Have the Rockies Found Answers at Altitude?

Bud Black pitched twice in Denver.

The first occasion was as a minor leaguer for the Omaha Royals in 1983 when he faced the Denver Bears, the Triple-A affiliate of the Texas Rangers. A decade later, Black returned to Mile High Stadium at the foot of the Rocky Mountains for his first and only major-league start at 5,200 feet above sea level — in this case, against the expansion Rockies on May 12, 1993. The next closest stadium in elevation at the time was Atlanta’s Fulton County Stadium (1,050 feet) followed by Kauffman Stadium in Kansas City (886 feet). Perhaps in all of professional baseball only Mexico City’s Foro Sol (elevation: 7,350 feet) was an environment less conducive to pitching.

Even as a minor leaguer in the early 1980s, Black had heard all about the perils of pitching in the thin air of Denver, about what it means to have fewer molecules bouncing off batted balls and pitches. Most often Black heard about how ineffective breaking pitches were there, with the Magnus force exerting less influence over a ball due to an air density of just 82% compared to sea level.

“I heard that. I tested that theory on my own,” Black told FanGraphs. “I placed a high degree of focus on the games I did pitch there, granted there were only two [starts]… When I threw a curveball, I had to throw it properly. I had to throw it with good spin. My release point had to be on… I had to release it at a certain point. Granted, that is a challenge.”

Mile High Stadium was a terrifying place. With a 365-foot power alley in left-center, even Eric Young could power up.

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.

After struggling early in his only major-league start in Denver, Black finished by retiring 21 of 22 batters before roughly 50,000 fans — a start he discussed with the Denver Post this offseason after he’d been hired as the Rockies manager. It was, in part, through that firsthand experience that his approach to pitching at altitude was informed. The competitive 36-year-old Black wanted to beat not only the Rockies, but also the environment. He wanted to test, and prove wrong, conventional wisdom. It was his experience there that has shaped some of philosophy about pitching at Coors Field. He thought he could throw, and trust, his breaking ball there.

Black wanted to test theories about pitching at altitude and as a player. He thought about it some with the San Diego Padres earlier in his managerial carer. But upon being hired as the Rockies’ new manager in November, he had the opportunity to experiment in the games’s most difficult environment, the sport’s most challenging laboratory.

Said Rockies pitching coach Steve Foster, who Black retained — and who believes in the curveball — of coaching at Coors Field: “It’s the ultimate challenge.”

Plenty of executives, coaches, and pitchers have failed to conquer the challenge, to unlock the secret of pitching in Denver. The Rockies have tried four-man rotations, to collect sinkerball pitchers, to bring in big-money, top-of-the-rotation arms. Little has worked. But anyone capable of succeeding in Coors will be remembered. And these Rockies might have figured out how to pitch, and win, at altitude. After having never produced an ERA- better than 90 for a season (the metric adjusts for ballpark and run-scoring environment), the Rockies enjoyed a franchise-best mark entering the weekend, pacing the club to its 43-26 start.

By adjusting their sights, by adjusting their pitch mix — and certainly by adding considerable talent — the Rockies have perhaps cracked the code in pitching at Coors.

***
Prior to the spring, Black had found an ally in the breaking-balls-can-work-at-Coors camp in bullpen coach Darren Holmes, whom Black also retained along with Foster. Holmes pitched in Denver for a number of years and often successfully. He was hired in part for his forward-thinking application of biomechanics. He was also non-traditional in that he encouraged his pitchers to throw curveballs. After all, Holmes threw his curveball there and often had success.

“[Trust in the breaking ball] was reiterated from [Holmes],” Black said. “He had a good breaking ball. A true 12-6 breaking ball.”

When Black, Holmes, and Foster and met with individual pitchers this spring in Arizona they were also making a sales pitch: they were selling the curveball to those who had one but lost trust in it. They were selling the pitch to those whom they thought could benefit by throwing it, from its velocity separation and depth.

They asked Tyler Chatwood to bring the pitch back after shelving it. Now, Chatwood is throwing curves at an 11.3% rate, compared to 4.8% last season. They have asked Chad Bettis to spike his curveball usage — which dropped by five percentage points last season — after he builds up enough stamina following his cancer treatment. Foster and Holmes had already worked on developing a curveball for Jon Gray, who had never thrown one. Gray threw his curve at a 10% rate last season and again threw it at a 10% rate this season before injuring his foot. German Marquez is throwing the pitch on a quarter of his offerings.

Beyond throwing the pitch, the Rockies’ staff wanted their pitchers to focus on where they threw the pitch.

“I’ve heard [Holmes] talk to a lot of our young pitchers, it’s more about your sight line,” Black said. “Every pitcher has a different visual of what they look at when they throw their breaking balls. Some guys look at the catcher’s pads, look at the umpire, look at something off the hitter. Some guys visualize the pitch out of their hand and landing it in a [certain area]. Darren thought for him, and kind of used it as a coaching tool, that if you’re a guy that throws your breaking ball to top of the catcher’s head, lower your sights and try to throw it to his chest. That’s sort of the mindset behind the teaching tool.” After all, the breaking ball breaks less at Coors Field.

This season no team is throwing their curveball lower than the Rockies. Consider the following chart:

Lowering Their Sights
Season Rockies’ Avg. CB height at home plate MLB rank Avg. CB height at home plate in MLB
2015 1.76 ft. 19th 1.85 ft.
2016 1.83 ft. 21st 1.86 ft.
2017 1.63 ft. 30th 1.86 ft.

Consider this Chatwood curve location:

While the Rockies have thrown a relatively low percentage of curveballs (6.3%) as a club — as they have throughout the PITCHf/x era, only once reaching double-digits in usage — a healthy Bettis and Gray could change that. When Bettis returns, he — along with a healthy Gray — will give the Rockies five starting options of pitchers that throw curveballs at a 10% rate or better, along with Chatwood, Marquez (23.6%) and Jeff Hoffman (17.4%).

“I do remember having a talk about it. I think it’s something you hear a lot about,” Bettis said of avoiding the curveball at Coors. “I think it’s all about adjusting your sights and being comfortable in how you are throwing it.”

How difficult is it for a pitcher to adjust sights?

“Everyone is a little different, but for the most part everyone is pretty visual,” Bettis said. “If I wanted to throw a get-me-over strike, my sights would be on a right-handed batter’s shoulder and if it’s a left-handed hitter and I want to throw it for a strike or a back-door curveball, it’s going to start at an imaginary spot. So I have to be comfortable wherever that spot is — if it’s from Tony’s [Wolters] mask over to the right, or from the umpire’s mask over to the right — but it’s an imaginary spot. There is no target there. You have to work on all of that feel. [To lower sights] you have to lower that from shoulder to elbow or elbow to hip.”

Rockies rookie Kyle Freeland, a former first-round pick and Denver native, imagines a landing spot and a point at where the pitch should break.

While Black believed the curveball could work as Holmes’ did, Foster was a convert.

“The biggest thing I’ve recognized is the curveball works here,” Foster said. “I guess I was skeptical… not knowing how effective it would be, and I’ve been pleasantly surprised. It’s been a good pitch in Coors.”

The Rockies’ curveball has the lowest xwOBA (.178) in the sport this season, according to Baseball Savant.

While the slider has been the most effective pitch at Coors Field in the PITCHf/x era, Greg Holland’s slider has curveball-like action, dropping straight down off a seemingly invisible cliff. Statcast classifies the pitch as a knuckle-curve with an average height of 1.81 ft. at the plate. Holland is throwing it at a rate of 48% in what has been a come-back season.

The Rockies have brought back a focus to the curveball. They plan on throwing it more. They think they’ve figured out how to make the pitch play more effectively, and they believe it is the ideal secondary pitch to play off their preferred primary offering, the four-seam fastball.

***

As the frequency of four-seam fastballs has declined throughout the game, the Rockies are going in the opposite direction: the Rockies have increased their usage of four-seam fastballs and currently lead the league in four-seams usage, 45.9%, up from 44.0% last season. The league-average usage rate for four-seam fastball rate is 35.6%.

“There’s intent,” said Foster of the four-seam/curveball combo. “You think about it, thin air, more spin. Physics. It makes sense. Four-seamers are harder than two-seamers, so we are talking about power and curveballs. You have variation of speed, and you have power; you have a faster fastball and a bigger variation. So those are things we talk about and discuss. Spin rate, four-seam fastball mixed with that curveball is critical. Those are things we see that are effective at Coors. It’s important.”

The Rockies are averaging 94 mph as a staff with their four-seam fastball, which is a team-best mark in the PITCHf/x era. The linear weight they have produced from fastballs is a record 13.1 runs above average, a club-record in the PITCHf/x era, and just the second time they have produced a positive linear weight.

The Rockies have raised the average height of their fastballs, too, but not significantly and perhaps that makes sense if a team wants to have a tunneling effect with the game’s lowest average curveball height.

Rockies’ average fastball height
Season Avg. FB height at home plate MLB rank Avg. FB height at home plate in MLB
2015 2.49 ft. 26th 2.56 ft.
2016 2.48 ft. 28th 2.58 ft.
2017 2.55 ft. 21st 2.61 ft.

Perhaps it’s a mix of quality four-seamers and curveballs that can serve as a sustainable foundation of success for Colorado.

There’s no question that success off any mound begins with talent. Holland has proven to be an important offseason acquisition, Jake McGee has been dominant with better health and usage of data, and the Rockies are beginning to develop their own arms like Gray, Freeland, and Hoffman. But the Rockies also might be as close as ever to breaking the code, to finding a strategy, answers, at altitude.





A Cleveland native, FanGraphs writer Travis Sawchik is the author of the New York Times bestselling book, Big Data Baseball. He also contributes to The Athletic Cleveland, and has written for the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, among other outlets. Follow him on Twitter @Travis_Sawchik.

26 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
paulmathewson5
9 years ago

Man, this is a great piece. Very interesting – that coaching staff seems to be filled with some very thoughtful guys.

jfree
9 years ago

Even if the result is merely the Hawthorne effect at Coors, putting that pitch back in their repertoire and having the confidence in it again is probably having a big effect on the road.

The pitching challenge at Coors has never been about physics. You don’t need to outrun the tiger. You just need to outrun the other guy. And it looks like they are doing that this year. But they’ve been (very roughly) doing the same thing most years.

What’s different this year imo is that on the road they are no longer pitching like Coors is still in their head. They can just pitch. And the results are night&day. From one of the regularly worst or near-worst road pitching teams to one of the best. Which can also then create a positive feedback loop for the bats. They don’t need to press as much and in so doing exacerbate the less-well-known-but-very-real ‘Coors problem’ for bats (overaggressiveness and poor plate discipline).

It’s fun to see the Rockies finally playing baseball not Hamlet.

Six Ten
9 years ago

They don’t say it quite this way, but it sounds like what the Rockies are doing is, in effect, turning curveballs into splitters. The curveball spin doesn’t catch the thinner air out of the hand when it’s at its fastest, so you can’t give it that big up and down loop we usually see. But if you start it out straight like a fastball, you can still count on it dropping at the end as it slows down and starts to catch more air. So, like a splitter, you make it look like a fastball on release. And then, like a splitter, it dives off a cliff as it nears the plate. Obviously we don’t know yet if this advantage is real, but it’ll be a cool solution to a hard problem if it is.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
9 years ago
Reply to  Six Ten

As a person who is skeptical that curveballs can ever succeed in Colorado, I was thinking something similar. It be a curveball but it doesn’t behave like a curveball, so the answer is to basically treat it like a different pitch. So it’s like a four-seam/pseudo-splitter combo anywhere else.

Joe
9 years ago

Excellent article Travis! Some interesting insights into the Rockies pitching staff that I have not heard anywhere else this year.

I only hope you are right when saying: “anyone capable of succeeding in Coors will be remembered”…it is difficult to believe when guys like Freeland and Senzatela aren’t even being mentioned in NL ROY conversations or for the All Star Game. I know Bellinger has been great, but these guys deserve some serious recognition for what they have come out an done to this point (from Day 1 of the season nonetheless). If the automatic #COORS write-off for batters is going to still continue to exist, Rockies pitchers should get the opposite automatic boost to their stats.

mikejuntMember
9 years ago
Reply to  Joe

I have heard discussion of the pitchers elsewhere, but I don’t think Fangraphs is inclined to believe in a group of pitchers who all average 6 K/9 or worse in a ballpark where babip trends high due to huge spacious outfields.

That whole staff minus Hoffman screams unsustainable to most advanced analytics.

Remember the Denver problem isn’t just breaking pitches working more poorly. Its also balls travelling further (yesterday alone had 3 home runs that rated under 15% hit probability on Baseball Savant) and having more room to fall in.

Until these curveballs result in strikeouts, I think many will be skeptical of their results. The Rockies are virtually tied with Arizona and LA due to their 10-2 record in one run games.

That’s not to say Cody Bellinger will hit 55 home runs or whatever his pace is but position players have a huge edge in ROY and his tremendous exit velocities and hard hit ball rates speak to some skill.

Pitchers succeeding with low k rates and not elitely low walk rates are rarely trusted. The Colorado rookies don’t even have elite groundball rates.

Travis did a chat today with a poll that asked if readers thought the Rockies would post a franchise record ERA-, theyre currently at 80 and the franchise record is 90.

57% of voters voted “no”, which with 70 games played means they expect the Rockies to put up a 105 or worse ERA- for the rest of the year.

If Senzatela does this for the rest of the year, hed get my ROY vote and I am a huge Dodger fan.

But he won’t because his peripherals are those of a number 4 starter.

jfree
9 years ago
Reply to  mikejunt

Fangraphs won’t believe it – but the measure you yourself are choosing (average K/9) is itself one of those measures that is affected by Coors. Getting K’s at Coors is extraordinarily difficult precisely because it is so much easier for batters to make contact – and for them not to get fooled and just watch a strike go by – when pitches aren’t moving. So obviously Rockies pitchers are always going to have a lower overall K/9 because half their games are at Coors. On the road, the Rockies pitchers have the 13th highest team K/9 this year and middle rank in the NL West. That’s a much bigger year-over-year change than it appears (the previous 4 years were – #24, #21, #26, #26) and could be significant going forward (if it is a signal that pitchers are no longer pitching scared).

Joe
9 years ago
Reply to  mikejunt

ROY and All Star appearances are not (and should not be) given out based on projections for future performance. Look at what these kids have done to date, and you have to at least recognize their success. Shoot, using your stat of choice, Freeland is #12 in all of baseball for ERA- right now for qualified starters and the best rookie, and it’s not even close. I did not say that any of the Rockies rookie pitchers deserves the ROY over Bellinger, that is going to take quite a bit more of the season to play out…simply that they should be in the conversation right now, and they haven’t been.

Why is that? Exactly because of what jfree points out. Stats like K/9 and even advance stats like ERA- have questionable results when applying them to such an extreme environment such as Coors. Well, that, and the fact that the Dodgers TV market carries a helluva lot more weight than the Rockies.

mikejuntMember
9 years ago
Reply to  Joe

I think you both missed my point – that the year isn’t over, so ROY or MVP type discussions will of course factor in what we think will happen over the remaining 90 games.

Now, ASG is another matter, though I think we all agree that in general we’d like to see more than just a few months of star-caliber performance to earn a berth in the ASG.

If we were determining a Rookie of the First Half, Senzatela and Marquez would merit discussion along with Bellinger for certain. I have certainly seen that discussion, even on Dodger broadcasts. Senzatela was April Rookie of the Month in the NL!

ERA- wasn’t my stat of choice (It was Travis’s, I just pointed at yon poll result from today because it was timely).

But over the whole season, I’d bet on Marquez if any because he’s the only one with a non-embarrassing strikeout rate.

The reason we focus on things like K% and GB% is that they are predictive of future success. I understand getting strikeouts at Coors Field is harder. But they are also more important, because the park consistently runs higher BABIPs and higher HR/FB numbers than other parks. The Rockies rookies do not have elite numbers in either category AND most of them have average-at-best walk rates. It is extremely unlikely they will contiune to avoid damage to the degree they have been.

Hoffman has pitched only 32 innings but has been excellent. Marquez has also been strong over a longer period. Both of those pitchers have some fundamental basis for their success.

Kyle Freeland has a nice GB% but truly awful K and BB numbers. His ERA is nice and his FIP is over a run higher. Senzatela has marginally better but still poor strikeout rates, better walk rates, and sub-50% groundball rates while pitching regularly in a park where fly balls are very, very bad. There’s a reason both of those pitchers have FIPs over 4.60. They’re not special pretty much by definition.

The goodness of the Rockies pitching numbers has been driven by their legitimately very strong bullpen. They will almost certainly not get these fundamentals-defying results from all 5 pitchers for the remainder of the season. Now, if Jon Gray returns and is good or their offense returns to Rockian levels, they may not need to.

The Rockies are 9th out of 15 NL teams in both K rate and BB rate. That’s not really the mark of a special pitching staff. It’s the mark of an average one.

The Dodgers and Diamondbacks have legitimately elite pitching, and unsurprisingly they’re the best teams in the NL at those underlying metrics. When you roll in whole pitching staff, you can see it pretty clearly here:

Whole pitching staff:
http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=pit&lg=nl&qual=0&type=8&season=2017&month=0&season1=2017&ind=0&team=0,ts&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0&sort=16,a

Starters only:
http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=sta&lg=nl&qual=0&type=8&season=2017&month=0&season1=2017&ind=0&team=0,ts&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0&sort=16,a

Even if the Rockies are using these curveballs in this way an getting splitter-like action, that creates a swing and miss pitch – and there’s little evidence that their starting pitchers are riding this to success.

There is significantly more evidence that their bullpen is doing so, and that’s what makes it interesting.

thetoddfather
9 years ago
Reply to  mikejunt

So maybe the Rockies are actually only 9th out of 15. Adjusting for park, that gives them an above average pitching staff. An above average Rockies pitching staff, filled to the brim with rookies, is definitely something to research and write about, trying to figure out what is different. That’s exactly what Travis did.

The entire article basically says: don’t freak out, good pitchers will be good pitchers even at coors. It doesn’t say they are special or elite, it does the opposite and says they are just like everyone else.

If you want to argue whether ROY or ASG should focus on results vs process, that’s a philosophical argument, different from the one you are having.

Robert Norton
9 years ago

The Rockies are so much damn fun to watch!

sadtromboneMember since 2020
9 years ago

It’s worth noting that Jeff Hoffman has pitched like Chris Sale on the road and like Andrew Cashner at home. I wouldn’t be surprised to see other Rockies pitchers who rely on the curveball that much have similar home-road splits.

EonADSMember since 2024
9 years ago

The only thing I don’t like is the Holland gif; it’s so short that your eyes don’t really follow anything and it doesn’t show his delivery or release point, so the pitch becomes harder to see. So it basically defeats the point of having a gif in the first place. The article itself though, is fascinating. Really glad that the Rockies are finding their own way instead of getting sucked into the mystique of Coors.

cgarner29
9 years ago

I talked to a Rockies advance scout the other day – this is pretty much dead on. Said TrackMan data suggested lower altitude kept sinkers from sinking. So they have been focusing on guys with swing and miss fastballs.

feslenraster
9 years ago

It makes a lot of sense, and if there was ever a rec button on Fangraphs, this is one article I’d totally rec. What a well written article.

John Autin
9 years ago

You seem to imply that the Rockies are pitching unusually well at home. In reality, the Rockies are pitching unusually well on the road, but their usual home/away chasm remains.

Overall ERA, 4.11. Home, 4.91. Away, 3.39. All their peripherals are much better away.

That 3.39 road ERA would be the best in club history, by far. Their home ERA would be 8th-best. But the 1.52 gap between home and road would be the 5th largest.

They haven’t solved Coors.

jfree
9 years ago
Reply to  John Autin

They’ve solved Coors as much as they need to. Rox ERA at Coors – 4.91 this year. Everyone else at Coors – 5.74 this year. Just need to beat the other team – not Coors.

But yeah – the road is where they are pitching well enough to be competitive with the other team playing at home. That is huge for any post-season chances. It greatly diminishes the slumpiness of road Rockies that normally knocks the wind out of the team. I doubt a 25-13 road record will persist – but even if they are .500 on road at year-end (115-207 – .357 over last 4 years) that gives them a big advantage. Cuz those other teams are then gonna have to have their pitchers deal with Coors – or go home for the winter.

John Autin
9 years ago
Reply to  jfree

Maybe we’re talking about different things. Pitching better in Coors than their opponents do is obviously great for their prospects, but it really says nothing about the validity of the methods discussed here.

The question is, have they found the key to pitching in Coors, or are they just a good pitching staff?

The 0.83 ERA edge you note for the Rockies in home games is LESS than their 0.90 edge in road games. On a percentage basis, their road edge is much larger.

In general, good pitchers will be good pitchers wherever they pitch, on a relative basis — i.e., better than their opponents. Clayton Kershaw has a 4.58 ERA in 14 Coors starts, which is good enough for a 9-4 record. That doesn’t mean he knows *anything* particular to pitching there; it just means he’s more talented than most. And that’s what the Rockies’ home/away splits this year suggest, to the extent that less than 40 games played in each pool can suggest anything.

Colorado’s 3.39 road ERA ranks 2nd in MLB. That’s far more noteworthy than what they’ve done at home, even if it doesn’t make for a good “process” story.

GG_huson
9 years ago
Reply to  John Autin

“The question is, have they found the key to pitching in Coors, or are they just a good pitching staff?”

Personally, I think the answer is both! The key to pitching in Coors is to have a good pitching staff. If you can throw a good curveball, throw it, and don’t avoid using a good pitch because of Coors.

jfree
9 years ago
Reply to  John Autin

In general, good pitchers will be good pitchers wherever they pitch, on a relative basis — i.e., better than their opponents.

Actually THAT is simply an assertion – which is at the heart of all the park-factor adjustments that purport to show who is ‘good’ and who is ‘not’.

What the history of Coors shows is that the Rockies do tend to pitch slightly better at Coors than their opponents – but rather than that being an indicator that they are ‘good’, the park factor adjustments tend to punish that because they are pitching at home where they should be better than the road but they clearly can’t do that because home is Coors and the road is pitching parks. Other NL West teams with traditionally good pitching get a mulligan on that because they are pitching both at Coors and away so they should be ‘bad’.

Personally I think a different assertion is probably valid – that ALL pitchers at Coors will tend to mediocre. Good pitchers will be mediocre. Mediocre pitchers will be mediocre. Bad pitchers don’t get enough sample size at Coors to potentially become mediocre. Coors diminishes ‘stuff’ – and ‘stuff’ is what mostly underlies variability in perceived pitching ‘skill’.

Yes I agree that the road ERA is more reflective of pitching skills – but for the Rockies that is ALWAYS the case. Coors is unique. It is always an outlier. It is an outlier for known predictable unmodelled reasons and can never be assumed to revert to mean eventually or be an outlier for mostly random reasons or even be an outlier like every other ‘hitting park’ (which are outliers mostly because small outfields – which means there are offsets – more HR but fewer doubles/triples) therefore it cannot simply be ‘adjusted for’. But this also means no team – including the Rockies – ever needs to ‘solve Coors’. The Rockies merely need to win more often than lose there (which they do). And every other team can ignore even that – unless its a playoff series.

John Autin
9 years ago
Reply to  jfree

Your hypothesis is interesting, i.e.:
— “ALL pitchers at Coors will tend to [be] mediocre [because] Coors diminishes ‘stuff’ – and ‘stuff’ is what mostly underlies variability.”

However, the data do not support it whatsoever. The variability of individual Rockies’ pitching performance is actually greater at home than on the road.

[Postscript deleted.]

redsoxmaniac
9 years ago

Anecdotal, but on an old Rockies broadcast on ESPN there was an analyst who was told by a Rockies coach (this, during the Ubaldo Jimenez dominant run) that for some reason pitchers have a tougher time pitching in Coors two years in a row.

He didn’t really explain why since it was during a game, nor did he specify if it was one year of greatness than nothing vs. one up and one down year, but he did mention how some pitchers like Jeff Francis would struggle right after having a good season there.

I always wondered, from that one tidbit, if there could be some truth to it, and if so why? I do think about guys who have had good one-season successes followed by very bad seasons (Chacin, Jimenez, Francis) and think about how this staff is pretty much built off of many guys pitching in their first full year.

Also think about good pitchers who have been split-less in their tenure here (Aaron Cook comes to mind) and wonder if their could be multiple complexities; one which there is possibly a physical change that affects the pitcher after one season, and others where pitch mixing and breaking ball usage could lead to direct correlative outcomes. Fastball/curveball could be a boon, but we are seeing an increase via many pitchers throughout the league, so the difference in these pitch mixes may not be that variant vs. other pitching staffs in the league.

But I digress, I did hear about this and wonder if anyone else had heard that too.

jfree
9 years ago
Reply to  redsoxmaniac

The indicator I’ve seen is more related to injury (slow-heal ligaments, dead arm, etc) in the second year. The pitchers who are good in one year also tend to get a lot of usage at Coors that year. And innings-at-altitude is very very tough on pitchers arms – and always will be. There’s just a natural tendency to try a bit harder to get back the movement that altitude takes away. Esp because you can’t SEE altitude taking that movement away. The result is that the 200-IP threshhold (and possibly appearances for RP’s) is a huge red flag – not a building block for the future.

This is where IMO the Rockies need to manage their pitching staff very differently from every other team if they want to sustain pitching success (and sabermetrics won’t ever measure ‘success’ well for the Rockies – so they can’t even do saber like everyone else). It’s why I’m still scared about this year despite the success. I still see a ‘like-everyone-else’ rotation schedule and a ‘like-everyone-else’ 1-IP bullpen usage. So next year worries me.

jfree
9 years ago
Reply to  redsoxmaniac

Specifically, the starters who concern me for next year are Senzatela, Freeland, and Chatwood. Chatwood has always struggled at Coors but could be dominant on the road – esp throwing the CB again. Senzatela and Freeland both look like pitchers who could pitch at Coors long-term – but seem a bit meh on the road.

Is it too soon to experiment with a home/road rotation platoon? Probably and I doubt the Rockies are even thinking of doing that. But I hope we don’t hit the 180/190 or so IP where injuries hit next year and make such an option impossible – again.

John Autin
9 years ago

Let’s compare the 2017 Rockies to their prior 10-year average:

Runs Allowed per 9 innings:
— 2017 Home RA/9 is 0.13 better than 10-year avg. (5.12 vs. 5.25).
— 2017 Road RA/9 is 1.12 better than 10-year avg. (3.58 vs. 4.70).

OPS Allowed:
— 2017 Home OPS is .004 *worse* than 10-year avg. (.797 vs. .793).
— 2017 Road OPS is .068 better than 10-year avg. (.682 vs. .750)

Colorado currently ranks 1st in MLB Road RA/9, 2nd in Road OPS (1st in the NL). They’ve never done this well in either road measure.

Their home RA/9 ranks 27th. Obviously they’ll never rank well, due to altitude. But they ranked better than this each year from 2006-10.

Choose your story.