Trevor Bauer’s Peculiar Curveball
Earlier today, Eno Sarris took a look at the arsenals of tonight’s World Series Game Two starters, Trevor Bauer and Jake Arrieta. In this article, I’m going to hone in on one of those pitches in particular: Bauer’s curveball.
Pitchers want to disguise their pitches. This is a pretty obvious statement – it’s harder for a batter to hit a pitch if he can’t tell what’s coming. So naturally, conventional wisdom dictates that pitchers should try to make every pitch look the same coming out of their hand. You don’t want drastically different mechanics while throwing one type of pitch than while throwing another.
So when Trevor Bauer throws his curveball from a significantly different height than all his other pitches, that stands out. It’s hard to notice on television, but Bauer releases his curve a full six inches higher than all his other pitches.
Or, here’s another way to look at it that highlights just how deviant the curve is from every other pitch:
It seems to me, a guy who struggled in Little League, like a pretty minimal difference — and something to which it’d be difficult to adjust in real time. But according to our prospects expert Eric Longenhagen, if a hitter sees a higher arm slot and knows that means curveball, they’re more likely to take the pitch – especially if they can tell that the ball is going to dip out of the zone. Bauer is facing major-league hitters: they perform their research and are prepared for what they’re facing, and they can adjust to tiny differences better than any other athletes in the world.
What’s more, in order to generate the higher release point, Bauer has to let go of the pitch earlier than he does others so that his arm doesn’t come down too much before he lets go. (It’s not like he stand on his tiptoes or jumps when he throws his curveball, and the extra height has to come from somewhere.) So the hitter has ever-so-slightly more time to track the pitch in the air. I don’t know if that’s very significant, but it can’t help the pitcher.
So, theoretically, this all should hurt Bauer. In particular, he should have a fairly low swing rate on pitches outside the zone (O-Swing%) on his curveball. Except…
| Player | O-Swing% | SwStr% | Contact% | RV/C | wOBABIP | GB% | Exit Velocity |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Trevor Bauer | 32.7% | 13.9% | 65.7% | 1.4 | .282 | 62.3% | 77.9 |
| MLB | 33.1% | 12.9% | 67.8% | 0.1 | .362 | 46.1% | 75.7 |
Instead of being poor, Bauer’s curve is extremely average to even above average across the board. Hitters can’t seem to square it up particularly well – he allowed just a .282 wOBA on contact and a pretty middling average exit velocity to go along with an elite ground ball rate. They don’t lay off it too much – yes, Bauer’s O-Swing% is slightly lower than average, but the difference is less than half a percentage point, hardly significant. His curve was worth +1.4 runs per 100 pitches (denoted by the RV/C column above), which is a very solid number.
The question is, then, why does Bauer’s curve work so well for him when it’s so easily identifiable? Well, even if a hitter knows what’s coming, sometimes a pitch can still be hard to hit. Mariano Rivera became the best closer of all time throwing the same pitch over and over; Kenley Jansen, Aroldis Chapman, and Zach Britton are similar; every knuckleballer works that way, too. The movement and spin on Bauer’s curve is fantastic – in fact, it stacks up well to a certain other notable right-handed curveball:
| Player | Year(s) | Horizontal Movement | Vertical Movement | Spin Rate | Velocity |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Trevor Bauer | 2016 | 5.584 | -10.029 | 1885 | 76.9 |
| Adam Wainwright | 2009-10 | 7.958 | -8.662 | 1863 | 74.1 |
| MLB | 2016 | 3.505 | -5.169 | 1330 | 77.7 |
Now, I’m not suggesting that Bauer’s curveball is on the level of prime Wainwright’s, or even that it could be if he fixed his release point: there’s a lot more that goes into a pitch (setting it up, tunneling, control/command, attacking the hitter’s weaknesses, etc.) than what I’ve mentioned. But the physical similarities help explain why Bauer’s curve can survive its lack of deception.
And to be sure, a poorly disguised pitch is hardly a death sentence. Out of 189 pitchers who threw 100 curveballs and at least 400 other pitches, Bauer has the eight-largest gap in average vertical release point between curves and non-curves – just about six inches – and the names surrounding him for the most part aren’t great. But there are some very successful pitchers, namely Max Scherzer and Clayton Kershaw, who fail to disguise their curveballs in a similar way.
| Player | Curveball and Non-Curveball Height Difference |
|---|---|
| Jon Niese | 0.670 |
| Brad Ziegler | 0.599 |
| Paul Clemens | 0.586 |
| Jorge de la Rosa | 0.577 |
| Joe Blanton | 0.566 |
| Joakim Soria | 0.554 |
| Max Scherzer | 0.539 |
| Trevor Bauer | 0.482 |
| Jeremy Hellickson | 0.477 |
| Miguel Gonzalez | 0.472 |
| Jake Odorizzi | 0.460 |
| Seth Lugo | 0.454 |
| Hisashi Iwakuma | 0.452 |
| Clayton Kershaw | 0.450 |
First, this raises the question of whether Kershaw’s curveball could be even better that it already is, which is a terrifying thought. But more relevantly, it shows that Bauer should be able to maintain this success even with the release he has now. The list isn’t terribly inspiring, but it has plenty of bright spots. All in all, you’d rather more deception, but whatever works works.
Because, unfortunately for Bauer (and Kershaw and Scherzer), it’s not so easy to just make curveball better by hiding it more. Bauer has worked incredibly hard his whole life to refine his mechanics to get to where he is – every pitcher does, but Bauer especially – and there’s a reason he lets go of that curveball when he does. That location generates the best movement and spin, and switching it up might screw with that. It’s easy to point and say that Trevor Bauer’s curveball could be elite were he to hide it better, but all the internal interactions won’t necessarily allow it.
As Eno touched on in the earlier article, Bauer has suffered from command problems, so it makes sense that he would stick with the mechanics he has if they’re repeatable. This would make it particularly difficult for him to just magically drop his arm and keep the same movement and spin. But you wonder if it’s worth it to try.
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.



One thing to keep in mind with release points of guys with 12-6 type curves is that release points are recorded at 50 feet. So that point isn’t really where he releases the ball, it’s where the ball was 10 feet passed the rubber. So in a lot of these cases, he could be releasing the ball so that it is traveling upward at release point. Does that make sense to you?
I don’t think that’s the case. That wouldn’t explain why the release extension – which is measured by StatCast – is so different as well. Maybe the earlier release point exaggerates the measured vertical release point a *bit*, but the fact is he’s still letting go from a very different spot.
Also, I’m not an expert on the physics, but it doesn’t make sense to me that a pitch could be traveling up on release and not be airmailed.
Picture an Eephus. It is thrown upward, this would just be less pronounced.
Not sure why Lucas is being downvoted. Many breaking balls have an initial upwards trajectory.
Some curves do start out upwards. Here’s Ted Lilly in side view:
http://www.hardballtimes.com/pitch-sequence-high-fastball-then-curveball/
It’s the slow curves, which have to start out upwards or they’ll bounce. Bauer’s curve is fast, and may head downwards from release.
I wonder about whether over-confidence in the batter plays a role. Not being a major leaguer I can’t say anything definitively, but if I felt like I knew what was coming I’d be more likely to feel like I could handle it, even if it wasn’t an ideal pitch for me to swing.
Perhaps even if there is some penalty for people hitting mistakes harder due to knowledge of what’s coming, there is also some gain for batters feeling more comfortable swinging at a “pitcher’s” pitch thinking they can handle it better than they actually can?
A fastball is a lot easier to hit than a curveball. If you know that he’s NOT throwing a curveball you can sit fastball, and if you get beat by the changeup he throws 12% of the time so be it you’re just going to whiff or foul it off not ground out or pop up.
Lol Brad Ziegler.
Where on earth does that MLB average curveball spin rate come from? The true average is nearly double that and curveball spins are missed less than 10% of the time. Even if the missed spins are counted as 0 that 1330 number would be incorrect.
Huh, I’m not sure what’s up with that. Those are straight from the FG database, which pulls straight from pitchf/x feeds – there aren’t any zeroes that would be screwing with the data, all the numbers are just like that. You’re right, those numbers are wrong. The Statcast ones are more in line with what we’re familiar with, but I can’t use Statcast for 2009-10 Waino.
Wait, Pitch f/x records spin rates? It is unfortunate there’s no statcast data for Waino from 09-10, but I wouldn’t think his curveball spin rate would be substantially different from now.
It’s just inferred from the observed pfx/pfz deflection; it doesn’t add any information.
Statcast spin rates come from Trackman and directly measured. PFX spin rates are the “useful” spin rates calculated from movement. For curveballs, the latter is often less than the former (http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=25915)
I feel like what I’ve always heard is that disguising a curveball, especially if it’s a good one, is less important than, in particular, disguising a change-up. A change-up, if you know it’s coming, is usually just a mediocre fastball; the essence of the pitch is the deception. Curveballs, on the other hand, rely less on deception and more just on the fact of being curveballs: the movement is so wicked that hitters have a hard time against it, even if they know it’s coming. (Elite change-up pitchers may be able to do things with movement that make the pitch independently nasty even taking the deception out of the picture; splitters may also be in part about that same thing. I’m not sure.) But this definitely squares with my sense of what I’ve heard as just general received baseball wisdom, that it’s not nearly as important for the curveball delivery to mimic the fastball as it is with a change-up.
This may or may not be correct, but it’s the exact thing that our pitching coach in college told our pitchers.
Yep, you’re right. But it’s still always better to have a more deceptive delivery for all pitches (all other things being equal). Just because the effect is greater for changeups doesn’t mean we should discount it for curveballs.
I suspect that pitchers with different release points for changeups can’t survive in the majors, which is why we don’t see them. Meanwhile, guys like Bauer *can* survive. That plays into your point.
Digging that first graphic
These were great visualizations of the release points.
What are the units of the release point graphs?
Feet
As someone who relied on a 12-6 curve in college, I expect Bauer is just doing whatever feels necessary to get on top of the ball, maximize spin-rate, and result in the ball being a strike in the lower half of the strike-zone. I assume when he does all those things with the slightly lower release point, it winds up being a 58 footer, and no amount of deception would make up for that.
I posted my comments on Twitter over here: https://twitter.com/drivelinebases/status/791732499575611394
But to sum it up, this article makes a ton of assumptions regarding hitter vision that are not necessarily true and have never been proven (deviations are bad, everything should be disguisable; these are not truisms). Furthermore using pfx spin rate instead of trackman spin rate (author seems unaware of the differences; one is inferred and one is directly measured) with not much knowledge of usable/gross spin rates is a big leak in the analysis.
Also: Trackman extension would be a better marker for analysis instead of vertical release point, as others in the comments have alluded to considering the 50′ measurement distance. Many pitchers release their CB much closer to their body than any other pitch, which is a much more distinctive marker than vertical release height.