David Cone on Pitching

David Cone was a thinking-man’s pitcher before he became a thinking-man’s analyst. The New York Yankees’ television color man took the mound for five teams in 17 major league seasons, and he logged lots of big wins along the way. Moxie played a role. The right-hander augmented his plus stuff with the same cerebral approach he now takes to the broadcast booth.

Cone shared some of his views on pitching when the Yankees visited Fenway Park earlier this summer. As you ‘d expect, he had a lot of interesting things to offer.

——

Cone on Don Mattingly going 1-for-17 against him: “I can’t really explain it, but generally speaking, my formula for getting left-handed hitters out was fastball, split. Against right-handed hitters it was fastball, slider. Maybe I threw some decent splitters to him that promoted ground balls. It’s possible that he hit some balls pretty hard at defenders, too. It was probably a combination of both. Of course, 17 at bats isn’t a very big sample, either.

“A lot of times when I was throwing a splitter to a left-handed batter, it was either-or. It was to get a swing-and-miss, or to get the hitter out front – get his timing thrown off – and induce weak contact. I’d take either one, so it was sort of the same pitch, looking for two different outcomes.

“A lot of it depended on the count. There were times I felt I had to throw a different splitter to get it in the strike zone. Say it was a 2-1 or 3-1 count. I didn’t want to take a chance on throwing a harder splitter down and out of the zone. I’d take a little bit off to get it into the strike zone, because a lot of times, hitters will take an off-speed pitch if they recognize it out of your hand. If I was throwing Don Mattingly a splitter on 3-1, it was probably designed to act more like a changeup, as opposed to a harder splitter with more movement.

You Aren't a FanGraphs Member
It looks like you aren't yet a FanGraphs Member (or aren't logged in). We aren't mad, just disappointed.
We get it. You want to read this article. But before we let you get back to it, we'd like to point out a few of the good reasons why you should become a Member.
1. Ad Free viewing! We won't bug you with this ad, or any other.
2. Unlimited articles! Non-Members only get to read 10 free articles a month. Members never get cut off.
3. Dark mode and Classic mode!
4. Custom player page dashboards! Choose the player cards you want, in the order you want them.
5. One-click data exports! Export our projections and leaderboards for your personal projects.
6. Remove the photos on the home page! (Honestly, this doesn't sound so great to us, but some people wanted it, and we like to give our Members what they want.)
7. Even more Steamer projections! We have handedness, percentile, and context neutral projections available for Members only.
8. Get FanGraphs Walk-Off, a customized year end review! Find out exactly how you used FanGraphs this year, and how that compares to other Members. Don't be a victim of FOMO.
9. A weekly mailbag column, exclusively for Members.
10. Help support FanGraphs and our entire staff! Our Members provide us with critical resources to improve the site and deliver new features!
We hope you'll consider a Membership today, for yourself or as a gift! And we realize this has been an awfully long sales pitch, so we've also removed all the other ads in this article. We didn't want to overdo it.

“A lot depends on the hitter and the angles. Platoon splits have a big affect on the hitter’s recognition. Mattingly, being left-handed, would have a split second longer to recognize the pitch.”

On throwing splitters to same-sided hitters: “I did more of that later in my career, just to mix it up. But it was always the third-best option for me against right-handed hitters. I always felt there was less margin for error. My splitter naturally had left-to-right movement, moving down. If I left it up to a righty, it was right to the wheelhouse. It was an all-or-nothing pitch; it could be a home run or it could be a strikeout. Psychologically, I was leery of throwing to a right-handed batter, whereas my slider would break away, off the plate, making my margin of error much greater.

“Feel did override the premise at times. In certain games, if I had a really good feel for that pitch, I would trust it. I knew it would dive down and in to a right-handed hitter, and not hang on the inner half.”

On knowing a hitter’s swing path: “There were a lot of left-handed hitters that I would attack down and in, particularly with sliders. My second-best pitch against a left-handed batter was a splitter, but I would throw what we call a back-leg slider. Generally, it would be lefties who had really good plate coverage. By that, I mean they could reach an outside pitch and pull it – a hooking style of a hitter. If there was a left-handed hitter who had that kind of swing path, he was more susceptible to down and in. Stephen Drew is like that. He hits kind of like his brother, J.D., in terms of not being a guy who will come inside with his hands and inside-out balls. He wants to pull and hit fly balls.

“That’s what I paid attention to the most: a hitter’s swing path. Was he a guy that brought his hands in and would lead with the knob of the bat like Derek Jeter used to do – a chicken-wing style – or was he a guy who really wanted to get the barrel out in front?

“It ultimately comes down to execution, but if there’s a hole you can attack – an area of the strike zone the hitter is susceptible to – you want to take advantage of it. I faced Joe Carter a lot, and he was a guy who could really feast off of mediocre sliders from a right-handed pitcher. If you remember the ball he hit off of Mitch Williams to win the World Series, the pitch wasn’t inside. It had a lot of the plate. Carter’s swing path was to get the barrel out in front, and he almost pulled it foul. He barely kept it fair.”

On commanding breaking balls: “Early in the count, against a really good fastball hitter, sometimes you can spin the ball and just get it in the strike zone, and he’ll take it. El Duque was great at that. He’d drop first-pitch, slow, rolling curveballs right down the middle. Left-handed batters would take it. They’d see it the whole way, but they wouldn’t swing because they didn’t want to risk making an out on that pitch early in the count, especially on the first pitch.

“When a pitcher hangs a breaking ball, it’s often designed to be off the plate or down. I threw a breaking ball that I wanted to be in the strike zone – if the hitter didn’t swing, the umpire would call it a strike – and that was a slider I definitely wanted to miss with. I wanted it to look like a strike and then be unhittable — in the dirt or off the plate. When I tried to throw that one, sometimes I would rush and it would hang. It would roll up there because I got a little ahead of myself and would try to snap it too hard with my wrist. Those are the breaking balls that tend to get hung.”

On Roger Craig and splitters: “The San Francisco Giants and Roger Craig were promoting the splitter in the 1980s. Ron Darling and Rick Aguilera threw one with the Mets, so I had a couple of guys around me as tutors. But the godfather of the splitter was Roger Craig. I went on the All-Star Japan tour with him in 1988. I talked to him about it – how to grip it, how to throw it – and he was very forthcoming.

“I said to (Craig), ‘I can’t really get it in there very wide.’ He said,’That’s not the way you do it. You hold it like a two-seam fastball with a moderate split.’ He showed me how to hold it just outside the seams, to get my fingertips off the seams and onto leather – maybe move my thumb up on the side of the ball just a bit. He also said to make sure that I threw it just like my fastball. That’s when the lightbulb went on for me.

“Part of it is being able to get a little tug and finish it out front. A lot of guys push it and have kind of a stuck wrist, instead of just normally rolling over with their wrist out in front. I think every pitcher who throws a good changeup or splitter has a little bit of artist-with-a-paintbrush to it. There’s a bit of a tug at the end that promotes movement, that promotes finish in the pitch.

“I don’t know why pitchers don’t throw more pitches, including splitters, in the dirt, right on top of home plate. If you set it up well, you can get a lot of swings and misses. Every warmup I had, if I couldn’t throw pitches right on top of home plate, I was upset with myself. Pitchers don’t practice that anymore; they just practice throwing perfect strikes.”

On influential pitching coaches: “I had several great pitching coaches, but the two who stand out the most are Mel Stottlemyre and Bruce Kison. I only worked with Roger Craig briefly, on that Japan trip. Bruce was probably the best, as far as mechanics. Mel was great emotionally, just keeping you up. He’s just the nicest guy — the most positive guy — I’ve ever been around. Never in a bad mood. Always something good to say. Always pumping you up, even in bad times.

“Mel got a plaque in Monument Park this year. He’s struggling with cancer, but you wouldn’t know it by talking to him. He’s just, ‘I’m fine, I’m O.K.’ That’s the kind of guy he is.”

On spin rate: “I wanted the spin on my slider to be really tight. A tight-spinning slider is like the eye of a hurricane, it’s a dot on the ball. I was more concerned with spin rate on breaking balls than I was on fastballs. But there have always been guys who don’t have high velocity but get a lot of swings and misses because they have life on their fastball. Their balls just seem to jump at the hitters. Hitters will say, ‘Man, this ball’s got some giddyup on it,’ and it was barely 90 mph.

Sid Fernandez was the classic example of that. He threw 88 to 90 mph but he got an incredible amount of swings and misses on balls just above the belt. Hitters couldn’t pick it up. Part of it was deception, but he probably also had a high spin rate. A lot of times it would even surprise the catcher a little bit. He wasn’t anticipating that kind of rising action.

“A lightbulb went off with the (StatCast) comparison of Jered Weaver and Nathan Eovaldi, and how there’s a 10 mph differential on their fastballs. Weaver has the lesser velocity and the higher spin rate. John Smoltz and I were talking about it and it drove him crazy. He couldn’t wrap his mind around it. It seems like velocity and spin rate have to be linked, but in actuality, they’re not.

“I kind of equate it to shooting a free throw. You see guys who can really spin the ball and you see guys who kind of throw knuckleballs up there. They’re traveling the same distance at pretty much the same velocity. Some shooters in basketball don’t have a lot of spin. Michael Jordan’s jump shot didn’t have a lot of spin or a lot of arc. There are 100 mph fastballs that don’t move or jump at hitters, even though they’re traveling at a high rate of velocity. I’m fascinated by that.

“I’d love to see Mariano Rivera’s spin rate on his cutter. I could make the ball break like Mariano’s did, but I couldn’t throw it as hard as he could. His ability to retain velocity yet still get movement was unique. I’ve never seen anybody — Mariano in his prime— be able to put those two together. When you throw a fastball you fully extend, and when you throw a cutter there has to be a little bit of a twist. The minute you start twisting you’re going to lose velocity. You lose extension; you lose the full range of motion.

Chris Young is another guy with tremendous spin rate on his fastball and he’s 85 mph. Those are things I’ve been thinking about. I always do old school-new school, but that said, I don’t think the differences are as great as some people make them out to be. There are a lot of common denominators between big data and old-school philosophy.”





David Laurila grew up in Michigan's Upper Peninsula and now writes about baseball from his home in Cambridge, Mass. He authored the Prospectus Q&A series at Baseball Prospectus from December 2006-May 2011 before being claimed off waivers by FanGraphs. He can be followed on Twitter @DavidLaurilaQA.

24 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Matt
10 years ago

Cone is just crushing it in the Yankees broadcast booth whenever they have him on. When I turn on the game and hear that he’s a color guy for the particular series, I make it a point to watch all the remaining games. His attentiveness to “modern” analytics, like “spin rate” discussed above, coupled with his being a former Cy Young winning player who was also a charismatic player personality, makes him the perfect TV analyst. Plus he’s a strong union guy who has a Marvin Miller photo as his twitter backdrop!

RotoholicMember since 2016
10 years ago

This is awesome.

Andrew
10 years ago

My favorite Cone pitch was the Laredo, when he’d drop his arm angle to nearly flat.

I’d pay money to hear Cone and Kaat call a game.

Mark Geoffriau
10 years ago
Reply to  Andrew

When I was a kid, the laredo slider seemed like just about the coolest thing ever. I was a Tigers fan but I loved watching David Cone and El Duque. Conversely, I hated watching David Wells and Andy Pettitte. Effective, but boring.

arc
10 years ago

Terrific content. Thank you.

Sean
10 years ago

I’d like to see Cone have a go as an MLB manager. Before/if you say boo remember — accomplished ex-players Robin Ventura, Matt Williams, Brad Ausmus, and Mike Matheny were hired with slim-to-no experience, and I don’t think they had previously proven to have the analytical depth of Cone!

rustydudeMember since 2021
10 years ago
Reply to  Sean

As good as Cone is in the booth, I have to agree with this that he might be better in the dugout spreading his ideas amongst 25 active players.

Roger
10 years ago
Reply to  Sean

Why manager and not pitching coach?

Eric M
10 years ago

Cone has been very good in the booth. Regularly cites FIP and other statistics and makes a point to explain them. A welcome addition

Owen S
10 years ago

As a Yankee fan who watches most games on TV, I’m really happy to see Cone getting the attention he deserves. Listening to him is such a treat. The only bad part is how incompetent he makes his colleagues look in the process. I mean I know they’re terrible (especially Ken Singleton), but in sitting next to Cone, their dullness/ineptitude is unpleasantly magnified.

The funniest thing is when Cone says something sabermetrically inclined and Kay+Singleton have no idea how to form a response. They just respond with, “….right….so if the Yankees don’t score more runs, they’ll have a hard time winning this game.” “Couldn’t agree more Kenny… It’s 89 degrees–that’s hot for weather”

tz
10 years ago
Reply to  Owen S

Lol – I’d love to see Cone paired with Hawk Harrelson, only to see the Hawk come back with some of his “insight”

Owen S
10 years ago
Reply to  tz

Do White Sox fans actually like Hawk? I mean, I enjoy that the Yankee HR calls are more enthusiastic than the ones for the opposing team, but that’s the extent of the homerism I want in my broadcasters. If they called the opposition “bad guys”, like Hawk, I’d throw my God damned remote

Billy
10 years ago
Reply to  Owen S

That’s a little hard on Singleton, no? I think he’s a good announcer who was a smart hitter and gives good commentary on the process of taking an AB. I don’t know if he’s particularly SABR savvy, but he’s not biased against advanced analytics either, as a player who valued OBP and played under Earl Weaver. And given the type of cranial hitter he was, he usually has smart things to say. He talks about “clutch” and RBIs, but it’s in terms of the process of how the hitter takes his AB so he can produce good results, not some kind of magical veteran RBI powers.

Karen W.
10 years ago
Reply to  Billy

I agree the comment was hard on Singleton – I find him to be excellent. It’s John Flaherty that makes me want to blow my brains out.

As for Cone, I love that they got him for the booth. Favorite person to watch pitch EVER and even though I can’t see him pitch and make shit up on the fly anymore @ least I can hear him talk about pitching.

Bpdelia
10 years ago
Reply to  Karen W.

Yeah. I actually really enjoy Singleton. Flaherty i can’t handle.

The same tired false humility.

He IS talking about magical veteran rbi pixie dust.

Though now that I’m reflecting on it maybe we still want those guys there. They serve as foils.

Nobody on earth can listen to flash and cone discuss something and find themselves agreeing with flash.

I also love when cone occasionally gets a little snippy and frustrated at his colleagues inability to understand these incredibly simple concepts.

In many instances it’s just a different terminology. All baseball fans dig measurement.

Tee Hee
10 years ago

Reading Cone say “Part of it is being able to get a little tug…” made me chuckle.

obsessivegiantscompulsive
10 years ago

Great article/interview, really loved it!

Linus
10 years ago

“Lion’s share” doesn’t mean what this piece wants it to mean.

RMR
10 years ago

The spin rate stuff is just excellent. I wish more players would focus on aspects of the game like that, the things they’re truly experts in, and less time talking about performance metrics.

Thomas Scherrer
10 years ago

Damn shame David Cone has to share airtime with arguably, the worst play-by-play TV man in baseball.

n0exit
10 years ago

Need to watch more baseball. Kay isn’t good, but he isn’t anywhere near the worst.

Bpdelia
10 years ago
Reply to  n0exit

When we’re talking about play by play we’re talking about a difficult job.

Duanne Stats does the job with as little personality as possible.

Others are more fun.

He’s not there to provide insight.

I think kay gets a bad wrap as a play by play man.

He’s fine, sometimes funny, keeps things interesting. He’s cranky and annoyed when appropriate. He absolutely is not a waldman/Sterling nausea inducing homer.

That’s a tough job and kay doesn’t detract from my enjoyment. He doesn’t do hyperbole.

And he plays off his colleagues well.

Nowadays you either get the boring kronkite style play by play like Stats or the cutesy aw shucks shit that i cannot abide.

Kay falls comfortably in the middle of those extremes for me and is therefore perfectly acceptable.

NathanLazarus
10 years ago

Cone’s great, and the rest of the Yankees broadcast team I’m generally fine with, but if I had a nickel for every time they talked about a hitter’s stats versus a pitcher, I’d throw those nickels at Singleton till he agreed to stop. Cone understands that Mattingly going 1-17 off of him is pretty meaningless trivia. All broadcasts do it, but YES does it incessantly. Anyway, David, thanks for being a great broadcaster and an even better player, and see if you can’t spread some of that thinking-man’s attitude around.

Bpdelia
10 years ago
Reply to  NathanLazarus

How much of that is the production team though. The graphics are all ready to go. It is history that happened.

I dunno. Yeah it’s pointless but usually they just give the info and then move on after the graphic disappears.