastian that his movement was different from how they remembered him.

From Bastian’s piece at MLB.com:

“His fastball is playing with a little rise, rather than sink,” Blue Jays first baseman Chris Colabello said. “When he’s lower 90s, I think he has a tendency to sink a little bit more. Right now, it’s more of a lateral movement, or an upshoot.”
…
“His fastball wasn’t running that much,” Bautista said. “I think he was trying to throw a little harder and it was straighter. I kept hitting the bottom of the ball. I was expecting to see more sink.”

Read the rest of this entry »

There’s this thing about the World Series: It’s the only baseball left. There are two teams, and they need to finish before the offseason can begin. This is the most meaningful baseball on the calendar. After all, the World Series is the whole point. So you’ve got everyone focused on at least four games — and maybe as many as seven. There are days off in the lead-up, and there are days off in the middle. During that time, almost every single thing is analyzed. Every stone in the stony field gets turned in the World Series, which is also funny because it’s one series — and it’s baseball — which means we might as well not do any analysis at all. The long and short of this paragraph is this: There’s no harm in talking about how Salvador Perez and Travis d’Arnaud receive pitches.

By the numbers at StatCorner, and by the numbers at Baseball Prospectus, d’Arnaud is a better receiver than Perez. Perez seems to be somewhere in the area of average, while d’Arnaud is one of the better receivers. I could just leave the point here, but what might be more interesting are the juicier, more granular details. Like, with hitters, you could stop at wOBA, but why not look at sub-components like walks and power? I’m going to borrow from an excellent post-ALCS article by Tom Verducci. There’s a lot in there that’s worth your time, but I’m drawing from just one section.

Read the rest of this entry »

J.P. Ricciardi is part of the Mets’ collaborative process. A special assistant to general manager Sandy Alderson, Ricciardi is one of the decision makers, and the decisions have been savvy. New York – a club with a cleverly-sculpted roster — is in the World Series.

Ricciardi’s role is multifaceted, and in his own words, he brings a “more old-school” voice to the table. That may seem surprising to some. The 59-year-old was viewed as a Moneyball protege when he worked under Billy Beane in Oakland, and later when he was handed the GM reins in Toronto. He joined the New York front office in 2011.

Ricciardi shared his thoughts on team-building, and how the Mets go about it, during the NLCS.

——

Ricciardi on the Mets front office: “What’s good about the group we have is that it’s all-inclusive. I don’t think any one person can take all of the credit for anything we’ve done, either the good or the bad. Sandy Alderson involves the people he brought in – Paul DePodesta, Dickie Scott, John Ricco, and myself. We’re all involved in the decisions. It’s never one person saying, ‘I was in charge of that.’

“We all bring something a little different to the table, Sandy is very analytical. Paul is analytical as well. I’m probably the least analytical – the most old-school – of the four. My background is probably more… I wouldn’t say I’m a gut-feel guy, because that can be a very misleading term. I’m a little more of a throwback in the sense that if I like a player, I’ll fight for him, even if the numbers don’t add up to X, Y and Z. Of course, if the numbers show that he’s clearly not the player we think he should be, I’m not stupid enough to say that we’re going to put a square peg in a round hole.” Read the rest of this entry »

We know the New York Mets dominated the Chicago Cubs in the National League Championship Series. the Cubs never held the lead; the Mets scored in the first inning in all four games; they were aggressive on the basepaths; their pitching was outstanding; Daniel Murphy homered, then homered again, then homered a few more times. We could list many more ways the Mets were historically successful in the NLCS. Let’s just say this instead: while the Cubs are set up for a very successful future, the Mets deserve to be in the World Series.

Because of the level of supremacy they showed against the Cubs, the Mets are enjoying a lengthy break between the NLCS and World Series: a five day lull, to be exact. That’s usually something that happens when one of the Championship Series results in a sweep, as the sweeping team has to wait around for the prescheduled first day of the World Series to start (which can be a lengthy interval). When Game One begins tomorrow, will that five days have mattered for the Mets?

Naturally, this is a topic that elicits differing viewpoints: one side might say the extra rest is beneficial for recharging tired arms and bodies, while the other side might say that rust accumulates with too much down time. Starting pitchers might get to rest elbows and shoulders that already have over 200 innings on them, but a hot-hitting team (as the Mets were in both the NLDS and NLCS) might cool off with an extended break leading up to the World Series. If you’ve watched or heard postseason baseball talking heads, you’ve almost surely witnessed both of these arguments being made.

That’s most likely because we have easily graspable examples that fit those narratives. There were the 2007 Colorado Rockies, who won 21 out of 22 games leading up to the World Series and were about as hot as any team has ever been over that number of games. Then they had an eight-day break before the Fall Classic: swept by the Boston Red Sox, they scored only 10 runs in four World Series games.

Fixating on those types of examples is easy to do: most of all, they’re memorable. But is what they tell us true? Do longer breaks between the LCS and World Series negatively or positively impact how teams perform? Let’s find out.

Using Baseball Reference’s playoff section, I’ve pulled all of the playoff series since 1969, the first year that baseball had League Championships (i.e. playoffs with four total teams). I then calculated how many days off each team that made it to the Fall Classic had between the Championship Series and the World Series. I then crunched some of the results in a number of ways.

First, let’s start by looking at how much rest teams usually get before the World Series, and how that has changed over time. Here’s a chart of how many days teams had off before the start of the Series for our time period:

Read the rest on Just a Bit Outside.

Allow me to oversimplify the upcoming World Series: earlier in games, the Mets are going to send out pitcher after pitcher armed with a shoulder bazooka. The Royals will try to deflect their attacks by swatting the shells away, which they’re particularly good at doing. If the Royals do well enough swatting, then they’ll take the advantageous position, trotting out their own bazookas. And the Mets won’t have much defense against that. In case this oversimplification failed to make anything clearer, the Royals just want to get leads to their bullpen. Which means a critical match-up will be the Royals’ famously contact-heavy bats against the Mets’ famously velocity-heavy arms.

Sometimes, when you’re looking for keys and distinguishing characteristics, you really have to dig and get at the subtleties. This one is super obvious. The Mets are driven by their hard-throwing starters. The Royals are driven at least in part by their aggressive, ball-in-play lineup. The Mets’ rotation is historically powerful. The Royals’ lineup is historically good at touching the baseball. It’s something that’s just begging to be analyzed. And, it has been analyzed already. I’ve just decided to go about it a different way.

Read the rest of this entry »

No matter what happens in the next seven games, we’ll be motivated to learn a grander lesson from it. Not many picked this World Series matchup anyway, so we’ll search ourselves for a takeaway. Why did we look the wrong way?

The problem with going too far down this rabbit hole, other than not finding very much, is that these teams couldn’t be any more different. Name a facet of the game and the Mets and the Royals are on opposite sides of the leaderboard. You have to squint to get them in the same neighborhood anywhere really.

Read the rest of this entry »

In any given nine-inning baseball game, there are upward of 250 pitches thrown. More than half of those pitches, more often than not, are going to be thrown somewhere in the range of 90-97 mph. They’re all going to move somewhere between two and 12 inches, and most of them will travel through the same theoretical three-square-foot box. It’s easy for these pitches to begin blending together. That’s why we appreciate the ones that truly set themselves apart. These ones are easy to spot.

This is similar to a post I did last year around this time. The mission: find the 10 individual pitches deemed nastiest by my subjective criteria, hopefully learn something about those pitches and what it is that makes them so effective, and then see them in action so we have a reference point and something extra to keep an eye out for the in World Series.

How it’s done: I expanded a bit on last year’s criteria. Last year’s criteria, it was just whiff rate and ground ball rate, per individual pitch. Those are the two best common results-based outcomes a pitch can have. A complete swing-and-miss, or the weakest contact of the three main batted ball types. This year, I folded in two process-based characteristics along with the results, adding velocity and spin rate, with spin data coming from Statcast. Two big things that make a pitch aesthetically pleasing, to us, are speed and movement. Velocity and spin rate should capture that. Two big things that make a pitch effective, to pitchers, are whiffs and grounders. We’ve got that down. Oh, also, an executive decision I made and forgot to mention: for four-seam fastballs, I substituted pop-up rate for ground ball rate. Felt like the right thing to do, given four-seams are the one pitch, more than any other, thrown up in the zone with no intention of getting grounders. Anyway, I calculated z-scores for each of the four selected characteristics, for each pitch type, added them up, and found 10 pitches that stood above the rest. These are those 10 pitches.

No. 10: Wade Davis – Knuckle Curve

Read the rest of this entry »

There’s something that would bother me about Kelvin Herrera. To be clear, it had nothing to do with his personality. And it had nothing to do with the fact that he was successful. Herrera should be successful. Have you watched him? The last two years, he’s run a 2.06 ERA. He’s allowed a .570 OPS, and while maybe that doesn’t mean a lot to you without context, how about this as context — Kenley Jansen has allowed a .569 OPS. David Robertson, .581. The numbers have been there for Herrera. He’s been a reliever with a triple-digit fastball and some statistics to match. Nothing about that is weird.

What would bother me was that, just from watching Herrera for a few minutes, you’d think he’d be a high-strikeout pitcher. Just from being aware of his velocity, you’d think he’d be a high-strikeout pitcher. I know we might make too much of strikeouts around here. I know I shouldn’t have been too bothered when Herrera was still finding ways to succeed. But the last two years, he’s been a flamethrower with the same strikeout rate as Chad Qualls. Compared to the league, Herrera actually ran a strikeout rate that was slightly below average for a reliever. It’s a small thing, maybe a petty thing, but it’s a thing my brain struggled to understand. Whenever I looked at Herrera’s numbers, I’d expect them to be something different.

Something like, say, what Herrera’s done in these playoffs. Since really emerging as a shutdown reliever for the Royals, Herrera’s struck out a little more than a fifth of the hitters he’s faced. Against the Astros and Blue Jays, however, he’s struck out about half of the hitters he’s faced. Herrera in this postseason: 33 batters, 16 strikeouts, .438 OPS. The heat, as you know, has been there. But it’s been accompanied by something different, something new. Kelvin Herrera tinkered with a slider, and he learned to harness it just in time.

Read the rest of this entry »

Mounds are set to specifications. They need to be elevated 10 inches above the rest of the field and slope at a rate of one inch per foot over a span of at least six feet. The front edge of the rubber has to be exactly 60 feet, six inches from the rear point of home plate.

They may be the same, but they don’t all feel the same. Jonathan Broxton, Steve Cishek and Jason Motte told me that each one is a little different. Cardinals pitching coach Derek Lilliquist opined that they’re all the same, but then compromised his claim by saying “some can change your feel, change your mechanics a little bit.”

But again, they’re set to specifications. Motte told me he saw the grounds crew measuring the Wrigley Field mound as the team was preparing to travel to Pittsburgh for the Wild Card game. As Lilliquist put it, “At the end of the day, it’s still 60 feet, six inches, with the same slope.”

Motte also told me that “It’s not like you can do anything to try to gain some kind of home field advantage by giving pitchers an advantage, or a disadvantage.”

Why then the different feel? Read the rest of this entry »

The Royals put me in a weird position. It’s not because their two consecutive pennants make skeptical and critical analysts look stupid — we went over that a year ago, and previously, we went over the same stuff with the Giants. If anything, that part of this is just funny. No, the Royals put me in a weird position, because they make it tempting to believe in ideas that run contrary to what I’ve been taught. I’m not supposed to believe in a team’s vibe. I’m not supposed to believe in a team’s unkillability. I’m not really supposed to believe in powerful and particular things, because baseball is intensely competitive, and it doesn’t make sense that one team would ever have a secret. I’m not supposed to believe the Royals are more special than any other team. Than, say, the Blue Jays. And I’m not saying I do believe in the Royals’ magic. They’re just pretty good at sucking me in. It’s a baseball team that makes me think twice about assumptions I have about baseball teams.

The ALCS isn’t going to have a Game 7. Would’ve been fun, but this was a plenty good way to wrap up. The ALDS between the Rangers and the Blue Jays came to an unforgettable conclusion, a very wild and unpredictable conclusion, but aside from the tie-breaking home run, that memorable inning turned on a series of defensive mistakes. Just before the homer, the whole inning was sloppy. That might’ve been baseball around its most entertaining. What we just saw in Game 6 was baseball in the vicinity of its best. The Royals and Blue Jays competed in a classic, and, of course, the Royals won. They’re the Royals, after all. I don’t know exactly how we got here, but I can tell where we are on the map.

Read the rest of this entry »