On Rotation, Part 1: The Effects of Spin on the Flight of a Pitch
My last article was a look at the effects of pitch location on batted balls. While it ended with on somewhat disappointing note, showing that the results couldn’t really be applied to individual pitchers, it did make me think more about which components of a pitch affect the pitch, and in which ways.
So I decided to examine spin. Spin is captured by PITCHf/x in two measurements: rate (in revolutions per minute) and direction (the angle in degrees). As it turns out, the spin of a pitch has quite the effect on its outcome, much like location. Different spin rates make the pitch move differently (obviously) and get hit differently. (For a look at this topic from a physics standpoint, check out this infographic and this much more complicated article, both from the excellent Alan Nathan. And, to make sure everybody knows: I know little about the actual physics of this past what I can infer from my baseball playing and watching experience. I am just looking at the PITCHf/x data.)
Before we get right to the graphs, a quick note about my methodology. I grouped each pitch from 2009 onward — which is the year PITCHf/x started to record spin rate consistently — into buckets based on spin rate (pitches were rounded to the nearest 50 RPM) and pitch type (I included four-seam fastballs, curveballs, changeups, two-seam fastballs, cutters, knuckleballs, and sliders). I then found a multitude of stats for each bucket: contact rate, average speed, average movement, ground ball rate, and many more. I also did the same with spin angle, grouping pitches into buckets by rounding to the nearest 20 degrees, but the results weren’t particularly meaningful.
I also combined two-seam fastballs and sinkers when I was doing this. There has been some discussion in the past about whether there is a difference between those two pitches. While PITCHf/x classifies them separately, they are more or less indistinguishable, and when I first did this without combining them, they overlapped on nearly all of the various graphs.
So now for the graphs, which are all embiggenable — to quote a certain, long-running animated program — by clicking. (Actually, they’re all emhugenable; clicking on them will bring you to a very zoomed-in version.) First, we’ll start out just with the number of pitches in the dataset at each spin rate for each pitch type. This should also give you a sense for the average spin rate based on the pitch.
Fastballs spin the most (at slightly over 2000 RPM); sliders, the least (less than 1000 RPM). Other pitch types fall somewhere in between.
You’ll notice that knuckleballs aren’t included; there are simply too few of them to show up noticeably on the graph. Here is a graph with just knuckleballs and a smaller y-axis scale:
Wait, this looks kind of weird. The average knuckleball spins about 800 times per minute? That’s over 13 times per second, faster than sliders. Something’s up here, and I don’t know what. It might just be best to take knuckleball data with a grain of salt.
Alright, now that you’ve seen that, let’s look at the actual effects of the spin. The first thing we’ll look at is the speed of the pitch based on the spin rate:
Each pitch but the curveball either stays roughly the same or sees a velocity increase as the spin rate goes up. This makes sense: curveballs are thrown with topspin, and other pitches are thrown with backspin, so a curveball with more spin will act differently than a non-curveball with more spin. I’m not sure whether the increased spin is a result of the pitcher throwing harder for non-curveballs, or whether the increased spin causes the ball to move faster through the air, but either way there is some sort of correlation.
How about movement? Horizontal movement in this graph is shown relative to the pitcher’s handedness, so the raw number in the PITCHf/x data is made negative for righties. A negative raw number is a pitch that runs towards the third base side of home plate, and a positive raw number is a pitch that runs towards the first base side. So adjusted the way it is here, a positive number indicates arm-side run and a negative number indicates glove-side run.
These are both very clear. More spin leads to more arm-side run for changeups and two- and four-seam fastballs, doesn’t really affect the run of cutters and knuckleballs, and leads to more glove-side run for sliders and curveballs. More spin also leads to a higher vertical movement (which is really just less drop; the vertical movement is relative to a pitch without spin, not relative to what would happen without gravity) for two-seam, four-seam, and cut fastballs, as well as for knuckleballs (which, again, are questionable) and changeups; it doesn’t affect the vertical movement of sliders; and it makes curveballs drop much more. Once again, the topspin of curveballs makes it behave much differently than other pitches when thrown with more spin. It seems intuitive that a ball with more topspin would drop more, which is evidently the case.
What about the change in speed between the release and arrival at the plate? Does more spin make pitches slow down differently from a pitch with less spin? As it turns out, it does:
PITCHf/x measures the speed of the pitch both as the pitcher releases the ball from his hand and as it crosses the plate. The quantity represented in the graph is the average of the latter subtracted from the former. And sure enough, for every pitch (but knucklers), more spin makes the pitch slow down significantly more during its flight towards the batter.
So, great. We know now what the spin of a baseball does to its flight, more or less, and we have cool graphical representations of that. But that’s not anything we couldn’t have explained with physics, and it doesn’t really help us know exactly how batters react to that or what effect a difference in spin makes in the result of the pitch itself. We can guess that more velocity is better for the pitcher, but then at the same time, the pitch slows down more with spin added — does those cancel each other out or is the effect compounded? We know that the movement of different pitches changes with different amounts of spin, but does that make pitches more harder to control or harder to hit? We’ll answer those questions tomorrow with a look at how pitches with different amounts of spin are hit.
Jonah is a baseball analyst and Red Sox fan. He would like it if you followed him on Twitter @japemstein, but can't really do anything about it if you don't.






The average knuckleball spins about 800 times per minute? That’s over 13 times per second, faster than sliders. Something’s up here, and I don’t know what.
What’s up is that Pitch F/X doesn’t measure spin at all: what it does is measure the movement and infer the spin from that. Knuckleballs move for reasons other than spin, but Pitch F/X sees that they move and interprets that as spin. Sliders don’t move as much because a lot of their spin is around the direction of movement, like a rifle bullet. That stabilises them rather than deflecting them, so Pitch F/X can’t “see” the spin.
Hmm, did not know that. Thank you!
Ah, I was going to post that about knuckleballs but was puzzled by the slider values, so thanks.
So the slider spin values are ‘effective spin’, a hypothetical pitch with its spin scouts orthogonal to the flight of the ball. As opposed to the actual slider near-rifle spin, which is largely wasted for Magnus deflection.
scouts -> axis
Would be interesting to see the percentage decrease in speed vs spin. You’ve shown that higher spin is related to higher velocity for 4-seam, 2-seam, and cutters. These along with curveballs are the ones that appear to show greater decrease in horizontal velocity. For the top-spin of the curve-ball this makes sense. For the other 3 it would be interesting to see if the greater velocity of balls with higher spin is what appears to cause greater decrease in velocity (ie the percentage decrease in velocity vs spin does not show the same correlation) or if the higher back-spin actually does slow the ball down.
Just a quick clarification question, you’ve shown that a faster spin rate means a faster “velocity”, but also a greater decrease in “speed” from the pitchers hand to home plate. Both of your graphs are measured in MPH.
I know speed and velocity are not the same thing, but I’m just wondering how the higher spin rates could result in both a higher velocity and yet a bigger decrease in speed at the same time?
My brain may be missing a key concept in speed vs velocity so if that’s the case, please be gentle.
The speed/velocity distinction doesn’t really come into play. The graphs showing just speed/velocity vs. spin is the speed at the release point.
Well, if higher-spin pitches also tend to be higher velocity pitches, I would expect drag to be higher on those pitches, too, regardless of spin, certainly at least for fastballs.
Curveballs appear to follow a similar trend, just not perfectly. There’s a little offset between the spin v. velocity and spin v. velocity decrease curves, which is interesting to me. It could be the direction of the drag force, it could be the release (which is different for curveballs than any other pitch), I’m not sure.
Hm, those lines on the spin / movement graphs are too clean to be true.
Especially as the number of zero spin pitches is vanishingly small.
Heck, even the spin rate / pitch count graph looks too clean for the 4 seam / 2 seam stats. Too much like a bell curve for my eye.
All the graphs are fitted with LOESS curves except for the number of pitches ones. Of all the graphs, the movement one surprises me the least, actually – it seems to me like there should be a very strong and clean relationship there.
Particularly since, as I mentioned above, the spin is inferred from the movement :). Those curves are essentially reversing the work that Pitch F/X did to produce its spin numbers in the first place.
I’d like to see whether/how spin rate and velocity combine to effect late movement, and the effectiveness of movement at various distances and velocities. One fg piece per pitch type, with many gifs, perhaps?
This statement gives me serious pause:
I’ll try to reserve judgment until tomorrow, but so far it sounds like you haven’t read Alan Nathan’s work on the effect of spin on pitch movement, because your question about whether increased spin causes the ball to move faster is answered within. Any discussion of this topic that doesn’t start with a very close reading of Dr. Nathan’s site is walking into a potential minefield.
I tried, I really did. My mind is not cut out for that kind of stuff. It’s entirely possible that I glossed over that part by accident.
I will be reading the Nathan paper today, but I am immediately struck by a wish for spin on batted balls to be studied, as well. There’s an intuition (a ball with backspin will carry, one with sidespin will tail, etc.), but I would love to see correlations to numbers.
Mostly, though, I want to know how many batted balls exit the bat as knucklers.
Ah, if only we could get the entirety of the statcast data! I’m sure spin rate of batted balls is in there somewhere, but it’s not in pitchf/x. The Nathan paper does cover batted balls as well as pitches, though, so there’s that.
Alan Nathan has written about that, too, on his site. Can’t provide you any links, but look around and you should easily find the articles.
I’m not a fan of your conclusion on spin rate vs. decrease in velocity.
You earlier show that spin increases as velocity increases. As an approximation drag will increase proportional to velocity squared for a pitch. My first thought is that faster pitches will have higher drag and so their velocity drops faster; they also happen to have higher spin. I’d need some pretty strong evidence to conclude that the spin is playing any significant part in the rate of velocity drop compared to the change in air resistance with velocity.
You’re right. I shouldn’t be implying any causation, and my wording does do that. There is certainly a correlation, however, which is what matters.
Here’s a hastily-constructed graph I just made:
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/speedchange.png
Since my name has been mentioned a few times, I guess I ought to make some comments. At the risk of hijacking the article, here they are:
1. Let me recommend my article All Spin Is Not Alike, from BPro a few weeks ago: http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=25915. In the article, I make the distinction between total spin and “useful” spin. The latter is the spin that results in movement. The spin rate quoted in this article (and by PITCHf/x) is the useful spin, which is a quantity derived from the actual movement according to some algorithm. So, there is absolutely no surprise that there is a relationship in the plots shown in this article between spin and movement (provided the spin is interpreted as the useful spin).
2. The same algorithm used for “normal” pitches is also used for knuckleballs, despite the fact that k-balls are not spinning. Instead their movement is caused by the air flow over the seams. But the algorithm does not distinguish between k-balls and ordinary spinning pitches, so the movement is used to derive a spin. But it is not a real spin.
3. Interesting observation about the speed loss correlated with spin. But it is also deceiving, since the speed loss is a fraction of the initial speed (roughly 9% loss over 50 ft). So, regardless of any spin dependence, faster pitches will lose more speed (i.e., 9% of a big number is greater than 9% of a small number). So I suggest plotting the fractional loss of speed versus spin. Actually this has been studied and it was found that there is evidence for spin-dependent drag. That is, the air drag increases (slightly) with increased spin, resulting in a greater loss of speed. In more technical language, the drag coefficient shows a slight increase with spin.
4. In my article, you will find that sliders, curveballs, and cutters all have various amounts of non-useful spin. So, when the movement is used to determine the spin of these pitches, it will underestimate the total spin. On the other hand, fastballs and changeups are consistent with all their spin being useful.
Thanks for the comment. Didn’t realize that about the “useful” and total spin, which explains a lot about the knuckleballs and sliders. Obviously these graphs are simplifying things to a certain extent, because there is more to the spin of a baseball than just the rate of useful spin. I must admit that a large part of this is over my head, and all I’m looking at is the pitchf/x data, so this explanation is very much appreciated.
On your third point: see the comment I made just above.
Thanks..I only saw your comment and that of deflated after posting mine. But let me again emphasize that there is evidence for spin-dependent drag. I don’t know how to attach a plot to this comment, else I would attach one showing the relationship.
You can upload it to imgur, or, email me at japemstein@gmail.com and I’ll upload it to the FG media library and link it here. I’m interested in seeing that.
Alan, is there any evidence that the movement of cutters is largely a result of slip-swing or whatever you call that movement created by the de-laminating of flow over the seams? This would create a decrease in glove side movement as spin rate increases, as the Magnus force would start to overpower the slip-swing force. I suspect pitchers are probably using that slip-swing force more than is commonly acknowledged. They’re probably using it even though they don’t realize what it is they’re doing.
Nathaniel: Interesting question. The type of pitch you are talking about seems like the Freddie Garcia splitter that I wrote about a few years ago. The ball broke gloveslide, opposite to what would be expected from the spin axis. I don’t think that is how a cutter works. I recall seeing high-speed video showing that cutter moves in the direction expected based on spin axis, which is tilted in opposite direction than a typical 2S fastball. To answer your question directly would require having Trackman spin data to compare with the movement.
Yes, the Freddie Garcia splitter was exactly what I was thinking of.
Hope to hear soemthing about those experiments, Kyle. Up to this point, the Magnus force has been the sole explanatory agent for break on pitches (other than knucklers). It’ll be interesting to find out how much of an effect the slip-stream effect might be causing.
I very much believe that the slip-stream effect is large. We have a lot of high-speed video on this with colored baseballs but we will soon have a PITCHf/x cage and hopefully a Trackman unit to test further this fall.
Having high-speed video to determine the spin axis along with either cameras or radar to track the pitch and determine the movement should allow a systematic study of this issue. Keep us all posted on what you find.
Nathaniel:
The splitter/cutter article would indicate otherwise, as does Rod Cross’ video on laminar / turbulent flow. Which is why it’s exciting. Trevor Bauer and I used Dr. Nathan’s article as the basis to learn the two-seam fastball he now throws 6-10 times per game. While it doesn’t break “the wrong way,” the offset grip (like Marcus Stroman uses) should theoretically take advantage of the misaligned seams. The coefficients in Dr. Nathan’s article tell a great story!
I was remiss in not pointing out that both of the comments by Paul Clarke were spot-on.
As his comments invariably are.
Thanks – coming from you that means a lot.