What Does Coors Field Do to Pitch Selection?

I’ve got Coors Field on the mind. And while usually I’m able to flit from one subject to another — probably too easily, to be honest — when I think about Coors, it tends to stick, because the Rockies are one of baseball’s greatest experiments and we still aren’t quite sure what to make of them or what to make of baseball at altitude. The game that’s played within Coors Field is recognizably baseball, of that there’s no question, but it’s the oddest brand of baseball that exists in the major leagues, so it’s fascinating to consider as many angles as is possible. Just what is it really like to play there?

For this post, I want to examine pitch selection. And not just for pitch-selection’s sake; this should, in theory, reflect what effects people think Coors has on pitching. There’s a thought out there that Coors is bad news for breaking balls. What would we expect, then? A reduction in breaking-ball rate in Colorado, because teams and pitchers aren’t idiots. Let’s say Pitcher B has an optimal mix of 60% fastballs, 20% breaking balls, and 20% offspeed pitches. Let’s say he senses that he doesn’t have a good breaking pitch on a particular day. Then we might expect, I don’t know, 65% fastballs, 10% breaking balls, and 25% offspeed pitches. That’s the theory. So what do we see in Colorado? That’s what these big giant tables are for.

Using Baseball Savant, I grabbed home and road data, and I split the information by count types. I also categorized the pitches by pitch types, as is done over at Brooks Baseball. The data covers the PITCHf/x era from 2008 – 2014, and while it isn’t perfect to compare raw home and raw road numbers — pitchers didn’t pitch equal numbers of innings home and away — the sample sizes should limit the amount of noise. In this first big giant table, you see information for Rockies pitchers:

Rockies Pitchers Hard Breaking Offspeed
Even, Home 67% 23% 10%
Even, Road 67% 23% 10%
Difference 0.0% -0.7% 0.7%
Hitter-Friendly, Home 76% 13% 11%
Hitter-Friendly, Road 76% 13% 11%
Difference 0.2% -0.6% 0.4%
Pitcher-Friendly, Home 53% 36% 11%
Pitcher-Friendly, Road 54% 35% 11%
Difference 1.1% -1.0% -0.1%

What do you notice? That’s right, hardly anything! I mean, there are a lot of numbers in there, but the differences are all small. The biggest difference is in the lower left. In pitcher-friendly counts, at home, Rockies pitchers have thrown slightly fewer fastballs, and slightly more breaking balls. No other difference is as large as a percentage point.

This is, I think, more interesting than it lets on. Overall, Rockies pitchers pitch at home very similarly to how they pitch on the road. Yet, while you’d expect that for most teams, the Rockies play in the most unusual home environment in the league, so you might’ve expected to see some actual adjustments. The Rockies have spent years and countless hours trying to figure out pitching a mile up. You’d think that, if they believed altitude was bad for breaking balls, there would be fewer breaking balls thrown at altitude. You’d expect a different mix to reflect consensus opinion. It would trickle down from the analysts to the on-field performance. What we see is practically no change at all. Which doesn’t mean altitude isn’t bad for breaking balls; it suggests altitude is more or less equally bad for pitches across the board. That, or, the Rockies just haven’t pitched optimally. I’m skeptical — they’ve got a lot invested in this. It’s literally their entire product.

You Aren't a FanGraphs Member
It looks like you aren't yet a FanGraphs Member (or aren't logged in). We aren't mad, just disappointed.
We get it. You want to read this article. But before we let you get back to it, we'd like to point out a few of the good reasons why you should become a Member.
1. Ad Free viewing! We won't bug you with this ad, or any other.
2. Unlimited articles! Non-Members only get to read 10 free articles a month. Members never get cut off.
3. Dark mode and Classic mode!
4. Custom player page dashboards! Choose the player cards you want, in the order you want them.
5. One-click data exports! Export our projections and leaderboards for your personal projects.
6. Remove the photos on the home page! (Honestly, this doesn't sound so great to us, but some people wanted it, and we like to give our Members what they want.)
7. Even more Steamer projections! We have handedness, percentile, and context neutral projections available for Members only.
8. Get FanGraphs Walk-Off, a customized year end review! Find out exactly how you used FanGraphs this year, and how that compares to other Members. Don't be a victim of FOMO.
9. A weekly mailbag column, exclusively for Members.
10. Help support FanGraphs and our entire staff! Our Members provide us with critical resources to improve the site and deliver new features!
We hope you'll consider a Membership today, for yourself or as a gift! And we realize this has been an awfully long sales pitch, so we've also removed all the other ads in this article. We didn't want to overdo it.

Now then! Information for Rockies hitters, or, if you prefer, opposing pitchers:

Rockies Batters Hard Breaking Offspeed
Even, Home 66% 25% 9%
Even, Road 67% 22% 10%
Difference 1.2% -2.6% 1.4%
Hitter-Friendly, Home 73% 17% 10%
Hitter-Friendly, Road 75% 14% 11%
Difference 1.5% -2.9% 1.4%
Pitcher-Friendly, Home 55% 35% 10%
Pitcher-Friendly, Road 56% 32% 12%
Difference 0.7% -2.4% 1.7%

Here, there’s a little more. All the individual differences are below three percentage points in magnitude, but, look in the middle. Opposing pitchers have thrown more breaking balls in Colorado in all situations. They’ve come at the expense of both fastballs and offspeed pitches. The first thing that might indicate is that even visiting pitchers don’t feel like their breaking balls are being particularly affected. If anything, it’s the opposite of that. And then, consider the differences between this table and the table above. Rockies pitchers are more incentivized to learn how to pitch in Colorado than non-Rockies pitchers. Given that Coors Field is so unusual, you’d think Rockies pitchers would better understand optimal pitching at altitude. Rockies pitchers don’t increase breaking balls at home very much. Opponents have shown a bigger change. That might have just a little something to do with Colorado’s significant home-field advantage.

There’s one last little thing I want to touch on, that’s tangentially related to the above. What you’ve seen is all about pitch mix. What about pitch location? For these purposes, imagine a horizontal line, 2.5 feet above the ground at the front of the strike zone. I’m going to use this line to split pitch location in half, with pitches being either up or down. Great, now, think about secondary pitches, or all the pitches that aren’t fastballs. Most of the time, you want those pitches to be down — left up, they might steal called strikes, but more often they look like hangers. Changeups, sliders, curveballs, splitters…you almost always want these in the vicinity of the lower zone border.

In home games, Rockies pitchers have thrown 69% of their secondary pitches down, which ranks them 23rd in baseball. On the road, they’re at 72%, ranking 9th in baseball. Now, in home games, Rockies hitters have seen just under 66% of secondary pitches down, ranked 30th in baseball. Away from home, that’s gone up to 70%, which is right in the middle of the pack.

This might be nothing more than a simple PITCHf/x park effect. I don’t actually know. Maybe there’s something about the system that spits out slightly higher vertical locations. But the alternate explanation would be that, in Colorado, it’s just a little harder to keep pitches down, especially the pitches you want to keep down. Which would leave more of those secondary pitches vulnerable. Rockies hitters might’ve been feasting on slower stuff that was supposed to be lower than it actually was. Could help explain the reduced strikeouts. Could help explain a lot of things. Wouldn’t explain the subtle changes in pitch mix we saw in the tables, but, who knows? The whole thing remains kind of a mystery.

There’s nothing quite like baseball in Denver. That’s not true. There’s even baseball over in Colorado Springs. But, there’s nothing in the majors quite like baseball in Denver. It’s a challenging thing to get used to. And then, very suddenly, a player has to get un-used to it. I’m glad such an experiment exists. I’m also glad I’m in no way involved with it.





Jeff made Lookout Landing a thing, but he does not still write there about the Mariners. He does write here, sometimes about the Mariners, but usually not.

29 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
BaseballGuy
11 years ago

I think the “baseballs don’t curve at altitude” thing is only moderately true. The thinner air seems to affect fastball movement more than breaking ball movement. In other words, guys who depend entirely on fastball movement just get lit up. Curve ball pitchers do OK.

The study I’d like to see is a comparison between Denver and Phoenix. It could be that the effect of DRY air is bigger than altitude. Rockies pitchers tend to pitch just fine in April, which is the only moderately wet season in Colorado. They start to get killed in June and onward, when things get hot and dry.

Nathaniel Dawson
11 years ago
Reply to  BaseballGuy

The only effect humidity in the air (notwithstanding temperature differences) would have on baseball play is on the spinginess of the balls, which would affect how far they travel. But Colorado has as humidor, so the balls aren’t going to get dried out. You would not think it would have any measurable effect on how much a pitch breaks (unless I suppose, if it was actually raining, which could have some effect).

If humidity affects temperature, that would be a different thing. If higher humidity days in the spring are colder or warmer than dry days, that would affect air density, but it’s really all about the temperature, rather than how much water vapor there is in the air.

Nathan Nathan
11 years ago

Humidity actually lowers the aerodynamic force on the balls because the higher partial pressure of water vapor makes the air slightly less dense. I doubt it is a significant effect, though.

John Choiniere
11 years ago
Reply to  BaseballGuy

I mean, whether they curve or not isn’t really a matter of opinion or perception – it’s physics. Balls curve less in less-dense air, and air density at Coors’ altitude is ~80% of what it is at sea level.

Jake
11 years ago
Reply to  BaseballGuy

I’ve seen a study done to this effect looking specifically at Carlos Gonzales’ road vs. home splits. The study found something along the lines of fastballs were more affected by the altitude than breaking balls. Fastballs appeared to “drop” less than at sea level. I can’t find the link anywhere though…

It’s always puzzled me why this hasn’t been followed up or studied in more detail. Batters see many more fastballs than breaking balls, and if the Rockies hitters could not adjust between fastballs at home vs. fastballs on the road, I think this could go a lot further in explaining the home/road variation than breaking balls.

N
11 years ago
Reply to  Jake

http://www.athleticsnation.com/2010/8/8/1611852/carlos-gonzalez-a-god-on-a-mountain

The post is gone but this is the article which you speak. I totally agree with it that fastballs were the issue more than off speed stuff

Jake
11 years ago
Reply to  N

Yes! Thank you for finding it.

novaether
11 years ago

I’d like to see a third chart. It’s the 29 non-Colorado pitchers’ pitch selection at home and away against the 29 non-Colorado teams. I wonder if the breaking ball home/away split is even more pronounced. This would imply that pitchers do adjust when throwing in Colorado, just not as much as Colorado’s pitchers do. This would give credence to the original assertion that breaking balls are less effective in Colorado, while also revealing information about pitchers’ tendencies at home and away in general. Is this possible to put together?

Mitchel Lichtman
11 years ago

While conventional wisdom says, or used to say, that throwing breaking pitches at a high altitude is a bad thing because they don’t break as much (which is true), there is some research that suggests that pitchers who throw a higher % of fastballs are MORE adversely affected at high altitudes like in Denver. It IS true that fastball movement AND breaking ball movement are both affected by altitude (air density actually). However, it is not at all clear whether it is beneficial to throw more fastballs or breaking pitches at high altitudes. My guess, which is supported by the data in this article, is that it doesn’t matter much.

Nathaniel Dawson
11 years ago

And it’s been noted (by somebody affiliated with a Rockies blog, IIRC) that fastballs have a higher spin rate than breaking pitches, which could make them more susceptible less movement in the lower density air in Coors.

Maybe sinkers are more effective? They have less rise, which would theoretically mean they have more sink.

tz
11 years ago

It may be as simple as pitchers having trouble keeping their fastballs in the lower half of the strike zone, and thus choosing to go with more offspeed/breaking stuff.

I mean, none of the variations are earthshattering. Probably the most significant is the 3-4% increase in high pitches at Coors vs. elsewhere.

Nathaniel Dawson
11 years ago
Reply to  tz

You would expect fastballs to end up slightly lower in the zone at Coors than elsewhere, as they experience less “rise”. It would be interesting to know if that’s actually the case. For the offspeed pitches, like curveballs and some sliders, the atmosphere might be creating the effect Jeff mentioned, as they have downward break, which would be reduced in Coors, leaving them higher in the zone.

LHPSU
11 years ago

The Rockies should pick up every knuckleballer out there.

Mr Punch
11 years ago
Reply to  LHPSU

I may be misremembering, but IIRC the Red Sox once screwed up their rotation (and lost anyway) to avoid starting Wakefield in Colorado.

plasmaj
11 years ago

this may have already been done here, but what about differences in vertical/horizontal movement for the different type of pitches as measured by PitchFX?

jfree
11 years ago

Have you separated starters from relievers? After all, Coors has a long history (for both Rockies and visitors) of driving starters out of the game early so I would assume that relievers with a limited pitch repertoire comprise a significantly different proportion of innings/TBF/pitches

Timbooya
11 years ago

Maybe the Rockies should start to employ a few knuckleballers up in that thin air of theirs. By the looks of it, it’s hard to keep balls that spin down in the zone, for the lack of spin. One solution could be throw balls that have the least amount of spin!

jfree
11 years ago

In a more philosophical vein – what happens to a knuckleball at altitude? I don’t think a knuckleballer has ever pitched at Coors and if I were a manager I wouldn’t want to be the first to try it either. But does anyone know what might happen?

Cam Hodgson
11 years ago
Reply to  jfree

Charlie Haeger pitched at Coors in 2008 – 1.1 IP, 1 H, 4 ER, 3 BB, 1K. That was in relief of Shawn Estes, who gave up 13 H in 4 & change IP.

Cam Hodgson
11 years ago
Reply to  Cam Hodgson

Then again, I don’t know if he was throwing knucklers at that stage. Gameday is just too far out of reach..

Phillies113
11 years ago

Could the increase in opposing pitchers throwing breaking balls be explained a little by game theory? Perhaps Rockies hitters are expecting their opponents to throw fewer curves due to the affect the altitude has on them. In response, their opponents throw MORE curves, as the Rockies hitters aren’t expecting it as much under normal situations.

Just a thought.

channelclemente
11 years ago

What I’ve noticed is not so much the lessening of breaks and movement, but it becomes more gradual and seems to have much less ‘snap’ than at lower altitudes.

DD
11 years ago

To this point, has someone compared the RPMs at Coors and away?

Jeremy Losak
11 years ago

This topic was addressed in depth in a study done by the Syracuse University Baseball and Statistics Club and others presented at the SLOAN Analytics Conference last year. Here is the link to the paper which essentially examines how pitch selection is effected in higher altitudes and how that impacts the betting market. http://www.sloansportsconference.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/2014-SSAC-Effects-of-Atmospheric-Conditions-on-Pitchers.pdf

David Sanchez
11 years ago

The problem is the size of the OF.Cin,ARI,Mil are hitters yards.The ball carries well in those parks.Imagine if those parks had an OF the size of Coors.Kershaw wouldn’t be able to pitch there.They need to move the fences in in LF.They need a wall like CLE has.That would cut down on those balls that are 10 ft over the SS head(I’m exaggerating of course)and it carries over the wall.In Coors you get carry,the gaps,and the bloops.The OF are always playing real deep.We know the ball’s always gonna travel in Col.We also know the ball never gets caught in the OF(exaggerating again,it seems like that though)If you bring the fence in and raise it in LF.You’ll see more defense.More assist.More baseball.The height should be the height of CLE wall.We’ll see if anyone in Col is smart enough.How dope would it be to see a wall like they have in Cle,in Col.I think the players,especially the pitchers.Would love to finally play in a real yard.

NoMoSnow
11 years ago
Reply to  David Sanchez

This is exactly what I have always maintained is the smartest thing the Rockies could do. Moving the fences in (and raising them) would reduce the gaps between the OFers and the gaps between the OFers and INFers.

I don’t know how to verify it but I believe the true Coors advantage for hitters and disadvantage for pitchers is at its most extreme on weak fly balls/flairs and on medium-to-high launch angle fly balls in the gaps.

jfree
11 years ago
Reply to  David Sanchez

The better alternative IMO is to move home plate out. Serves the same function of reducing the size of the OF. But it also creates more foul territory (I believe that Coors has the smallest ‘foul territory’ of any MLB park – but not sure of that) which would provide an alternative way of getting outs. And yes, raise the OF wall to compensate somewhat for the great carry of the ball. The needed changes would certainly eliminate even the possibility of a home-run robbing catch but that’s a pretty small price to pay.

Jeff Gross
11 years ago

Jeff:

Why look at absolute percentage point changes instead of percentage changes? a 2.6% point change of a 26 percent point total is more substantial than it would otherwise appear, since the baseline is not 100%

Matthew Murphy
11 years ago

Nathaniel Dawson mentioned this earlier, but I think it bears repeating. Because the rotation on nearly all non-curveballs (and fourseam fastballs in particular) generates “rise”, the reduced air density should (and does) decrease this rise, and actually cause these pitches to drop more.

The increase in pitches “up” at Coors could be a function of more relief innings, as an earlier commenter mentioned. If anything, the reduced “rise” on most pitches should make them more effective lower in the zone, as they drop slightly more than hitters would expect given their experience outside of Coors.