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.

Audio intro: Benny and a Million Shetland Ponies, “Effectively Wild Theme (Pedantic)”
Audio outro: Liz Panella, “Effectively Wild Theme”

Link to story about Colon
Link to Colon’s flip play
Link to Colon’s homer
Link to story about Bernie’s retirement
Link to story about Franco’s retirement
Link to story about Jones’s retirement
Link to story about Bautista’s retirement
Link to Ben on Pujols’s 2022
Link to Ben’s story on Chipper’s gifts
Link to Stark on the oldster derby
Link to EW episode on the derby idea
Link to Romney bio excerpt
Link to info on thinking things are worse
Link to story about Rays’ ballpark
Link to Drellich on public funding
Link to Manfred on expansion
Link to preview-pod team goals
Link to Gilligan on the Brewers
Link to Blum on Ohtani and the Angels
Link to Blum on Rendon
Link to EW episode on King
Link to EW episode on Ivie
Link to article on Rendon’s suspension
Link to video of Rendon altercation
Link to list of old Rendon articles

 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

Podcast (effectively-wild): Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: RSS

Read the rest of this entry »

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.

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 »

The Braves are the best team in baseball right now. They were the first team to clinch their division, and their title odds are nearly double that of any other squad. Their leadoff man, Ronald Acuña Jr., is gunning for a 40-70 season, and their cleanup hitter, Matt Olson, just hit his 52nd homer of the year, surpassing the franchise’s single-season record. Oh, and they have six other All-Stars besides that pair, including one of the favorites to win the FIP Cy Young in Spencer Strider.

If the Braves have shown any weakness this season, it’s been their relative lack of starting pitching depth. They’ve had a trio of 29-game starters in Strider, Bryce Elder, and Charlie Morton, and while all of them have showcased their warts down the stretch, the main problems for the rotation were the absences of last year’s ace — Max Fried — and breakout starter — Kyle Wright. Though he’s made just 13 starts on the season (the fourth most on the team), Fried is back now, and he’s looking pretty darn good, rounding out what should be an excellent four-man playoff rotation, so the Braves’ issues with depth (and Wright’s struggles) likely won’t matter as much in October. Yet, they left me scratching my head at times this season when they passed over top prospect AJ Smith-Shawver for starts in Fried and Wright’s absence. Read the rest of this entry »

In the Beforetimes, mid-September brought my annual check-in on the potential for end-of-season chaos in the playoff races via the Team Entropy series. With last year’s introduction of an expanded and restructured postseason, however, Major League Baseball did away with the potential for scheduling mayhem in favor of a larger inventory of playoff games. Along with the expansion of the playoff field from 10 teams to 12 and of the Wild Card round from a pair of winner-take-all games to a quartet of three-game series, MLB also eliminated all winner-take-all regular-season tiebreaker games. In the name of efficiency, we have no more Games 163 and no more potential Bucky Dents. Instead, ties, even for spots where the winner would receive a postseason berth and the loser would go home, are decided by mathematics. It’s enough to make a fan want to shout, “Hey, Manfred, pull your head out of a spreadsheet and watch an elimination game!”

The untangling of the often-chaotic scenarios by which those one-game tiebreakers could come about was Team Entropy’s raison d’etre. But particularly with so many close races, there’s still enough untangling to do in potentially complex tie scenarios that I’ve chosen to continue a version of this exercise, pouring out a cold one for what might have been. If what we’re left with isn’t exactly chaotic, you can thumb your nose at the commissioner as you take a seat on the Team Un-Tropy bandwagon. Read the rest of this entry »

Two years ago, I wrote about the imminent demise of the 3,000 Hit Club after Miguel Cabrera became a member. Simply put, it was a question of math. The worse the environment is for hitting for batting average, the fewer players there will be who will put up lofty career hit totals. While it would be easy to think there are simply more lousy hitters these days, as league batting average has dropped in recent decades, the spread in individual batting averages has not increased; great players see lower batting averages when league batting averages decline. But while 2023’s new rules didn’t herald a reversal of the trend, one late entrant in the race for 3,000 hits has continued to excel: Freddie Freeman.

What makes the nadir of the 3,000 Hit Club so jarring to a baseball fan is the newness of this phenomenon. The explosion of offense in the 1990s wasn’t just homers, but batting average as well. Even going back 10 years, there were always a lot of players with career hit totals somewhere north of 2,000.

In 2023, that number is seven, and that’s only because there were four new members this year: Freeman, Jose Altuve, Elvis Andrus, and Andrew McCutchen. (I’m going to go out on a limb and predict that Evan Longoria won’t get 72 hits over the next two weeks.) Contrast that with 2004, which featured 27 active players with 2,000 career hits. Read the rest of this entry »