Ben Lindbergh and Meg Rowley banter about the five-year anniversary of a Twitter wager about Adalberto Mondesi and Shohei Ohtani, then compare and contrast two in-depth articles about the problems supposedly plaguing the Padres and discuss how convincing they find those reports’ explanations for the team’s disappointing season (plus additional banter about the possible reasons for recently successful former Padre Mike Clevinger going unclaimed on waivers, and a few follow-ups).
Jay Jaffe: Good afternoon, folks! Welcome to another edition of my weekly chat — the first one in two weeks. It’s been a lively time around Casa Jaffe-Span lately due to pending real estate transactions; I missed last week’s caht and was late setting this one up. Since i’m also late in securing lunch, I’m going to let the queue fill up for a few more minutes and then light this candle.
2:08
Chadwick: Is this the stadium proposal that gets done in St. Pete?
2:12
Jay Jaffe: This isn’t just a proposal, they actually appear to have a deal, so yes. Other than the fact that they literally could not get any other deals done until now, what I don’t get is how this one solves one of the big problems that Tropicana Field has faced, which is simply getting to the ballpark given its location.
2:12
Jay Jaffe: Because this park will be right near the current one
2:13
Jay Jaffe: and it’s a dome, not even a retractable.
2:13
Jay Jaffe: it will be interesting to see how this ignites the discussion of expansion to 32 teams. When I wrote about Salt Lake City’s surprising bid, it was clear that solving the Oakland and Tampa Bay stadium issues was necessary and both have now been, uh, dealt with.
Adam Wainwright rose to the occasion. Summoning vintage form to pitch like the staff stalwart he’s been for the better part of the past two decades instead of the palooka he’s been for most of this season, the 42-year-old righty tossed seven shutout innings against the NL Central-leading Brewers at Busch Stadium. Thanks to a solo homer by catcher Willson Contreras and two more scoreless innings from his bullpen, Wainwright collected the 200th win of his career, and provided some long-awaited cheer and relief for the Cardinals and their fans in an otherwise dismal season.
If you haven’t been paying attention, most of what you need to know about how hard-won this milestone was is right there in Wainwright’s ERA: his seven scoreless frames lowered his mark from 7.95 to 7.40. You’re not going to notch many victories allowing runs at that clip, and in most organizations, you wouldn’t get many opportunities to keep trying, particularly when the underlying numbers do nothing to mitigate that ugly top line. The Cardinals, now 67-83 and en route to their first sub-.500 season since 2007, have continued sending him out there nonetheless, at times seeming to do so out of a sense of loyalty to a player who’s been a vital part of 10 playoff teams, two pennant winners and one champion rather than a clear-eyed judgment of his current abilities.
For one night, all that was put aside. Facing a team that began the day 18 games ahead of the Cardinals in the standings, and lacking even the pedestrian fastball velocity he could summon earlier this season, Wainwright nonetheless kept the Brewers off balance while working into and out of trouble in the majority of his innings. His one-out, first-inning walk to William Contreras was erased by a 4-6-3 double play off the bat of Carlos Santana. After retiring the side in order in the second, he induced Contreras to hit a slow chopper to Paul Goldschmidt to escape a two-on, two-out jam to end the third. In perhaps his most impressive sequence of the night, after serving up a two-out double to Willy Adames, he struck out Rowdy Tellez to end the fourth via a well-placed 87-mph sinker, that after the slugger had fouled off three curveballs and a cutter. He ended the sixth erasing another single by Contreras with another double play at the expense of Santana, who hit a 98.8-mph hot shot straight up the middle but right at shortstop Masyn Winn, who stepped on second and threw to first. After Mark Canha smacked a leadoff single on an 87.6-mph sinker — his fastest pitch of the night — then took second on a grounder and stole third with two outs, Wainwright stranded him, as Lars Nootbar chased down Josh Donaldson’s fly ball into the left-center gap. Read the rest of this entry »
There are certain stats that seem likely to always move in tandem. A high walk rate will, almost by definition, result in a high on-base percentage. A low whiff rate seems to naturally beget a high contact rate. But sometimes things don’t line up in the way intuition would dictate.
The other day I was perusing the minor league pitching leaderboards and when I sorted them by swinging strike rate, a crop of standouts topped the list, posting rates higher than 16% (the minor league average is around 12% for pitchers with at least 100 innings pitched). Curious, I re-ordered the list to see how these pitchers stacked up in terms of strikeout rate – a stat my brain assumed would result in a similar list of names, if slightly reordered. To my surprise, however, many of the top-ranked swinging-strike inducers skidded down the list when it was re-sorted by strikeout rate:
This caught me off guard, so I pulled up the major league leaderboards and repeated the same steps, first sorting by swinging strike rate, then by strikeout rate. At the major league level, no pitcher even falls out of the top 30, let alone tumbling as tremendously as some of the top bat-missers of the minor leagues:
It seems like the recipe that whips up minor league pitching success isn’t the same as the one that results in being a bat-missing major leaguer.
So, what gives?
Let’s start with the obvious. Perhaps the clearest difference between pitching in the minors and pitching in the majors is the caliber of the opponents. Specifically, it’s much more difficult to induce a swinging strike on a junky pitch when facing an advanced hitter than it is against a less-experienced minor leaguer. Thus, it stands to reason that in-zone swinging strike rate is a more reliable indicator of the sustainability of minor league results, as it diminishes the impact of a batter being duped. Testing this theory against the major league pitching leaderboard supports this idea, as the list of high-achievers stays relatively constant when sorted by in-zone contact rates.
That logic still holds true when we look to the minor league leaderboards. Indeed, of the 10 pitchers leading the minors in swinging strikes, only two (Drew Thorpe and Yoniel Curet) have in-zone swinging strike rates that are better than their overall mark in that column. And wouldn’t you know it, those are the only two pitchers who stay in the top 10 when the list is instead sorted by strikeout rate. The other three minor leaguers with overall swinging strike rates above 16% (Chih-Jung Liu, Cristian Mena, and Nick Nastrini) all have in-zone swinging strike rates that are lower than their overall swinging strike rates, and each of these pitchers falls by a few dozen spots when the list is re-ordered by K-rate. This illustrates the importance of missing bats in the zone, particularly when it comes to alchemizing whiffs into punchouts.
It also stands to reason that promotion to a higher minor league level would result in a dip in these types of pitching statistics. Assuming, as we do, that it’s easier to fool a Double-A hitter into offering at an unhittable breaking ball out of the zone than it is a Triple-A hitter, then promotion from one level to the next would presumably expose a pitcher’s reliance on chase swings as opposed to those precious in-zone whiffs. Lucky for us, two of the aforementioned pitchers – Nastrini and Mena – are not only in the same org and have virtually identical Double-A stats, but they also received simultaneous Triple-A promotions at the end of August. So, let’s take a look at how they compare and assess what their results might indicate about the sustainability of their minor league success.
Looking at how Nastrini and Mena performed on paper at Double-A makes them seem like virtually the same player. They’re both in the White Sox system, with similar stats in terms of swinging strikes, walks and strikeouts. They also feature the same arsenal – four-seamer, slider, curveball, changeup – and made their Triple-A debuts within a couple days of one another. But within those similarities, there are key distinctions between them that might alter our expectations of them.
Let’s start with how they ended up with the White Sox. Mena was signed for $250,000 out of the Dominican Republic in 2019, and while the start of his pro career was delayed by the pandemic, he was still just 18 when he took the mound for the first time in 2021. Having been largely untested before then, he quickly ascended through the org as part of Project Birmingham and is now the youngest pitcher to reach Triple-A this year. Conversely, Nastrini, who is several years older, was acquired mid-season as part of the Joe Kelly trade with the Dodgers and boasts a more robust track record than Mena, having been a fourth-round pick in 2021 out of UCLA.
In terms of statistics, their walk rates were identical at Double-A, each posting an unsavory 11.3% mark in that column. Their strikeout rates were similar to one another as well, each hovering above 25%, and their swinging strike rates differed by just .1%, with Nastrini’s coming in at 16.5%, and Mena’s at 16.6%. But before we chalk up those similarities to these guys being the same pitcher in different fonts, let’s investigate how they’re producing these numbers and see what we might expect from each going forward.
While Nastrini and Mena feature the same pitch mix, they use their arsenals in very different ways. Mena has long boasted an impeccable ability to spin his curveball, to the point that he’s been tasked with building his arsenal around that pitch. Since turning pro, he’s worked on adding a slider to his mix, and while it’s developed a slightly more distinct shape this season (tighter, with more horizontal action), it still blurs with his curveball, with both pitches acting in similar ways to miss bats on offerings out of the strike zone.
While Nastrini’s breaking balls don’t cause jaws to drop the way Mena’s curveball has throughout his career, their shapes are much more distinct from one another, and there’s roughly 7 mph of velocity separation between them.
Both pitchers throw a changeup between 13-14% of the time, and both favor the cambio against lefties. Nastrini’s changeup has a sharp shape to it, with its velocity and arm-side movement geared at mirroring the movement of his slider, allowing the changeup to work against lefties the way that his slider works against righties.
Mena’s changeup is also most effective when he’s able to play it off of the shape of his slider, in the hopes of getting lefties to flail at it off the plate. Unfortunately, his changeup is much faster than the slider, flirting with 90 mph, and its shape doesn’t feature much horizontal action.
Meanwhile, Mena’s fastball has lost some of its ride, as well as a tick or two of velocity, so it tends to hover in the 91-92 mph band, and without the bat-missing ride, its shape and velocity are too similar to those of the changeup for either pitch to be a reliable in-zone bat-misser.
As a result, Mena’s lukewarm heater has been frighteningly hittable this season, contributing to a very high home run rate for the young hurler. Nastrini’s four-seamer, on the other hand, has been much more successful, with a flatter, more deceptive shape. It’s thrown from a release point that’s more difficult to pick up due to Nastrini’s setup towards the third base side of the rubber. His fastball has maintained a higher average velocity, eliciting significantly more swinging strikes and a more anemic resulting slash line than that induced by Mena’s heater. This in turn has resulted in more whiffs throughout the strike zone, particularly at the top of it, and confirms that Nastrini’s overall swinging strike rate doesn’t rely as heavily on chase as Mena’s does.
That said, Nastrini’s command is worse than Mena’s, as he offers up a greater number of non-competitive wild pitches compared to Mena’s strategic out-of-zone offerings. Their matching walk rates at Double-A were arrived at very differently, with Mena’s coming as a side effect of intentional out-of-zone offerings, whereas Nastrini’s were more indicative of legitimate mistakes. This has held true at the higher level, with both pitchers now a few starts into their time with Triple-A Charlotte. In fact, many of the assumptions that could be drawn from their time at Double-A have come to fruition since their promotion.
In Mena’s first start, only three of his 88 pitches resulted in a swinging strike, due largely to Triple-A batters’ collective ability to lay off his breaking balls. His second and third starts were better in this regard, but he still struggled to induce chase on the outer half against righties, which was a key ingredient in the elixir that allowed his stuff to play up at lower levels. The patience of his opponents has resulted in a relative downtick in strikeouts, along with an uptick in walk rate. He has also given up an inordinate number of hits, due in large part to the hittablity of his heater. Nastrini, on the other hand, has kept opposing bats off his offerings but has struggled to maintain command. His second start with Triple-A Charlotte featured four wild pitches, including one with the bases loaded, which nearly allowed two runs to score when the ball bounced several feet in front of the plate and caromed off the catcher’s gear into the visitors dugout.
It’ll take more than a few starts apiece to get a sense for how Mena and Nastrini adapt to the higher level, but their outings have been in keeping with our expectations so far. Mena is young and athletic enough to hope that he’ll be able to tack additional velocity onto his fastball, while also working to refine the look of his entire arsenal to induce more in-zone whiffs. Expectations-wise, this likely means Mena’s on his way to a big league role at the back of a rotation, with multi-inning relief as a fallback option. Nastrini is more fully developed in terms of the look of his stuff, so his more urgent task will be to refine his command, such that his entire repertoire can play to its potential. As such, his ceiling is higher, and a spot near the front of a rotation is attainable if the command piece falls into place. Otherwise, he has the look of an impactful late-inning reliever.
All in all, if either Mena or Nastrini hope to remain atop the swinging strike leaderboard at Triple-A and beyond, there are key improvements to be made and flaws to be addressed, and despite their seeming similarities, their respective flaws (and necessary improvements) are distinct from one another. While it seems neither is likely to emerge as the next Spencer Strider, they both have a good shot at firming up an important big league role within the next season or two.
Freddie Freeman has dominated the sport for over a decade. It feels impossible to summarize his well-rounded skillset with any single plate appearance, but I think I’ve found one. Last Monday, in the ninth inning of a Dodgers loss against San Diego, Freeman stepped into the box against Josh Hader and in the span of eight pitches demonstrated what makes his talent so special. Read the rest of this entry »
J.P. France is a late-bloomer proving the skeptics wrong. Selected in the 14th round of the 2018 draft by the Houston Astros, the right-hander not only made his big league debut in April at age 28, he’s performed admirably since doing so. In 22 starts plus one relief appearance, France is 11-5 with a 3.84 ERA over 131-and-a-third innings. Moreover, he’s put up those numbers with a skill set that’s unusual in today’s game. His fastball ranks in the 34th percentile for velocity, his groundball rate is in the 51st percentile, and his 17.% strikeout rate is among the lowest for qualified pitchers.
France, who graduated from Tulane University with a degree in Homeland Security before finishing up his college career at Mississippi State University, sat down to discuss his unique profile, and the underdog attitude that comes with it, when the Astros visited Fenway Park at the end of August.
———
David Laurila: You went from a later-round pick to the starting rotation on a contending team. How did that happen?
J.P France: “First, it’s been a grind. I think the COVID year was probably the best thing that’s ever happened to me. It gave my arm basically a full year of rest, and it also gave me time to truly focus on mechanics: how to clean up my motion, how to simplify it. I think that would have happened eventually, but I don’t think it would have happened as quickly. I was able to literally just focus on what was I feeling, and what I was fixing, as opposed to having to go out there and compete and possibly be working on something else at the same time. Read the rest of this entry »
Last week, David Laurila asked me an interesting question. He’d been talking baseball with some baseball players – it’s true, we really do have great jobs – and the conversation landed on Josh Hader. That got Laurila thinking about Hader’s similarities to Spencer Strider. The crux of the discussion: Would Hader have ended up as a lefty version of Strider if, after appearing in the major leagues as a reliever, he’d transitioned back to the starting role he held in the minors?
I love questions like this. They’re fun to research, and I also feel no pressure to reach a definitive answer. Would Hader have ended up as a great starter? It’s clearly unknowable. That gives me a lot more latitude to speculate. In addition, this question isn’t just about Hader. It’s about whether future pitchers with Hader-esque profiles make more sense as starters or in the bullpen. No wrong answers and broad implications? Sign me up.
First things first, let’s talk about what it means to look like Strider as a starter. Strider has two standout pitches, but it’s really one standout pitch and a capable understudy. His fastball explodes through the top of the zone and screws hitters into the ground. It’s not so much the velocity – though that doesn’t hurt – but the shape and release point that combine to bamboozle opposing hitters. Read the rest of this entry »
Ben Lindbergh and Meg Rowley banter about precedents for 50-year-old Bartolo Colon retiring as a Met, whether it’s better for a player to go out on top or be humbled a bit before the end, the ramifications of the Rays’ deal for a new ballpark in St. Petersburg, whether each team is on track to have a successful season by the standard set on the podcast’s season preview series, the likely end of Shohei Ohtani’s time with the Angels, and the curious career of Anthony Rendon.
The Wild Card races in both leagues continue to be filled with drama as none of the teams vying for those playoff spots have created any daylight in the standings.
A quick aside before we get into the rankings themselves: there has been some discussion about the efficacy and value of these rankings, particularly the team quality metric I’m calculating. I won’t argue that it’s a perfect encapsulation of any given team’s relative strength or the right way to rank teams on a weekly basis, but I did want to share some historical data from last season. In 2022, team quality had a 97% correlation to a team’s final win percentage. In addition, team quality at the All-Star break had a 95% correlation to a team’s final record. The relationship hasn’t been as strong this season with team quality at the All-Star break having a 82% correlation to a team’s current record. It’s possible teams like the Orioles and Padres who are historically over- or under-performing their underlying stats are skewing the relationship and that’s a possible area of research this offseason. Anyway, I’m comfortable with the established relationship between team quality and actual wins to continue using it as a way to compare team strengths.
A reminder for how these rankings are calculated: first, we take the three most important components of a team — their offense (wRC+), their pitching (a 50/50 blend of FIP- and RA9-, weighted by starter and reliever IP share), and their defense (RAA) — and combine them to create an overall team quality metric. I also add in a factor for “luck,” adjusting a team’s win percentage based on expected win-loss record. The result is a power ranking, which is then presented in tiers below.
Tier 1 – The Best of the Best
Team
Record
“Luck”
wRC+
SP-
RP-
RAA
Team Quality
Playoff Odds
Braves
96-53
2
125
93
91
-7
156
100.0%
Rays
92-59
-3
117
89
93
6
164
100.0%
With the NL East and a first-round bye into the playoffs locked up, the Braves are simply hoping to get to October with a healthy roster that hasn’t lost its edge. That’s why it’s important to not get too worked up about any extreme swings in results over these last few weeks of the season. Case in point: Atlanta took three of four from the Phillies in a potential NLDS preview early last week before allowing 36 runs across three games in a sweep by the Marlins over the weekend.
The Rays had an opportunity to take over the AL East lead after taking the first two games of their big weekend series against the Orioles. The two best teams in the AL ended up splitting that four game-series and head into this week locked into the same position, with Tampa Bay sitting two games behind Baltimore. One of the biggest reasons why the Rays have been able to keep pace in the division is a much improved bullpen locking down games behind a suddenly stable starting rotation. Read the rest of this entry »
Sponsor Us on Patreon
Facebook Group
Twitter Account
EW Subreddit
Effectively Wild Wiki
iTunes Feed (Please rate and review us!)
Get Our Merch!
Email Us: podcast@fangraphs.com
Jay Jaffe
