The Athletics, The Phillies, And Short Pitchers
If you watch the Athletics, you may have noticed something about their pitching staffs over the last few years. They’re… shorter than average. Sonny Gray, Scott Kazmir, and Jarrod Parker are all six foot one or shorter, and none of the A’s pitchers are taller than six foot six.
Look across the country at the Phillies, and the difference becomes more stark.
@enosarris Phillies have 4 guys 6'6" or taller to the Athletics 0, it would be interesting to see if it is an org philosophy or just random
— Matt Winkelman (@Matt_Winkelman) February 20, 2015
Turns out, these two staffs define the range between the tallest and shortest pitchers in the majors.
It’s not immediately as obvious if you go by average height. Here are the teams ranked by their average height in inches, over the last five years.
| Team | Height (inches) |
|---|---|
| Mariners | 75.15 |
| Yankees | 74.98 |
| Orioles | 74.90 |
| Pirates | 74.86 |
| Reds | 74.82 |
| Rangers | 74.82 |
| White Sox | 74.80 |
| Phillies | 74.79 |
| Tigers | 74.76 |
| Nationals | 74.75 |
| Cubs | 74.74 |
| Marlins | 74.72 |
| Indians | 74.70 |
| Padres | 74.69 |
| Red Sox | 74.64 |
| Cardinals | 74.64 |
| Twins | 74.59 |
| Rockies | 74.57 |
| Rays | 74.56 |
| League Average | 74.55 |
| Diamondbacks | 74.50 |
| Athletics | 74.45 |
| Dodgers | 74.38 |
| Mets | 74.33 |
| Angels | 74.30 |
| Blue Jays | 74.19 |
| Brewers | 74.17 |
| Braves | 74.09 |
| Giants | 74.04 |
| Astros | 73.96 |
| Royals | 73.63 |
The Phillies are near the top and the Athletics are near the bottom, but there isn’t much spread here. An inch and a half separate the tallest from the shortest, and no staff is an inch shorter or taller than average.
But that list isn’t weighted. You could have a 6’7″ reliever hanging out on your 40-man roster, and he’d change the whole calculus. Let’s instead look at the sum of the pitches thrown by pitchers shorter than 73 inches tall, by team.
| Team | “Short” Pitches |
|---|---|
| Athletics | 50490 |
| Giants | 50295 |
| Astros | 48831 |
| Mets | 44693 |
| Royals | 44200 |
| Brewers | 43361 |
| Reds | 43218 |
| White Sox | 42227 |
| Diamondbacks | 39367 |
| Braves | 39094 |
| Blue Jays | 38340 |
| Orioles | 38097 |
| Angels | 35552 |
| Dodgers | 34532 |
| Padres | 34514 |
| Rockies | 34253 |
| Indians | 32339 |
| Marlins | 30397 |
| Twins | 28977 |
| Cubs | 28091 |
| Rangers | 27144 |
| Nationals | 27002 |
| Rays | 26913 |
| Mariners | 26343 |
| Tigers | 25936 |
| Red Sox | 25236 |
| Yankees | 24774 |
| Pirates | 20154 |
| Cardinals | 19400 |
| Phillies | 15119 |
Well now. Over the last five years, the Athletics have had nearly 40,000 more pitches thrown by short pitchers than the Phillies. Think of Roy Halladay (6’6″) and Sonny Gray (5’11”) as emblems of their respective staffs.
Looking at pitches thrown by shorter pitchers gives us a larger spread between the teams, and it indicates that perhaps different organizations do have different philosophies about height. From Mr. Winkelman again:
@enosarris I believe the Phillies have not signed a HS pitcher in the draft under 6'2" since at least 2007
— Matt Winkelman (@Matt_Winkelman) February 20, 2015
It’s interesting to put this in those terms, considering that the Athletics’ pitchers are mostly developed by other teams and then acquired by the A’s. But that also suggests that short pitchers are undervalued by the market — the A’s were able to acquire these guys, maybe because short pitchers don’t sell jeans. And the Phillies have been drafting for height, at least on some level.
We’ve heard more substantive critiques of smaller pitchers. Scott Kazmir was actually at the center of this sort of argument earlier in his career — he wasn’t supposed to be able to retain his velocity and pitch deep into a career, given his height. His stature was mentioned in virtually every scouting report at the time.
But is height actually correlated to success in anyway? We’ll want to weight the correlation by number of pitches thrown to avoid the 6’7″ occasional reliever problem. But once you do, it looks like height isn’t very important.
Matt Dennewitz is six foot one and some pennies, the BeerGraphs co-founder, Saber Archive founder, and Pitchfork Music tech maven by day — but more importantly, he helped run these numbers, weighting the correlation between height and a few obvious variables by the number of pitches the pitcher threw. Here are the p values and r-squared numbers for those correlations, using all pitchers since 2007 that threw more than 100 pitches (to remove position players).
| Dependent Variable | p value | r-squared |
|---|---|---|
| Career Innings Pitched | 0.0006 | 0.01 |
| Fastball Velocity | 0.1 | 0.013 |
| Strikeout Rate | 0.9 | 0.0003 |
You usually want your p values smaller than .05, so, in tandem with the poor r-squared numbers, it doesn’t look like there is a relationship between height and fastball velocity and strikeout rate in the big leagues. There *might* be a relationship when it comes to longevity, but the size of the relationship is tiny. Height explains 1% in the variance in career innings pitched totals.
Baseball as a whole doesn’t seem to be selecting out the shorter pitchers completely, even if the entire population is skewed taller than the general population. The average baseball starting pitcher is six foot two, the average American is around four inches shorter. And yet the starting pitcher population looks normally distributed, just around that higher mean.
If you think about things mechanically, it might make sense that pitchers with ‘longer levers’ might be able to create more of a downward plane, and therefore more fastball velocity. But the numbers don’t seem to bear that out, and being shorter has its own benefits, mechanically. Kyle Boddy of Driveline Baseball doesn’t discriminate or think there’s really a big difference with respect to height. But he did say that it does seem “way easier to teach shorter pitchers — shorter levers means less clumsiness usually.”
Imagine trying to corral long limbs. Imagine being Anthony Ranaudo. And imagine not taking Marcus Stroman because he was short. Boddy was succinct about that one: “Anyone who thought Marcus Stroman wasn’t at least the third best pitcher in his draft class is/was an idiot.”
The lack of a correlation between height and key pitching statistics mirrors a great longer piece on the subject by Jeff Zimmerman, but it is interesting to see the major league teams allotting pitches to short pitchers at largely different rates.
The data seems to suggest that you shouldn’t avoid giving shorter pitchers more of a role in your organization, if anything.
With a phone full of pictures of pitchers' fingers, strange beers, and his two toddler sons, Eno Sarris can be found at the ballpark or a brewery most days. Read him here, writing about the A's or Giants at The Athletic, or about beer at October. Follow him on Twitter @enosarris if you can handle the sandwiches and inanity.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sX6I2NrguAs
The last time I did an analysis on height and weight in MLB, I did it by position and age as well. It was for 2013. What I found was that out of the 1,313 players that threw a single pitch, had one plate appearance batting or played even a 1/3 of an inning in the field, pitchers and catchers were the heaviest and tallest players of any position. Position players(non-pitchers) on average were 6 feet 1 and 3/4 inches tall, with a range of 5 feet 10 inches to 6 feet 2 inches and average weight was 205 to 218 pounds, with the most likely scale range of 185 to 230 pounds. Pitchers were an altogether different bird. Basically where the rest of the position players ended, is where most of the pitchers started. Pitchers ranged from 6 feet to 6 feet 6 inches and weighed anywhere from 200 to 260 pounds. The average being in the 6 feet 3 or 4 inch range, and what I would consider amazingly underweight at 210 to 225 for that height. In terms of shortness, in 2013, out of the 1313 unique players, only 12, count’em 12, were under 5 feet 10 inches tall. That is less than 1 percent and being in the major leagues is already rarefied air enough. The only caveat I will say is that we all know as a player ages, well some of them get tubby or use steroids, and yet they still leave their rookie weights on the back of their baseball card, as if it never changed, AHEM, cough, cough.
210-225 is not “amazingly underweight” or a guy who is 6’3″ or 6’4.” It is closer to being overweight.
No I am sorry, that is underweight. If you are going by BMI, well BMI is absolutely ridiculous to go by because it simply considers height and weight without regard for broadness, thickness, skeletal frame, nor content such as muscle versus fat. Every guy going back 5 generations in my family are 6 feet to 6 feet 2 inches in height and all weigh 200 to 240 pounds and are quite athletic, very strong, and that weight is on a frame up to 4 inches shorter.
In any study of pithers and their height you have to eliminate the lefthanders from the data pool. Durable lefthanders come in all shapes and sizes. From the small(Bobby Shantz, Ron Guidry, Whitey Ford) to the tall (Randy Johnson) to the overweight (Mickey Lolich) to the tall and overweight (C C Sabathia).
The Phillies’ preference for tall pitchers goes way back. I don’t have the time to mine any data, but any longtime fan can remember the gushing praise for tall hurlers, and a corresponding lack of praise for shorter ones. My favorite was a high-schooler named Brad Baisley, 6’9″, drafted in the second round in ’98, washed out four years later by injuries but no great shakes before that. When they have a short but useful pitcher, they aren’t high on him. They consistently undersold Randy Wolf, 6’0″.
Don’t forget that what you’re measuring is the distribution of height conditional on being a MLB pitcher. This sort of conditioning creates strange effects, such as the anti-correlation of height and speed in tennis: http://cheaptalk.org/2011/05/23/how-selection-creates-tradeoffs/.
So other than clickability, why were the A’s and Phillies singled out here?
If you compare the M’s to the Royals is there any noticeable difference?
Plus, then you get to learn that Hisashi Iwakuma is 6’3″
Dude, look at the second table with number of pitches thrown, that’s the big difference.
And so is the inverse of good/bad on the opposite side between the Mets and the Cardinals.
A reasonable conclusion might be that it just doesn’t matter.
Of the pitchers that placed in the Top 10 Pitching War last year, only Johnny Cueto is under 6’1″
But I get it, Phillies = Bad – A’s = Good.
Who concluded that it matters?
At least be an honest troll, and just whine about the A’s. Then be done with it.
The reason they were singled out is the gap between them shows that it’s larger than it looks if you just look at average height.
As for your WAR leaderboard point, I went with a much larger sample size and found no relationship between height and outcomes.
If no relationship between height and outcomes, why would you choose to have 35k fewer pitches from short pitchers.
I made no link between the team heights and their respective outcomes because the correlations didn’t make that link for me.
I’m wondered if their is some correlation between floor and ceiling. As well as success of initial call up. Shorter pitchers developer earlier and have an easier time repeating their mechanics. Taller pitcher develop later because they have a hard time repeating their mechanics and take longer(See Randy Johnson)
A bit of a curious case study is Stroman vs. Alex Meyer. Both were first rounders,Stroman was drafted a year later and is the Blues Jay #1 starter while Alex Meyer is 6’7″ and is going to be throwing his 80 grade fastball until the control gets better.
I thought were might be bias against small pitchers because they get banished to the pen, but they often need a more complete arsenal, while tall pitchers are more likely to succeed with just a monster fastball, forcing them into the pen.
“As for your WAR leaderboard point, I went with a much larger sample size and found no relationship between height and outcomes.”
but in your article..
“But that also suggests that short pitchers are undervalued by the market — the A’s were able to acquire these guys, maybe because short pitchers don’t sell jeans.”
Or maybe their peak value is less and are therefore more affordable? The same correlation could probably be drawn with FB velo perhaps? At some point, MLB pitching and front offices is a meritocracy and if the choices the Phillies make, while still losing means that there will be different guys making those decisions, but they certainly shy away from the low ceiling low floor Aaron Nola (6’1″) last June.
A close second on that list to the A’s are the Giants who are known for, and are certainly now, overpaying for a pair of short pitchers in Lincecum and Hudson.
I yes. I realize I have no idea what I’m trying to say. I’m just asking questions out loud.
This all started with a tweet about how the Phillies had no pitchers under 6’1″ on their opening day 40 man roster. Then that was confirmed by the numbers, and thus a post was born.
Tall guys are cute.
The Brewers took Taylor Jungmann and Jed Bradley over Sonny Gray. Hooray for taller pitchers!
Thank you. I have been making a similar point in various comment forums for years. The flashpoint, for me, was the frequent comment (maybe not so much anymore) that Yordano Ventura might be better suited to the bullpen because his height raised question about his endurance. I found that kind of statement to be based purely on assumption–or bias, if you want to call it that. I have been unable to find any evidence for it in historical baseball statistics, nor in any medical literature. In fact, there are some traces in US military management and training literature that lean the other way–that taller personnel may experience some stamina issues in extreme physical environments.
And took Michael Choice over 6’6″ Chis Sale…. That showed ’em!
Michael Choice has borderline 80 raw power. It is understandable what teams saw
I think most teams
…had Choice rated higher than Sale in that draft
Would it be crazy to think that a guy like as short as stroman would lose enough plane from the stretch thus causing his hr/Fb to go up?
I knkw it’s a small sample but he has had a strand rate issue throughout his pro career (300 ip).
If you check his splits from last year the only difference I see in his peripherals with men on vs bases empty is a staggering gap in hr/fb%.
This could obviously be just noise but at at his height I wouldn’t be shocked if this turned out to be a career issue.
He’s been so good at limiting base runners though that even with said issue I don’t have him any worse than league average. To me this issue (if it turns into a thing) would be the only thing preventing him from posting truly elite era’s.
Talking with Matt some more, and there is something I’d like to add. The strategy of taking high school pitchers that are tall might be a fine one. The data here is for major leaguers, who have shown success with believable stats. HS stats are unreliable, so you don’t know if you can trust the short high schooler.
But a college arm that’s short but has shown good numbers, like Stroman? The Phillies might take him, too. Because he’s shown success with believable numbers and so height becomes less relevant.
All that said, don’t know why this has filtered up to the major league team so starkly if there isn’t some bias against short pitchers on some teams.
I wonder if part of it is the fact that one of Beane’s first successes was Tim Hudson.
Do you think the distribution is actually that much taller than the population? I thought it was generally accepted (maybe not proven) that most players lie about their height by and inch or two. particularly those pitchers that are shorter.
Leftist comment I think it was got me thinking about ceiling and upside. Eno says their is no correlation between height and ability. That may be true on the whole but it certainly isn’t true at the top.
I looked at the top ten WAR for pitchers for the last ten years in both leagues. I grouped players by height and gave 10 points to the best, 9 points to the second best, etc. I then totaled the numbers and broke down the percentages against the whole. I also tried to use the height histogram to do the same thing by the percentage of height. Here are the results
Height – Percent of top 10 WAR Value – Percent of Starting Pitchers
5’8 – 0% – .67%
5’9 – 0% – 2.47%
5’10 – .37% – 4.68%
5’11 – 5.49% – 12.26%
6’0 – 9.21% – 13.03%
6’1 – 8.74% – 17.5%
6’2 – 8.93% – 18.7%
6’3 – 25.67% – 14.16%
6’4 – 9.67% – 8.02%
6’5 – 8.93% – 5.01%
6’6 – 12.47% – 2%
6’7 – 9.86% – .8%
6’8 – .65% – .4%
6’9 – 0% – .25%
As you can see pitchers 6’2 and below all under perform the top end WAR percent you would expect based on the number of them in the league. 6’3 to 6’8 all over perform their top end WAR value against their percentage in the league.
It seems pretty obvious that the reason some teams prefer height is because there is a higher ceiling on those players.
That histogram looks no different from the league’s histogram I put up above. There aren’t a lot of short athletes, particularly in baseball, but once you make the big leagues, your height has no effect. If it had an affect on ceiling, you’d expect to see it correlated to some outcome.